the malari^ropessi@£ the maxillary, hone being thus prominent,
i t follows that the antrum maxillare is more spacious.
In the same manner the-sphenoidal sinuses are deeper than
in German .eneh: the cells of the'^ethmoid -bone “are
■ greater; and the papyraceous lamina, which generally, stands
in^u. perpendicular direction, is in the Esthonians somewhat
chambered, and projecting towards' the orbit; - The frontal
sinuses are very large, which in the external aspect is indicated
by., a prominent glabella, and h y projecting,.^ superciliary
arches; connected with this greater developement of,-all the
sinuses, is a more ample expansion of all the mucous membranes
lining them.
The malar process of the . upper . maxillary bone being
strongerthan usual, and on the! other hand the frontal -process
and the alveolar process of the same bone cbeipgf'Shorjter,4fe’e
whole face; from the frontal sittufeof .theiinasahhoBfeS ’to thfe
alveolar limbus, is less extended. Thi^hroad?'form .ofttfefacC,'
with contracted length, displays it^rnfluaCifce on th e sfe p eO f
the orbits, and gives to the skull of the Esthonians its most
characteristic type, for the orbits-are, im comparison with their
breadth, low, and have transversely an mb languor- a n ' almost
square shape. This-appearance depends mn^the-^proportions
already described of the ■ superior m^iil‘lary^boae,j; and s so
much the more affects the eyes, a s . the jUpra-orbital margin
under a very convex superciliary archpdescends lower,fand> is
of a form less eurvated, while opposite to it the anfra-orbital
margin also makes a very prominent edge. From the anteifidr
to the back part th e orbit is deeper than in other skulls,-and
on account of the narrow entrance appears to be. deeper than
it really is.
The root of the nose is compressed and flat, and the nasal
bones not. much chambered out» The frontal process of the
upper maxillary bone being shorter and the alveolar process
lower, and at the same time th e body of the upper maxillary
bone less broad than usual, the space surrounded by the
teeth is necessarily narrower.« .The.incisor teeth of the upper
jaw being turned obliquely forwards and rarely perpendicular,
their.alveolar edge passes gradually jn to the hard palate. The
peculiar evolution of the organs which assist manducation, oc.-
casions differences even in the. cranium, fo rJh e whole circuit
temporal is-,hstó#e )l$igtol>ly-,4efined, not .only by the:
semicircular line ofvthe os- fjronljjsybut also by a very prominent
■ cue'sfc|?abq.y e^he opening .of thc> ear, into which the zygo-
matio;®rheessesv‘às^lpntinued behind. > -Moreover in almost
alL the Esthfoniani s^ujl^tbe ç^eMal pterygoid -processes are
vefyl^fge. spinous pr<J>e^j=|5*of the sphenoidal bone:
6sfat 'time- so? pröloiigéft, that it coalesces with, the
margin^of tffet former vproefess.^ This conformation
indi^x,tcista«gfeaté^'«)lutàons;nf thé external pterygoid muscle.,
, T h % l a t e r a l ,§£ - the,lower, j aw -js^thus increased ; -hetice
p|e;çrowris,Vf thçi teeth are' found very much worn in persons
hafiiag^greater than usual powçfSpf^naàsfeication, and living on
vegetable food-*.- It onlyiremains to be observed, that, in the
lower.jaw, theascendïPg ramusViö^wer than in other skulls,,
the-angle mère pbtusë, and the posterior part o f, the body of
the*jaw le^fbcokd and tl.% anterior part> higher, and the .chin,
litself rounded. and fe®ly angular. .
The^é-cha^ö^ersjare discovered in yaÉionsxtegrees in different;
individuals^but perceptibly. exist in all the 'skullsàpf Estho-
nians at. Dorpat.;
It is.very evident that this type of the human skull differs
-very.considerably from-that of -tÉte Mongolian. Dr. Hueekhas
pointed out fh&following particulars in which the differ-;
ewe chiefly consists. The Mongolian face is broader, th e .
cheek-beUes very strong, the .malar fossa shallow, the nasal
bones small and flat,,.teeth strong and straigbtly placed, surrounding
a large, space; the-orbits are deep, less;! vsquare.
Oblique palpebral openings answer.* to the formation of the
facial bones, for the internal orbital proeéss of the frontal
•bone descends more deeply than in , Esthonians and other
Europeans, whepce the lachrymal bone and the entrance
to the canal are lower down. The internal canthus being
adjacent to this is placed lower ; hènee- the obliquity of
the rima of the lids.* We this? And nothing common to
the Mongolian type and to,the shape of the Esthonian skull,
except a certain squareness of figure which is not constant.
* I doub t the correctness of this observation, and beg to refer to remarks, in a
following chapter1, on the obliquity of the eyes in Chinese and Japanese skulls.
1 x 2