252 
I)T{. A. LEE AND PROFESSOR K. PEARSOX OX 
the meeting of the Anatomical Society in Dul)lin, June 10 , 1898. They 'were 
measured in tlie Anthropometrical Laboratory of Trinity College, and the data were 
piddished in the ‘Journal of Anatomy’ in 1898. The University College .stall 
consist of twenty-five members only of the staff of University College, London, 
measured Ijy Professor Karl Pearsox. The Bedford College students were 
measured Ijy Miss C. 1). Fawcett, B.Sc., and myself, and were thirty in number. In 
all these cases there were undoubtedly a good many heads not of English origin, but 
this was especially the case at the Anatomical C’ongress, where a number of foreign 
savants were present. 1 sliould consider the Briti.sh Association returns the most 
homogeneous and reliable for woi'king witli, but it is noteworthy to what an extent 
the Bedford Colleo’e women exceed in size of head the women attendino; the British 
A.ssociation meetings. 
Now it woidd be impossilJe to compare the /q, /jq, of the British Association 
measurements directly witli the Lq, B,j, of the Bavarians, for the latter belong to a 
far more brachycephalic race. But if we compare y + A,j) witli ^ (L,j -f B() -p Ho) 
we find a difference of 107 for ^ and 9 ’8 for 5 . If we compare the corre.sjionding 
residts for tlie Aino, a race ivith somewhat tlie same degree of dolichocejihaly, we 
find difierences of 12 ’5 and 10‘8 respectively. Although we cannot lay much stress 
on this reasoning which supposes | (L,, -p Bq + Hq) approximately con.stant for local 
races, still it confirms Welcker and Merkel’s results so far as it goes. I think, 
without differentiating betiveen the sexes, we shall obtain reasonable re.sults by cou- 
sideiino’ that we must subtract about 11 millims. from the head measurements in 
order to obtain tlie corresponding skull measurements. This being so, we have the 
following fundamental eipiations deduced from the mean ecpiation of p. 243, to find the 
capacity from measurements on the living head :—• 
cJ C = -000337 (/- 11) (fi - 11) (/;.-11)-P 406-01| 
? C = -000400 (/- 11) (fi - 11) (/? -11) -p 206-60] ’ ' ' 
If we use tlie Britisli As.sociation mean values in (14), we find that for the mean 
skull capacity of the British—no doulit English in the bulk—the values 
S 1495 cubic centims. ? 1323-5 cubic centims. 
There apjiears at jiresent to be no satisfiictoiy determination of the skull caj^iacity 
of English men and women, and tliese results are, I iielieve, as reliable as any e.stimates 
yet formed.^' The ratio of d to ? skull capacity Avould thus be 1-13, corresponding 
well with the ratio of lirain weights, 1-12, as determined by Eeid and Peacock, but 
considerably higher than the ratio for brain weiglits given by CTexdixxixg and Sims. 
A rough sort of control formula for comparison with (14) may be obtained by 
substituting the British A.ssociation values for Cjj, Iq, h^, and in tlie eipiation 
C — (1,3 -= e (I X h X h — Iq X X h^). 
* See Reahsox, “ Y.'iriatioii in Man .and Wnnian,’' ‘ The Chances of Death,’ vol. I, p. 328. 
