ANCIENT MAN IN NORTH AMERICA 281 
the skull, approach closely in every character of import- 
ance the average skeleton of the present-day Indian of 
the Central States. . . . The forehead is somewhat low and 
sloping when compared with that of a well-developed 
skull of a white man, but appears normal in comparison 
with the forehead of undeformed skulls of Indians." 
The dimensions are such that the Lansing skull would 
fit exactly within the conventional frame used for modern 
specimens of average size. The length is 189 mm. ; the 
width, 139 mm. ; the height of the vault above the ear- 
holes, about 122 mm. ; the brain capacity a little over 
1500 c.c. — in all respects a well-developed skull of the 
modern type. Clearly the men living in Kansas when 
the loess at Lansing was being deposited had all the 
physical characters of the American Indian. 
As regards the age of the Lansing terrace, in which 
these human remains were found, Dr G. Frederick 
Wright, who has given a lifetime to the study of- glacial 
deposits, has no doubt. " A question has been raised," 
he writes,^ "as to whether the deposit of loess at Lansing 
was original or secondary. Professor T. C. Chamberlin 
maintained that the evidence was doubtful, and that it 
might be a secondary redeposition of the material, of 
great age indeed, but much younger than the main body 
of loess in the valley. Professor N. H. Winchell and 
Dr Warren Upham (both very high authorities upon 
such subjects), after repeated visits, adduce overwhelming 
evidence that the deposit is original, and that the skeleton 
was buried by the loess at the time of its deposition 
during the ' lowan ' stage of glacial recession." The 
" lowan " interglacial period preceded the final or 
"Wisconsin " glacial phase, and followed the " Illinoian " 
glacial phase.2 The age attributed to the Lansing skeleton 
is thus about the same as the estimate for the Trenton 
fragments. Both appear to belong to the temperate 
interval which prececied the last glaciation. 
Another discovery of the remains of "loess men " was 
' See reference on p 273. 
- The writer here follows Dr Wright's terminology. 
