262 
DR A. LEE AND PROFESSOR K. PEARSON ON 
Ancient Egyptians, S, 202 Skulls. 
Organ. 
i 
Mean. 
S. D. 
Correlation. 
1 
IT . . . 
511-722 
14-010 
r = -8133 ± -0161 
c . . . 
1391-54 
121-616 
/-j;y = ‘6651 + ‘0265 
5' . , . 
306-703 
8-204 
r^c = -7876 ± 0176 
Ancient Egyptians, ?, 96 Skulls. 
IT . . 
495-104 
14-116 
-8262 + 
•0218 
C . . 
1251-98 
102-063 
'Vy = 
•6246 ± 
•0420 
5' . . 
.1 296-073 
i 
8-414 
>Vc = 
•6731 ± 
•0377 
From these data I have deduced the following equations for reconstruction :— 
For males : 
C = 7-060 U - 2220-98 p.e. 
C = 11-676 V - 2189-61 p.e. 
C = 4-505 U+ 6-559 V -2925-31 p.e. 
For females : 
47-72 
\/ n 
50-5 4 
\/n 
39-28 
Vn 
. ( 20 )". 
. (21)". 
. ( 22 )". 
0 = 5-974 11 - 1705-73 p.e. 
C = 8-165 V - 1165-66 p.e. 
0= 4-811 U + 3-124 V- 2054-94 p.e. 
\/ n 
50-91 
s/n 
36-23 
\/« 
Now, although the Naqada and Theban skulls have in some cases very close mean 
values—and it is impossilDle not to consider the races very closely related—yet the 
reconstruction equations for C from U and differ very widely. It is true that the 
Theban skull capacity calculated from the Naqada formula or the Naqada capacitv 
calculated from the Theban formula do not o-ive verv bad results • 
i 
1 
Aetna!. 
From Theban 
formula (22). 
Naqada ■ 
r d • ■ 
1379 
1365 
L ? • • 
1281 
1242 
Actual. 
From Naqada. 
Theban < 
fd • • 
1391 
1251 
1394 
1285 i 
