17 
ANTHROPOMETRIC CHARACTERS 
Measurements Recorded and Indices Calculated 
The following measurements were taken : 
1. Stature 
2. Sitting height 
3. Length of head (glabella ad maximum) 
4. Width of head (biparietal maximum) 
5. Width of forehead (frontal minimum) 
6. Length of face 
(a) Menton-nasion 
(b) Menton-crinion 
7. Width of face (bizygomatic maximum) 
8. Height of nose 
9. Width of nose 
10. Length of mouth 
11. Length of ear 
12. Width of ear 
13. Length of upper lip 
14. Length of hand 
15. Width of hand 
From these measurements the following indices have been calculated: 
16. Sitting height (sitting height to stature) 
17. Cephalic (width of head to length of head) 
18. Cephalo-facial (width of face to width of head) 
19. Facial (length of face (menton-nasion) to width of face) 
20. Nasal (width of nose to height of nose) 
21. Ear (width of ear to length of ear) 
22. Hand (width of hand to length of hand) 
The data from which the report has been worked up and from which 
the various tables have been compiled are set out in the appendices, and 
are available to any one who may wish to treat the material in a different 
manner. The results of the method it was decided to adopt are presented 
in their most concise form in the “Table of Means and Probable Errors of 
Means’' on page 30. Anyone, who would analyse the figures from which 
a particular mean has been calculated, should turn in the first place to the 
appropriate frequency distribution table where he will find the standard 
deviation, the probable error of the mean, the coefficient of variation, and 
the number of cases examined all duly recorded: and, subsequently, if he 
would pursue his investigation further, let him consult tables VI-X, which 
interpret the means and probable errors of means and make words more 
or less superfluous. 
The Probable Error 
It may, perhaps, be of help to some in the understanding of this report 
if an explanation is offered of how “Probable Errors of Means” are to be 
interpreted, for, unless the significance of this function is appreciated the 
figures in the various tables of the report will fail to convey their full 
meaning. 
For example, in table VI, it is stated that the mean or average stature 
of the men at Fond-du-lac is 164*7 cm., and of those at Chipewyan 167 *1 
cm. These Chipewyans at Fond-du-lac are, therefore, on an average 
2*4 cm. (i.e., practically 1 inch) taller than the Chipewyans at Chipewyan. 
If we assume that the measurements were carefully taken and that there 
