C ranial C apacity M )&over C ranial Capacity 1380-1440. C ranial Capacity 1280-1360. C ranial Capacity 1120-1260.
FACIAL
INDEX 4849 50 515253545556575859606162
——----— 1— ^— ------------ ■/v—-------------- s ^ \ s' — ^
“ X 67 68 69 70 7172 75 74 76 76 7 7 78
9 US1
R m . 68 69 70 7 1 7 2 73 74 73 76 7778
JNDEX 5756 5554 5352 51,50 4P 48 4746 454443
«48 49 50 5152 53 54.55 56 57 58 59 60 61 £
NASAL
INDEX 1099 111 . 58 57 56 55 54 53 5251,50 49 48 4746 4544 43
I
I
4849505152 53 5455 56 5758 59 60 6162 loss n i ' 1¥ 9 \ J!., **(*3 ayP9
1017 , 187 1075
33 1099 11« U5S 109* Y 1059
f K 67 68 69 70 7 1 7 2 73 74 75 76 7 7 78
1153 im liar 1099 111,7
1017 1155 1095 7 3 3 35 107$ 1059
68 69 70 7 1 72 73 74 76 76 7778
FACIAL
INDEX
1159 m i 1103 $
131 1203 1035 1 1069
c wow*67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 7 7 78
1035 1103
5 1103 1159 1111 131 IO69 1
VERTICAL
i n d e x 68 6 970 717273 7475 76 7778
!££ 575655545352 51,5049 48 4746 454443
sI
TB». 48 49 50 5152 5354 55 565758596061 £
139 u «
11 29 2 5 1143 1057
index 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 7 7 78
\ n ^ jdex 68 6 9 70 717 2 73 74 75 76 7 778
N A S A L
INDEX’** isf 1057 58 5756 55 54 535251,50 494847 46 454443
PLATE II. Example of the Graphic Analysis of Correlations.
LOne period, viz. the Early Predynastic Males.]
CH A P T E R IV
NEW METHODS OF ANALYS IS EX PLA INED AND TH E IR RESULTS
RECORDED
A t present our knowledge of the laws which determine the shape of the skull is confessedly
unsatisfactory. We are familiar with certain broad principles which seem to
underlie the modelling of the cranial vault and to some extent also that of the facial
skeleton, yet the exceptions to what may seem to be the rule are often so numerous that
their occurrence can only be accounted for by our lack of knowledge of the true principles
involved. There seems undoubtedly to be evidence of a correlation between cranial
capacity and head form. There seems, too, to be some connexion between cranial form
and mandibular development, but with this exception the growth and shape of the face
seem to be largely independent of that of the calvaria. Professor Kollmann of Basel
has endeavoured to establish a correlation between head form and face form, and
though in many instances this suggestion seemed fruitful, yet as a matter of experience
it is common knowledge that the exceptions are likely to prove as numerous as the
examples of the rule. Hitherto we have considered the various indices independently,
and have endeavoured to trace throughout the various periods the modifications which
the indices have undergone. It is now necessary to consider whether there is any
correlation between these several indices, and whether the changes which each exhibit are
in any way associated with the changes which occur in any or in all of the other indices.
Unfortunately, the data at our disposal are insufficient for us to discuss satisfactorily
the correlations between cranial capacity and the cephalic index, since it appears to be
a matter of much importance that in discussing this association we should also have
at our command evidence of the stature of the people with whom we are dealing.
There seems to be little doubt that, as a general rule of craniology, a rise in the
cranial capacity is accompanied by a broadening of the head, provided always that the
stature be the same. But unfortunately in the present instance, whilst, as will be seen,
there is a general corroboration of this rule, yet there are exceptions which may most
plausibly be accounted for on the hypothesis of a variation in the stature of the groups
examined. This hypothesis is confirmed by the fact that in nearly all cases the females
are less dolichocephalic than the males, their absolutely smaller cranial capacity being
compensated by their shorter stature.
With only so few rules to guide us, it proved a matter of difficulty to subject the
various series to any preconceived theory of correlation. We were perforce left with
the only alternative, viz. that of treating our data in every possible combination in the
hope of detecting such correlations as might possibly exist. In the result the opinions
already expressed have been found to be abundantly confirmed. There seems to be
little or no correlation, in these series at least, between head form and upper-face form;
and whilst the relations between the cephalic index, vertical index, and cranial capacity
are by no means inconsistent with the view that there is a close association between
them, there seems ample justification for assuming that there is an intimate correlation
between the form of the face and the shape of the nose.
The method of analysis which was pursued was not statistical but graphic.
MAC1VSA H
On the correlation
of
cranial and
facial forms.
T w n Method of
i w o analysis