HUMAN REMAINS FROM THE NORTH KURGAN. A5I 
level of the lower edge of the trochanter minor on the anterior side, and on the 
lower end about in the place where it is customary to measure the lower sagittal 
diameter, both points being of course in the medial plane. The height would 
be the greatest height of the anterior surface above this base. 
By this method we obtain for the two femora under consideration a chord- 
height index =5.5 right and 5.3 left. The curvature is not evenly distributed along 
the diaphysis; it is greatest at the boundary between the upper and middle thirds. 
The contrary is the case in Homo primigenius, where the strongest curvature 
is in the lower part of the diaphysis. Thirty femora of the Anatomical Institute 
show, with the single exception of two belonging to the same individual, the same 
character in this respect as our Anau femora; this seems, too, to be the rarely 
broken rule among modern Europeans. I measured the greatest curvature, and 
obtained the curvature value, which is to be defined as the reciprocal value of the 
radius of curvature (in meters) for a distance of about 80 mm. on both femora 
= 2.7, which would correspond to a curvature radius of 37 cm. 
Notwithstanding the impression of slenderness made by this femur alongside 
of that of the Neandertal man or even of that of most Europeans, its length- 
thickness index (respectively 24.8, 23.9) lies above the mean value, 22.8, given 
by Bumiiller (1899, p. 21). This, however, is due to the fact that the circum- 
ference of the middle of the diaphysis is much enlarged by pilaster-formation, as 
Broca has called the ridge which sometimes extends down the posterior side of the 
femur and carries the linea aspera. ‘To characterize the degree of development 
of the pilaster Broca calculated an index pilastricus, taking the sagittal diameter 
at the point of greatest elevation of the pilaster, in relation to the transverse 
diameter. This index amounts for our femora, for both sides, to 121.4. We 
may use for comparison the following figures compiled by Klaatsch (1901, p. 627) 
from different authors: 
Japanese (Bumiiller)............. ToGo eskiton (Hepburn), . oc «ae < «,stoetes ss 2 3 118.4 
ATG  (BOUmUHEeR) eect oe ecc sie eles 2 ea 6 103.1 Nesron( Bumitller) sence ere ersten oes ole 119.8 
Malayan (Eeppurn)ceemer a» sistss.er 104 AustEalian; (ep OuULi eects estes ee ee AG: 
NEAOIT LECT DUET ce oss cory aiecac stare 110.1 Cro-Magnon (Bumiiller) (one individual). 128.0 
Andamanese (Hepburn).......... 113.5 
Marked curvature of the diaphysis has been held responsible for the growth 
of the pilaster. Manouvrier and Bumiiller find its cause in muscular action. 
Neither view seems to me to be correct. Bumiiller shows that curvature and 
pilaster-formation do not stand in any correlation. If we visualize the direction 
in which the bone is compressed by the weight of the body, it will seem very 
probable that the strongest tendency to break will be somewhat below the middle 
of the diaphysis; that is, at that point where the pilaster-formation is as a rule 
most marked. An exact proof of this view can be had only experimentally. 
The strongest tendency to break moves elsewhere when the bone is deformed by 
abnormal curvature. This can happen, for instance, in rachitic changes. Then 
the pilaster can move up into the upper third of the diaphysis. As Bumiiller 
remarks, a strong pilaster-formation is often accompanied by a marked convexity 
of the anterior surface, in a sense an anterior pilaster (fig. 493 d). This is equally 
