[110] But these are by no means extreme instances of the Gibraltar tibiæ.

[111] As regards the absolute dimensions of the skulls, it would seem that the Welsh crania stand high in the scale—quite as high as any of the existing races of mankind. I have made the comparison in a rough way in the following manner:—

If the numbers representing the length, breadth, and height of the skull are added together, a number is obtained which will, of course, in some measure, indicate the gross dimensions of the skull. From the rather numerous data furnished by my own Tables of Measurements I obtained the results stated in the subjoined list, in which the gross mean dimensions of various sets of crania are contrasted.

 1. Scandinavian priscan skulls of the neolithic epoch18·88
 2. Esquimaux and Greenlanders18·81
 3. Perthi-Chwareu skulls18·65
 4. Modern European18·58
 5. Various ancient and priscan skulls18·55
 6. Burmese18·55
 7. Caffres and Zooloos (extratropical negroes)18·45
 8. Derbyshire tumuli18·42
 9. Tasmanian17·95
10. Hottentot17·80
11. Negroes (intertropical)17·67
12. Australian17·58
13. Bushmen17·48
14. Veddahs17·09
15. Andamanese17·00

[112] “Notes on the Human Remains from Keiss,” p. 85.

[113] Loc. cit. p. 114.

[114] Vol. i. p. 174, pl. v.

[115] The stature is obtained, according to Prof. Humphry’s method, from the length of the femur, which is 27·5 of stature taken as 100.

[116] Ορθος straight, γναθος jaw, with profile vertical, as opposed to προγναθος, with projecting jaws, or “snouty.”

[117] “Anthropological Memoirs,” vols. i. and iii.; Huxley and Laing, “Prehistoric Remains in Caithness.”