LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 572.05 FA v. 31 pt.l cop. 2 -etf /TADOUSAC MAP OF LABRADOR Adapted from Speck (1931, p. 565), showing approximate location, since about 1850, of local bands of Montagnais-Naskapi and Eskimo (oblique lines). The principal settlements along the northeast coast are indicated. The territory west of Ungava Bay is still uninhabited except for inland caribou-hunting parties of Eskimo ANTHROPOMETRIC OBSERVATIONS ON THE ESKIMOS AND INDIANS OF LABRADOR BY T. DALE STEWART DIVISION OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM MATERIAL AND DATA COLLECTED WILLIAM DUNCAN STRONG DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY FORMERLY ASSISTANT CURATOR OF NORTH AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY ANTHROPOLOGICAL SERIES FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY VOLUME 31, NUMBER 1 DECEMBER 30. 1939 PUBLICATION 462 KRAUS REPRINT CO. New York 1971 Reprinted from a copy in the collections of the University of Illinois Library Reprinted with the permission of the original publisher KRAUS REPRINT CO. A U.S. Division of Kraus-Thomson Organization Limited Printed in U.S.A. 51Z.C6 FA v. 31 ft i ^ ' "*- CONTENTS PAGE List of Illustrations 7 Preface 9 I. Introduction 13 The Eskimo 13 Problem of Affiliation 13 Problem of Physical Changes Due to Altered Diet 13 The Indians 15 II. Theories of Eskimo and Indian Migrations 17 The Eskimo 17 Recent Labrador Eskimo 17 Thule Eskimo 17 Dorset People 18 Prehistoric Inhabitants of Labrador 18 Theories 19 Significance of Theories to Physical Anthropology 22 The Indians 23 III. Analysis of Metrical and Non-Metrical Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 25 Methods 25 Personal Error 26 Measurements of the Skull: Old Stone Grave Series 31 Age 31 The Vault 31 Diameter Antero-Posterior Maximum 31 Diameter Lateral Maximum 32 Basion-Bregma Height 33 Cranial Index 34 Height Indices 34 Cranial Module 34 The Face 34 Diameter Frontal Minimum 34 Menton-Nasion Height 34 Alveolar Point-Nasion Height 34 Diameter Bizygomatic Maximum 36 Facial Indices 36 Basion-Nasion 37 Basion-Alveolar Point 37 The Orbits, Nose, and Alveolar Arch 37 Orbital Height, Mean 37 Orbital Breadth, Mean 37 Orbital Index, Mean 37 Nasal Height 37 Nasal Breadth 37 Nasal Index 40 Length of Alveolar Arch 40 Breadth of Alveolar Arch 40 Alveolar Arch Index 40 Discussion 40 Measurements of the Skull: Recent Grave Series 42 3 1 Contents PAGE Non-Metrical Observations on the Skull 43 Norma Lateralis 44 Profile 44 Pterion 45 External Auditory Meatus 45 Lower Jaw 46 Norma Frontalis 46 Inclination of the Orbits 46 Norma Verticalis 47 Parietal Foramina 48 Norma Basilaris 49 Jugular Fossae 49 Perforation of the Tympanic Plate 49 Teeth 50 Palatal and Mandibular Tori 52 General 52 Microcephaly 52 Pathology 53 Discussion 53 Measurements and Observations on the Long Bones 53 Humerus 54 Septal Apertures 54 Radius 56 Femur 57 Third Trochanters 57 Tibia 57 Long Bone Relationships 61 Reconstructed Stature 61 Reconstructed vs. Living Stature: St. Lawrence Island Eskimo 63 Reconstructed vs. Living Stature: Nunivak Island-Hooper Bay Eskimo 64 Reconstructed vs. Living Stature: Labrador Eskimo .... 64 General Observations 65 Vertebrae 65 Pathology 66 Discussion 67 IV. Record of Contact between Europeans and Native Population of Northeast Labrador 70 The Moravian Missions V- 70 Population 71 Intermixture 72 Longevity 75 V. Analysis of Metrical and Non-Metrical Observations on Living Eskimos and Indians 76 Circumstances Surrounding the Collection of the Data 76 Problems Involved in Data of This Nature 77 Personal Error 78 Trial Measurements 78 Duplicate Measurements 79 Comparative Data 79 Age 82 Birthplace 82 Contents 5 PAGE Resume of Conditions Affecting the Labrador Series 83 Individual Measurements and Observations 84 Stature 84 Sitting Height 85 Relative Sitting Height 86 Head Length 87 Head Breadth 89 Cephalic Index 90 Head Height 93 Height-Length Index 95 Minimum Frontal Diameter 96 Fronto-Parietal Index 96 Maximum Bizygomatic Diameter 97 Cephalo-Facial Index 98 Bigonial Diameter 99 Gonio-Zygomatic Index 100 Menton-Crinion 100 Total (Physiognomic) Facial Index 103 Menton-Nasion 103 Forehead Height 104 Nose Height 105 Nose Breadth 106 Nasal Index 107 Ear Length 108 Ear Breadth 109 Ear Index 110 Skin Color Ill Missing Teeth 112 Palatal Raphe 113 Discussion 114 VI. General Discussion 119 VII. Conclusions 124 Appendices 126 Bibliography 155 Index 161 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PLATES 1. Four views of skull 192001 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Old stone grave series. Old male. 2. Four views of skull 192031 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Old stone grave series. Old female. 3. Four views of skull 192006 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Recent grave series. Male, 69. 4. Four views of skull 192007 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Recent grave series. Old male. Note pathological changes in maxillae. 5. Four views of skull 192008 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Recent grave series. Male, 73. 6. Four views of skull 192009 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Recent grave series. Male, 43. 7. Four views of skull 192010 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Recent grave series. Male, 37. 8. Four views of skull 192013 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Recent grave series. Male, 21. Note diminutive upper lateral incisors. 9. Four views of skull 192025 (Field Museum) oriented in Frankfort position. Recent grave series. Female, 52. 10. Two views of the right humerus of 192009 (Field Museum) showing patho- logical proximal extremity. Recent grave series. 11. Male Eskimos from Nain, Labrador. Figs, a, b, and d are Strong's subjects 21, 188, and 13, respectively. Photographs by Strong. 12. Male Indians of the Davis Inlet and Barren Ground Bands. Figs, a to d are Strong's subjects 1, 4, 3, and 39, respectively. Photographs by Strong. 13. Indians of the Davis Inlet and Barren Ground Bands. Fig. d is a female. Figs, a and c are Strong's subjects 34 and 43, respectively. Photographs by Strong. 14. Eskimo women from Hopedale or Nain, Labrador. Photographs by Langford. 15. Figs, a and b, Eskimo women from Hopedale or Nain, Labrador. Figs, c and d, Indian women of the Davis Inlet Band. Fig. c is Strong's subject 5. Photographs by MacMillan and Strong. 16. Female Indians of the Davis Inlet and Barren Ground Bands. Figs, a, b, and c are Strong's subjects 8, 7, and 37, respectively. Photographs by Strong. TEXT FIGURE PAGE 1. Graph formed by connecting the Xp.e.'s of various measurements and indices for three Eskimo groups as calculated against the Labrador group. All points above the horizontal line at the level of 3 Xp.e. are considered statistically significant 41 MAP Map of Labrador adapted from Speck (1931, p. 565) showing approximate location, since about 1850, of local bands of Montagnais-Naskapi and Eskimo (oblique lines). The principal settlements along the northeast coast are indicated. The territory west of Ungava Bay is still uninhabited except for inland caribou-hunting parties of Eskimo Frontispiece PREFACE Among the important results of the 1927-28 Rawson-MacMillan Subarctic Expedition of Field Museum are the measurements secured by Dr. W. D. Strong on a large series of living Labrador Eskimos and a small group of Montagnais-Naskapi Indians. When obvious mixed-bloods and sub-adults are eliminated, these series comprise 137 Eskimos (58 males, 79 females) and 18 Indians (11 males, 7 females). In addition, physical anthropology benefited by the Expedition's recovery of considerable Labrador Eskimo skeletal remains. This material includes 32 measurable skulls (17 males, 15 females), many of which have associated skeletal parts. The present study, while based primarily upon this collection, also presents new observations on much other material, as will appear. Originally this study was conceived, and indeed largely com- pleted, as a report on the measurements of the living Labrador Eskimos and Indians secured by Dr. Strong. These observations on the living seemed such a natural descriptive unit that, although I knew Dr. Strong had also obtained skeletal remains from the same region, I did not at first consider their inclusion in this study. It was only after analysis of the measurements on the living was well advanced that I perceived the need for information on the earlier population of Labrador. Obviously, without some knowledge of the prehistoric Labrador physical type it is impossible to determine what changes may have taken place during the historic period and this complicates group comparisons. Since measurements on the living of the northeast coast of Labrador date back only to 1880, whereas the historic period began there about 1770, the earlier physical type can best be identified in the skeletal remains. Moreover, since the published data on Labra- dor skeletal remains are limited to scattered reports on small numbers (see Appendix A), it is desirable to increase these observations. Unfortunately, this applies only to the Eskimo; no skeletal remains of Labrador Indians have been secured. When I thus undertook to broaden the scope of the study it appeared that the available skeletal remains from Labrador, in combination with the data on the living, constitute a rather unusual series. Dr. Strong secured for Field Museum some skeletons of Eskimos who had received Christian burial during the middle of the nineteenth century. Also, he obtained a few skeletons from pagan 9 10 Preface stone graves. It is the latter type of grave, dating back to the eighteenth century or farther, from which have come the few Labra- dor Eskimo skulls and skeletons described in the literature. Thus there are available for the Eskimo population three groups represent- ing separate chronological periods: (1) an old stone grave series (pre-White, or its equivalent as far as the influence of civilization is concerned) ; (2) a mid-nineteenth century grave series (early Mission period); and (3) recent living (1880-1928). Naturally, measure- ments on the living and on the skeleton are not strictly comparable except for a few characters such as head shape and stature. Never- theless, the combination of these two forms of data for intervals during more than a century is unique for many native populations, and especially so in the far north. Having secured permission to examine and include the skeletal material, I decided to leave the section on the living essentially as originally planned, except for broadening the interpretation. As will be seen by reference to Chapter V, the comparisons are made chiefly with other data on the living of Labrador. The reason for thus restricting the comparisons is due to the fact that as recently as 1933 an extensive study of measurements on living Eskimos was made by Seltzer. Also, no new information regarding the anthro- pometry of Labrador Indians has appeared since Hallowell's pioneer study of 1929. In presenting the skeletal data, unlike those for the living, it became necessary to make certain general comparisons because newer figures have appeared since Oetteking's report — the one study dealing largely with Labrador crania — was published in 1908. It may be added that the series of Labrador Eskimo skeletal remains heretofore studied either are inadequate in number or are not com- pared with other Eskimo groups. During the progress of this study, as outlined, I have received from a number of sources assistance which I am pleased to acknowl- edge. It is desirable in a few cases to tell the story of this co-opera- tion, since it has an important bearing on the course of the study. From early reading on the subject I was aware of Shapiro's state- ment (1931, p. 355) that Duckworth and Pittard seem to have measured the same group of Labrador Eskimos. Apparently a group of 26 individuals from Hebron was being exhibited in Europe and was seen by Duckworth in 1899 and by Pittard in 1900. When I noted also that Dr. Boas had reported (1895) the stature of 26 Labrador Eskimos, presumably measured at the Chicago fair (1893), Preface 11 it occurred to me that perhaps some of this group 1 might have been taken on the European tour. Upon questioning Dr. Boas on this point he stated that his measurements were all taken in Labrador and not at Chicago. Furthermore, he generously sent me the original data, which proved to have been taken in 1891-92 by Professor Leslie A. Lee (see Cilley) and Mr. J. D. Sornberger. These records show that the subjects measured all lived in settlements to the south of Hebron. Since most of the Lee-Sornberger findings have never been published, they greatly enhance the value of the present study. I discovered that perhaps the largest collection of skeletal re- mains from Labrador old stone graves is in the Peabody Museum, Harvard University. This collection, for the most part obtained by Sornberger (at the time he measured the living), was reported on briefly by Russell and Huxley in 1899. Since only average measurements are given by these authors, I inquired of Dr. Hooton whether the original detailed records were still preserved. When these records could not be located, Dr. Hooton kindly granted me permission to restudy the collection. The facilities of the labora- tory of Physical Anthropology in Peabody Museum made the exam- ination of this material both easy and pleasant. As already indicated, Dr. Oetteking published in 1908 the only extensive study heretofore made upon Labrador Eskimo crania. The nucleus of this study was the Hantzsch collection at Dresden, consisting of nine skulls from Labrador, two from Greenland and one from the Aleutian Islands (to mention only the adults). For the purposes of his study Dr. Oetteking did not sex these skulls, pre- sumably because much of the comparative material from Greenland (Bessels, Fiirst and Hansen) 2 also was not sexed. When I explained to him that I wished to include the Labrador adults in my series, Dr. Oetteking very kindly secured the proper sex identifications for me through Professor Struck of Dresden. Professor Suk of Brno, Czechoslovakia, kindly sent me his copy of S. K. Hutton's privately printed publication (1926) entitled "Health Conditions and Disease Incidence among the Eskimos of Lab- rador." A copy of this book could not be procured in this country. Finally, but not least, I am indebted to the Smithsonian Institu- tion for the full support which I have received during the course of 1 The correspondence in number is, of course, a coincidence, because the group visiting Europe included children. 2 The individual skulls were sexed by Fiirst and Hansen; but with the exception of C.I., all distributions and calculated means are for the combined sexes. 12 Preface this study. Not only have I been permitted to use my official time, and the facilities of the United States National Museum, for this purpose, but the Institution has given me leave and defrayed my expenses to Chicago and Cambridge for the purpose of studying the skeletal collections in Field and Peabody Museums, respectively. December 9, 1938 T. Dale Stewart United States National Museum The field work forming the nuclear body of the present report was accomplished in northeastern Labrador during 1927 and 1928 while the investigator was serving as anthropologist with the Rawson- MacMillan Subarctic Expedition of Field Museum. I wish first of all to acknowledge my gratitude to President Stanley Field and the Trustees of Field Museum, to the late Frederick H. Rawson, and to Commander Donald B. MacMillan, for the opportunity thus afforded. To the Moravian missionaries at Hopedale, Nain, and Hebron, Mr. and Mrs. Walter Perrett, Mr. and Mrs. Paul Hettasch, and Mr. and Mrs. Waldman respectively, I am indebted for complete scientific co-operation and unstinted hospitality during my travels up and down the coast. Dr. E. K. Langford was an invaluable companion and assistant on many of these journeys. Finally, I am grateful to Dr. T. Dale Stewart for taking these rough and too often incomplete data and painstakingly fitting them into the present larger study. For certain errors in a portion of the basic data herein pointed out I accept full responsibility. In part they are personal, in part due to defects in training. Since I am deeply convinced of the basic necessity of the combined biological and cultural approach in anthro- pology this lack of training and practice in anthropometry is sig- nificant. Until all our university departments in anthropology offer adequate opportunities for, and enforce, such training, penetrating biological and cultural correlations will rarely be made by anthro- pologists. That a field ethnologist among a willing people should fail to record biometric data seems absurd. Yet so long as the field ethnologist or archaeologist lacks the necessary training and practice in this regard the results of such work must always be suspect. December 15, 1938 William Duncan Strong Columbia University ANTHROPOMETRIC OBSERVATIONS ON THE ESKIMOS AND INDIANS OF LABRADOR I. INTRODUCTION The Eskimos The northeast coast of Labrador is peopled by a remnant of the Eskimo population that at the beginning of the historic period extended to the Gulf of St. Lawrence (Speck, 1931, p. 560). This remnant, probably somewhat mixed in blood through long contact with Europeans, nevertheless excites the curiosity of the physical anthropologist for several reasons. PROBLEM OF AFFILIATION The coast of Labrador, as far as the Eskimo is concerned, seems always to have been a sort of cul-de-sac; the entrance was from the north; to the south and recently in the interior were hostile Indian tribes. This being the case, speculation naturally arises as regards the wave or waves of migration represented in the modern population, as postulated in the various theories of Eskimo origin and dispersal (see Chapter II). The solution of this problem is hardly to be expected of physical anthropology alone; archaeology must lead the way here. However, the analysis of new anthropometric data from Labrador in the light of recent data on other Eskimo groups, should at least define the problems more clearly. PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL CHANGES DUE TO ALTERED DIET From another standpoint new anthropometric data on the Eskimo population of Labrador are of peculiar interest. Since 1771, when the first Moravian mission was permanently established, the major part of the northeast coast has been under the spiritual, moral, and commercial guardianship of the Moravian missionaries. The still relatively high percentage of fullbloods here, retaining many of their original customs, is probably due to the fact of this protection from rapacious commercial interests. In this connection, the mis- sions, while rapidly changing Eskimo beliefs, have seemingly retarded the introduction of such things as European foods. The result is that both the mixed-bloods and the amount of European foods consumed decrease as one goes north; or, in other words, as the influence of the Moravians increases. 13 14 Introduction On this subject Dr. S. K. Hutton, a medical missionary and a keen observer who spent several years in Labrador, has commented as follows: At Okak, and in the north generally, the people are broad and plump, with flat faces and sunken noses; but farther south I have seen lean, sharp- faced Eskimos, with bony limbs and pointed noses. They are pure-blooded Eskimos, all of them; they may be lean and bony without any admixture of other blood; and the cause of the change lies in the altered food and habits of the people themselves. At the southern stations they are more in contact with the outside world, and, especially, there are English-speaking settlers living among them, cod- fishing and fur-trapping. The Eskimos are born imitators; they do what they see others do; and when they have settler folks living among them in little wooden shacks like their own, and passing in and out among them, it is small wonder that they fall into the settler habits of food and clothing (1912, p. 215). The missionaries have done the people a good service in persuading them to remain Eskimos in their food and clothing; there has been no attempt to force European ways upon them; and I am convinced of the wisdom of this attitude because I have seen how the natives degenerate when they take to European food. They lose their natural coating of fat to a great extent, and need more clothing to withstand the cold; they become less robust, less able to endure fatigue, and their children are puny (p. 279). This factor of altered diet is one that has entered all too little into the researches of physical anthropologists, chiefly of course because it is obscured by other factors and also because series of measurements representing different time intervals are not often available. However, among the Western Eskimos the appearance of dental caries has been attributed by Collins (1932) to a change in diet., Also attacking the problem of dental caries from the anthro- pological approach, Dr. Weston A. Price of Cleveland has made an extended series of investigations among highly immune primitive racial stocks at their zone of contact with modern civilization. He made these further observations: ^s. ... I have found that several other degenerative processes rapidly appear in the group being modernized. Among these are a lowered resistance to infective processes and the development of physical disturbances. These are proving to be the result of an inadequate nutrition of the individual during the formative period and related directly to the nutrition of the mother. This latter group often includes facial deformities, crooked teeth, abnormally narrow nostrils with inadequate nasal openings, and a narrowing of the body pattern including the hips. An important phase of this change in physical development is expressed by a narrowing and lengthening of the face. It is most significant that these changes in physical development produce a series of deformity patterns which are characteristic of the people of our modern civilization. It is also of great significance that these deformity patterns are Introduction 15 the same for all of the primitive racial stocks studied when they have adopted the imported staple foods of our modern civilization, including white flour, sugar, polished rice and canned goods (1937, unabridged abstract). In view of these opinions, the Labrador material of the present study affords an opportunity to test the effect of this dietary factor, for not only does the consumption of European foods vary geo- graphically, but also in time — as the canning of foodstuffs became more efficient, to mention only one element. On the other hand, if physical changes have taken place in the Labrador population as the result of diet, then it will be appreciated why physical anthropology is handicapped in solving the problem of affinities. The Indians Another native element in the population of the Labrador penin- sula, and apparently a relatively recent arrival, is the Indian of the interior— the Montagnais-Naskapi tribe of the Algonkin linguistic family. The people of this tribe are nomadic hunters organized into bands, each of which claims a large section of the territory as a hunt- ing preserve (see Map). Extending southward all of the way to the Gulf, the Indians have become much mixed with European blood, especially in the south. Speaking of these southern bands, Hallowell states as follows: That [White admixture] has taken place is not to be denied. ... In some families indeed, it is not only traditional but, as expressed in a few traits, perfectly apparent to the eye (1929, pp. 338-339). On the other hand, the Indians and Eskimos have always been hostile and probably have not admixed appreciably. Thus Kohl- meister and Koch, writing in 1814 of a voyage of exploration from Okak to Ungava Bay, say that ... to the south of Hopedale the Indians and Esquimaux sometimes meet, but as the Hopedale Eskimaux seek to cultivate their friendship, quarrels and bloodshed seldom occur. In Ungava, however, though they often exchange tokens of friendship, they are apt to give way to their national jealousies; and provocations being aggravated, their meetings now and then terminate in murder. The Esquimaux are much afraid of the Indians, who are a more nimble and active race (p. 57). About one hundred years later Hutton (1912) found the same reaction at Okak: Eskimos and Indians are hereditary foes: even in my time I have seen Eskimos scared at the mention of "Indian," and when I travelled southward my drivers once asked me in awestruck voices, "Shall we see the Allat?" (Indians) (pp. 110-111). 16 Introduction Dr. Strong's data include measurements on living Indians of two of the most northerly bands (Barren Ground and Davis Inlet). It might be supposed, therefore, that these remote bands, as in the case of the Eskimos, would be relatively pure-blooded. However, Dr. Strong's records show that even here both White and Eskimo blood is present, though dilute. This is indicated by the following account of the origin and history of the Davis Inlet band, which I have abstracted from Dr. Strong's ethnological manuscript: Paradoxically enough the Davis Inlet band of Indians owes its inception to the mating four generations ago of a Scotchman (or Scotch-Cree half breed) and an Ungava Eskimo woman. According to the account of his descendants, this man was a Hudson Bay Company clerk at East Main or some nearby post on James Bay. His post was attacked by Indians, said to be the Moca- nuinuits or Rupert House people, and was burned to the ground. Following a successful punitive expedition against the attackers, Mantish [Macintosh?] as he is called by the Indians, went to Northwest River and thence to Petis- kapau Lake where he established a post. The local Indians here were the petiskopauinluts "Petiskapau people," but even the Barren Ground people occasionally came this far south to trade. The post was later abandoned and Mantish crossed overland with the Indians to Ungava. Here he built another trading post after returning overland for supplies and material which he took to Ungava by sea . . . here he married an Eskimo woman named Habidlnik and had several children. He died in Ungava at a ripe old age. Most of the children of this mating reverted to their mother's people and their descendants today are probably Eskimo. One son, however, Edward Mantish (or Rich), returned on his father's trail to Northwest River where he married a fullblood Mingan Indian woman . . . but for some reason ... he moved north to the vicinity of Davis Inlet. . . . For many years after leaving the Northwest River band he lived with the Barren Ground people in the interior and his six sons grew up with these people and with other nearby Labrador Indian groups. Three of the sons married Indian women from the Northwest River band, one married an Ungava Indian woman and two died unmarried. . . . Besides the Riches, another family, that of Long Shan, makes up the Davis Inlet band. Long Shan is a cousin of uncertain degree . . . and came from Northwest River many years ago. .V. The present generation of the Davis Inlet Band have for the most part married women from the northern [Indian] bands. . . . II. THEORIES OF ESKIMO AND INDIAN MIGRATIONS The Eskimo In comparing the Labrador and other Eskimo anthropometric data it is important that those groups be included that may, if possible, throw some light on the problem of Eskimo migrations. To this end it is necessary to review briefly the cultural differentia- tion of the Eastern Eskimo and the theories accounting for their widespread distribution. The older views — largely speculations — can be ignored here in favor of the latest theories grounded directly upon archaeological and ethnological evidence. RECENT LABRADOR ESKIMO Before becoming altered by contact with European civilization, the culture of the Labrador Eskimo seems to have been most closely related to that distributed over the central Arctic. Thus in his study of relationships based on the archaeology of the Central Eskimos Mathiassen makes the following statement: .... In several respects Baffin Land and Labrador differ from the Central Eskimos, in that more of the Thule culture has been preserved there than in the central regions proper. This has, for instance, been observed when dealing with the form of houses, the whalebone house still being used in places along the east coast of Labrador. Some of the elements which Baffin Land and Labrador, but not the Central Eskimos, have in common with the Thule culture are, it is true, objects found in the earth which may date from the time of the Thule culture: lamps with a ridge and round-cornered, square cooking pots, etc.; but other types are used to this day and show that the present day Bafhnlanders and Labrador Eskimos have inherited a good deal more from the Thule culture than their western neighbours: whaling harpoon, women's boat, etc. In addition, these Eskimos are coast dwellers to a much greater degree than the other Central Eskimos and consequently live a less nomadic life. And yet in most features — and the most important ones at that — they resemble the other Central Eskimos: snow house, sledge, hunting implements, clothing, etc. They are much closer related to the Central Eski- mos than to the Thule culture, even if they have taken over a number of its elements (1927, pp. 163-164). THULE ESKIMO The Thule culture mentioned in the above statement, the details of which are unimportant here, is a prehistoric phase of Eskimo culture centering in the Hudson Bay region of northern Canada, but also known from Greenland. Some sites in Greenland have yielded artifacts of Norse origin, thus aiding in establishing the chronological position of this culture. Generally, though, in the eastern Arctic, 17 18 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Thule remains are known only from pre-contact sites, and, where the two occur together, underlying the deposits of the modern Eskimo. However, one group of Thule Eskimos is known to have survived on Southampton Island until about 1902 (Mathiassen, 1927, pp. 284-286). DORSET PEOPLE Although Mathiassen considers the Thule to be the original Eskimo culture in the eastern Arctic, Jenness has presented evidence that the Thule in turn perhaps were preceded by the so-called "Dor- set" people. He says: Objects of Dorset culture types . . . have been found in many scattered districts throughout the eastern Arctic. . . . Thule remains also are known from nearly all these places, or from places not far distant, so that it might still appear probable that the Dorset culture was not an independent phase in Eskimo history, but in some way linked with the Thule. In 1929, however, W. J. Wintemberg, of the National Museum of Canada, discovered several pure Dorset sites (that revealed no trace of European contact such as iron, and, therefore, could not be later than a.d. 1500) along the northwest coast of Newfoundland, and also at Bradore, on the coast of Labrador to the north- ward. Here the genuine Thule culture was conspicuously absent, as it seems to be also along the coast of Labrador to the northward. It is very difficult to believe that both the Thule culture itself, and a peculiar twelfth to fifteenth century phase of it, could overlap each other in so many parts of the eastern Arctic and preserve their separate characteristics alongside of one another; that this peculiar phase, practically unchanged, could extend from northern Greenland and Ellesmere Island to Newfoundland within one or two centuries. Every difficulty disappears, however, if we regard the Dorset as an independent culture contemporaneous in some places with the Thule, in others preceding and probably extinguished by it (1933, pp. 390-391). PREHISTORIC INHABITANTS OF LABRADOR For northeastern Labrador Dr. Strong has described (1930) a stone culture found at three sites between, Hopedale and Nain by the Rawson-MacMillan Subarctic Expedition of Field Museum. Owing perhaps to the small number of artifacts recovered, or to the nature of the sites (workshop, small camps) this stone culture is of uncertain relationship to the Dorset and Thule cultures. After describing his finds, Strong concludes: There is a striking difference between the sites known to be of Eskimo origin in northeastern Labrador and those we have been discussing. . . . Most of [the Eskimo sites] we examined and excavated dated from early mission times, that is, the latter half of the eighteenth century, and contained objects showing early Caucasian contact. The bulk of the material, however, was Eskimoan and consisted for the most part of steatite (cooking pots and lamps), bone, antler and ivory work, with stone implements other than steatite in a Theories of Eskimo and Indian Migrations 19 decided minority. Like the stone, sod and whalebone houses, stone graves, gift cairns and box traps, the material culture revealed by excavation most closely resembles the Thule and the later Eskimo cultures of the central Arctic. . . . Both the Thule and Cape Dorset cultures, like the known Labrador Eskimo sites, are characterized by bone, antler, ivory, and steatite artifacts, whereas the Labrador stone culture under discussion contains almost nothing of these materials and possesses in addition such unique types as the gouge, ground chisel, and oval celt, which are not at all characteristic of the Eskimo. Moreover, these stone culture sites are entirely without the surface indications or abundant bone debris that mark the Eskimo remains. Certain isolated finds such as the stone adzes previously described, suggest that an older Eskimo culture may yet be distinguished in northeastern Labrador that will bridge the wide gap between the old stone culture and the later bone and steatite-working Eskimo culture. This is a possibility, but until such evidence comes to hand I incline toward the belief that the true Eskimo culture reached northeastern Labrador in much the fully developed form revealed in the eighteenth century ruins. If so, this leaves the earlier stone culture with its Eskimo-like stone ulus, ground slate points, and chipped scrapers to be other- wise accounted for (pp. 131-132). The more recent (1934) work of Bird at Hopedale appears to substantiate Strong's conclusions. Moreover, Bird believes that, owing to the finding of European objects in all the sites he excavated, the Eskimo could not have been in Labrador longer than 400 years. THEORIES In broad outline, this is the picture of the known succession of eastern Arctic cultures extending back into the prehistoric. By fitting into this picture the mass of ethnological detail for the widely scattered living groups— especially that for the "primitive" Caribou Eskimo of the interior, west of Hudson Bay (Birket-Smith, 1929) — several theories of Eskimo origin and migration have been formulated. Mathiassen, as already mentioned, regards the Thule as the original Eskimo culture, the first to spread eastward over the Arctic coast of America. To him the Caribou Eskimo are primitive only in the sense of being descendants of Thule people who went into the interior and gave up many of their former customs. Birket-Smith, on the other hand, considers the Caribou Eskimo as a relatively unchanged remnant of the population from which all the other Eskimos arose. Some time in the past he would have a group move to the central Arctic coast and adapt themselves to the environment of the seashore. Moving westward to Alaska these "Palaeo-Eskimo" in turn would give rise in the course of time to a "Neo-Eskimo" group with a whale-hunting, or Thule, culture. Thus, 20 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador it would be the eastern migrations of the "Neo-Eskimo" that led to the introduction of the Thule culture into Baffin Land, Greenland, Labrador, and elsewhere. Later, also according to this theory, a second group moved out of the central regions to overcome the Thule people and become the present-day Eskimo ("Eschato-Eskimo"). Since neither of these theories accounts for the Dorset culture, Jenness (1933, 1937) has been led to formulate still another theory. Speaking of Eskimo movements in Canada during the Christian era, Jenness, in his latest publication, explains his theory thus: Some time around a.d. 500, apparently, bands of Eskimos, spurred from Arctic Alaska by some unknown cause, began to spread eastward, dropping settlers all along their route. Some families hugged the mainland and con- tinued to Hudson Bay, others scattered over the islands to the northward and eventually reached Greenland. There, in the southwest corner of the island, Eric the Red and his Norsemen found their traces in a.d. 982; and at Repulse Bay, in the northwest corner of Hudson Bay, the Danish archaeologist Mathi- assen recently excavated some ruined stone houses that were built about the same period. Meanwhile other and more primitive Eskimo roaming the hinterland behind Hudson Bay felt similar stirrings of unrest, and sent out colonies to the coasts of the eastern Arctic. A few families reached Ellesmere Island and Greenland; others monopolized the coast and islands in Hudson Strait; and still others, working down the coast of Labrador, or else traversing the heart of that peninsula, took possession of the north arm of Newfoundland. Whether this movement from the interior to the coast preceded or coincided with the eastward movement of the Alaskan Eskimo we do not know. We suspect that it started several centuries earlier, and that in places where the two peoples subsequently clashed, as in Baffin Island, the western Eskimo had the mastery. We have reason to believe, also, that these western or "Thule" natives differed not only in culture but in physical type from the eastern Eskimo — both those who remained inland and those, the "Dorset" people, who settled on the coast — because the eastern natives seem to have acquired the features of the neighbouring Algonkian peoples with whom they jostled and intermarried through many centuries. . . . Still holding our gaze on the Eskimo, but dropping down a few more centuries, we can detect, about A.d. 1200, a new impulse surging through the Arctic. Again the Indian-like Eskimo behind Hudson Bay began to stream seaward, this time not to Hudson Bay alone, but to the Arctic coast northward and westward beyond Coronation Gulf, possibly even as far as Alaska. Little by little these newcomers swamped the older coastal inhabitants, both the "Thule" people and their own kinsmen of the "Dorset" culture, until they held undisputed sway from Coronation Gulf to Labrador. A few descendants of the "Thule" people managed to survive on Southampton Island until the beginning of the twentieth century, but the "Dorset" Eskimo, or at least their culture, disappeared completely before the arrival of Europeans, even in Newfoundland. Meanwhile, the rising islands in the far north shuffled off the seal- and whale-hunting population they had gained so short a time before. Theories of Eskimo and Indian Migrations 21 The majority of these natives made their way to Greenland, where they may have assisted in overwhelming the settlements of the early Norsemen; others, perhaps, retreated to the mainland, only to be submerged by the tide of Eskimo from the interior. . . . We are now in a position to understand why the present-day Eskimo of Canada fall naturally into three divisions. The natives in Mackenzie River delta (and, until 1902, the inhabitants of Southampton Island also) descend from some of the old "Thule" people who migrated from their Alaskan home to the eastern Arctic 1,000 or more years ago, dropping colonies all along their route; on the Barren Grounds behind Hudson Bay the primitive "Caribou" Eskimo, numbering in 1923 less than 500, represent the survivors of the second great reservoir of the race — the inland Eskimo, now shrunken to a fast vanish- ing pool; and occupying the whole coast-line from Coronation Gulf to Labrador are the Eskimo who flowed out of this inland reservoir about a.d. 1200, over- whelmed the earlier coast-dwellers, and in their new environment gained a fresh lease of life and vigour (1937, pp. 34-35). This theory, as presented by Jenness, and intended primarily to apply to the Canadian Eskimo, is not complete without some refer- ence to the work of Collins in Alaska (1937a). The work in this area has revealed cultural stages (Punuk, Birnirk, Old Bering Sea) pre- ceding and presumably ancestral to the Thule. In addition, Collins has presented evidence of a late return movement of Thule people into Alaska (1937b). In general, however, the theory stated by Jenness, particularly as applying to the eastern Arctic, may be accepted for working purposes. On the grounds of culture successions, therefore, it seems best to assume two reservoirs of population at the beginning of the Chris- tian era: one in Alaska and one in the central Arctic. Presumably, also, since these two bodies of Eskimos have so much in common culturally, they must have been united at some earlier time, but certainly before the development of the earliest culture thus far recognized — the old Bering Sea culture. Mathiassen (1936) and Collins (1937a) have suggested that the early Central, or Dorset, group of Eskimo may have been of Indian origin. Collins says: One of the most important problems of Arctic archeology is that of the origin and relationships of the Dorset culture .... Its peculiar art is to a certain extent suggestive of the earliest phase of Old Bering Sea art, and it likewise resembles the old Alaskan culture in its highly developed stone chipping technique. It cannot have been derived from the Old Bering Sea culture as we know it, however, for the latter is already in many respects a highly developed Eskimo culture, possessing numerous important features of which the Dorset culture had no knowledge. As Jenness has pointed out, the Dorset culture shows unmistakable Indian affinities, particularly with the Beothuk and the prehistoric "Red Paint" culture. Jenness has suggested that since the Dorset culture preceded the 22 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Thule, it may have been derived from that of the Caribou Eskimos. In view of the divergence of the Dorset culture from Eskimo culture generally and its rather close relationship to that of the Indians, it would seem that its origin might with equal propriety be sought in the latter direction; in which case we would suppose the Dorset to have been an originally Indian culture, which before the spread of the Thule culture to the central regions, had gradually worked northward; later, with the advent of the Thule Eskimos, the Dorset peoples would be forced to give way, and gradually succumb to the better equipped and more aggressive newcomers from the west. This, of course, is only speculation. . . (p. 373). SIGNIFICANCE OF THEORIES TO PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY From the foregoing, it appears that in order to interpret fully the Labrador physical type in terms of Eskimo origins and migrations some knowledge is necessary of at least the Thule and Dorset physical types, in addition to those of recent eastern groups. This goal is impossible at the present time because no Dorset skeletal remains have as yet been identified. Nevertheless, according to Jenness' theory, we still have, in the Thule and modern Eskimos, representa- tives of the two earlier reservoirs of population. Since the Thule physical type has been identified only during the past year (Fischer- M0ller, 1937) it is now possible for the first time to carry out even to this extent the comparisons suggested by the theories of migration. Another archaeologically identified physical type, and older even than the Thule, is that of the "Old Igloo" (Birnirk) remains from Point Barrow, Alaska, described by Hrdlicka (1930; see also Collins, 1934) . It is desirable to compare this and the Labrador series because of the contradictory opinions held regarding the physical affiliations of the "Old Igloos." Thus, Hrdlicka says (1930, p. 323), in speaking of the skull: "It is the Labrador-Greenland type throughout. . . ."; whereas Seltzer, although mistaking the "Old Igloos" for Thule people, and apparently thinking only of the living Labrador Eskimo, says (1933, p. 357) : "The present Labrador-Eskimos do not resemble the Old Igloo Thulers." Except for contributing fuller evidence toward this controversial matter, there seems to be little reason, on the basis of Jenness' theory, for expecting to find unchanged representatives of the Birnirk people in the eastern Arctic. It should be added also that these theories of Eskimo migrations, while helpful in directing anthropometric comparisons, necessarily do not indicate how completely the people of one culture phase have displaced or absorbed those of another. The skeletal remains may be the only clue to this. However, in view of the isolation and inbreeding of such relatively small groups, and unless fairly distinct Theories of Eskimo and Indian Migrations 23 physical types are represented in the bearers of the different cultures, the results of physical anthropology alone are not likely to be con- clusive in establishing the course of events. The Indians Relatively little is known regarding the early history of the Montagnais-Naskapi Indians. The early records have been sum- marized recently (1931) by Speck, from whose writings the following is extracted : Evidence of an eastward drift of Indian tribes, known as Montagnais, along the St. Lawrence coast of the peninsula occurs as early as the seven- teenth century in the Relations of the Jesuits. This evidence has been accepted without question by most historical authors .... Since there is little reason to doubt its correctness, we may next seek for more knowledge respecting the time and extent of the movement, and of the forces behind it. The sources generally agree in ascribing one such force to the Iroquois. . . . At the time of the arrival of the French in lower Canada the Montagnais were apparently located en masse in the territory north of the St. Lawrence between Quebec and the Saguenay inland to Lake St. John, and eastward to Moisie River and Seven Islands, and the waters inland to the Height of Land. At this time we do not hear much of any people residing north and east of them. With the subsequent expansion of French trading stations and mission influence, we hear of the Montagnais working eastward along the coast to Blanc Sablon. . . (p. 561). The eastward migration of Montagnais is a matter of convincing certainty from published records, showing that from Mingan eastward, and from per- haps still farther toward the mouth of the St. Lawrence, the so-called Montagnais were urging their hunting and trading down into the Gulf coast, keeping pace with the retreat or annihilation of the Eskimo, even actually push- ing them onward. This move correlates with the reasonable supposition of the eastward and northward drift of the Naskapi, resulting in the peopling by Algonkian-speaking Indians of the interior plateau and the coast — a process by the present time nearly complete; but not quite so in view of the still un- inhabited peninsula west of Ungava Bay [see Map]. I have only hinted at the possibilities here, for we are as yet woefully ignorant of what will be dis- closed by archaeological investigation (p. 564). Thus, although the contact between the Indian and Eskimo in Labrador appears to be of rather recent date, it is important to keep in mind the fact that both groups migrated there from farther west and that a remote relationship has been suggested (cf. Strong, 1930, p. 142). Mathiassen's and Collins' speculations as to the possible Indian origin of the Dorset culture have already been discussed. Shapiro (1931, 1934) has gone further and made anthropometric comparisons between modern Eskimo, Chipewyans, and Hurons. The linkage of the Chipewyans, Cree, and Eskimo has been confirmed 24 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador by Seltzer (1933). Shapiro has theorized on the basis of his anthro- pometric findings thus: The Thule type, composed of the Old Igloo and the Angmagsalik series, is, on the evidence of the Old Igloo dating, identifiable with the Thule period. Apparently, this type was once spread from Alaska to Greenland as a remark- ably stable and uniform population. Coming from the south, a population of Indian origin absorbed and in part replaced the Thule people. In the west the newcomers emerge as the type I have named Seward-Barrow .... The Indians who best represent the original stock are Athabascan Chipewyans and the Algonkian Cree and Iroquoian Huron. These three Indian groups appear to have a common bond in their conformity to the Algonkin type. The eastern Eskimos, successors of the Thule type in Greenland and Labrador, appear in some respects to be a blend between the old Thule people and the invaders of Indian origin. Another suggestion which must await ampler data points to the eastern Algonkin as a possible source for the new- comers in the eastern Eskimo area (1934, pp. 2731-2732). Discussion of these theories is best postponed until the present evidence is presented. However, I would point out here that Shapiro and Seltzer, like many others, have been misled by a mistaken identi- fication of the Old Igloo remains, which are pre-Thule, as Collins (1934) has clearly shown. III. ANALYSIS OF METRICAL AND NON-METRICAL OBSERVATIONS ON ESKIMO SKELETAL REMAINS Methods Circumstances usually determine the pattern assumed by a study of this nature. Although it is generally desirable to place on record a large body of measurements and observations for future reference, there is a lack of accord among physical anthropologists as to the items that should receive attention. Needless to say, the possible measurements or observations are innumerable. However, unless the material is permanently at hand, and time is plentiful, this course is not always possible. In the present case, the study of the skeleton was undertaken initially to facilitate analysis of meager data on the living. Also, the author had to go to Chicago and Cambridge to measure the material, and could spend only a few days at each place. These circumstances were sufficient to limit the records to essentials. The decision as to the essential measurements depended upon those available for comparison. In making comparisons of the skeletal measurements I have been guided by three considerations: (1) That the Labrador Eskimos are usually grouped with those of Greenland as the "eastern long heads" ; (2) that in a search for relationships primary attention should be given to archaeologically established groups, as discussed in the preceding chapter; and (3) that, because of the high degree of homogeneity among the Eskimos, the factor of personal error should be held to a minimum. The following circumstances favor these desiderata: My training in anthropometry has been almost entirely under the influence of Dr. Hrdlidka and as a result we accord very well in our anthro- pometric technique, as will be shown below. It happens also that Dr. HrdliSka has reported (1924, 1930) on one of the best series of Greenland skulls available — for the most part collected by Hayes in 1860-61 and described (without sexing) by Bessels in 1875. Further- more, Dr. HrdliSka has measured skeletal remains of the only two early Eskimo types thus far identified archaeologically: (1) the Barrow "Igloos" (1930), and (2) the "Thule" of the central Arctic regions (Southampton Island, 1910). These groups permit a very broad comparison in which the personal error can be evaluated. Fischer-M0ller (1937) has extended the series of known "Thule" 25 26 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador remains; his data are too important to omit. For further comparison the reader is referred to Dr. Hrdli6ka's Alaskan survey of 1930. The restricted number of measurements here reported, as dictated by circumstances and the comparative data, still include the more significant figures, and almost all of those available for the groups mentioned above. The technique of measurement used by the author is that described by Hrdlicka (1920). Minor exceptions will be explained in the appropriate places. I have subjected the data to a minimum of metrical analysis, but sufficient, I believe, to enable others to check the validity of the con- clusions. Moreover, by giving the basic data in detail in the form of appendices, it is possible for others to amplify this phase of the study. Having at my disposal, through the kindness of Dr. Hrdli6ka, most of the original records for the comparative series, I have ex- tended the same statistical treatment to these. The formulae involved are available in any standard work on statistics. In calculating probable errors of the means and standard deviation I have relied upon Pearson (1914). Because the labor involved is not proportional to the return, I have not employed statistics in series of less than 20. Personal Error As already stated, it is desirable to reduce personal error to a minimum in anthropometric records, and especially in those per- taining to Eskimos. To this end fairly precise directions have been formulated and are to some extent the subject of international agree- ments. Nevertheless, error is still introduced into these records chiefly in the matter of sexing and through differing interpretations of landmarks that require some judgment as to location. In addition there is the possible instrumental error that may either add to or compensate for unconscious bias in technique. As is well known, the difficulty of an experienced observer in sexing skeletal material varies both with the completeness of the skeleton and with the particular parts preserved. When the entire skeleton is available, the accuracy of sex identification is high; when the pelvis is missing, this accuracy diminishes considerably; and in that small group of large females resembling weak males (and vice versa), the chance of accurate sex identification, without the aid of the pelvis, is about fifty-fifty. This problem, so far as the Eskimo is concerned, has been emphasized by Morant (1926) in commenting upon his coefficients of racial likeness for Greenland crania as cal- Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 27 culated from the records of Hrdlidka (1924) and Furst and Hansen (1915): So there is sufficient statistical justification for considering that the two series of male means represent samples drawn from identically the same popu- lation. The female indices are also in perfect accord, but nearly all the female direct measurements show differences that are just significant, Furst and Hansen's means being greater than the corresponding ones given by Hrdlicka. The discordance is evidently not symptomatic of a racial difference. The difficulty of sexing their material was stressed by the writers of the Crania- Groenlandica (see p. 56) and by others who have examined Eskimo crania. The observed differences between the means are evidently due to inaccurate sexing and we are inclined to accept as accurate the determinations of the Professors of Anatomy in the Universities of Lund and Copenhagen on account of their wider acquaintance with the racial type, the fact that they were helped in many doubtful cases by an examination of the pelvis and that their male and female distributions of characters are closely fitted by normal curves (p. 260). That Morant's confidence in the superior sexing ability of Furst and Hansen is somewhat in the nature of wishful thinking, appears from an examination of the quotation referred to: If in certain cases there can be no doubt as to the sex of the cranium, there are many instances in which it is very difficult, not to say impossible, to assign a skull with certainty to one or the other sex. . . . Still it should be added that, in seemingly doubtful cases, the diagnostic of several crania could be later on confirmed by the pelvis and in rare cases by grave findings (p. 56; italics mine). It is hardly to be expected that even the most experienced of observers will agree entirely on the sex of a series of crania. In this connection I am able to present some interesting data on the error due to sexing. The series of Greenland crania measured by Hrdlicka (1924; re-examined for the 1930 report), as already indicated, is made up for the most part of the Hayes collection (expedition of 1860-61 to the Greenland side of Smith Sound near Etah), acquired through the Army Medical Museum (see Otis catalogues 1876, 1880; Nos. 1182-1253). This is part of the famous series measured, but unsexed, by Bessels (1875). Otis records the same measurements as Bessels (with only one exception, so far as I can discover: 1250-C63), and adds the sex. Since the original numbers are still visible on most of the skulls it is possible to correlate the records of Bessels, Otis, and Hrdlicka. The Hrdlicka 1924 series includes 55 skulls of the Hayes collec- tion; the 1930 series 62. Of the 55 common to both series all but four agree as to sex; at the re-examination three were changed from male to female; one from female to male. Of the 62 in common to the Hrdlicka 1930 and the Otis series, 44 are of the same sex; 18 have been considered female by Hrdlicka and male by Otis. 28 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador The personal error of these same observers due to other factors can also be determined by combining the sexes. Unfortunately, there are only two measurements which are both comparable and common to the various series: length of skull and breadth of face (bizygomatic diameter). Bessels confined his measurement of skull breadth to the parietals, 1 whereas Hrdlicka has recorded the maxi- mum. With this fact in mind I will include this measurement also. Combining the two sexes, I find that the 62 skulls measured by HrdliSka (1930) and Bessels have identically the same average length; the average breadth differs by 1.3 mm. (in favor of Hrdlicka) as might be expected from the above explanation; and the face breadth (obtained on 51 specimens) differs on the average by only 0.2 mm. (in favor of Bessels). I would conclude, therefore, that where the measurement is defined in the same way, the error from technique is negligible. We may now consider the effect of these combined errors on the averages of the respective series (Table 1). It will be seen that the tendency has been to decrease the number of males and increase the females; in other words, skulls have been removed from the lower range of the males and added to the upper range of the females. Since the decision for this change, lacking the pelvis, rests primarily upon the size of skull, the effect upon the averages has been to increase those of both the males and females. Thus it appears from the males at least that an error of 3 mm. or more can result in a small series from errors of sexing. Table 1. — Three Independent Observations on the Same Series of Greenland Crania: Example of Error Due to Sexing (In millimeters) Observer Males Females Length maximum(5U) Otis(Bessels) (41)186.4 (13)180.8 Hrdlicka (1924) (28)189^ (26)180.6 Hrdli5ka(1930) (26)189.4 (28)181.3 Skull breadth(50)* Otis(Bessels) (39)132.2 (11)126.2 Hrdli5ka(1924) (26)134.8 (24)129.5 Hrdlicka(1930) (24)135.2 (26)129.6 Bizygomatic diameter (3 5) Otis(Bessels) (27)136.3 ( 8)128.6 Hrdli6ka(1924) (17)139.0 (18)128.0 Hrdli6ka(1930) (15)140.7 (20)129.7 * Bessels by definition limits this measurement to the parietals; Hrdlicka takes the maximum. In 62 specimens (sexes combined) the difference in method favors Hrdlicka to the extent of 1.3 mm. 1 Furst and Hansen, evidently not aware that Bessels defined his measurement of breadth differently, conclude that the average breadth increases from north to south in Greenland. Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 29 The results of two observers measuring the same collection, and thereby showing their personal error, are not often available. For this reason, and in order that due consideration may be given to this factor in the present analysis, I give two more examples, this time involving myself. The first of these examples (Table 2) shows my findings on the Peabody series of Labrador Eskimo skulls in relation to the published results of Russell and Huxley (1899) on the same collection. Two factors of uncertainty enter into this table; namely, that it is im- possible now to determine (1) how many individuals were measured originally, and (2) how they were sexed. For the most part the differences in the results are probably due to sexing. Nevertheless, the numbers of individuals are large enough, and the results for the two sexes are consistent enough, to justify the conclusion that at least some of the major differences are due to technique. Table 2 shows that in general I tend to get slightly smaller measurements than did Russell and Huxley. However, three measurements yielding pronounced differences are emphasized: (1) diameter lateral maxi- mum, (2) alveolar point-nasion height, and (3) orbital breadth. These differences are best discussed in the light of the second example. Table 2. — Independent Measurements of the Same Skulls Peabody Series (Labrador)* (In millimeters) Male Female , * -. , * s Russell and Stewart Russell and Stewart Measurements Huxley(13?) (14) Dif. Huxley(15?) (21) Dif. Diam. ant.-post. max 189.2 188.5 -0.7 179.6 179.4 -0.2 Diam. lateral max 136.2 134.4 -1.8 129.9 128.2 -1.7 Basion-bregma height 136.0 135.4 -0.6 130.4 127.8 -2.6 Diam. frontal min 93.9 93.6 -0.3 90.4 89.5 -0.9 Menton-nasion height 125.0 123.3 -1.7 113.3 113.4 +0.1 Alv. pt.-nasion height 72.3 74.4 +2.1 65.5 68.8 +3.3 Diam. bizyg. max 138.1 136.9 -1.2 128.5 127.9 -0.6 Basion-nasion 104.1 102.8 -1.3 97.6 97.7 +0.1 Basion-alveolar point 100.9 102.1 +1.2 96.8 96.5 -0.3 Orbital height, meant 37.1 36.0 -1.1 34.6 34.4 -0.2 Orbital breadth, mean t 42.4 40.1 -2.3 39.7 37.8 -1.9 Nasal height 52.7 52.3 -0.4 49.4 48.6 -0.8 Nasal breadth 22.7 22.4 -0.3 21.8 21.6 -0.2 Alveolar length 54.5 54.3 -0.2 51.1 52.2 +1.1 Alveolar breadth 64.1 63.2 -0.9 61.2 62.0 +0.8 * See Appendices A 1-3 (old stone grave series) for details. t The mean is assumed for the data of Russell and Huxley. In order to show how my results check with Dr. Hrdlicka's, I measured 30 of the Greenland and Igloo skulls reported by him in 1930. The comparison, disregarding sex, is shown in Table 3. Again I more frequently get lower averages, but near agreement is the rule, 30 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador with the exception of diameter lateral maximum and nasal height. Only the first of these two exceptional measurements is common to the two examples; in both cases I have gotten a smaller figure for head breadth. Since we are all seeking maximum breadth, and since neither Dr. HrdliSka nor I take this measurement on the temporal crest, the difference would seem to reside in my greater conservatism in estimating the flare of the temporal squama, for the maximum very often coincides with the edge of this structure in Eskimos. Table 3.— Independent Measurements of the Same Skulls National Museum Series* (In millimeters) Measurements Hrdlicka (30) Stewart (30) Dif. Diam. ant.-post. max 186.3 185.7 -0.6 Diam. lateral max 133.8 132.6 -1.2 Basion-bregma height 136.0 135.6 —0.4 Alv. pt.-nasion height 73.9 73.3 -0.6 Diam. bizyg. max 137.6 137.3 -0.3 Basion-nasion 104 . 5 104 .7 +0.2 Basion-alveolar point 104.3 104.0 -0.3 Orbital height, mean 35.4 35.2 -0.2 Orbital breadth, mean 39.4 39.5 +0.1 Nasal height 51.4 52.2 +0.8 Nasal breadth 22.9 23.0 +0.1 Alveolar length 55.2 54.7 -0.5 Alveolar breadth 64.4 64.0 -0.4 * Mostly Greenland; sexes combined. Morant (1937) has pointed out (p. 4) that between 1924 and 1930 Hrdlicka seems to have changed his technique of measuring upper face height and nasal height. I am unable to learn whether HrdliSka changed his method of taking upper face height during this period, although it is certain that his present practice of locating alveolar point differs somewhat from the definition appearing in his "Anthro- pometry" (1920, p. 16, item 12). Because the point on the alveolar border between the two upper median incisors is so easily altered by absorption of the bone following tooth loss^and also since this point is not always the lowest point on the border even when the teeth are present, Hrdlicka estimates the position of the point in these cases so as to bring it into alignment with the points between the upper median and lateral incisors. Thus, a slightly larger measurement results, and some approximate measurements are included. As regards nasal height, it can be shown that HrdliSka changed the definition of the inferior nasal landmark following his experience (1925) in measuring Australian skulls: In Australia considerable difficulty was encountered with the measure- ments of the face and nose. . . . With the nose . . . the difficulty lay in the peculiarity of the lower border of the aperture. In many cases there was found Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 31 a double inferior border, a higher internal and a lower external one, with a depression (prenasal fossa) between; or there was but the higher border, the lower one being indistinct. The proper measurement of the nasal height, it was determined, is to the level of the upper border, which is also the level of the nasal floor. . . (1928, p. 2). Previously (1920, p. 16, item 13) he had recommended measuring "to the upper limiting line of the gutters." Thus the measurement has been shortened. Until engaged in the present investigation of personal error I did not realize that I was still following Hrdlicka's earlier definition. In pursuing this policy, which has given results similar to those of Russell and Huxley, I have often compromised by measuring to the crista spinalis of Gower (1923). The considerable difference in orbital breadth obtained by Russell and Huxley and by myself is due mostly of course to the use of different landmarks medially. Dr. Hrdlifika now uses lacrimale almost, if not entirely, and I follow his example. It seems obvious that Russell and Huxley have used dacryon or maxillo-frontale. It is unfortunate that this measurement is so seldom defined. Measurements of the Skull: Old Stone Grave Series It is desirable that we consider first the oldest known physical remains of the Labrador Eskimo. Thus the data on the skeletal material will be analyzed before those on the living, and the "old stone grave" series of skeletons before the "recent grave" series. In this way only is it possible to detect and interpret changes in the physical type. AGE I have very little confidence in rules for aging the skull, particu- larly in a group such as the Eskimo, hence only three broad age periods are recorded here. On this basis the only difference in age distribution between the two sexes is the greater number of young adults among the females. Combining the two sexes (55), one- quarter (25.4 per cent) are found to be old (50 years or over), 36.4 per cent middle-aged (35-50 years), and 38.2 per cent young (up to 35 years). There is no reason to believe, therefore, that this series includes an unusual representation of either immature or senile individuals. THE VAULT Diameter Antero-Posterior Maximum (Tables 4, 5). — In the four groups here compared this diameter is smallest in Labrador, but the difference in size is statistically significant only in relation to the 32 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Table 4. — Statistical Constants of Measurements op the Vault: Males Group No. Labrador*.. 38 Thulef 21 Greenland!. 49 Old Igloo | . 30 Labrador. . . 34 Thule 21 Greenland . . 49 Old Igloo.. 30 Labrador. . . 31 Thule 21 Greenland . . 49 Old Igloo.. 30 Labrador ... 34 Thule 21 Greenland . . 49 Old Igloo.. 30 Labrador. . . 31 Thule 21 Greenland . . 49 Old Igloo.. 30 Labrador. .. 27 Thule 21 Greenland . . 49 Old Igloo.. 30 Range Meanip.e. S.D. ±p.e. Diameter antero-posterior maximum 171-202 187.66±0.75 6.83±0.53 179-204 189.43±0.89 6.07±0.63 175-202 189.67±0.55 5.75±0.39 180-208 192.93dz0.75 6.09±0.53 Diameter lateral maximum 128-144 134.62dbO.51 4.41±0.36 131-144 138. 67 ±0.50 3. 38 ±0.35 126-146 136. 10 ±0.45 4. 67 ±0.32 126-140 132.77±0.46 3.76±0.33 Basion-bregma height 128-145 136. 00 ±0.50 4. 14 ±0.35 133-146 139.43±0.54 3.68±0.38 128-148 139.53±0.41 4.28±0.29 134-147 140.40±0.45 3.63±0.32 C.V.ip.e. 3.64±0.28 3.20 ±0.33 3. 03 ±0.21 3.16±0.28 64.5-77.9 68.5-78.2 65.3-78.6 62.0-75.0 Cranial index 71.80±0.34 73.24±0.42 71.74±0.31 68.80±0.38 67.4-79.2 66.2-79.2 67.4-80.0 65.9-78.9 Length-height index 72.52±0.34 2 73.72±0.45 3 73.55±0.26 2. ,93±0.24 .86±0.30 ,18±0.22 .09±0.27 77 ±0.24 04 ±0.32 72±0.18 72.83±0.36 2.89±0.25 Breadth-height index 92.8-110.2 101.11±0.55 4.25±0.39 95.0-106.8 100.52±0.46 3.13±0.32 92.3-115.9 102.57±0.46 4.72±0.32 98.5-114.0 105.73±0.46 3.78±0.33 Labrador... 27 Thule 21 Greenland . . 49 Old Igloo.. 30 Xp.e. 1.52 2.72 4.97 3.28±0.27 .... 2.44±0.25 5.70 3.43±0.23 2.18 2.84±0.25 2.68 3.05±0.26 .... 2.64±0.28 4.63 3.07±0.21 5.43 2.58±0.22 6.57 4.08±0.33 .... 3.90±0.41 2.67 4.43±0.30 0.13 4.49±0.39 5.88 3.82±0.33 .... 4.12±0.43 2.14 3.70±0.25 2.40 3.96±0.34 0.62 4.21±0.39 .... 3.11±0.32 0.82 4.61±0.31 2.03 3.57±0.31 6.42 3.36±0.31 .... 3.32±0.34 0.91 3.33±0.23 2.46 3.21±0.28 3.58 1.99±0.18 1.89±0.20 6.42 2.02±0.14 4.90 1.77±0.15 5.19 Mean height index 78.1-90.3 84.44±0.37 2.83±0.26 78.5-89.8 84.95±0.42 2.82±0.29 79.0-92.1 85.57±0.27 2.85±0.19 80.0-92.2 86.23±0.34 2.76±0.24 Cranial module Labrador... 27 145.0-158.3 152.70±0.39 ^04±0.28 Thule 21 152.0-161.7 155.72±0.43 2.95±0.31 Greenland.. 49 147.7-163.0 155.10±0.30 3.14±0.21 Old Igloo.. 30 150.0-160.7 155.40±0.34 2.75±0.24 * See Appendix Al: old stone grave series, t Fischer-Mflller (1937), Hrdlicka (1910). t Hrdlicka (1930). Old Igloo males. The shortness of this diameter in the Labrador group, allowing for a slight personal error, and in view of the low cranial index (males 71.8, females 72.2), suggests a smaller skull. Diameter Lateral Maximum (Tables 4, 5). — Allowing for a possible personal error of 1 mm., the breadth of the skull in the Labrador group is seen to approximate that for Greenland, to be less than that Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 33 Table 5. — Statistical Constants of Measurements of the Vault: Females Group No. Range Meanip.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Diameter antero-posterior maximum Labrador*.. 37 169.0-190.0 179.62±0.55 4.99±0.39 2.78±0.22 .... Thulef 10 172.0-194.0 181.80 Greenland*. 52 165.0-193.0 180.44±0.50 5.33±0.35 2.96±0.20 1.11 Old IglooJ. 31 170.0-190.0 180.84±0.70 5.80±0.50 3.21±0.28 1.37 Labrador . . Thule Greenland . Old Igloo. Labrador . . Thule Greenland . Old Igloo. Labrador . . Thule Greenland . Old Igloo. 32 116.0- 10 129.0- 52 120.0- 31 116.0- 34 121.0- 9 131.0- 52 124.0- 30 120.0- 31 66.3- 10 69.6- 52 67.0- 31 66.3- Labrador ... 33 Thule 9 Greenland . . 52 Old Igloo.. 30 Labrador. . . 29 Thule 9 Greenland . . 52 Old Igloo.. 30 Labrador... 28 Thule 9 Greenland . . 52 Old Igloo.. 30 64.9- 70.6- 67.0- 69.8- 92.6- 95.1- 94.0- 98.5- Diameter lateral maximum ■135.0 129.09±0.49 4.14±0.35 ■142.0 135.10 -139.0 129.85±0.39 4.20±0.28 ■138.0 127.94±0.54 4.45±0.38 Basion-bregma height ■139.0 128.97±0.53 4.60±0.38 ■139.0 135.66 •140.0 131.23±0.36 3.90±0.26 140.0 133.37±0.48 3.90±0.34 Cranial index ■75.8 72.16±0.32 2.69±0.23 ■78.6 74.34 •83.0 71.94±0.27 2.92±0.19 ■76.5 70.74±0.31 2.53±0.22 Length-height index ■76.8 71.85±0.34 2.94±0.24 ■77.5 74.93 ■79.4 72.81±0.24 2.57±0.17 •78.0 73.77±0.26 2.12±0.18 Breadth-height index 110.3 100.14±0.53 4.26±0.38 105.4 100.13 •109.4 101.04±0.33 3.56±0.24 ■112.3 104.23±0.48 3.90±0.34 3.21±0.27 3.24±0.21 1.21 3.48±0.30 1.58 3. 57 ±0.29 .... 2!97±6!20 3!53 2.93±0.25 6.11 3.73±0.32 4.07±0.27 0.52 3.57±0.31 3.23 4.10±0.34 3.53±0.23 2.28 2.88±0.25 4.46 4.25±0.38 Mean height index 77.7-88.5 83.79±0.38 2.99±0.27 81.3-88.9 85.79 79.7-91.0 84.60±0.23 2.49=b0.16 81.0-91.3 86.10±0.31 2.53±0.22 Cranial module 3. 52 ±0.23 3.74±0.32 3. 57 ±0.32 Labrador... 28 139.3-151.0 145.32±0.40 3.13±0.28 2.15±0.19 Thule 9 146.0-155.7 150.72 Greenland.. 52 140.7-154.3 147.15±0.31 3.28±0.22 Old Igloo.. 30 136.0-154.0 147.47 ±0.47 3.84±0.33 * See Appendix Al: old stone grave series. t Fischer-M#Uer (1937), Hrdlicka (1910). X Hrdlicka (1930). 1.45 5.68 2.94±0.19 1.84 2.94±0.26 4.71 2.23±0.15 3.59 2.61±0.23 3.47 for the Thule, and greater than that for the Old Igloos. This same relationship may be noted in the cranial indices. Still allowing for personal error, the differences in head breadth appear to be significant both with the Thule and the Igloos. Basion-Bregma Height (Tables 4, 5). — This diameter in the Labrador series is well below that of any of the other three groups 34 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador compared, and the difference is significant in each case. The indica- tion is the same for the males and females. Since this diameter in the Labrador series is only absolutely and not relatively low (see mean height index) a small skull is again indicated. Cranial Index (Tables 4, 5). — Considering that personal error as regards skull breadth in the Labrador series may raise the cranial index slightly, it appears that Labrador is intermediate between the other two dolichocranic groups, Thule and Greenland. The Igloos show a lower index even than Greenland, the males being hyper- dolichocranic. The indications are the same for the two sexes, except that as usual the index for the females is slightly higher. Height Indices (Tables 4, 5).— The relation of length and breadth to height of skull is summarized in the "mean height index." Rela- tive to length there is little difference between the groups; but a great difference exists relative to breadth, especially between Labra- dor and the Igloos. The result is that the highest mean height index is to be found in the Igloos, with Greenland, Thule, and Labrador following next in order. The difference between Labrador and the Igloos is probably significant. Cranial Module (Tables 4, 5). — Summarizing the three main diameters of the skull, it is not surprising, in view of the foregoing, that the lowest module is found in Labrador. Indeed, this module appears to be the lowest of any known Eskimo group, and certainly significantly different from any of the three groups used here in com- parison. In other words, as indicated above, the Labrador Eskimos have comparatively small heads. THE FACE Diameter Frontal Minimum (Tables 6, 7). — Among the groups under consideration only the Thule supplies data on breadth of fore- head for comparison with the Labrador group. Although this diame- ter is lower in the Labrador series, it is not significantly so. Menton-Nasion Height (Tables 6, 7). — The frequent failure to secure the lower jaw with the skull makes it impossible to take this measurement in the majority of cases. Also, it is necessary to be somewhat cautious in interpreting the figures because tooth-wear lessens the diameter slightly. In general, however, a greater range is observable in both sexes of the Igloos, and the largest diameter on the average occurs among the Thule. Alveolar Point-Nasion Height (Tables 6, 7). — This is a more reliable indicator of face height than the preceding measurement. Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 35 Table 6. — Statistical Constants of Measurements of the Face: Males Group No. Range Meanip.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V.ip.e. Xp.e. Diameter frontal minimum Labrador* .. 31 90-106 95.32±0.43 3.59±0.31 3.76±0.32 .... Thulef 22 89-104 96.68±0.56 3.92±0.40 4.06±0.41 1.92 Greenland^ ... Old Igloo J Menton-nasion height Labrador... 12 115-131 123.17 Thule 16 117-133 125.87 Greenland. 12 111-134 123.83 Old Igloo. 19 109-134 124.16 Alveolar point-nasion height Labrador... 32 69-80 74.25±0.38 3.18±0.27 4.29±0.36 .... Thule 18 71-80 76.50 Greenland.. 46 66-86 76.06±0.39 3.89±0.27 5.12±0.36 3.35 Old Igloo.. 27 71-84 77.04±0.39 3.00±0.28 3.89±0.36 5.17 Diameter bizygo'matic maximum Labrador ... 28 126-150 136.46±0.71 5.60±0.50 4.11db0.37 Thule 22 135-149 142.41db0.57 3.96±0.40 2.78±0.28 6.54 Greenland.. 47 129-151 140.47±0.54 5.51±0.38 3.92±0.27 4.50 Old Igloo.. 29 132-151 141.45±0.56 4.48±0.40 3.17±0.28 5.54 Facial index total Labrador... 10 82.0-95.3 89.61 Thule 16 78.5-97.8 88.22 Greenland. 12 78.2-95.6 87.31 Old Igloo. 19 76.8-96.2 87.40 Facial index upper Labrador... 27 50.7-59.4 54.68±0.29 2.27±0.21 4.16±0.38 .... Thule 18 47.7-58.5 53.66 Greenland.. 45 47.9-60.6 54.19±0.28 2.84±0.20 5.23±0.37 1.22 Old Igloo.. 27 50.0-58.3 54.56±0.31 2.42±0.22 4.44±0.41 0.28 Basion-nasion Labrador... 30 88-113 102.97±0.59 4.82±0.42 4.68±0.41 .... Thule 21 98-114 106.81±0.48 3.23±0.34 3.03±0.32 5.05 Greenland.. 48 100-115 106.04±0.34 3.49±0.24 3.30±0.23 4.51 Old Igloo.. 30 100-116 107.13±0.47 3.83±0.33 3.57±0.31 5.55 Basion-alveolar point Labrador... 28 93-111 101.57±0.55 4.31±0.39 4.24±0.38 Thule 8 103-114 107.62 Greenland.. 42 93-115 105.62±0.47 4.54±0.33 4.30=b0.32 5.62 Old Igloo.. 23 95-114 104.83±0.63 4.47±0.44 4.26±0.42 3.88 * See Appendix A2: old stone grave series, f Fischer- M0ller (1937), Hrdlicka (1910). J Hrdlicka (1930). Considering that Fischer-M0ller may have interpreted alveolar point differently, and more like Russell and Huxley (see p. 29), there is a possibility that the largest diameter occurs among the Thule. On the other hand, it is definite that the lowest diameter occurs in Labrador. In the males, at least, this figure is significantly different from those for Greenland and the Igloos. 36 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Table 7. — Statistical Constants of Measurements of the Face: Females Group No. Range Mean±p.e. S.D.±p.e. C.V.±p.e. X p.e. Diameter frontal minimum Labrador*.. 36 85-97 90.00±0.39 3.45±0.27 3.83±0.30 Thulef 10 93-102 96.30 Greenland^ ... Old Igloo* Menton-nasion height Labrador... 11 109-123 116.09 Thule 3 117-123 119.67 Greenland.. 5 108-121 115.20 Old Igloo.. 19 98-124 114.10 Alveolar point-nasion height Labrador... 32 63-75 69.09±0.41 3.42±0.29 4.95±0.42 .... Thule 9 66-76 71.56 Greenland.. 45 61-78 70.51±0.35 3.47±0.25 4.93±0.35 2.63 Old Igloo.. 22 59-78 70.32±0.70 4.88±0.50 6.94±0.71 1.52 Diameter bizygomatic maximum Labrador... 27 120-136 128.33±0.57 4.40±0.40 3.43±0.31 .... Thule 9 127-143 135.67 Greenland.. 50 122-143 130.34±0.45 4.69±0.32 3.60±0.24 2.75 Old Igloo.. 29 117-139 130.86±0.61 4.90±0.43 3.74±0.33 3.05 Facial index, total Labrador... 8 84.7-96.8 89.39 Thule 3 86.2-87.9 86.93 Greenland.. 5 79.4-90.6 85.80 Old Igloo.. 19 76.0-96.1 88.22 Facial index, upper Labrador... 26 48.8-58.9 53.94±0.35 2.67±0.25 4.95±0.46 Thule 9 46.1-56.6 52.81 Greenland.. 45 47.9-60.8 54. 17 ±0.31 3.07±0.22 5.67±0.40 0.41 Old Igloo.. 22 45.7-59.7 53.98±0.41 2.82±0.29 5.22±0.53 0.06 Basion-nasion Labrador... 35 87-107 98.11±0.55 4.79±0.39 4.88±0.39 .... Thule 9 100-107 103.00 Greenland.. 52 95-108 101.31±0.30 3.18±0.21 3.14±0.21 5.08 Old Igloo.. 30 95-109 101.70±0.47 3.80±0.33 3.73±0.32 4.99 Basion-alveolar point Labrador... 31 87-107 96. 78 ±0.56 ^63 ±0.40 4.78±0.41 .... Thule 4 96-104 100.25 Greenland.. 45 93-110 100.93±0.45 4.50±0.32 4.46±0.32 5.76 Old Igloo.. 19 92-108 101.84 * See Appendix A2: old stone grave series. t Fischer-Miller (1937), Hrdlicka (1910). X Hrdlicka (1930). Diameter Bizygomatic Maximum (Tables 6, 7). — Both from the range and from the average it appears that the narrowest face occurs in Labrador. On the same basis, the Thule have the broadest face. In the males the differences are significant in all cases. Facial Indices (Tables 6, 7). — Because the trends are the same for length and breadth of face in the four groups, the relative pro- Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 37 portions are not very different; indeed, none of the differences is significant in the case of upper facial index. Basion-Nasion (Tables 6, 7). — This diameter in the Labrador series is significantly smaller than in the three groups here used in comparison. This finding would be expected in view of the usual good correlation between basion-nasion and skull length, and the fact that absolute skull length is smallest in Labrador. Basion- Alveolar Point (Tables 6, 7). — Here again this diameter is smallest in Labrador, and generally the differences between the Labrador series and the other groups are significant. This is the expected finding in accordance with basion-nasion and skull length. THE ORBITS, NOSE, AND ALVEOLAR ARCH Orbital Height, Mean (Tables 8, 9). — The means of this measure- ment for all four groups are very close, probably reflecting partly the accuracy with which it is usually taken. Orbital Breadth, Mean (Tables 8, 9). — The fact that Fischer- Miller's measurements (Thule), as well as those from Labrador in the literature (see Appendix A3), all involve dacryon as the medial orbital landmark, whereas Hrdlifika and I have used lacrimale, is reflected in the means. Thus, greatest orbital breadth occurs in the Thule, with Labrador next. It is likely, therefore, that none of the differences is significant. Orbital Index, Mean (Tables 8, 9). — Keeping in mind the above statements regarding orbital breadth, it may be conceded that a higher index will result from the use of lacrimale than dacryon. Hence it would appear that there is even less difference between the groups than is indicated in the table. Nasal Height (Tables 8, 9). — It has been pointed out in the dis- cussion of personal error (p. 30) that I tend to get a larger figure for nasal height (by about 1 mm.) than Hrdlicka. The fact that the mean for the Thule is considerably higher than those for the other groups, suggests that Fischer-M0ller likewise takes a different point for the lower nasal border. Reducing the Labrador mean for the males to 51 mm. makes this the lowest of the four. By this change the Xp.e.'s for the Igloos and Greenland increase, but that for Green- land remains without statistical significance. The females show less marked differences. Nasal Breadth (Tables 8, 9). — This diameter is not subject to personal error, hence the difference between the means of Labrador and the Igloos is noteworthy. Moreover, it accords with the signifi- 38 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Table 8.— Statistical Constants of Measurements of Orbits, Nose, and Alveolar Arch: Males Group No. Labrador*. . 29 Thulef 22 Greenland}. 48 Old IglooJ. 29 Labrador... 27 Thule 22 Greenland . . 48 Old Igloo.. 29 Labrador... 27 Thule 22 Greenland . . 48 Old Igloo.. 29 Labrador. . . 31 Thule 22 Greenland . . 48 Old Igloo.. 30 Labrador. .31 Thule 22 Greenland . . 48 Old Igloo.. 30 Labrador. . . 25 Thule 17 Greenland . . 44 Old Igloo.. 26 Labrador... 22 Thule 17 Greenland . . 44 Old Igloo.. 26 Labrador... 22 Thule 16 Greenland . . 44 Old Igloo.. 26 Range Mean ±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. Orbital height, mean^ 32.5-40.8 36.02±0.21 1.68±0.15 33.0-42.0 36.50±0.32 2.20±0.22 31.2-40.0 36.45±0.18 1.84±0.13 32.2-40.5 36.02±0.26 2.04=1=0.18 Orbital breadth, mean^ 37.2-45.0 40.17±0.23 1.77=1=0.16 38.2-45.0 41.18±0.24 1.66zfc0.17 38.0-44.5 39.93=1=0. 12 1.19±0.08 37.2-42.5 39.83=1=0.16 1.32=1=0.12 Orbital index, mean^i 82.3-100.0 89. 52=1=0.51 3.92±0.36 75.0- 98.7 88.68±0.88 6.12±0.62 79.1- 98.2 91.44=fc0.42 4.28=fc0.30 79.2- 98.8 90.34=1=0.56 4.45=fc0.39 Labrador... 31 48-58 Thule 22 52-60 Greenland.. 48 47-59 Old Igloo.. 30 50-61 18-26 22-26 20-26 20-28 32.7-50.0 36.7-46.4 38.5-52.0 36.4-50.9 Nasal height 52.42=fc0.29 55.41 =fc0. 29 52.40=fc0.26 54.53=1=0.32 Nasal breadth 22.58=1=0.20 23.00=fc0.17 22.69±0.16 23.90=fc0.21 Nasal index 43.10=1=0.47 41.50=1=0.37 43.33±0.33 43.87=fc0.40 2.43=fc0.21 2.04=1=0.21 2.64=fc0.18 2.57=fc0.22 1.62=fc0.14 1.21=fc0.12 1.60±0.11 1.68=fc0.15 3.89±0.33 2.55=1=0.26 3.39=fc0.23 3.28=fc0.29 C.V.ip.e. 4.66=1=0.41 6.03=1=0.61 5.05=fc0.35 5.66=1=0.50 4.41=fc0.40 4.03=1=0.41 2.98=fc0.20 3.32=fc0.29 4.38=fc0.40 6.90=b0.70 4.69±0.32 4.93=1=0.44 4.64=fc0.40 3.68zfc0.37 5.03±0.35 4.71±0.41 7.18±0.62 5.25zfc0.53 7.04=1=0.48 7.03=1=0.61 9.02=1=0.77 6.15=b0.63 7.83=1=0.54 7.48=1=0.65 Xp.e. 1.26 1.54 3.06 0.92 1.21 0.82 2.91 1.08 7.29 0.51 4.91 1.62 0.42 4.55 2.67 0.40 1.24 Length of alveolar arch 49-60 54.04=1=0.35 2.58±0.25 4.78=1=0.46 .... 50-62 56.06 45-62 56.30=fc0.32 3.20=1=0.23 5.68=1=0.41 4.81 50-63 55.73=1=0.35^62=1:0.25 4.71=1=0.44 3.38 Breadth of alveolar arch 57-68 63.86=1=0.41 2.86±0.29 4.49=fc0.46 58-75 67.47 57-75 66.25±0.35 3.45=1=0.25 5.21±0.37 4.42 62-76 67.04=1=0.42 3.18=fc0.30 4.74=1=0.44 5.39 Alveolar arch index 110.0-136.7 118.45=1=0.98 6.82=fc0.69 5.75=1:0.58 106.7-134.0 120.02 106.6-132.7 117.80=1=0.61 6.00±0.43 5.09=1=0.37 111.9-133.3 120.38=b0.59 4.47±0.42 3.71=fc0.35 0.56 1.69 * See Appendix A3: old stone grave series. t Fischer-Miller (1937), Hrdlicka (1910). t Hrdlicka (1930). •^ When only one orbit could be measured it has been included with the means. Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 39 Table 9. — Statistical Constants of Measurements of Orbits, Nose, and Alveolar Arch: Females Group No. Labrador* . . Thulef Greenland!. Old Igloot. 32 9 50 25 31 Labrador . . Thule 8 Greenland . . 50 Old Igloo.. 25 Labrador. . . 31 Thule 8 Greenland . . 50 Old Igloo.. 25 Labrador ... 32 Thule 9 Greenland . . 50 Old Igloo.. 26 Labrador ... 32 Thule 9 Greenland . . 50 Old Igloo.. 26 Labrador ... 28 Thule 7 Greenland . . 45 Old Igloo.. 20 Labrador. . . 25 Thule 7 Greenland . . 45 Old Igloo.. 20 Range Mean ±p.e. S.D.ip.e. C.V.=fcp.e. Orbital index, mean^ 81.6-100.0 91.61±0.48 4.00±0.34 4.37±0.37 85.4-104.0 92.14 85.1-102.1 92.40±0.41 4.28±0.29 4.63±0.31 84.6- 99.3 91.40±0.57 4.26±0.41 4.66±0.44 Labrador... 34 43-57 Thule 9 48-56 Greenland.. 50 44-55 Old Igloo.. 26 44-58 19-27 20-26 19-26 18-27 38.0-52.9 39.3-51.0 35.2-50.0 37.7-59.1 Nasal height 49.00±0.32 51.44 .... 49. 94 ±0.20 49.96±0.44 Nasal breadth 21. 91 ±0.22 22.44 .... 21.94±0.16 22. 54 ±0.26 Nasal index 44. 88 ±0.48 43.67 .... 43.98±0.35 45.35±0.68 2.73±0.22 5.58±0.46 2.14±0.14 3.34±0.31 4.28±0.29 6. 67 ±0.62 1.84±0.16 8.42±0.71 1.72±0.12 1.98±0.18 7.86±0.53 8.80±0.82 3.99±0.34 8.89±0.75 3!7i±6!25 8i44±6!57 5.17±0.48 11.39±1.07 48-56 51-58 49-59 50-58 54-67 63-70 55-66 56-70 Length of alveolar arch 51.82±0.29 2.25±0.20 54.43 53.51±0.25 2.46±0.17 53.60±0.39 2.60±0.28 Breadth of alveolar arch 61.80±0.46 3.40±0.32 65.28 61.64±0.27 2.65±0.19 63.15±0.51 3.37±0.36 4.35±0.39 4!59±0^33 4. 84 ±0.52 5.51±0.52 4!30±o!30 5.33±0.57 Alveolar arch index 5.21±0.51 4.38±0.43 Labrador... 24 107.7-128.6 118. 88 ±0.72 Thule 7 114.5-125.0 120.01 .... Greenland.. 45 105.2-127.4 115.27 ±0.56 Old Igloo.. 20 107.3-132.1 117.90±0.96 * See Appendix A3: old stone grave series. t Fischer-Mjrtler (1937), Hrdlicka (1910). t Hrdlicka (1930). 1 When only one orbit could be measured it has been included with the means. 54 ±0.39 35 ±0.68 4.81 ±0.34 5.38±0.57 Xp.e. Orbital height, mean If 32.0-39.0 35.03±0.21 1.77±0.15 5.05±0.43 .... 32.0—39 36 22 31.5-39.5 35*.56±6'.i8 i'.84±6'.12 5.i8±6'.35 i .96 32.0-37.5 35.00±0.24 1.77±0.17 5.06±0.48 0.09 Orbital breadth, mean If 35.0 -42.0 38.22±0.21 1.73±0.15 4.53±0.39 37.0 -43.0 39.75 35.25-41.5 38.47±0.14 1.48±0.10 3.85±0.26 33.5 -41.0 38.30±0.23 1.68±0.16 4.39±0.42 1.00 0.26 1.25 0.28 2.47 1.78 0.11 1.86 1.52 0.57 4.45 3.63 0.30 1.96 3.97 0.82 40 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador cant difference in nasal height. In other words the Igloo Eskimos stand apart from those of Labrador in having larger mean nasal dimensions. Nasal Index (Tables 8, 9). — Correcting for the personal error in taking nasal height, it still appears that, with the exception of the Thule (which are difficult to evaluate), there is little difference in relative proportions of the nose among the four groups. Length of Alveolar Arch (Tables 8, 9). — Little difference, in the matter of interpreting landmarks, enters into the taking of this measurement. It is interesting, therefore, that the smallest figure occurs in the Labrador series. The difference is statistically signifi- cant, at least in the case of Greenland and the Igloos, and for both sexes. Breadth of Alveolar Arch (Tables 8, 9). — Again the smallest figure is found in the male Labrador series, and in the females the figures for Labrador and Greenland are very close. The difference is significant only in the case of the male Igloos. Alveolar Arch Index (Tables 8, 9). — With the exception of the female Greenland series, the relative proportions of the alveolar arch in all of the groups do not differ significantly from those of Labrador. DISCUSSION The position of the Labrador skulls in relation to those of the other three groups, here compared by metrical means, is conveniently shown by charting the Xp.e.'s (the number of times that a difference exceeds its probable error). It is customary to accept a difference which is three or more times its probable error as almost, or certainly, significant. In Figure 1 (p. 41) I have plotted the Xp.e.'s of the males, emphasizing statistical significance by a line at the level of three times the probable error. In calculating the differences the Labrador averages have been corrected for personal^rror to the extent that this is indicated in Table 3. The Xp.e.'s thus differ somewhat from those given in preceding tables. It should be clear that the line connecting the Xp.e.'s of the Old Igloos is in general more often above the 3 line than either of the others. Also, the line showing generally the least significant dif- ferences (most often below the 3 line) is that for Greenland. From this it appears that of these three groups Greenland bears the closest metrical resemblance to Labrador. This chart brings out the fact also that, although the measure- ments themselves differ considerably, their relationships, as expressed Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 41 by the indices, do not vary nearly as greatly. The Igloos are an exception as regards cranial index and breadth-height index. The explanation of this restriction of the differences to the absolute measurements seems to be that it pertains to general size; that is, the average Labrador skull is smaller than that of other Eskimo groups. The differences are so consistent and marked that one might justly suspect an instrumental error or some other such ex- planation before accepting their existence. However, the published THULE _ ^GREENLAND - IGLOO Fig. 1. Graph formed by connecting the Xp.e.'s of various measurements and indices for three Eskimo groups as calculated against the Labrador group. All points above the horizontal line at the level of 3 X p. e. are considered statis- tically significant. findings of Russell and Huxley (Table 2) on some of the same crania point in the same direction and the study of personal error (Table 3) rules out instrumental error. 1 That the differences between the Labrador and Greenland groups are not dependent upon the particular Greenland series employed may be proved by making similar comparisons with the Furst and 1 In checking my results with Dr. Hrdlicka's on the Greenland crania I used the same instruments with which the Labrador crania had been measured. 42 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Table 10. — Cranial Measurements Differing Significantly Between Labrador and Greenland Series Mean ±p.e. X p.e. Basion-bregma height Labrador 136.4±0.50 Greenland Hrdlifika 139.5±0.41 4.82 Furst and Hansen 138.2±0.24 3.21 Bizygomatic diameter Labrador 136.8±0.71 Greenland Hrdlicka 140.5±0.54 4.17 Furst and Hansen 139.5±0.32 3.46 Basion-nasion Labrador 102.8±0.59 Greenland Hrdlicka 106.0±0.34 4.81 Furst and Hansen 105.6±0.20 4.52 Basion-alveolar point Labrador 101.9±0.55 Greenland Hrdligka 105.6±0.47 5.21 Fiirst and Hansen 104.4±0.27 4.10 Hansen series. We are indebted to Morant (1926) for working out the biometric constants for this material. The measurements given in Table 10 are the only ones differing significantly and at the same time being wholly comparable by definition. Measurements of the Skull: Recent Grave Series As pointed out in the introduction, the small group of individuals composing the recent grave series all received Christian burial during the middle of the nineteenth century. By thus representing, both in time and in the process of acculturation, an intermediate group between the old stone grave people (probably eighteenth century) and those who have been measured during life in recent times, they should indicate whether or not a physical change had taken place during this interval. Table 11 gives the arithmetical means of both the recent and old stone grave series, male and female. Since only measurements taken by the author are here considered, the factor of personal error should be constant. The main physical changes indicated in this table may be summarized as follows: As compared to the pagans the Christians have shorter and smaller heads with longer and narrower faces, relatively higher orbits and relatively narrower alveolar arches. Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 43 Table 11. — Comparison of Measurements and Indices of Old Stone and Recent Grave Series* Male Female , * „ „ * , Measurement or Index Old Recent Old Recent (21)t (12) Dif. (30) (8) Dif. Diam. ant.-post. max 188.0 185.7 -2.3 179.9 178.6 -1.3 Diam. lat. max 134.9 134.4 -0.5 128.3 130.7 +2.4 Bas.-breg. height 135.5 134.1 -1.4 128.3 128.3 Cranial index 71.8 72.6 +0.8 71.6 73 .8 +2.2 Lt.-ht. index 72.1 72.7 +0.6 71.8 73.8 +2.5 Br.-ht. index 100.6 99.8 -0.8 100.0 98.9 -1.1 Mean ht. index 81*. 8k. 1 +0.1 83.3 81*. I* +1.1 Cranial module 152.9 151.0 -1.9 144.9 144.1 -0.8 Diam. frontal min 94.5 92.2 -2.3 89.9 87.9 -2.0 Ment.-nas. height 123.1 128.0 +4.9 115.1 123.0 +7.9 Alv. pt.-nas. height 74.2 77.0 +2.8 69.0 72.7 +3.7 Diam. bizyg. max 136.1 133.0 -3.1 128.1 127.0 -1.1 Facial index, total 91.6 98.1 +6.5 88.3 98.0 +9.7 Facial index, upper 51*.7 59.1* +1*.7 53.9 57.3 +3.1* Basion-nasion 102.9 100.9 -2.0 98.1 97.3 -0.8 Basion-alveolar point 102.1 100.2 -1.9 97.3 91.5 -5.8 Orbital height, mean 35.9 35.8 -0.1 34.8 35.3 +0.5 Orbital breadth, mean 39.9 38.8 -1.1 38.2 38.4 +0.2 Orbital index, mean 90.1 92.5 +2.1* 91.1 93.8 +2.7 Nasal height 52.0 50.9 -1.1 48.7 50.3 +1.6 Nasal breadth 22.4 22.5 +0.1 21.9 22.0 +0.1 Nasal index US .2 1*1*. 3 +1.1 h5 .2 1*3.2 -2.0 Length of alv. arch 54.4 55.0 +0.6 52.2 51.8 -0.4 Breadth of alv. arch 63.5 63.0 -0.5 61.8 60.0 -1.8 Alveolar arch index 117.0 111*. 8 -2.2 117.2 116.6 -0.6 * In this table the old stone grave series is limited to the material measured by the author in Field and Peabody museums (see Appendices Al-3). t Maximum number. It is uncertain whether the nose has changed. Unfortunately, the sample from the recent graves is not adequate to prove that these changes are statistically significant. Non-Metrical Observations on the Skull In working with cranial measurements not infrequently the fact is overlooked that dimensions are very incomplete descriptive agents. Even the relationship between two dimensions, known as the index, fails to tell anything about the shape measured, except the proportion of length to breadth. Thus it is possible to find diverse races agreeing closely in a few measurements and even indices, but showing their true relationship only when many measurements and indices are brought into consideration. On the other hand, when working with subdivisions of one racial group, where the resemblance is close, as in the case of the Eskimo, it is desirable to supplement the metrical with non-metrical, or visual, impressions. Non-metrical observations apply generally to such characters as do not lend themselves readily to measurement, and include state- 44 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador merits of presence or absence and degree of development. In so far as these observations record more complex entities than do dimen- sions and indices, they aim at greater refinement of observation and comparison. However, refinement is usually accompanied by difficulties. Whereas measurements are recorded in standard units and obtained by well-established techniques, visual observations depend for their standards largely upon individual experience. The average European, or North European, which are the standards used by HrdliSka and Hooton, are but vague conceptions at best. For the most part non-metrical observations have value to others only in a general descriptive way. Nevertheless, few will deny that the eye can see differences which often escape metrical analysis. In undertaking the present study I soon found that detailed non- metrical observations on Eastern Eskimo skulls are practically non- existent. Of course, the various peculiarities of the generalized Eskimo skull are well known; but such data are not recorded for those groups which are here used for comparison. After thinking over this situation, I decided to record for the Labrador Eskimo certain simple observations for which the standards are fairly clear. Since, as mentioned above, the time available was limited, these observations had to be limited in number. I report here in some detail only those which subsequently appeared to have some com- parative value. For comparison in these cases I have made similar observations on 30 male and 30 female Greenland skulls from the National Museum series. The sexing is that reported by HrdliCka (1930). The main cranial contours, as well as other details, are best shown by photographs, and for this reason the most complete of the Field Museum specimens are shown in Plates 1-9. Unfortunately, only two stone grave specimens could be useq! for this purpose. The reader can supplement these with the thriee shown by Oetteking (1908, 1931). 1 NORMA LATERALIS Profile. — It happens that the two stone grave specimens from the Field Museum series have considerable natural lambdoid flattening, in contrast both to those shown by Oetteking and those from the recent graves here illustrated. The rounded form is more typical. Otherwise the contours, except as affected by difference in length, are rather uniform. 1 Unfortunately the skull from Sculpin Island (near Nain), Labrador, was overlooked, owing to the wording of the title, until too late to be included in the calculations. The measurements of the long bones have been used. Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 45 Pterion. — In all cases that could be observed, except one, the H-form of pterion was present. In the exceptional case (59658) there was temporo-frontal contact (x-type) on the left; on the right the separation was only 3 mm. This general observation may be sup- plemented with approximate measurements of the minimum temporo- frontal separation (Table 12). The larger number of cases from Labrador in which the form of the pterion cannot be determined reflects mostly a difference in age distribution and preservation. There is a suggestion, especially among the females, of a smaller temporo-frontal separation in the Labrador stone grave series than in the Greenland series. Table 12.— Width of Pterion (In millimeters) Group Side ? 0-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 13-15 16-1 Labrador Male Recent grave . / Right \Left 9 8 1 1 i o 1 1 Stone grave . . f Right ' \ Left 10 6 1 2 3 2 5 6 1 3 1 2 Greenland / Right \Left 2 1 2 4 5 3 10 13 7 5 4 3 Labrador Female Recent grave . / Right ' \Left 6 4 1 1 Stone grave . . / Right ' \Left 9 12 2 2 4 3 9 7 5 6 2 1 Greenland f Right \Left 8 9 4 1 1 4 10 9 6 5 1 2 12 12 12.7 12.2 21 21 10.4 11.5 30 30 11.5 11.4 G 6 i2l5 31 31 8.1 8.0 30 30 10.9 11.1 External Auditory Meatus. — In 1933 I made a special study of the ear in Eskimo and Indian skulls. Hyperostosis of the tympanic plate is one of the characteristic features of the Eskimo skull, as contrasted with the Indian. This bony development is largely at the expense of the external auditory meatus, which in extreme cases is narrowed to a small tube. It is possible, therefore, to express this condition as it affects the meatus, the grades being: tube-like, slightly funnel-shaped, medium funnel-shaped, and marked funnel- shaped. Since the Greenland Eskimo were among the groups studied in 1933, the present findings on the Labrador series may be shown in comparison with the earlier findings (Table 13). The considerable difference in the figures shown in this table may be due in part to the size of the series, but it is not impossible that I have unconsciously changed my standard during the interval. However, two things seem clear regarding the condition of the meatus in Labrador; namely, (1) that the feature is typically Eskimoid, 46 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador more so in the females than in the males; and (2) that, broadly speaking, the resemblance is with Greenland rather than with the Western groups (see Stewart, 1933, Table 3). I may add that, as in other Eski no groups, the shape of the porus acousticus varies from oval to round, with its axis vertical or slightly inclined to the horizontal (Frankfort). In no case was an ear exos- tosis observed. Table 13. — Form of External Auditory Meatus Slightly Medium Marked Tube- funnel- funnel- funnel- Group No. like shaped shaped shaped Labrador Male Recent grave 12 ll,, 2 8 Wfi 3 ^ 24 2 ■•Ufl Stonegrave 21 4/ 15 ^ ll/ 5 '- b 5/ Z4 ^ l/"*' Greenland 38 5.3 34.2 42.1 18.4 Labrador Female S±*,Sr:::::::::«8 I} 22 - 2 i?K 6 \) 22 - 2 ::}•■■ Greenland 48 37.5 29.2 27.1 6.2 Lower Jaw.— Attention may be called in passing to the orientation of the lower jaw in the views of the recent grave skulls (Plates 3-9). These pictures give the impression of an unusually lengthened lower face with resultant increased inclination of the mandible, an un- Eskimo feature. Number 192013 (Plate 8) is somewhat extreme in this regard. It will be recalled from Table 11 that the recent grave series is distinguished by an absolutely longer face. NORMA FRONTALIS Because the characteristic keel-shape of the Eskimo skull is a construction limited largely to the parietal region, this feature is not so evident when the skull is viewed from in front. The two old stone grave specimens here^llustrated (Plates 1, 2) do not show the usual Eskimo facial characters of flatness and breadth. Oetteking's illustrations are more typical. However, neither do the recent grave specimens show these characters. More- over, experienced observers might have difficulty in identifying the latter racially from these views alone. The difference in appearance would seem to reside chiefly in the relatively longer and narrower face, as pointed out in connection with Table 11. Inclination of the Orbits. — A feature of the orbits, which is not described by the usual measurements or even by statements as to shape, is the inclination of the long axis. Although the angle of Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 47 orbital inclination is one deserving exact determination, since it varies considerably among races, the procedure is time-consuming. However, rather than express this angle in terms of some vague standard, I have attempted to estimate it approximately; that is, whether it approached 5, 10, 15, or 20 degrees. With the skull on a pad in norma frontalis and with the aid of a narrow strip of cardboard, or a celluloid ruler, I mark the point where the long axis from lacrimale crosses the outer border of the orbit. In the same way I mark on the outer border the position of the horizontal through lacrimale. Then by comparing the angle formed between these three points with cardboard or metal angles (triangles) corresponding to the four degrees above-named, it is a simple matter to state which is the nearest to fit. It is convenient also, characteriz- ing these four angles by descriptive terms, to say whether the group tends to have slight, medium, moderate, or pronounced orbital, inclination. The chief disturbing factor in this method is the visual determination of the horizontal; the position of the observer in relation to the skull affects this. A refinement would be to inter- polate between the given angles. The showing of the Labrador and Greenland series, as determined in this way, is given in Table 14. The figures would seem to indicate a considerable difference between the Labrador and Greenland groups, the latter being characterized by lesser inclination. How much the personal factor has entered into this result is uncertain, since I am unable to check the specimens. In any case it is safe to say that the majority of the Eskimos of Labrador and Greenland have from 5 to 10 degrees (slight to medium) of orbital inclination. Table 14. — Inclination of the Orbit Slight Medium Moderate Marked Group 5 1 10° 15° 20° Labrador Male 8SSttsr:::::::::J}»-* I} 42 - 3 I} 42 - 3 ::}•••• Greenland 8 26.7 20 66.7 2 6.7 Labrador Female SSSiS^. ■:::::::: *}»■• ii}"- 8 !}»•« ::}••■■ Greenland 15 50.0 15 50.0 NORMA VERTICALIS The convention of illustrating the skull in the Frankfort position fails ofttimes to bring into one plane the maximum horizontal dimen- sions; the vertical photographic view may present a shape differing 48 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador slightly from that indicated by the cranial index. However, it may be seen that in general the shape of the Labrador Eskimo skull varies from elliptical to ovoid. Parietal Foramina. — It is not clear that the variability of this feature has much comparative racial significance. Moreover, it is difficult to express the condition concisely for comparative purposes. I propose to give here the distribution of the various combinations (Table 15a), together with figures (Table 15b) derived with the aid of Stevenson's formula (1931). This formula, since it weights the different grades, is useful for converting non-metrical data to a form suitable for comparison: 3 Pi, p 2 and p 3 being the percentages of the different positive grades (small, medium, and large). It seems wise to disregard exceptional cases (one foramen in midline, multiple foramina). Table 15a. — Parietal Foramina: Combinations Labrador g " "" < z 8 « tl o u > c > O M OS & CO be Male A. 5 Labrador a z 4J 0J 1) a > O ct w u Female < z 1 1 M o 3 8 9 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 3 5 5 1 1 4 2 1 5 27 26 Absent 1 5 7 1 small, right 1 2 1 small, left 2 2 1 medium, right .... 1 6 2 1 medium, left 2 1 2 1 large, left 1 2 small 2 1 6 2 medium 2 4 6 2, right small, left medium . . 2 2, right medium, left small ^_^ _ ; _ 1 _ 4 Total 11 21 30 V v Table 15b. — Quantitative Estimate (Stevenson's Formula) Male Female Both Sexes Right Left Right Left Right Left Labrador Recent grave 27.3 36.4 6.7 6.7 \ „, „ 9A z Stonegrave 36.5 20.6 32.1 25.9/ dl * J " 4 -° Greenland 35.6 36.6 20.5 32.1 28.6 34.6 The results, although not very consistent, suggest that the foramina are about the same, quantitatively, in the two series, with perhaps a lower frequency in the females and neither side favored. Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 49 NORMA BASILARIS Jugular Fossae. — Because of their position the relative sizes of the two jugular fossae do not always appear in photographs of the base of the skull. As a general rule, in man the right is larger than the left, but the reverse is not uncommon, and they may be approxi- mately equal. This condition usually reflects also, among other things, the relative sizes of the sigmoid sinuses, which leave their impressions within the skull. Since considerable judgment is re- quired in those cases where the difference in size between the two sides is not great, I have distinguished in Table 16 between those cases where the difference is marked and those approaching equality. Table 16 . — Relative Size of Jugular Fossae Group No. R>L Rsl>L Equal L sl>R L>R Labrador Recent grave Stone grave . . Greenland .. 9 . . 19 30 Male ,1} 64.3 I 11 36.7 1 1 5 I} 35 ' 7 3 30.0 ::}•••■ 10 33.3 Labrador Recent grave Stone grave . . Greenland .. 2 . . 25 30 Female 11 36.7 3 7 4 •^40.7 5 40.0 • 4 }l4.8 7 23.3 There seems to be a decided difference between the Labrador and Greenland series in that the latter shows greater frequency of the L > R arrangement. Absolute size is not considered here. Perforation of the Tympanic Plate. — This feature varies consider- ably among racial groups; it is probably in the nature of a develop- mental defect. The conditions shown in Table 17 for the Labrador and Greenland series indicate fairly consistent differences. Fewer Table 17. — Perforation of the Tympanic Plate Group Labrador Recent grave. (12) Side Absent Small Medium Large Right Left Stone grave . Greenland 9 8 Right 16 Left 19 (21) { (so) {ET 78.8 Male 1 ) 2 [ 5 1 Labrador Recent grave . (6) / Right \Left 27 4 88.3 13.6 10.0 Female Stone grave.. (^ {f^^ H 68.9 inland (30) { £? ht \\ } 76.7 \}ll.l J}ll 5 4] 2 12. 8.1 3.0 4.5 }... 2.7 50 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador perforations are found in the Greenland group. When summarized by means of the Stevenson formula, combining sexes and sides, the weighted percentage for Labrador is 9.9, and for Greenland 8.1. This compares with approximately 15 per cent for Algonkin Indians of the eastern United States. Teeth. — Although the condition of the teeth, especially the pathological aspect, appears to be largely environmentally deter- mined, it is important to place it on record, and this is a convenient place to do so. We will consider the degree of attrition and the ante- mortem tooth loss, as well as anomalies, etc. Attrition varies among the individual teeth of the same jaw, and so the several degrees of this process as here recorded cannot be closely defined; they are general impressions based upon the previous examination of considerable material. Since Eskimos generally give their teeth hard usage, attrition is apparent at an early age. Thus the age composition of the series perhaps influences the picture less here than elsewhere. There is no point in comparing in these regards the Labrador and Greenland series. The chief interest lies in the two Labrador series, in which altered food habits Table 18. — Tooth Wear in Labrador Degrees of Attrition A Group Jaw 12 3 4 ? Male Labrador R«»nt grave { ^PPer ' 1} 70 .8 ;; B v g-a 8*2 B-o 3T3 £t3 3-D W.S fa. 5 W.S Male W.3 fe.S W.S Labrador (2) (12) (9) (2) (12) (9) f Paired 71.6 79.3 72.2 71.9 79.1 70.8 Recent . (4) (2) (3) (1) I Single 71.0 70.6 74.2 72.7 f Paired Old "(2) "(1) ' (1) "(1) "(3) I Single 81.0 70.7 75.6 80.8 70.7 (6) (14) (12) (6) (13) (13) Total 71.2 79.6 71.8 73.6 79.2 70.9 Old Igloo (10) (11) (12) (10) (11) (12) Paired 74.7 81.5 72.4 75.7 81.8 71.4 (5) (4) (4) (5) (4) (4) Single 76.3 80.6 71.6 75.4 80.5 68.8 (15) (15) (16) (15) (15) (16) Total 75.2 81.2 72.2 Female 75.6 81.4 70.8 Labrador (3) (6) (4) (3) (6) (4) f Paired 69.4 77.2 72.5 70.1 77.4 71.6 Recent . ( Single "(1) (1) 72.7 (1) (1) 70.4 (1) (1) 69.2 (1) r Paired 6 72.7 71.6 71.6 Old ... . 1 Single (1) 72.7 "(2) 77.6 (5) (8) (6) (5) (6) (6) Total 70.1 77.3 72.6 70.4 77.4 71.2 Old Igloo (5) (9) (6) (5) (9) (6) Paired 73.2 80.6 72.1 74.3 80.4 70.5 (7) (5) (8) (3) (2) (4) Single 73.2 80.3 72.0 V. 76.6 81.0 70.6 (12) (14) (14) (8) (11) (10) Total 73.2 80.3 72.0 75.2 80 5 70.5 Table 27. — Long Bone Relationships: Thule, Greenland Group Hum.-rad. index Male Fem.-tib. index Hum.-fem index Thule ... 72.2 80.9 72.0 Greenland 72.5 Female 78.2 72.3 Thule Greenland 75.0 ... 72.0 82.8 78.8 67.4 71.9 Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 63 believe that the Pearson formulae do not apply to groups with rela- tively long trunk lengths, such as the Chinese and Eskimo. Unfor- tunately, Stevenson did not adjust his formulae for predicting living Chinese stature from their dried long bones. Since there is some uncertainty as to whether Pearson's formulae will correctly predict living Eskimo stature from the measurements of their dried bones, it will be of some value to test these formulae on two Alaskan Eskimo groups for which we have both long bone and stature measurements. Such a check on the formulae is desirable before applying them to the Labrador data, because in the latter case the measurements for the long bones and living stature relate to different periods. Reconstructed vs. Living Stature: St. Lawrence Island Eskimo. — In 1912 Dr. R. D. Moore visited St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Sea and obtained a series of measurements on the living, as well as numerous skeletons. The latter have been measured by Hrdlicka (1930). Of these measurements the following, pertaining to the right side alone, are used in the Pearson formulae: Length (mm.) / — — ^ Male Female Femur (maximum) (49)428.3 (17)384.1 Tibia (without spine) (26)344.2 (23)310.5 Humerus (31)305.2 (24)279.0 Radius (11)230.0 (16)209.7 Table 28 shows that Eskimo stature as reconstructed by the Pear- son formulae from the above measurements falls short of the ob- served stature by 3.1 cm. in the males and by 3.2 cm. in the females. Table 28.— Reconstructed vs. Living Stature St. Lawrence Island Eskimo (In centimeters) Pearson formula Male Female (a) 161.8 147.6 (b) 159.0 148.3 (c) 160.4 147.8 (d) 161.2 151.3 (e) 160.8 147.4 (f) 160.9 147.4 (g) 159.4 149.5 (h) 158.8 148.5 (i) 160.0 147.5 (k) 159.9 146.9 Average 160.2 148.2 Living (Moore) (63)168.3 (48)151 .4 Difference 3.1 3.2 64 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Reconstructed vs. Living Stature: Nunivak Island-Hooper Bay Eskimo. — In 1927 Mr. H. B. Collins, Jr., and the writer measured a series of Eskimos on Nunivak Island in Bering Sea, and at the same time collected skeletons known to have been the ancestors of the living. Mr. Collins was able to increase the series by securing data and specimens the same year at Hooper Bay, north of Nunivak. Both of these localities are fairly isolated. Again, the long bone measurements of Hrdlidka supply the following data for use in the Pearson tables: Length (mm.) Male Female Femur (maximum) (33)422.9 (27)402.8 Tibia (without spine) (28)333.0 (28)312.7 Humerus (27)308.2 (27)290.6 Radius (27)226.7 (21)203.7 The results shown in Table 29 are rather similar to those for the St. Lawrence Island Eskimo. The differences between reconstructed and living stature in this case are 4.3 cm. for the males and 3.8 for the females. The findings on these two series suggest that Pearson's formulae fail to reconstruct Eskimo stature by at least 3 cm. Table 29. — Reconstructed vs. Living Stature Nunivak Island-Hooper Bay Eskimo (In centimeters) Pearson formula Male Female (a) 160.8 151.2 (b) 159.8 151.5 (c) 157.8 148.3 (d) 160.1 149.3 (e) 158.9 149.7 (f) 159.0 149.7 (g) 159.4 150.4 (h) 159. 5V^ 151.3 (i) 159.9 151.2 (k) 159.2 150.3 Average 159.4 150.3 Living (Collins and Stewart) .... 163 .7 154 . 1 Difference 4.3 3.8 Reconstructed vs. Living Stature: Labrador Eskimo. — On the basis of the above findings we can now proceed to apply the same formulae, with the correction, to the Labrador series. The data for these calculations are as follows: Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 65 Old Stone Graves Length (mm.) a. Male Female Femur (maximum) (10)426.7 (4)384.5 Tibia (without spine) (8)343.4 (6)308.7 Humerus (7)294.4 (4)275.0 Radius (3)219.0 (2)199.0 Recent Graves Femur (maximum) (12)421.4 (8)388.5 Tibia (without spine) (12)332.4 (7)300.4 Humerus (11)302.1 (6)276.5 Radius (3)216.4 (3)189.7 Admittedly the numbers are inadequate, but they are all we have. Table 30, in which we have anticipated the findings on the living (p. 85), suggests that Eskimo stature has decreased in Labrador since the eighteenth century. Table 30. — Reconstructed vs. Living Stature Labrador Eskimo (In centimeters) Eighteenth Century Nineteenth Century Pearson Graves Graves formula Male Female Male Female (a) 161.5 147.6 160.5 148.4 (b) 155.8 147.2 158.1 147.6 (c) 160.2 147.4 157.6 145.4 (d) 157.6 147.8 156.7 144.6 (e) 160.5 147.2 158.6 146.7 (f) 160.6 147.2 158.7 146.8 (g) 155.7 147.1 156.6 145.8 (h) 155.6 147.1 157.6 147.3 (i) 158.2 147.2 158.8 147.8 (k) 158.6 147.1 158.4 147.3 Average 158.4 147.3 158.2 146.8 Correction +3.0 +3.0 +3.0 +3.0 161.4 150.3 161.2 149.8 Reconstructed stature Male Eighteenth century graves. . *(10)161.4 Nineteenth century graves . . (12)161 .2 Living (1880-1900) (37)1 57. 0t Living (1928) (58)158. 4f * Maximum number. t Difference not significant (see Table 36). Female (6)150.3 (8)149.8 (22)150. 4t (78)148. 3f GENERAL OBSERVATIONS Vertebrae. — I have reported (1931, 1932) on the unusually high incidence of separate neural arch in the lumbar vertebrae of the Western Eskimos. The difference in incidence north and south of the Yukon River suggests, in view of more recent knowledge, that 66 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador this anomaly may have been more common among the Thule Eskimo and that its presence in the Seward Peninsula is due to a late return migration of this people into Alaska (Collins, 1937b). On account of this explanation it would be desirable to have more information regarding the distribution of this anomaly in the eastern Arctic. Unfortunately, the present collection does not help us much. The entire spine was preserved in only three of the recent grave speci- mens, and in only two others was the lumbo-sacral region preserved. However, of these five, two had the anomaly present (192005, L 4 and 5; 192008, L 5). Only two isolated anomalous lumbar vertebrae were observed (57352, 61604). Of the three complete spines, two had the modal number of segments, whereas one (192010) had 6 lumbar and 4 sacral vertebrae. Pathology. — Hutton (1926) and Suk (1927) have pointed out that syphilis reached Labrador about 1902 upon the return of some natives from an exhibition in the United States. Prior to this the Eskimos about Hudson Bay and Straits may have acquired the disease from whalers, but there is no clear evidence that it penetrated to the coast of Labrador from this northern source before 1902. Until 1912 Hutton saw only primary and secondary stages in the living. By 1927, however, Suk was able to witness a number of cases in the tertiary stage. Regarding the older population, Suk says : My attention was focused on this question and for this I examined very carefully as many of the so-called heathen graves along the coast in different places as I had the opportunity of doing. It is not easy to say how many persons these skeletons represented, as many of the graves contained several individuals and the graves were already very much disturbed; all I can say approximately is that I examined about 150 to 160 long bones, a couple of skulls and some parts of skulls, in these different graves with the special object of finding traces of osseous syphilis. But there were no traces at all, none on the long bones and none on the few skulls I saw (p. 8). My examination of the material forming-the basis of the present study revealed no evidence of syphilis, either in the old stone grave series or in the recent series. As far as this material goes, therefore, it is fairly certain that syphilis was not present in Labrador in the middle of the nineteenth century. Hypertrophic arthritis, a natural phenomenon of old age, showed little that could be called unusual in the Labrador material. In one of the recent grave skeletons, 192007, there was marked erosion of the left lumbo-sacral articular surfaces. The vertebrae in this case exhibited considerable lipping generally. Number 192014 had the vertebrae of the lumbar and lower thoracic regions fused in marked Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 67 kyphosis. There is some reason here for considering tuberculosis as the etiological agent causing this deformity. The only other notable pathologic process is that involving the right humerus of 192009. This specimen is shown in Plate 10. Unfortunately, the corresponding scapula was not recovered, so the nature of the articulation is not known. I will not venture to diag- nose this condition. DISCUSSION Interpretation of the findings on the long bones is handicapped chiefly by the small numbers involved in the groups represented. As far as the comparisons go, the long bones from Labrador are peculiar in their small size. In this respect the affiliation of this group is much more likely with Greenland than with the Thule or western groups. The significance of the unusually short radius must depend upon data from more representative series. The error in sexing undoubtedly contributes in large measure, especially in small series, to the differences between the various groups. Nevertheless, in general the relative extremity proportions for the Labrador group are typically Eskimo. It is not clear that the recent grave series shows anything different in this regard. Application of the correction factor to the reconstructed stature of the Eskimos, one of the most important items in this chapter, brings to light some interesting relationships. Fischer-M0ller has calculated by Pearson's method the stature of two groups: Naujan in Repulse Bay, and Greenland. Bearing in mind that the skeletal remains upon which these calculations are based are in general from a much earlier period than that in which measurements on the living have been obtained, the following rela- tionship appears: Reconstructed Locality Stature Living Stature (Male) (Nearest locality) Fischer- Corrected M01ler (+ 3 cm.) Naujan 162.0* 165.0 166.0 (Melville Peninsula; Parry, 1824) 162.0 (Southampton Island; Tocher, 1902) West and southeast Greenland 159.1 162.1 162.0 (west Greenland; Han- sen, 1893) 160.4 (southeast Greenland; Hansen, 1914) 157.6 (southwest Greenland; Hansen, 1914) Northeast Greenland 162. 6f 165.6 ? * Maximum number of any one long bone (right side): 7 (femur), t Maximum number of any one long bone not over 9. 68 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Only males are considered here, but the females give about the same indications. It is interesting to note that Fischer-M0ller has commented as follows on the reconstructed stature of the Greenland Eskimos: A stature of 159.1 for males and 148.2 cm. for females in prehistoric Green- land (i.e. prior to Hans Egede's time) is low, but the writer does not consider the estimate to be much too low. . . . If in particular we take S0ren Hansen's measurements [1893], which comprise about two thousand individuals, the height is 2.9 cm. higher for males and 3.8 cm. for females compared with our heights calculated from the extremity bones. It must be remembered, however, that in the two to five hundred years which lie between the skeletons and those alive today the stature in all probability has increased as a result of the improved social con- ditions, just as stature has increased in Denmark and many other countries. In addition, there is the crossing with the Nordic race. S. Hansen states that for Greenlanders whose fathers or grandfathers were Danish, the average stature was 166 cm. (1938, pp. 25-26). In view of the evidence showing that Pearson's formulae do not reconstruct Eskimo stature by at least 3 cm., I suggest a more likely explanation of the Greenland situation than that presented by Fischer-M0ller; namely, that (except in the northeast) the ancient Eskimo had a stature about the same as reported by Hansen for west Greenland in 1893, and that among the fullbloods changing to the foods of civilization this stature has decreased (as witnessed by Hansen's measurements in southwestern Greenland). That Hansen (1893) did not find the stature of the west coast Eskimo much different from that of the Eskimo of the southeast coast is due perhaps to his inclusion of mixed-bloods among the former. This possibility is suggested by the increased range of the measurements from west Greenland : Locality Male Female Source West Greenland. . . (346)140-183 (295)133-173 Hansen, 1893, p. 185 Southeast v Greenland (22)148.6-168.2 (23)143.^-163.0 Hansen, 1914, p. 155 Labrador (58)144.0-172.1 (78)136.4-156.7 Strong (Table 36) Labrador (37)148.8-167.3 (22)137.4-161.2 Lee et al. (Table 36) Unfortunately, there is little information available as to the range of the lengths of the long bones from the ancient population of Greenland. In the case both of Naujan and northeast Greenland we are deal- ing with reconstructed stature based upon few measurements, and so this stature may not be entirely accurate. Still, it is interesting to note that the two figures are very similar. This is important in view of the fact that both groups are Thule (for discussion of this point Observations on Eskimo Skeletal Remains 69 see Larsen, 1934, pp. 161-172). Since, according to the latest theory of Eskimo migration (Chapter II), the Thule are considered to be a western people, and Eskimo stature today is higher in the west, our correction of reconstructed stature makes the picture more consistent. For example, the modern Point Barrow Eskimo are considered to be of Thule origin (Collins, 1937b). The two records of stature for this group disagree; Ray (1885) gives 161.3 for the males, whereas Seltzer (1933) gives 164.6. It will be recognized that the latter agrees with the reconstructed Thule statures given above. The data in Tables 21-25 permit the reconstruction also of the Barrow Igloo stature; this in males is 166 cm. (corrected). Seltzer gives a stature of 169.5 cm. for the Old Igloos (1933, p. 358) which, although probably calculated by the aid of Pearson's formulae, seems to be excessive. It appears therefore that perhaps two stature groups can be distinguished among the Eskimos: (1) a low-statured group, aver- aging in the males about 160-162 cm., and found chiefly in the east (Labrador, southern Greenland); and (2) a high-statured group, 164-166 cm. in the males, found chiefly in the west, but also among the Thule people of the east. In connection with the first group it is interesting to note that Birket-Smith (1925) has reported a stature of 160.6 cm. for the Caribou Eskimo (males). This may be significant in view of the theory (Chapter II) that the Caribou Eskimo represent a remnant of one of the "reservoirs" of population. Seltzer (1933) has already called attention to this distribution of stature: I have shown, on the basis of somatological criteria, that the Hudson Bay Eskimos are undeniably related to a particular group of Cree Indians. I have also pointed out how the Hudson Bay, Labrador and Angmassalik Eskimos all belong to a single physical type. It follows, therefore, that this short- statured type of which the Hudson Bay tribes are members, is also closely affiliated with the Cree. . . . In Greenland today, both the east and west coasts are racially so mixed that very few pure Eskimos are to be found. There is no doubt in my mind that the bearers of the Thule Culture arrived here, but not in any great num- bers. The Eskimos who have maintained their purity up to the present, are usually of the short-statured dolicho group. Occasionally, we find among them a few tall individuals, who are probably descendants of the Old Thulers (p. 366). IV. RECORD OF CONTACT BETWEEN EUROPEANS AND NATIVE POPULATION OF NORTHEAST LABRADOR 1 The historic period of Labrador divides itself naturally, and geographically, into two parts: That involving the section south of Hamilton Inlet, and that — more important from our point of view — involving the northeast coast. The coast north of Hamilton Inlet is more difficult of access and less inviting than that to the south, and hence remained largely isolated until the arrival of the Moravian missionaries in the eight- eenth century. As Hawkes has so aptly phrased it: The wiping out by the combined Whites and Indians, of the entire southern branch [of the Eskimo] south of Hamilton Inlet, which remained hostile and pagan to the last, and the careful nourishing of the northern branch by Chris- tian missionaries, form one of the many paradoxes with which the history of native races in their relation to the Whites abounds (p. 1). This quotation clearly indicates the end results for the two areas. Since we are concerned chiefly, both as regards the living and the dead, with the northeastern part of the peninsula, I will not go into the history of the southern part of Labrador. Hawkes has given a good account of this to which the reader may refer. Unfortunately, the history of northeastern Labrador concerns chiefly the Eskimos, because they have always been the coastal people, and exploration and trade by Europeans followed the coast. The Moravian Missions According to Hawkes, before the Moravians took up their work on the north coast they demanded and received 100,000 acres of land for each settlement, so as to "keep the Eskimo away from the con- taminating influences of dissolute whites^' After an unsuccessful attempt to settle near Hopedale in 1752, the Moravians established their first mission at Nain (see Map) in 1771. During the next century five other stations were started in the following chronological order: Okak, 1776; Hopedale, 1782; Hebron, 1830; Zoar, 1865; and Ramah, 1871. The last two were abandoned in 1890. Finally, two more stations were established: Makkovik in 1896 and Killinek, at Cape Chidley, in 1904. Killinek, too, has since been abandoned (Suk, 1927, p. 1). 1 This chapter is placed here rather than following Chapter II because it deals primarily with observations on the living, which is the subject next to be con- sidered. This position also facilitates reference with Chapter V. 70 Europeans and Natives of Labrador 71 The missionaries discovered early that it was difficult to combat the lures of the southern white traders. This led them to establish trading stations in connection with their missions so that they might regulate the trade. It is generally conceded that these trading stations did not seek to profit unjustly at the expense of the natives, and neither did they attempt to hasten unduly the process of accul- turation. Through the efforts of the missions other commercial interests were for some time prevented from gaining much of a foot- hold along this part of the coast. Population The history of the coast is largely that of the mission stations, where, once established, a missionary routine ensues. Hutton (1912) has given a readable account of such a course of events at one of the northern stations (Okak). Much of this detail is of little interest anthropologically. Of considerable interest, however, is the popula- tion trend, which declines with each tragic epidemic and with the Table 31. — Population of Labrador Moravian Mission Stations Mission Records (Hawkes) Official Censuses 18A0 1850 1860 1880 1890 1891 1901 1911 1921 1935 Killinek 50 106 Ramah 44 59 64 72 ... 17 Hebron... 179 346 206 202 ... 256 211 196 72 132 Okak 352 408 314 329 350 362 396 351 17 14 Nain 298 314 277 282 263 272 287 230 159 250 Zoar 130 89 92 Hopedale.. 205 229 241 315 331 341 229 213 170 153 Makkovik ... 132* 167 32 65 * Including Turnavik. steady course of acculturation. There is little need to detail the various epidemics, because they are imperfectly recorded and the causative agent is often in doubt. The result is reflected in the mission and census records. The figures given above in Table 31 do not represent the full Eskimo population ; the records give only the resident populations of the stations; that is, the Christian natives, plus a few Whites. The figures of the last two censuses are confusing because of the effort at refinement; many small places are listed which formerly may have been figured in connection with the main stations. More detailed figures for part of this period (1918-27) were obtained by Dr. Strong from Mr. Walter Perrett of Hopedale. They relate to six of the stations given in Table 31; that is, all except Ramah and Zoar, which, it will be recalled, had been abandoned: 72 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Year Population Change 1918 1239 ? 1919 859 -380 1920 847 - 12 1921 855 + 8 1922 852 - 3 1923 884 + 32 1924 887 + 3 1925 915 + 28 1926 899 - 16 1927 934 + 35 These figures seem to pertain to the early part of each year, because the great decrease in population between 1918 and 1919 was attrib- uted by Mr. Perrett chiefly to the influenza epidemic that came north in the autumn of 1918. According to Mr. Perrett this disease was carried from St. Johns, Newfoundland, by ship to Hebron and then to Okak. About 350 Eskimos died at Hebron and Okak. The latter, formerly a prosperous settlement, Strong found practically depopulated when he visited it in 1928 (cf. Table 31). The fact that the southern stations were so much less severely affected by the influenza was attributed by Mr. Perrett to the existence there of a smallpox epidemic. Only about 40 people died at Hopedale and Nain. In spite of the fluctuations, it is clear that the general trend of the Labrador Eskimo population is downwards. The smallest figures are for the year 1920 (1921 of the census); there seems to have been somewhat of a recovery following this. The general trend is also shown by the census figures on "other denomination," which seems to be made up largely of Moravians: Year Number 1901 1383 1911 1312 1921 777 1935 1110 Intermixture N* Not indicated in the census reports are the proportions of full- blood Eskimos, mixed-bloods and Whites constituting the Labrador population. Few figures of this nature are obtainable, partly because the missionaries may wish to minimize the extent of the intermixture, but also because untrained observers are not capable of estimating it correctly. It seems likely that mixture, getting an earlier start in the south, reaches a peak around Hamilton Inlet. Against the possible introduction into Moravian territory of mixed-bloods from the south is the repeated statement in the official reports that a population shift has taken place from the northern to the southern Europeans and Natives of Labrador 73 stations. Thus, in his reports of official visits to Labrador in 1905 and 1908 Sir William MacGregor says: Some 28 of the natives settled at Hebron migrated further south this year. The missionaries of that place believe that the whole race has at present a tendency to move southwards (p. 88). To show how far intermixture had proceeded at Hamilton Inlet by the early part of the nineteenth century the figures of Thomas Hickson may be quoted (Young, 1931). Hickson was a young minister who spent the summer of 1824 exploring Labrador for the Wesleyan Conference. Under date of July 9 he recorded in his journal : This morning I conversed with two real Esquimaux women with their ungodly European partners, with whom they have been living in a state of concubinage for many years. This I find to be a practice which prevails to a very great extent in this part of the world; it has sometimes been the case that they have left the poor Esquimaux and their little ones in the most distressing circumstances. I expressed my disapprobation of their conduct (p. 23). On July 28 he recorded that A few of [the natives] assisted me to ascertain the probable number of the inhabitants of the bay, which is as follows : Real Esquimaux adults 100 Real Esquimaux children 60 Half Esquimaux 60 European settlers 90 Canadian settlers 16 (p. 33) Another source of admixture is the Labrador fishermen. Writing in 1885, Packard says: Few Europeans or Americans had previous to 1864 visited the Labrador coast north of Hopedale, and there the race has been preserved in most cases intact, though there may now be an occasional intermixture with the New- foundland fishermen, who now go as far as Nain (1891, p. 271). Writing again in 1891, Packard says: It has been already stated that the fishermen have only in recent years gone up the coast for their fares beyond Hopedale. When we visited the coast in 1864 scarcely any fishermen went beyond Hamilton Inlet. . . . The American fishermen have abandoned the Labrador coast, preferring the Newfoundland banks, which are nearer to their homes. As late as 1880 about one hundred Canadian and Nova Scotia vessels were annually engaged in the Labrador fisheries. Formerly a good many Jersey fishermen frequented the coast, where there were several of their fishing establishments; but of these only three remained up to 1880, while all the English mercantile houses have been withdrawn (1891, pp. 240-241). Delabarre reports essentially the same thing in 1900: Very few of those [fishermen] who go down the Atlantic shore ever get beyond Nain or Port Manvers. One venturesome man alone maintains a fishing station at Cape Chidley all the year round, and goes to it every summer 74 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador in his steamer. These Newfoundlanders are almost exclusively of English descent, with a queer, oldtime flavor to their speech, with an almost fanatic formal piety and respect for the Sabbath. . . (p. 152). On the other hand MacGregor reports that: According to the missionaries the fishermen on the coast do not often give liquor to the natives, or interfere in any way with the family affairs of the Innuit (p. 88). Such figures on mixed-bloods as are available I will give for what they are worth. MacGregor obtained the following figures during his visits to the coast in 1905 and 1908: In 1856 there were practically no half-castes, "settlers," on the coast. In 1874 the Innuit Christians were 1,176, the "settlers" 115. In 1904 the Christian natives numbered 1,018, the heathen Innuit about 30, altogether say 1,050 persons; while the half-breeds or "settlers" were about 280. . . (p. 100). To this he appends a letter from C. A. Martin of Nain giving further figures: On the 31st of December, 1905, the population of our seven stations and their neighbourhood (i.e. from Killinek north to Cape Harrison south) was as follows: Killinek 81 (Eskimo, 78; settler, 3) Rama 79 (Eskimo, 75; settler, 4) Hebron 174 (Eskimo, 166; settler, 8) Okak 329 (Eskimo only) Nain 287 (Eskimo, 233; settler, 54) Hopedale 233 (Eskimo, 123; settler, 110) Makkovik 138 (nearly all settlers) ... .1 was very sorry to find that in the last ten years the Esquimaux on our Stations have decreased rather rapidly. While in the [decade] 1877-87 the decrease amounted to 15; 1887-97 to 56; now in the past ten years it amounts to 127, and in those ten years we had no special and severe epidemic on our stations, besides the influenza. The rates per 100 for the past seven years, as I found them, are the following ones: 1901 1902 1903 190^ 1905 1906 1907 TP»Wmo,nr/ Births --- AA 4 " 5 6 - 4 " 3 5 " 8 4 " 3 4 " 2 £iSKimaux \ Deaths.. 4.6 6.2 5.8 >9.6 7.8 6.5 6.6 -0.2 -1.7 +0.2 -5.3 -2.0 -2.2 -2.4 c . ., /Births.. 3.2 2.8 4.4 2.7 4.0 3.0 2.7 &etuers - • \ Deaths.. 2.1 2.8 1.0 2.3 1.4 2.0 2.3 + 1.1 ... +3.4 +0.4 +2.6 +1.0 +0.4 (pp. 212-214.) In 1926 Dr. Suk, Professor of Anthropology and Ethnology, Masaryk University, Brno, Czechoslovakia, visited the mission stations on the north Labrador coast in a medical capacity. His notes on intermixture are of importance here both because of his anthropological training and because the date is so close to that of Dr. Strong's visit. As a result of stopping twice at each of the sta- Europeans and Natives of Labrador 75 tions and staying at each place from four to ten days (seven weeks at Hebron) he gives the following opinion on intermixture: Makkovik with prevalent population of the Labrador settler type, i.e. White and Eskimo mixed breed in various shades and degrees of hybridism between the two human groups, from a cross between a pure blood white man and a pure blood Eskimo to a Near White with, say, one sixteenth or less of foreign admixture, and perhaps one or two pure Whites (the term "Near White" is a distinction used in the United States for an offspring of an octoroon with a pure White and we use it here in an analogous way). Hopedale, Nain, Okak in the majority pure Eskimos, the remainder hybrids of different shades. Hebron almost entirely pure Eskimos but for five or six mixed breeds. As for pure Eskimos this is the best station and at present the largest settlement on the Labrador Coast. . . (p. 1). Longevity The mission stations having been established in Labrador so long, it is a comparatively easy thing to get the approximately correct age of most of the natives. The skeleton cannot be aged as closely. Nevertheless, there is some interest in the process of aging among a people subjected to the rigorous Arctic environment. Packard has observed that At Hopedale we understood the oldest person, the patriarch of the colony, to be a woman of seventy years: we saw her — a picture of ugliness which still haunts our memory. There were three Eskimos who were sixty years old. A man becomes prematurely old when forty-five years of age, as the hunters are by that time worn out by the hardships of the autumnal seal fishery (1891, p. 208) . MacGregor says further that It is a strange peculiarity of many of the young Innuit girls of about a dozen years of age that, if one looks only at the face of the girl, it would pass as belonging to a woman of thirty (p. 81). Hutton also found age a very deceptive thing: "Sixty-two" might be the answer from a bowed old figure crouching over the stove — I would have guessed twenty years more than that. The fact is that the Eskimo wears out fast; after fifty he begins to decline, and few live long after sixty. I have known a few over seventy, and the people told me with wonderment about an old woman who lived to be eighty-two, and who worked to the last; but these are great rarities, and it must be a unique thing in one's lifetime to meet with an Eskimo great-grandmother. These very old people nearly always seem to be active to the last; they have an unusual store of vitality; and they die in harness, dropping out like those who are too tired to go any further, and passing away without illness or suffering. They are always those who have clung closely to their own native foods, and can always speak of having been mighty hunters once upon a time (1912, pp. 111-112). The 1935 census lists 15 individuals, mostly females, of 70 years or over at Hopedale, Nain, and Hebron. V. ANALYSIS OF METRICAL AND NON-METRICAL OBSERVATIONS ON LIVING ESKIMOS AND INDIANS Circumstances Surrounding the Collection of the Data In addition to the skeletal material already considered, Dr. Strong obtained during 1927-28, among other things, anthropo- metric measurements on a good series of Eskimos and a small series of Indians. In this work he was assisted by Dr. E. K. Langford, physician to the expedition. These data were turned over to the writer for critical analysis in the fall of 1935. x In anticipation of the opportunity of securing anthropometric records while in Labrador, Dr. Strong had reviewed the subject of anthropometry with Dr. Henry Field, who was then preparing for his work in Arabia. Dr. Hooton had advised both men regarding desirable measurements to be secured, and in Strong's case had suggested that observations be included on the dentition and palatal torus. In addition to this preparation, Dr. Strong had provided himself with three handbooks on the subject; namely, those by Hrdlicka (1920), Sullivan, and Wilder. Dr. Langford's only instruction in this subject was that given him by Dr. Strong. Instruments were provided by Field Museum and consisted of Martin's anthropometer, spreading caliper, and small sliding caliper. Von Luschan's color scale was used for comparing skin color. All measurements and observations were recorded on blanks supplied by Field Museum. The expedition established its headquarters at Anatalak Bay (see Map) and here several Montagnais-Naskapi Indians of the Barren Ground Band were measured in December of 1927. During January of 1928 some members of the Davisjnlet Band, encountered at a camp in the interior west of Davis Inlet, were measured. In April of 1928 three additional members of the same band were measured at Davis Inlet. Also during April and in May, measure- ments were recorded on Eskimos at the following places: Hopedale, Nain, and Hebron. Finally, one Indian of the Barren Ground Band was -measured in June at Anatalak. Before measuring any of the Indians, Strong and Langford had checked their techniques. This procedure was repeated again in the spring of 1928 before measuring 1 The writer gave a preliminary report on these measurements at the New Haven meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, May 1, 1936, under the title "New Measurements on the Eskimos and Indians of Labrador." 76 Observations on Eskimos and Indians 77 any of the Eskimos. All the Indians, and all but seven of the Eski- mos used in the final analysis were measured by Strong, with Lang- ford recording. Any suspected admixture of white blood was noted at the time of measurement and all such individuals have been eliminated in analysis. In the case of the Eskimos the records of the Moravian Missions formed the basis for estimates of pure-bloodedness, as well as age. After deletions of mixed-bloods and subadults the series have the following composition: Eskimos: 58 males, 79 females; Indians: 11 males, 7 females. The numbers of mixed-bloods and subadults are too small to warrant analysis. In addition to name, age, sex and birthplace, the data thus secured comprise the following items: Stature Menton-nasion (part only) Sitting height Forehead height Head length Nose height Head breadth Nose breadth Head height Ear length Minimum frontal diameter Ear breadth Bizygomatic diameter Skin color Bigonial breadth Number of missing teeth Menton-crinion (part only) Development of palatal raphe (torus) Problems Involved in Data of This Nature The analysis of anthropometric records collected by those who, although thoroughly conscientious in their efforts to advance anthro- pological knowledge, yet are not experienced physical anthropolo- gists, often presents some problems. In the first place, it is doubtful whether a hasty review of anthropometry preliminary to such a trip is fully retained in the memory. This is especially true when physical measurements are not the primary objective, as in the present instance. The problem thus created is whether or not resulting metrical differences from the comparative material are due to faulty technique or are inherent in the samples. It is undoubtedly true that if the observer clearly understands the definition of a particular dimension and tries conscientiously to obtain it, his result (in the form of the mean) will be reliable, provided as always that the series is adequate in number. On the other hand, when the true position of a landmark is not comprehended (the most frequent error) all measurements involving this point will likely be biased; they will be consistently either greater or less than the true dimension. As is commonly known, one of the landmarks most difficult to locate in the living is "nasion," and because of its uncertainty of location the 78 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador measurements of nose and face height, as obtained by the beginner, often are not trustworthy. A second problem concerns the full-bloodedness of the subjects measured. Since it is usually impossible to obtain reliable genealogies among primitive peoples during a brief sojourn, it is customary to select the full-bloods by any means available. The ability to dis- tinguish between full- and mixed-bloods by inspection increases with experience and cannot be imparted fully by instruction beforehand. In this respect an experienced physical anthropologist encountering a racial group for the first time would be at much the same disadvantage as anyone else. Even where local records are available, as in the present case, it is doubtful whether these are unerring. This situation may be obviated to some extent by securing photographs of as many of the sub- jectsas possible. Unfortunately, in the far north it is not always conven- ient or possible to get a photograph when the opportunity presents itself. In addition to the above standard problems associated with this type of material, the present case offers another difficulty. The anthropometric form supplied by Field Museum listed the usual measurements, including total facial height and upper facial height. The first of these was interpreted by Strong at the beginning as menton-crinion, but later as menton-nasion; the upper facial height was interpreted throughout as nasion-crinion (forehead). 1 Of the several problems thus described, the first — the technique of measuring — offers the greatest difficulty in evaluating. One of the first aims in presenting these data, therefore, will be to judge their reliability. As far as the full-bloodedness of the sample is con- cerned, we are forced to assume that most cases of recent admixture were avoided. However, the few photographs secured (Plates 11-16) indicate that at least some individuals are not full-bloods. Personal Err6r^ The reliability of the present measurements may be tested in three ways: (1) by examination of trial measurements on members of the expedition; (2) by comparison of measurements on the same subject as recorded by two different observers; and (3) by compari- son with data from other sources. trial measurements Before attempting work on the natives, Strong and Langford measured one another as well as other members of the party. It has 1 Others have been confused in measuring face height; Stefansson, for example, measured to glabella instead of nasion (Seltzer, 1933, p. 318). Observations on Eskimos and Indians 79 not been convenient to remeasure Langford or the others in con- nection with this analysis, but I have secured Strong's measurements. These figures are here presented (Table 32) in contrast to those (up to three trials) taken by Langford. The chief indication from this comparison is that Langford has failed to get maximum head and face breadths and is not measuring minimum frontal diameter. However, since Langford measured relatively few subjects, the above is of interest mainly for what follows. Table 32.— Evaluation of Trial Measurements Strong Strong measured by measured by Stewart (1936) Langford (1927) CM. CM. Stature 178 (with shoes) 175.5-175 (moccasins) Sitting height 95.8 91.1 MM. MM. Head length 201 201-200-196 Head breadth 157 147-148-154 Head height : 131(proj. method) Min. front, diam 112 121-120 Bizyg. diam 146 142-134 Bigon. diam 108 107 Menton-crinion (hair loss) 164-163 Menton-nasion 116 126-119 Nasal height 54 58-56 Nasal breadth 35 32-33 Ear length 67 65-65 Ear breadth 37 34-33 DUPLICATE MEASUREMENTS The data contain three cases where the same subject was measured by both Strong and Langford. Also, some measurements were obtained on the same individual (4 or 5 years apart) by Strong and the late Dr. Truman Michelson. The identity of these subjects is assured by the agreement in name, age, and birthplace. Their measurements compare as shown in Table 33. Here it is certain that Langford is not measuring minimum frontal diameter. Also, it seems probable that Strong is not securing maximum face and head breadths, but this is not definite because of the poor agreement between the different observers. However, Strong is consistently high in nasal height and low in forehead height, from which it can be concluded that he located nasion too high. COMPARATIVE DATA With these indications in mind we can turn now to comparison with the data from other sources. Here a noteworthy situation exists: The largest series of Labrador Eskimo of one sex (male) heretofore reported in the literature (Duckworth) for which a number 80 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Table 33. — Duplicate Measurements on the Same Subject E J3 5 ,- T3 O M 5 T3 j- . P z f | I 1 2 J S •& 2 .3 "o •» -o • 5? o so . S 9 n n S U Duckworth.. 10 ? 79.7 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 10 77.7-89.4 84.4 Hallowell 4179 -95 87.40±0.32 3.00±0.22 3.40±0.25 .... Cree Grant 22 79.8-96.3 89.10±0.55 3.82±0.39 4.28±0.44 .... Chipewyan Grant 40 84.3-94.8 89.40±0.30 2.79±0.21 3.11±0.32 .... Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 73.3-82.7 79.9 Hallowell 29 64 -86 79.90±0.49 3.90±0.34 4.90±0.34 .... Chipewyan Grant 14 76.8-87.3 82.40±0.52 2.86±0.36 3.47±0.44 .... Considering that Strong's Indian series do not show as great ranges as Hallowell 's, the means are in fair agreement. All of these figures, however, are below those obtained by Grant on tribes to the west. RELATIVE SITTING HEIGHT Table 38 shows that, relative to stature, mean sitting height for males is significantly different in the Strong and the Lee-Sornberger series. However, the figure for Strong's series is in agreement with that of Duckworth. By comparison with the Labrador females and other Eskimo groups, it would appear that Strong's figures are too low. I suspect that there has been some error in obtaining sitting height. Since this measurement involves the deduction of bench height, there is always a chance for error. I note, for instance, that Observations on Eskimos and Indians 87 Strong used chiefly three benches of heights 53, 48.3, and 43.3 cm., respectively. The first two benches are probably too high for people of short stature. In addition there is the possibility that the second and third benches were really one and the same, the eight being mistaken for a three, or vice versa. The relatively long trunk length in the Eskimos, as compared to extremity length, is believed to be the factor which interferes with the prediction of stature from the long bones of this group. Thus, the approximate figure of 53 for the Eskimo compares with the 51.9 for the French given by Stevenson (1929). Table 38. — Relative Sitting Height Observer Number Range Mean±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. CV. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 57 47.7-54.6 51.58±0.13 1.44±0.09 2.79±0.18 .... Merger .: I?} 26 Il ! t lis } 53 - 08±0 - 20 1-«±0.14 2.79±0.26 6.25 Duckworth. . ? ? 51 .4* Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 78 46.1-57.5 53.03±0.14 1.80±0.10 3.40±0.18 .... Lee 10\ 1it 48.6-55.9\„ Q Sornberger. . 4/ 14 52.2-57.1 / oav Duckworth.. ? ? 53.2* Labrador Indian: Male Strong 10 50.1-52.8 51.3 Hallowell 4149 -55 52.40±0.18 1.70±0.13 3.20±0.24 .... Cree Grant 22 53 -59 55.80±0.23 1.63±0.17 2.92±0.30 .... Chipewyan Grant 40 49 -57 53.80±0.22 2.06±0.16 3.83±0.29 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 50.6-53.6 52.1 Hallowell 29 42 -53 51.70±0.28 2.20±0.19 4.20±0.37 .... Chipewyan Grant 14 51 -57 54.80±0.29 1.62±0.21 2.96±0.38 .... * Calculated from means. The figures for the Indians shown in Table 38 are low as com- pared with Grant's figures shown and with Hrdlicka's findings on the Sioux (1931) and Southwestern Indians (1935). HEAD LENGTH The early measurements of head length for the Labrador Eskimos, as published by Duckworth, Pittard, and Virchow, showed averages for the males ranging from about 191 to 197. When these small series are combined with those of Lee and Sornberger (Table 39), a mean is obtained for each sex that agrees fairly well with Strong's; only that for the females is significantly different. It will be 88 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador observed, however, that Strong's ranges are slightly lower, suggesting a small personal error. For the Indians, Strong's range for both sexes is within that of Hallowell's, and yet Strong's mean is lower. This is probably due, for the most part, to the small series. In any case it does not appear that these Indians are very different in head length from the Cree or Chipewyans. Table 39. — Head Length (In millimeters) Observer Number Range Mean±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 177-204 192.17±0.55 6.27±0.39 3.26±0.20 Lee 9] 184-196 1 PitTar?^ '"* X 8 37 188-200 192 - 89±0 - 68 6 - 12 ± - 48 3.17±0.25 0.83 Virchow. .'. '. 3 J 188-205 J Duckworth . . 11 ? 191 .2 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 170-196 185.04±0.42 5.55±0.30 3.00±0.16 .... Lee 10] 172-193] P?tt£d rger " 6 21 186— i97 f 189.48dr0.80 5.43±0.56 2.86±0.30 4.93 Virchow. .. '. 2 J 189-192 J Duckworth.. 10 ? 190.2 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 180-201 189.4 Hallowell 67 178-208 194.50±0.56 6.80±0.40 3.40±0.20 .... Grant 25 183-201 193.20±0.67 4.94±0.47 2.56±0.24 .... Chipewyan Grant 43 180-204 193.50±0.56 5.41±0.39 2.80±0.20 .... Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 180-188 184.1 Hallowell 54 173-205 187.30±0.59 6.40±0.42 3.40±0.22 .... Chipewyan Grant 21 180-195 186.60±0.58 3.96±0.41 2.12±0.22 When we examine these figures in the light of the comparative lists compiled by Shapiro (1931) and Seltzer (1933) for the Eskimos there is little apparent order. Several reasons can be advanced to account for this. In the first place, a strict east-west arrangement ignores the cultural background. In the second, small series, just as in Labrador, give means deviating widely from the true means. Third, variations in head length may reflect differences both in shape and size. The last fact makes it necessary to postpone further com- parison until head breadth has been examined. All that can be said here is that head length among the Labrador Eskimos is in the lower part of the range of all Eskimo groups and about the same as that for the Labrador and other northern Indians. Observations on Eskimos and Indians 89 HEAD BREADTH When the earlier measurements of Pittard and Virchow are com- bined with those of Lee and Sornberger (Table 40) a mean is obtained for the males that is higher than that of either Strong or Duckworth, and the difference is statistically significant. In the case of the C.V. ±p.e. Table 40. — Head Breadth (In millimeters) Observer Number Range Mean±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male 58 133-164 148.31±0.45 5.09±0.32 3.43±0.22 138-154 o 7 143-lffS 61 146-154 146-152 11 ? ' 147.6 Xp.e. Strong Lee* 9 Sornberger . . 17 Pittard 8 Virchow. ... 3 Duckworth . . 151.49±0.73 6.56±0.51 4.33±0.34 3.76 Strong Lee 101 Sornberger. . 3 i 91 Pittard 6 f £L Virchow .... 2 J Duckworth.. 10 Labrador Strong 11 Hallowell 67 Cree Grant 25 Chipewyan Grant 44 Labrador Eskimo: Female 79 130-151 142.26±0.40 5.21±0.28 3.66±0.20 141-152 1 142-147 ' 143 - 72±1 - 00 6 - 77 ±°-70 4.71±0.49 1.35 131-143 141.8 Indian: Male 131-155 144.1 145-167 156.80±0.39 4.70±0.27 3.00±0.17 141-156 150.00±0.63 4.70±0.45 3.13±0.30 141-162 153.70±0.44 4.35±0.31 2.83±0.20 Labrador Strong 7 Indian: Female 136-149 144.0 Hallowell.. .54 142-165 151.70d=0.34 3.70±0.24 2.40±0.16 Chipewyan Grant 21 141-156 148.60±0.52 3.54±0.37 2.38±0.25 *In 1901 Boas reported a head width of 149 for 10 individuals measured by Lee. females the difference is much less and hence not statistically signifi- cant. It will be observed that throughout both the Eskimos and Indians, Strong's range is below the others. We have seen (Table 33) that Strong got a lower figure for this dimension than either Langford or Michelson. I would suggest, therefore, that this constant personal error accounts for Strong's lower means. As in the case of head length no perceptible order exists in Sha- piro's and Seltzer's comparative lists, and the same explanation applies. However, the Labrador figures for head breadth, both Eskimo and Indian, do not appear to be so low in the range of the other groups as in the case of head length. 90 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador cephalic index The earlier figures on the cephalic index of the male Labrador Eskimos vary from 75.5 (Virchow, 3 individuals) to 77 (Duck- worth, 11 individuals). By combining the data of Virchow and Pittard with those of Lee and Sornberger (Table 41), we get a mean index of 78.6 for the males, which is not significantly different from Strong's figure of 77.3. Similarly the difference between the female means is not significant. Table 41. — Cephalic Index Observer Number Range Meandbp.e. S.D.ip.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 69.6-83.6 77.28±0.28 3.21±0.20 4.15±0.26 .... Lee 9) 75.0-80.2 1 Pittard rger ^8 f 37 73'0-79*4 f ^8. 61 ±0.43 3.92±0.31 4.99±0.39 2.61 Virchow 3 j 74.1-77.6 J Duckworth. . 11 ? 77.0 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 70.6-83.7 76.94±0.22 2.94±0.16 3.82±0.20 Lee 101 72.7-85.71 PiUa^ 8 ^ ' 6 21 73 1-77 4 f 75 ' 88± °' 55 3 - 77±0 - 39 4.97±0.52 1.80 Virchow.'.'.' '. 2 j 68! 2- 75 '.7 J Duckworth.. 10 ? 74.5 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 68.2-80.6 76.1 Hallowell 74 74 -86 80.60±0.24 3.00±0.17 3.70±0.20 .... Boas (1895). . .79 74 -93 81.43±0.24 3.21±0.17 3.94±0.21 2.44 Cree Grant 25 73 -81 77.60±0.26 1.92±0.18 2.47±0.24 .... Boas 8174 -87 79.80±0.19 2.60±0.14 3.26±0.17 6.88 Chipewyan Grant 43 73 -85 79.30±0.23 2.25±0.16 2.84±0.21 .... Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 75.6-79.7 78.2 Hallowell 58 74 -90 81.10±0.27 3.10±0.19 3.80±0.24 .... Chipewyan v Grant 2175 -83 79.60±0.25 M.69±0.18 2.12±0.22 .... As for the Indians, Strong gets means well below those of Hal- lowell. In turn, Hallowell's mean for the males agrees with that of Boas (1895) for the Montagnais, and is close to Grant's figures for the Cree and Chipewyans. Although there are few individuals in Strong's series of Indians, still, in view of his good results in the case of the Eskimo, it is reasonable to believe that his Indians were some- what different from those of Hallowell. It is not impossible that the Labrador Indian was longer-headed before becoming admixed with the White, but admittedly this is contrary to Sullivan's observations (1920) on mixed-blood Sioux. Observations on Eskimos and Indians 91 I would point out also that, whereas the female Eskimo in Table 41 have relatively longer heads than the males, in the Indians the opposite is true. This, I am told, is probably due to the fact that the Indian women braid their hair on the side, thus rendering it difficult to obtain the true maximum breadth. On the other hand, this sex difference seems to be peculiar to the two groups. Seltzer (1933) says of the Eskimos: It must not pass unnoticed that, with the exception of the Mackenzie, all the female groups have lower mean cephalic indices than the corresponding males (p. 327). A higher mean cephalic index for the Indian females, as compared with the males, appears in HrdliSka's studies of the Chippewa (1916), Sioux (1931), and Pueblos (1935). The relationship of this index on the living head and the skull has received considerable attention (see Stewart, 1936b). A dolicho- cranial group may reasonably be expected to have had an average index at least 1.5 units higher in life. We have seen (Table 4) that the male Labrador crania from the old stone graves have a cranial index of 71.8; that in recent grave crania this has increased to 72.6 (Table 11). In contrast to the cephalic index of 77.3 (Strong) for the living today, the above figures are 5.5 and 4.7 units lower, respectively. Turning to Greenland, we see a like condition: cranial index, 71.7 (Table 4); cephalic index, 76.8 (Deniker, 1913); difference, 5.1 units. Also, quoting Hansen (1914) : As will appear from the special investigation of the skulls to follow below, their average index is 72.1. .. , that is to say, they are pronouncedly doli- chocephalic. If, for convenience, we consider the two sexes under one head, the average index for the 91 men and women measured on the East coast is 76.4. . . , that is to say, larger by 4.3 than the index of the skulls, and the living population thus turns out to be mesaticephalic (p. 161). For comparison I give similar figures for two mesocranial groups from Alaska: Skulls Living Difference Nunivak Island 75 .0(46) 78 . 6(19) 3 . 6 \ „ ,,.,. , OQrt St. Lawrence Island. . . . 77.1(153) 79.7(63) 2.6 j Hra,,CKa » LyM These examples from among the Eskimos all show a larger dif- ference between the indices of the head and skull than would be expected on theoretical grounds. This is to be accounted for partly by the fact that the living and dead are not the same individuals, but. rather, different and sometimes inadequate samples of the population. Hansen (1914) has suggested another explanation: 92 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador The question now is whether this difference is to be regarded as evidence that the skulls have belonged to a more dolichocephalous, and perhaps older, tribe than that now living, or whether it should be ascribed to special circum- stances in the measuring. . . . Quite apart from the intrinsic improbability of the first alternative, there seem to be no grounds for doubting that the cephalic index of the living East Greenlanders is considerably greater than that of their skulls, notably on account of the powerful development of their masticating muscles, of which the muse, temporalis alone might easily increase the latitudinal diameter by the few millimeters in question. . . . Even the more careful investigations of recent times do not seem to have settled the question; . . . the difference in question must naturally be greater in a vigorous primitive race like the East Greenlanders, than in the population of European towns, which latter have furnished the materials for most of these investigations, where persons emaciated by sickness must often have been the subjects of examination (p. 161). It is true on theoretical grounds, as I have shown (1936b, p. 136), that a disproportion in the thicknesses of the tissues of the head, favoring those laterally (the temporal muscles), increases the dis- proportion between the cranial and cephalic indices, and especially in dolichocranic skulls. However, it must not be overlooked that the use of white man's food and customs by the Eskimos undoubtedly leads on the one hand to developmental changes, and on the other to decreased activity of the temporal muscles. I believe, therefore, that in Labrador the Eskimo skull has become more brachycranic as a result of changed nutrition. Evidence of this new type is already apparent in the "recent grave" skulls (Table 11). It seems probable also that a similar change has occurred on the west coast of Greenland, which has long been in contact with Whites, and from where Hansen (1914) reports a cephalic index of 78.1 for 21 men (stature 157.6 cm.) as compared with Poulsen's 76.5 for 29 men of the east coast (stature 161.1 cm.). This explanation, in which a rounding, of the skull accompanies the decreased activity of the temporal muscles, would seem to be a re-statement of the old theory attributing the shaping of the skull to the temporal muscles. This implication is not intended. I believe that the essential factor is altered nutrition. We have yet very little knowledge regarding the effect of malnutrition during the develop- mental period upon the shape of the skull. Again, I may call attention to the lack of agreement between the figures for the Cree (Grant, 77.6 ; Boas, 79.8) . It would appear that the "truly startling" results obtained by Seltzer (1933, p. 363) with Shapiro's "statistical device" were determined partly by the series used. Observations on Eskimos and Indians 93 head height This is one of the less satisfactory measurements, owing to the use of different instruments, techniques, and landmarks (see Howells, 1938). Of the older data, Virchow defines his merely as "Ohrhohe"; Pittard uses the phrase "hauteur du crane." Duckworth gives two head heights: (1) "auriculo-bregmatic" and (2) stature less height of auditory meatus from ground. Presumably the method used in each of these cases was either projection or subtraction. However, the results given by Duckworth do not agree. Thus, the male auriculo- bregmatic height is 140.4, whereas by subtracting from stature the height of auditory meatus from ground we get 121 for the males. Strong used the projection method of Martin. Two other methods Table 42. — Head Height (In millimeters) Observer No. Range Meanip.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 114-152 132.34±0.71 7.98±0.50 6.04±0.38 Pittard 8 139-149 (142.5) Virchow 3 121-124(123.7) Duckworth... 10? ? (140.4) Western Alaska Moore* 63 120-149 132.27±0.40 4.76±0.28 3.60±0.22 0.08 Collins and Stewartf. . . 38 124-139 130.90±0.40 3.61±0.28 2.76±0.21 1.76 Hrdlicka (1933) 174 128-151 139.0 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 100-154 126.20±0.73 9.57±0.51 7.59±0.41 .... Pittard 6 129-140(134.5) Virchow 2 113-121 (117.0) Duckworth... 11? ? (133.5) W pstpm A Ijlskji Moore 48 120-137 127.58±0.41 4.25±0.29 3.33±0.23 1.64 Collins and Stewart. .. 27 122-139 128.33±0.56 4.29±0.39 3.34±0.31 2.32 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 10 109-136(123.8) Hallowell 41 125-145 134.20±0.49 4.70±0.35 3.50±0.26 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka(1916) 17 129-149 137.8 Sioux Hrdlicka(1931)72 121-146 135.6 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 111-132(118.6) .... Hallowell 12 121-144 133.2 Chippewa Hrdlicka 42 127- 139 133 . 6 Sioux Hrdlidka 36 120-140 130.8 •See Hrdlicka (1930): St. Lawrence Island. tSee Hrdlicka (1930): Nunivak Island and Hooper Bay. 94 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador were used in obtaining the comparative data given in Table 42: (1) Hrdlicka's method (1920) for the data from western Alaska, and on the Chippewa and Sioux; (2) Todd's head spanner used by Hallowell on the Labrador Indians. It may be pointed out in addition that these different methods involve different landmarks: the projection methods generally use tragion; Hrdlicka's method uses the floor of the auditory meatus; Todd's method uses the roof of the auditory meatus (porion). In view of all these complicating factors the data in Table 42 can serve only as a summary of the information available, not as strictly comparable data. A surprising thing about these findings is that Strong's figures for the Labrador Eskimo compare well with Table 43. — Height-Length Index Observer No. Range Mean±p.e. S.D.rfcp.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 57.4-79.6 68.90±0.41 4.60±0.29 6.67±0.42 .... Pittard 8 70.6-76.4(73.1) Virchow 3 59.0-66.0(62.3) Duckworth ... ? ? (73 . 5) Moore* 63 61.5-74.7 68.47±0.24 2.89±0.17 4.22±0.25 0.90 Collins and Stewart*. .. 38 63.2-73.6 67.37±0.26 2.38±0.18 3.53±0.27 3.19 Hrdligka (1933) 174 ? 72. 4f Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 57.8-86.0 68.22±0.36 4.81±0.26 7.05±0.38 .... Pittard 6 67.0-73.3 (69.8) Virchow 2 59.8-63.0 (61.4) Duckworth... ? ? (70.7) Wpstpm Al {mkji Moore 48 64.1-75.4 68.72±0.19 2.00±0.14 2.91±0.20 1.22 Collins and Stewart... . 27 65.1-74.7 68.04±0.26 2.02±0.18 2.97±0.27 0.41 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 10 59.3-69.5 (65.2) .... V^v Hallowell 41 65 -74 68.90±0.27 2.60±0.19 3.70±0.28 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka(1916) 17 67.0-72.2 69.4 Sioux Hrdlicka(1931) 72 62.6-73.1 68.1 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 59.4-71.7 (64.4) .... Hallowell 12 66 -82 72.5 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka 42 65.7-74.3 70.4 Sioux Hrdligka 36 64.0-76.4 68.6 * See Hrdlicka (1930). t Calculated from means. Observations on Eskimos and Indians 95 those for the Western Eskimo, whereas his figures for the Labrador Indians disagree completely with those of Hallowell and Hrdlifcka. In the case of the Eskimos, Strong's range is large and- his standard devi- ation high. Measuring larger numbers of Indians Strong might have gotten more comparable results. This is evidently a case where con- siderable error in the individual measurements disappears in the mean. HEIGHT-LENGTH INDEX It may be remarked in connection with Table 43 that the results shown are as reliable as the individual measurements from which the index is derived; Strong's large range of head height is reflected here. Compared with the Western Eskimo the Labrador Eskimo show almost no difference, as regards this index, that is of statistical significance. Table 44. — Minimum Frontal Diameter (In millimeters) Observer No. Range Meanip.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V.ip.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 52 94-114 105.36±0.37 3.96±0.26 3.76±0.25 Pittard 8 109-121 (115.8) Moore* 63 94-124 109.41±0.43 5.04±0.30 4.60±0.28 7.10 Collins and Stewart*. ... 39 96-114 104.41±0.47 4.33±0.33 4.15±0.32 1.53 Hrdlicka (1933) 165 92-116 103.0 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 78 95-112 102.50±0.27 3.55±0.19 3.46±0.19 .... Pittard 6 110-115 (112.7) Moore 48 97-115 105.88±0.41 4.22±0.29 3.99±0.27 6.90 Collins and Stewart 27 98-110 104.04±0.44 3.37±0.31 3.24±0.30 2.96 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 96-114 107.3 Hallowell 41 102-128 112.30±0.58 5.50±0.41 4.90±0.36 .... Cree Grant 25 91-112 103.20±0.63 4.69±0.45 4.54±0.43 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 94-118 104.20±0.45 4.39±0.32 4.16±0.30 .... C h 1 D DGWS HrdliCka (1916) 17 103-114 107.6 Sioux Hrdlicka (1931) 72 93-114 106.4 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 102-109 104.6 Hallowell 29 99-130 111.10±1.06 8.50±0.75 7.70±0.68 .... Chipewyan Grant 19 94-109 102.40±0.53 3.42±0.37 3.34±0.36 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka 42 93-108 102.6 Sioux Hrdlicka 36 94-113 103.0 * See Hrdlicka (1930). 96 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador minimum frontal diameter Pittard is the only one giving figures for this dimension prior to those here presented. His results seem much too high. When Strong's figures (Table 44) are compared with those given by Hrd- licka (1930, 1933) for western Alaska a significant difference appears only in the case of the St. Lawrence Islanders. Hallowell notes (p. 366) that his figure for the minimum frontal diameter of the Labrador Indians is high as compared to other Indians. Here Strong's result is undoubtedly more correct. In taking this measurement it is possible for the inexperienced to fail to get minimum breadth. Table 45. — Fronto-Parietal Index Observer No. Range Mean±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 52 63.1-79.4 71.30±0.31 3. 36 ±0.22 4.71±0.31 .... Pittard 8 72.6-82.2 (78.0) Moore* 63 61.8-77.6 71.02±0.26 3.05±0.18 4.30±0.26 0.70 Collins and Stewart*. .. 38 61.9-71.5 67.44±0.26 2.43±0.19 3.60±0.28 9.65 Hrdlifika (1933) 165 ? 66. 4f Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 78 66.0-81.5 72.18±0.24 3.16±0.17 4.37±0.24 .... Pittard 6 75.9-80.3(78.1) ^V^Ps1"PT*T1 Al fiJIiCft Moore 48 65.5-75.9 71.55±0.28 2.90±0.20 4.06±0.28 1.70 Collins and Stewart.. .. 27 64.7-73.1 69.15±0.30 2.29±0.21 3.31±0.30 7.97 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 61.9-85.5 74.7 Hallowell 41 63 -79 71.70±0.39 3.70±0.28 5.20±0.39 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka(1916) 17 ? 71. Of Sioux Hrdlicka(1931)72 ? 67. 7t Labrador Indian: Female V_^ Strong 7 69.4-75.0 72.5 Hallowell 29 64 -84 72.80±0.66 5.30±0.47 7.30±0.65 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka 42 ? 72. Of Sioux Hrdlicka 36 ? 66. 7f *See Hrdlicka (1930). t Calculated from means. FRONTO-PARIETAL INDEX This index expresses the relationship between the minimum fore- head breadth and the maximum head breadth. It will be recalled that there is some evidence indicating that Strong failed to get maxi- Observations on Eskimos and Indians 97 mum head breadth. This perhaps accounts for his higher fronto- parietal index. However, in the case of the Eskimos (Table 45) Strong's figures seem more nearly correct than Pittard's. For the Labrador Indians neither Strong's nor Hallowell's figures for the fronto-parietal index can be correct, both being too high. MAXIMUM BIZYGOMATIC DIAMETER One of the things shown in Table 33 is that Strong did not always get maximum face breadth. This seems to be borne out by a com- parison of his means and ranges for the Eskimo with those of the combined earlier groups (Table 46). The differences between these means is significant, at least in the case of the males. Table 46. — Maximum Bizygomatic Diameter (In millimeters) Observer Number Range Meanip.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 126-154 141.74db0.51 5.78±0.36 4.08±0.26 Lee* 9] lSi-U9) Pkte^^ " -1 8 37 140-149 144-92± °" 59 5 - 30±0 - 42 3.66±0.29 4.09 Virchow '.'['.'. 3 J 141-152 J Duckworth... 11 ? 142.2 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 112-149 133.35±0.54 7.14±0.38 5.35±0.29 .... Lee 10] m-142 1 Htta^ 8 ^ '"' 6 22 134^141 135 - 59±0 - 74 513 ± - 52 3.78±0.38 2.43 Virchow.'.".'! .2 J 132-137 J Duckworth... 10 ? 136.6 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 134-150 141.7 Hallowell 67 136-159 147.20±0.40 4.90±0.28 3.30±0.19 .... Cree Grant 25 138-147 144.60±0.39 2.86±0.27 1.97 ±0.19 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 138-159 149.60±0.50 4.89±0.35 3.27±0.24 .... Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 128-144 134.3 Hallowell 54 126-149 139.30±0.42 4.60±0.30 3.20±0.21 Chipewyan Grant 21 132-150 141.90±0.74 5.03db0.52 3.54±0.37 * In 1901 Boas reported a face width of 142 for 10 individuals measured by Lee. A similar showing appears likewise in the case of the Indians; Hallowell's higher figure is probably more nearly correct. It will be observed that the Labrador Indians thus fall between the Cree and Chipewyans. The fact that the Labrador Eskimos and the Cree have equally narrow faces fits in with Seltzer's theory as to their relationship. 98 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador We may recall, however, that the old stone grave population of Labrador showed a slightly broader face than the recent grave popu- lation (Table 11). I would call attention also to the unusually small range for this measurement in the Cree (S.D. 2.86±0.27), which would suggest that the mean is atypical. There is thus reason to believe that there has been a convergence in the face breadths of these two groups that can be explained otherwise than by close relationship. CEPHALO-FACIAL INDEX This index shows the relationship of the maximum breadths of head and face. The fact that Strong has not obtained the maximum of each of these dimensions is masked in Table 47 ; there is no statis- Table 47. — Cephalo-Facial Index Observer Number Range Mean±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V. ±p.o. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 85.1-107.4 95.66±0.38 4.29±0.27 4.49±0.28 . . . . Lee* 9) 91.2- 99.3] Pittanp 61 "" 1 ! f 37 ll'3-102'o\ 95 - 77lt0 - 39 3.50±0.27 3.66±0.29 0.20 Virchow . .' .' . 3 j 96!6-10o!o J Duckworth. . 11 ? 96. 3f Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 77.8-107.7 93.78±0.39 5.16±0.28 5.50±0.30 . . . . Lee 10 1 86.1- 94.6) Pk?a b rd ger 6 | 21 ll'.Vil'i 94.35±0.77 5.26±0.55 5.58±0.58 0.66 Virchow.'.'.'.' 2 j 92! 3-1 04.' 6 J Duckworth. . 10 ? 96. 3f Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 90.5-109.5 98.6 Hallowell 67 86 -101 94.00±0.23 2.80±0.16 2.90±0.17 . . . . Grant 25 93 -101 96.60±0.31 2. 27 ±0.22 2.35±0.22 . . . . Chipewyan Grant 44 91 -101 97.60±0.25 2.49±0.18 2.55±0.18 . . . . Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 86.5-97.9 93.2 .... v Hallowell 54 84 -97 92.50±0.31 3,40±0.22 3.70±0.24 . . . . Chipewyan Grant 21 87 -99 95.50±0.42 2.83±0.30 2.96±0.31 . . . . *In 1901 Boas reported an index of 95 for 10 males measured by Lee. t Calculated from means. tically significant difference between Strong's figures and those of the combined earlier groups. According to Seltzer's table the nearest approach to the present Labrador figures is that for Hudson Bay (Birket-Smith). For the Labrador Indians Strong's small series give higher indices than Hallowell's. However, the latter is below those of Grant for the Cree and Chipewyans. Observations on Eskimos and Indians 99 This index is of little value for differentiating Indian from Eskimo, as Shapiro has pointed out. Undoubtedly this relationship between head and face (a high index) is a generalized Mongolian character. BIGONIAL DIAMETER The earlier data from Labrador regarding the breadth of the angles of the lower jaw consist of small series measured by Duck- Observer No. Table 48. — Bigonial Diameter (In millimeters) Range Mean ±p.p. S.D. ±p.e. Eskimo: Male C.V.ip.e. Xp.e. Labrador Strong 58 100 -128 114.33±0.56 6. 37 ±0.40 5.58±0.35 Virchow 3 116 -136(125.0) Duckworth.. 11? ? (131.2) East. Greenland Poulsen 26 104 -125 114.92±0.72 5.44±0.51 4.74±0.44 0.65 Coronation Gulf Jenness (1923) 82 100 -129 115.80±0.43 5.80±0.30 5.00±0.26 2.07 \\ pet, prn Al ssk 21 Moore* 63 102 -136 117.83±0.52 6.11±0.37 5.18±0.31 4.47 HrdliCka (1933)... 165 102 -140 117.8 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 94 -121 107.43±0.40 5.22±0.28 4.86±0.26 Virchow 2 116.5-117(116.8) Duckworth.. 10? ? (126.2) East. Greenland Poulsen 10 105 -119 111.8 Coronation Gulf Jenness 42 Western Alaska Moore 48 101 99 -120 110.30±0.58 5.60±0.41 5.00±0.37 4.10 123 111.83db0.51 5.26±0.36 4.71±0.32 6.77 Indian: Male Labrador Strong 11 96 -120 (109.3) Hallowell . . . 41 104 -132 117.30±0.67 6.40±0.48 6.70±0.42 .... Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 100 -109(102.4) Hallowell ... 28 101 -124 110.20±0.80 6.30±0.57 5.70±0.51 .... ♦See Hrdlicka (1930). worth and Virchow. In both cases the means are high, judging by other records. Strong's means are slightly lower than those for other Eskimo groups given for comparison in Table 48. This difference may or may not be due to personal error. In the case of the Indian, Strong's means are below Hallowell 's. The latter gives figures comparable with those of the Western Eskimo. These seem to be a little high compared with other Indians. 100 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador gonio-zygomatic index We have seen that Strong tends to get low means for both the bigonial and bizygomatic diameters. This fact is reflected in Table 49, where Strong's mean gonio-zygomatic index compares well with those of other Eskimo groups. Table 49. — Gonio-Zygomatic Index Observer No. Range Mean±p.e. S.D.dbp.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 70.8-91.7 80.62±0.37 4.19±0.26 5.20±0.32 .... Virchow 3 78.9-89.5(85.2) Duckworth... ? ? (93.1)* Eastern Greenland Poulsen 26 74.3-84.4 79.53±0.32 2.38±0.22 3.00±0.28 2.22 Coronation Gulf Jenness (1923) 82 66 -89 79.40±0.29 4.00±0.21 5.00±0.26 2.60 Mooref 63 71.1-92.0 79.91±0.32 3.79±0.23 4.74±0.28 1.45 Hrdlicka (1933) 165 ? 79.0* Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 72.5-98.2 80.49±0.32 4.26±0.23 5.29±0.28 .... Virchow 2 85.4-88.2 (86.8) Duckworth... ? ? (91.4)* Eastern Greenland Poulsen 10 79.0-86.9 81.7 Coronation Gulf Jenness 42 71 -86 80.10±0.40 3.90±0.2S 4.80±0.35 0.76 Wpsf pt*ti A lftjilc& Moore 48 72.9-84.8 79.45±0.30 3.04±0.21 3.82±0.26 2.36 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 67.8-84.4 77.0 Hallowell 41 73 -89 80.10±0.36 3.40±0.25 4.20±0.31 .... Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 73.6-78.1 75.4 Hallowell 28 73 -86 78.80±0.43 3.40±0.31 4.40±0.40 .... * Calculated from means. t See Hrdlicka (1930). The poorer agreement in the case of thVIndians is doubtless due to the smaller sizes of the series determining the figures upon which the index is based. Comparative data are generally lacking for the Indians, but it appears that the relationship between breadth of jaw and face is about the same in the Labrador Indians as in the Eskimos. MENTON-CRINION As mentioned on page 78 Strong began by measuring menton- crinion and forehead height (nasion-crinion) directly, but with sub- ject 150 he changed from menton-crinion to menton-nasion. Thus, for these two face heights there are direct measurements in only about half of the cases. In the remaining cases menton-crinion can be Observations on Eskimos and Indians 101 obtained by the addition of menton-nasion with forehead height; menton-nasion by subtraction of forehead height from menton- crinion. It will be recognized, however, that both forehead height and menton-nasion involve the landmark "nasion," which the Table 50. — Menton-Crinion (In millimeters) Observer No. Range Mean±p.e. S.D.±p.e. CV. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male o* / 32* 178-222 200.22±1.18 9.89±0.83 4.83±0.42 .... btrong \26t 196-230 (209.7) Virchow 3 191-198(194.3) MooreJ 63 180-230 200.lldbO.79 9.29±0.56 4.64±0.28 0.07 Collins and Stewart*... . 39 175-209 193.23±0.87 8.11±0.62 4.20±0.32 4.75 Hrdlicka (1933) 174 174-228 197.6 Labrador Eskimo: Female c*™„„ (45*172-200 186.87±0.70 6.99±0.50 3.74±0.27 .... &lrong \34f 181-222 (200.1) Virchow 2 177-192(184.5) Moore 47 167-201 188.13±0.78 7.88±0.55 4.19±0.33 1.20 Collins and Stewart 27 164-206 184.37±1.20 9.23d=0.85 5.00±0.46 1.80 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11*178-199 188.7 Cree Grant 25 160-195 184.00±0.97 7.21±0.69 3.92±0.37 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 170-210 187.60±0.83 8.13±0.58 4.34±0.31 .... C^hlDDGWS Hrdlrtka (1916) 8 183-200 189.1 Sioux Hrdlicka (1931) 72 171-216 194.2 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7*170-177(174.0) Chipewyan Grant 21 160-195 180.80±1.13 7.70±0.80 4.26±0.44 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka 10 172-190 181.5 Sioux Hrdlidka 36 164-195 180.7 * Measured directly. t By addition of menton-nasion and forehead height. JSee Hrdlicka (1930). beginner has difficulty in locating. All measurements involving this landmark must be examined very critically, hence I have distin- guished between those cases in which the measurement was taken directly and those derived indirectly. The only earlier figures for menton-crinion in the Labrador Eskimo are those of Virchow. These can hardly be reliable, since 102 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador they were taken on only three males and two females. However, it will be observed (Table 50) that these figures agree with the findings of Collins and Stewart for the Western Eskimo. Strong's direct measurements are higher than those of Virchow, but are close to those of Moore and HrdliSka for the Western Eskimo. Strong's figures for menton-crinion as derived by the addition of menton-nasion and forehead height are considerably higher than his direct measurements. It is certain, therefore, that one or both of the constituent measurements are too large. This in turn implies that nasion was located too high in taking menton-nasion, or too low in taking forehead height, or both. Strong's figure for the male Indians is in fair agreement with the comparative data; his figure for the females is low. Accepting these figures as approximately correct, it seems that the Indians, especially the Cree, have shorter faces than the Eskimo. Table 51. — Total (Physiognomic) Facial Index Observer No. Range Mean±p.e. S.D.ip.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 32 63.3-77.9 70.07±0.46 3.85±0.32 5.50±0.46 .... Virchow 3 71.2-79.6(75.5) W T pst"Pi*n A 1 3.SKH Moore* 62 64.8-83.2 73.66±0.32 3.78±0.23 5.14±0.31 6.41 Collins and Stewart* ... 39 70.2-84.6 77.73±0.35 3.22±0.24 4.14±0.32 11.61 Hrdlicka (1933) 174 67.5-86.7 75.4 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 45 57.4-77.5 70. 27 ±0.40 4.03±0.29 5.73±0.41 .... Virchow 2 71.4-74.6(73.0) Western Alaska Moore 47 68.9-82.4 74.68±0.31 3.14±0.22 4.20±0.29 8.65 Collins and Stewart. ... 27 70.9-84.7 78.01±0.42 3^21±0.29 4.12±0.38 13.34 Labrador Indian: Mak Strong 11 69.4-79.4 75.2 Chippewa Hrdlicka(1916) 8 74.8-83.4 78.7 Sioux Hrdli5ka(1931) 72 69.0-86.1 77.4 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 72.3-84.2 77.2 Chippewa Hrdligka 10 72.6-82.6 77.3 Sioux Hrdlicka 36 71.3-90.4 80.8 *See Hrdlicka (1930). Observations on Eskimos and Indians 103 total (physiognomic) facial index Only the indices derived from Strong's direct measurement of menton-crinion are considered in Table 51. Since this index expresses the relationship of the bizygomatic diameter to menton-crinion, and since Strong may not have obtained the maximum for the former in all cases, his mean index is low compared to the values for the West- ern Eskimo. The index for the Labrador Indians may be low for the same reason. MENTON-NASION It has already been explained in connection with menton-crinion why Strong's measurements are divided into two groups. Also, it has been pointed out that the landmark "nasion" is difficult to locate in Table 52. — Menton-Nasion (In millimeters) Observer Number Range Meandbp.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male c*™™ / 26* 116-148 130.04±0.81 6.13±0.57 4.72±0.44 .... btrong \32f 108-150 (124.8) Lee 9] 118-129 1 Sornberger . . . 17 29 110-1S1 \ 121 .34±0. 66 5.27±0.47 4.34±0.38 8.36 Virchow 3 J 125-131 J Duckworth... 11? ? 127.0 Labrador Eskimo: Female Cf™™ / 34* 105-140 123.47±0.88 7.58±0.62 6.13±0.50 .... strong \45f 103-142 (115.4) Lee 10) 111-117) Sornberger ... 4 f 16 99-116 \ 112.8 Virchow 2 J 117-121 J Duckworth.. 10? ? 116.5 Labrador Indian: Male Strong lit 116-128 (121.1) Hallowell 41 110-134 119.70±0.48 4.70±0.35 3.90±0.29 .... Cree Grant 25 113-134 124.60±0.83 6.13±0.58 4.92±0.47 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 113-143 125.30±0.68 6.64±0.48 5.30±0.38 .... Labrador Indian: Female Strong 71104-116(109.7) Hallowell 29 103-122 112.20±0.64 5.10±0.45 4.50db0.40 .... Chipewyan Grant 21 107-128 120.10=b0.77 5.19±0.54 4.32±0.45 .... * Measured directly. t By subtraction of forehead height from menton-crinion. the living and that marked variations in the means must be looked upon with suspicion until carefully verified. By reference to Seltzer's Table 9 it will be seen that for menton-nasion the male means range from 123.5 (Hudson Bay, Birket-Smith) to 131.5 (Mackenzie, Boas). If we add to this the combined series of Lee, Sornberger, and Virchow 104 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador (Table 52) for the Labrador Eskimo, we get the range extended down- ward to 121.3. A range of 1 cm. for the means of 18 Eskimo groups may be possible, but, in view of the fact that many of the groups have been measured by amateurs, needs verification. The great range between the two Labrador Eskimo series (Lee, Sornberger, Virchow; Strong) suggests that Strong is locating nasion too high, and the others are locating it too low. Strong's figure for the male Labrador Indians agrees with that of Hallowell, but both are below those of Grant for the Cree and Chipewyans. Since this measurement carries so much suspicion with it, I will not give the lower (morphologic) facial index. FOREHEAD HEIGHT In Table 53 are shown two series for the Labrador Eskimo in which forehead height was measured directly. The rather good Number 20 Observer Labrador Strong Sornberger. . . .17 Virchow 3 Western Alaska Moore* 62 Collins and Stewart* 39 Hrdlicka (1933) . . .174 Labrador Strong 79 Sornberger. ... 4 Virchow 2 Western Alaska Moore 47 Collins and Stewart 27 Table 53. — Forehead Height (In millimeters) Range Mean ±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. Eskimo: Male 58 56-97 77.33±0.68 7.72±0.48 9.99±0.62 c.v. ±p.e. Xp.e. 56-91 64-69 73.2 8.13±0.49 4.68 8.00±0.61 11.35 57-89 73.35±0.51 5.96±0.36 52-78 67.23±0.58 5.38±0.41 53-86 71.6 Eskimo: Female 56-90 73.58±0.55 7.30±0.39 9.91±0.53 60-79 ^ 68 - 5 59-82 54-74 72.66±0.55 5.62±0.39 7.73±0.54 1.18 63.63±0.68 n5.22±0.48 8.21±0.75 11.44 Indian: Male 57-78 67.6 8 57-75 64.6 Labrador Strong 11 Chippewa Rrdlicka (1916) . Sioux Hrdlicka (1931)... .72 Labrador Strong 7 Chippewa Hrdltfka 10 Sioux Hrdlicka 36 48-71 59.3 Note: Strong and Sornberger measured forehead height directly. All the others determined it indirectly by subtracting menton-nasion from menton-crinion. *See Hrdlicka (1930). 54-78 64 . 8 Indian: Female 55-69 64.3 53-68 61.9 Observations on Eskimos and Indians 105 agreement of the Sornberger-Virchow means with those from western Alaska suggests that Strong's figures are too high; in other words, that he located nasion too low for the purposes of this measurement. Likewise, Strong's figures for the Labrador Indians are high as compared to Hrdlicka's for the Chippewa and Sioux. nose height The earlier data on nose height in the male Labrador Eskimos vary from 51.9 (Pittard) to 58.7 (Virchow, 3 individuals). When these series are combined with those of Lee and Sornberger (Table 54) Table 54. — Nose Height (In millimeters) Observer Number Range Mean±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 45-73 56.98±0.48 5.46±0.34 9.58±0.60 .... Lee 9 | 46-56 1 PitTanP^ ^f 37 50-54 f 5200:t0 - 42 3 - 76 ± - 29 7.22±0.57 7.78 Virchow . . '.'.'.'. 3 J 57-60 J Duckworth 11 ? 57.4 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 44-71 54.82±0.33 4.37±0.23 7.97 ±0.43 .... Lee 10 1 -43-52] pSud 1 " 6f 22 44^52 f 4827±0 - 41 2 - 88 ± - 29 5.96±0.61 12.36 Virchow. .... ! . . 2 J 51-53 J Duckworth 4 ? 51.25 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 52-63 57.3 Hallowell 41 44-63 51.80±0.41 3.90±0.29 7.50±0.56 .... Cree Grant 25 50-59 54.70±0.37 2.72±0.26 4. 97 ±0.47 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 47-62 55.10±0.31 3. 07 ±0.22 5.58±0.40 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 50-59 56.4 Hallowell 29 41-54 47.10±0.41 3.30±0.29 7.00±0.62 Chipewyan Grant 20 41-56 53.70±0.57 3.93±0.42 7.32±0.78 .... a mean is obtained, 52, which is significantly different from Strong's mean, 57, and yet is well below the general Eskimo figure (see Sha- piro's Table 10) ; indeed, Strong's mean is very close to the general mean of the Eskimos. Nose height, of course, is another measurement involving the landmark "nasion." For this reason, and in view of the above facts, it is difficult to say whether Strong is locating nasion too high in this case; but Table 33 suggests this, and we have noted the same tendency in connection with the measurement of menton-nasion. On 106 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador the other hand, it is not impossible that many of the earlier group measuring the Labrador Eskimo have located nasion too low. An irregular technique is perhaps reflected in the extreme upper range of Strong's measurements. This has resulted in standard deviations which in the case of the males exceeds Howells' (1936) computed "mean sigma" plus three times its standard deviation. The same situation exists in the data for the Labrador Indian; Strong's figures are much higher than those of Hallowell's. Still, it should be noted that Hallowell's figures are well below Grant's for the Cree and Chipewyans. Hrdlicka reports 59.4 and 56.6 for the male Sioux and Chippewa, respectively. NOSE BREADTH The earlier data on nose breadth in the male Labrador Eskimo vary from 36.8 (Duckworth) to 39 (Virchow, 3 individuals). By combining the earlier series (Table 55) we get a mean of 38.3, which is not significantly different from Strong's mean of 38. The dif- ference is slightly greater in the case of the females, but still this is Table 55. — Nose Breadth (In millimeters) Observer Number Range Mean±p.e. S.D.±p.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 32-45 37.95±0.27 3.04±0.19 8.02±0.50 .... Lee 9] 35-41] P?ttard rger X 8 37 35-41 f38.27zfc0.29 2.61±0.20 6.81 ±0.53 0.80 Virchow .' .' '.'.'.'.'.'. 3 j 37-42 J Duckworth 10 ? 36.8 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 28-42 34.11±0.21 2.83±0.15 8.30±0.45 .... Lee 10] 50-381 Pittard^^ 6 f 22 Iih88 f 8604 ± 037 yj 57±0.26 7.32±0.74 2.21 Virchow .' .' .' ! '. . '. '. 2 j 32-35 j Duckworth 4 ? 32.0 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 10 34-45 39.6 Hallowell 41 29-46 37.60±0.36 3.40±0.25 9.00±0.67 .... Cree Grant 25 31-45 38.20±0.42 3.14±0.30 8.23±0.78 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 31-45 39.70±0.33 3.28±0.24 8.26±0.59 .... Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 33-44 38.7 Hallowell 29 29-40 35.10=k0.36 2.90±0.26 8.10±0.72 .... Chipewyan Grant 20 33-41 36.20±0.33 2.22±0.24 6.12±0.65 .... Observations on Eskimos and Indians 107 not significant. According to the comparative data assembled by Shapiro these figures are close to the general mean of the Eskimos. Strong's means for the Indians are slightly higher than Hallo- well's, and closer to Grant's means for the Cree and Chipewyans. The Indians appear to have absolutely broader noses than the Eski- mos. However, these northern Indians seem to have absolutely narrower noses than those to the south, for Hrdlidka reports breadths of 41.8 and 42.8 for the male Sioux and Chippewa, respectively. NASAL INDEX From the wide range of variation in the means of the earlier data on nose height and breadth for the male Labrador Eskimo, as noted under these respective headings, it is not surprising that the mean nasal indices from these same sources vary from 64.1 (Duckworth) to 72.3 (Pittard). The mean for the combined earlier series for male Labrador Eskimos (Table 56) goes still higher, 73.8. Not only is this figure higher than any of those assembled by Shapiro in his comparative table, but it is significantly different from Strong's mean of 67. The latter figure is more nearly in line with Table 56. — Nasal Index Observer Number Range Mean±p.e. S.D. ±p.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 53.3-84.3 66.98=fc0.65 7.38±0.46 Lee 91 62.5-89.1 ] n£S": : l l « m:t°°d ^i±».n 6.72*0.53 Virchow 3 J 62.7-70.0 J Duckworth.. 10 ? 64.1 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 47.5-78.7 62.54±0.52 6.90±0.37 Lee 10] 64.7-79.1] fSSST::. » S:S^:? "•"*••« 6 - 95±0 - 6 » Virchow. ... 2 J 60.5-68.6 J Duckworth.. 4 ? 62.4 Labrador Indian: MaU Strong 10 56.7-83.3 68.9 Hallowell 44 52 -92 73.00±0.81 8.00=1=0.58 Grant 25 55 -85 69.20=1=1.01 7.49±0.71 Chipewyan Grant 44 55 -85 71.90=fc0.71 6.95±0.50 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 7 61.0-75.9 68.6 Hallowell 29 67 -93 74.80±0.89 7.10=b0.63 Chipewyan Grant 20 55 -85 71 .50=1=1.19 7.89=b0.84 C.V. ±p.e. 11.01±0.69 9.10=fc0.71 Xp.e. 6.97 11. 08 ±0.59 .... 8.17d=0.83 10.23 11.00±0.79 10.83±1.03 9.67=b0.70 9.50±0.84 10.04±1.07 108 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador the general mean of the Eskimos. A similar difference appears in the case of the females. Strong's mean indices for the Labrador Indians fall well below those of Hallowell and agree with those of Grant on the Cree and Chipewyans. There is thus a suspicion that Hallowell's figures are too high, although we cannot be certain of this because they are still within the range of other American Indian groups. The probabilities are that these northern Indians have a relatively broader nose than do the Eskimos. EAR LENGTH The ear is not commonly measured and there is thus little com- parative data on this feature for the Eskimo. However, the few early measurements of ear length for the male Labrador Eskimo give Table 57. — Ear Length (In millimeters) Observer Number Range Meanip.e. S.D. dbp.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 56-84 70.88±0.49 5.57±0.35 7.86±0.49 .... Pittard 8 V « , 60-75 \ R7 9 Virchow 3 J 62-70 /°'"* Duckworth 11? ? 67.5 Moore* 63 64-86 73.94±0.42 4.98±0.30 6.74±0.40 4.78 Collins and Stewart* 39 60-81 69.13±0.53 4.89±0.37 7.07±0.54 2.43 Hrdlicka (1933) ... 173 60-87 71.2 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 51-82 66.47±0.48 6.34±0.34 9.54±0.51 Pittard 6\ 60-71 ' Virchow 2/ ° 60-69 / 64 ' 5 Duckworth 10? ? 63 . 6 Moore 48 58-77 67.29±0.44 4.49±0.31 6.68±0.46 1.26 Collins and Stewart. 27 54-73 65.04±0.60 4.66±0.43 7.17±0.66 1.86 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 60-71 (66.1) .... V^ Cree Grant 25 56-74 65.60±0.59 4.35±0.42 6.63±0.63 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 59-77 67.00±0.51 4.99±0.36 7.45±0.54 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka (1916)... .17 64-89 72.00 Sioux Hrdlicka (1931)... .72 61-84 73.3 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 3 58-66 (63.0) Chippewa Hrdlicka 42 58-80 68.5 Sioux Hrdlicka 36 62-78 70.5 *See Hrdlicka (1930). Observations on Eskimos and Indians 109 a mean of about 67. This figure is low compared with those for the Western Eskimo (Table 57). Strong's figure of 70.9 is more nearly in agreement with the latter. The same relationship holds for the females. Strong's series of Indians are inadequate for reliable means. However, his mean for the males is close to those of Grant for the Cree and Chipewyans. On the other hand, Grant's figures are well below those of Hrdli6ka for the Sioux and Chippewa. It would be interesting if these northern Indians were intermediate in ear length between the Eskimos and the American Indians. EAR BREADTH The mean ear breadth for the Labrador Eskimo as obtained by Strong (Table 58) is in good agreement with the earlier data both from the same area and for the Western Eskimo. Table 58. — Ear Breadth (In millimeters) Observer No. Range Meanip.e. S.D.ip.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 27-45 37.45±0.33 3.77±0.24 10.06±0.63 .... Pittard 8 36-43 38.6 Duckworth 11? ? 36. 1 Moore* 63 33-47 40.40±0.21 2.44±0.15 6.03±0.36 7.56 Collins and Stewart* 39 31-43 37.95±0.31 2.90±0.22 7.64±0.58 1.11 Hrdlicka (1933). . .173 32-45 37.7 Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 25-47 35.43±0.27 3.61±0.19 10.20±0.55 .... Pittard 6 34-39 36.2 Duckworth 10? ? (30.2) \y pstpm A 1 msIci Moore 48 31-41 35.67±0.23 2.37±0.16 6.63±0.46 0.68 Collins and Stewart 27 27-39 34.41±0.31 2.42±0.22 7.04±0.65 2.49 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 33-39 35.5 Cree Grant 25 29-39 35.20±0.28 2.09±0.20 5.95±0.57 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 33-43 36.80±0.23 2.30±0.16 6.23±0.45 Chippewa Hrdlicka (1916).. . 17 35-43 38.8 Sioux Hrdlicka (1931) . . . 72 34-45 39.3 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 3 32-35(33.0) Chippewa HrdliCka 42 33-42 37.7 Sioux Hrdlicka 36 34-43 37.6 ♦See Hrdlicka (1930). 110 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador For the male Labrador Indian, Strong's mean agrees with those of Grant for the Cree and Chipewyans, and all of these are inferior to Hrdlicka's means for the Sioux and Chippewa. We have noted a comparable relationship in the case of ear length. If true, this can only mean that these Indians have absolutely smaller ears than either the Eskimos or certain American Indians. EAR INDEX Differences in absolute size of ear are masked in the index. According to Table 59 there is little sex difference noticeable, as is true in most races, and indeed very little group difference. In general it may be said that the Eskimos and Indians are alike in having relatively somewhat long ears. Table 59. — Ear Index Observer No. Range Meanip.e. S.D.ip.e. C.V. ±p.e. Xp.e. Labrador Eskimo: Male Strong 58 38.6-65.2 52.97db0.45 5.09±0.32 9.61±0.60 .... Pittard 8 52.8-63.3(57.1) Duckworth... 11? ? 53.0 WMtfiFH A l ofl lf ft Moore* 63 46.9-62.9 54.61±0.29 3.40±0.20 6.23±0.37 3.04 Collins and Stewart*. .. 39 47.7-62.9 54.91±0.43 3.97±0.30 7.22±0.55 3.13 Hrdlidka (1938) 173 45.2-59.7 52.9 .... Labrador Eskimo: Female Strong 79 41.1-70.6 53.36dz0.36 4.75±0.25 8.90±0.48 .... Pittard 6 50.7-65.0(56.3) Duckworth ... 10? ? (47 .4) Moore 48 43.4-62.9 53.12±0.39 4.01±0.28 7.55dz0.52 0.45 Collins and Stewart.. .. 27 44.3-60.7 53.04±0.52 3.99dz0.37 7.53d=0.69 0.51 Labrador Indian: Male Strong 11 49.2-61.3 53.8 .... , Cree V^ Grant 25 46 -61 53.40d=0.52 3.83±0.36 7.17±0.68 .... Chipewyan Grant 44 43 -64 55.00±0.47 4.65±0.33 8.47±0.61 .... Chippewa Hrdlicka(1916)17 47.2-60.9 53.8 Sioux Hrdli5ka(1931)72 42.2-64.2 53.6 Labrador Indian: Female Strong 3 49.2-55.2(52.5) Chippewa Hrdltfka 42 48.1-65.2 55.4 Sioux Hrdltfka 36 46.7-61.5 53.3 *See Hrdlicka (1930). Observations on Eskimos and Indians 111 SKIN color The skin of the inner side of the upper arm was judged as to color tone by comparison with von Luschan's scale. There are no comparative records for Labrador Eskimos, but Hallowell made the same test on his Indians and Shapiro reports Weyer's observations on Alaskan Eskimos (Seward Peninsula). In combining these obser- vations (Table 60) I have followed Coon's (1931) recommendations: Numbers 1 and 2 [of von Luschan's scale] are seldom encountered, and numbers 4 to 6, shades of yellowish unvascular brown, interrupt the more or less logical sequence, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, etc. I have divided this range Table 60. — Skin Color: Von Luschan scale (Inner side of upper arm) Color number • 3 1 7 8 . . 2 9 . . 13 10 . . 14 11 . . 10 12 . . 8 13 . . 1 14 . . 2 15 1 16 17 Total . . . 3 52 7 8 1 9 1 10 . 37 11.. . 14 12 . . 15 13 6 14 . . 3 15 1 16 17 Total . . . .. 78 Labrador Eskimo (Strong) No. Per cent. 30.8 5. 2.6 92.3 5.1 Alaskan Eskimo (Shapiro) No. Per cent Male 70.0 30.0 1 40 Female Labrador Indian's (Strong) No. Per cent (Hallowell) No. Per cent 11.3 10 50.0 50.0 62. 26. k V 57.1 U2.9 6 5 12 1 3 4 2.8 68.6 28.6 U 35 as follows: light, 3, 7, 8, 9; medium, 10, 11, 12, 13; dark, 14 and all thereafter. The divisions are of course purely arbitrary but were made because they seem best to coincide with my own observations made in 1928 (p. 254). The classification "light," numbers 3, 7, 8, and 9, are colors such as one would normally find in Europeans with a considerable increment of Nordic or North European blood; a skin almost without pigment, and made pink by 112 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador the presence of capillaries close to the surface of the skin. Under "medium" comes the color range usually found among South European Whites of brunet stock, with black hair and dark eyes; a skin more deeply pigmented than and not as highly vascular as the former. Under "dark" are included those hues which are found, in the south of Europe, among persons in whom the possession of a slight increment of Negro blood is visible, and all shades of brown deeper than this. . . . Although this method of lumping together the skin color observations into three categories may be somewhat crude, it has the advantage of greater reliability than the confusing and specious accuracy of a strict compilation, number by number, of von Luschan's categories (p. 256). Allowing for individual variations in the color sensitivity of the observers, it is remarkable that the results shown in Table 60 are so uniform. With the exception of Strong's insufficient sample of Indians, the majority in each series falls in the group of colors numbered 10-12 (medium). On the basis of Ridgway's color stand- ards (1912), these tones of most frequent occurrence may be described as ranging approximately from light pinkish cinnamon to light vinaceous cinnamon. The lightest tone encountered (no. 3) may be described, on the basis of the same standards, as shell pink; the darkest tone (no. 17) as wood brown. That there is a tendency to slightly darker skin in the Indians than in the Eskimos is suggested by the fact that both Strong and Hallowell agree in recording higher percentages of the dark group of colors for the Indians. MISSING TEETH Strong was not equipped to make a full dental examination. However, he looked for caries as best he could and when they were present he estimated the amount of destruction in one of four degrees. In addition, he recorded the number of missing teeth. Since dental destruction is of very little value for comparative purposes unless detailed, I have considered only the record of missing teeth. Table 61 shows the frequency of missing teeth according to age and sex. It is quite apparent, of course, that more teeth are missing in old age and in the females. If we count the number of missing teeth for each sex and compute the frequency in relation to the usual complement of teeth (32 per person), we find that in males 15.2 per cent and in females 25.6 per cent were missing. This compares with about 12 per cent for the skulls of the old stone grave series (Table 19). Although there is thus a considerable difference between the modern and prehistoric peoples in this respect, these figures do not tell the whole story. We have seen in Table 18 that dental attrition was markedly greater Observations on Eskimos and Indians 113 in the prehistoric group than in the early historic. This factor is undoubtedly responsible for the tooth loss of those early times, for the Labrador Eskimo then had caries very infrequently, just as did other Eskimo groups before contact with civilization (see Goldstein; Pedersen). Today the teeth of the Labrador Eskimo living on white man's food do not get heavy wear but are lost through decay. Unfortunately, our data are not full enough to show that the amount of dental decay varies with locality and therefore with the amount of white man's food consumed, a fact established by Collins (1932) for the Western Eskimo and by Pedersen for the Greenland Eskimo. Table 61. —Frequency OF ] VIlSSING Teeti i IN LlVIh fG L ABRAD 3R ESK MO Number of Teeth Missing Age 1-4 5-8 9-12 13-16 17-20 21 -24 25-28 29-32 Total Male 18-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-old 3 3 i 11 6 4 2 4 2 2 1 2 1 1 3 3 i 1 1 i 16 12 7 8 10 Total 7 27 7 8 2 1 1 53 Female 17-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-old 4 4 1 1 1 12 3 4 4 1 3 1 1 5 3 i ■2 2 1 1 1 2 2 i 1 1 1 'i i 1 18 13 11 12 17 Total 11 23 11 7 5 7 4 1 2 71 It is important to note that the record for the Indians is very different from that of the modern Eskimos. Although there are records for only thirteen Indians, none of them had any teeth missing. Presumably this situation is to be accounted for by the fact that these northern Indians have verv limited contact with civilization. PALATAL RAPHE In life there is a line or ridge marking the midline of the hard palate, known as the "raphe." This structure overlays the suture connecting the two maxillary bones anteriorly and the two palate bones posteriorly. Since hyperostosis of the borders of this suture, the so-called "palatal torus," is fairly common in Eskimos, Strong palpated with his finger the hard palate of each of his subjects in order to determine the degree of development of this structure. When the raphe was palpable it was recorded as 114 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador slight (trace, faint), medium (+), or marked. In a few cases the expressions "present" and "not marked" were used and these have been interpreted as "medium." The records comprise 52 males and 76 females. Of these a raphe could not be detected in 23 males and 23 females; in other words it was present in 55.8 per cent of the males and 69.7 per cent of the females. Two males and six females were noted as having this structure markedly developed. Only in these eight individuals (6.2 per cent) could there have been much of a bony torus present. It will be recalled (p. 52) that of 59 Labrador skulls examined by the writer only one showed a torus of more than slight development. The difficulty as regards interpretation has been mentioned in con- nection with the torus. As regards the Indians it may be noted that of the thirteen individuals for which a record was made, five, all males, had the raphe present. In two of these cases the raphe was stated to be of marked development. DISCUSSION Of first importance in this study of Strong's observations on the living is the evaluation of the reliability of the measurements. Having reviewed the evidence for personal error and studied the measurements in comparison with the best available data, the conclusions may be summarized briefly as follows: Stature Good Sitting height Slightly low Head length Slightly low Head breadth Slightly low Head height Agrees with comparative data for Western Eskimos Minimum frontal diameter .... Best data available Bizygomatic diameter Slightly low Bigonial diameter Best data available Menton-crinion Direct measurement good Menton-nasion Direct measurement high Forehead height High Nose height Possibly high, but close to general mean of Eskimos Nose breadth Good Ear length Best data available Ear breadth Good The least reliable measurements are those involving nasion; namely, menton-nasion, forehead height, and nose height. In these three cases the means are higher than would be expected. In four other cases errors in technique are probably responsible for failure to obtain the maximum measurement: sitting height, head length, head Observations on Eskimos and Indians 115 breadth, and face breadth. Here, naturally, the means are lower than would be expected. All the remaining eight measurements are fairly reliable and for the most part represent the best data available for the region. In the course of this analysis mention has been made of the fact that an unrefined technique may lead to increased ranges of the measurements and still give reliable means. I would attribute to this factor, rather than to White admixture, any unusual variability shown by Strong's data. Under these circumstances it is desirable to summarize the variability of this Labrador series in relation to other Eskimo groups. Howells (1936) has pointed out that The Coefficient of Variation has a proper application in comparing the variabilities of different anthropometric criteria, as such, with one another, but it should not be used in comparing the mean variabilities of different human groups: the reason for this is that while it measures the variability of the sample, it is at the same time measuring the inherent variability of the character to which it applies, and the latter is a considerable differential which should be removed (p. 594). Howells has gone to considerable trouble to calculate the mean standard deviations (mean sigmas) of all the available series of 50 or more cases. On the basis of these figures he proposes to sub- stitute for the Coefficient of Variation a "sigma ratio": This is arrived at by dividing any individual sigma by the mean sigma for that character, giving a ratio, or percentage of the mean sigma. Ideally, and on the average, this figure will approximate 100 (when expressed as a percent- age) which may thus be taken as a norm. Therefore, for any given sample the mean sigma ratio for all available measurements and indices will con- stitute an index of the variability of that group relative to the general average which is represented by 100 (p. 594). Using this device I have calculated the mean sigma ratios of Strong's male Labrador Eskimo series and of such other Eskimo series for which sigmas are available and where the number exceeds 50. These figures are shown in Table 62 and seem to indicate that the Labrador series is of little more than average in variability (nose height excluded). Furthermore, as far as the data go, the Labrador series seems to be less variable than either the Barrow or Nunatag- miut series of Seltzer. Another thing brought out by this study is the fact that we should be very careful about generalizing from the measurements on the living Eskimos of Labrador, because they have undergone certain changes in physical type during the historic period. There is good reason to believe that stature has decreased slightly here. 116 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador The skull, too, has probably become more rounded, although it is not certain that this is detectable in the living, owing perhaps to the decreased thickness of the temporal muscles (p. 92). A narrow- ing and lengthening of the face is also suggested. Table 62. -Sigma Ratios of Male Eskimo Series with More Than Fifty Individuals Measurements Strong (58) Stature 96.4 Head length 100.6 Head breadth 97 . 1 Min. front, diam ... 81.1 Bizyg. diam 109.5 Bigon. diam 110.0 Face height Upper face height Nose height * Nose breadth 104 . 1 Cephalic index 94 . 7 Ceph.-fac. index . . . 122.2 Facial index Nasal index 94 . 9 Coronation Gulf Jenness Seltzer (82) (65) 94.7 94.7 89.6 78.2 82.4 Barrow Seltzer (62) NUNATAUMIUT Seltzer (64) (10) Mean sigma ratio 101.1 102.3 100.2 99.5 81.5 108.8 99.3 76.4 91.2 60.9 83.1 (13) 90.1 87.9 102^0 72.0 78.6 88.0 (7) 85.8 102.6 109.0 122 ! 2 iti'.i 95.0 92.6 96.1 (7) 105.5 76.7 87.2 i38^8 116^5 86.7 134.8 78.4 (7) 102.7 * Excluded because standard deviation exceeds the "mean sigma" plus three times its standard deviation. That these changes have not produced a type differing very con- siderably from that of the main comparative series from the eastern Arctic appears from Table 63. As Seltzer has clearly shown, these Eskimo groups are characterized by low stature, as compared with those of the western Arctic. Considering the possibilities of personal error and other factors affecting these figures, as brought out in the present study, there seems to be no justification for evaluating the Table 63. — Comparative Measurements on^Ltving Eskimos (Males) of the Eastern Arctic Eastern Northwestern Hudson Labrador Greenland Greenland Bay Strong Others Poulsen Hrdlicka-Steenshy Birket-Smith Measurements (58) (37) (29) (ID (99) Stature 158.4 157.0 161.1 157.4 160.6 Head length .... 192.2 192.9 192.0 195.8 193.7 Head breadth . . . 148.3 151.5 147.0 152.2 149.7 Cephalic index . . 77.3 78.6 76.5 77.7 77.3 141.7 144.9 141.7 147.0 143.4 Ceph.-fac. index 95.7 95.8 98.1> 96.5 95.8 Bigon. diam. . . . 114.3 113.9 Gon.-zyg. index 80.6 80. k Nose height .... 57.0 52.0 49.5 Nose breadth . . . 38.0 38.3 34.1 Nasal index .... 67.0 73.8 69.2 Observations on Eskimos and Indians 117 differences too closely. I would point out, however, that the low stature and other differences reported for northwestern Greenland (Smith Sound) by HrdliSka and Steensby cannot be accounted for on the basis of contact with civilization as in Labrador; indeed, the reverse is true, and it is necessary to look upon this group as having had a different origin or as the product of inbreeding in isolation, unless of course the sample is not representative. In addition to considering the Labrador Eskimos in relation to the other Eastern Eskimos, it is desirable to review the evidence upon which Seltzer has based his contention that The "Algonkian Cree" stock sent their numbers to the north and east in successive waves of migration. The first group occupied the whole territory of Hudson Bay, Labrador, Baffin Land and Greenland, supplanting still exist- ing bands of Old Thulers. The second group, represented by the present Caribou Eskimo, at a later period invaded the Barren Grounds where they are to be found today (1933, p. 368). The relationship of the Eskimo groups mentioned in this quotation has been pointed out (Table 63), and is based considerably upon low stature. In establishing the connection with the Cree, Seltzer used Grant's figures for the group living at Chipewyan, a reserve located at the western end of Lake Athabaska, Alberta. Here again the relationship was based largely upon low stature, for Grant's Cree gave a figure of 161 cm. (male). I have called attention, how- ever, to the fact that Boas (1895) reported a stature of 168.5 cm. for 57 males. Moreover, Grant himself has reported a stature of 172.5 cm. for 55 male Cree measured at Oxford House, northeastern Manitoba. It is true that Grant attributes the high stature of the Oxford House Cree to White admixture, but it seems doubtful whether this factor would account for the total difference of 11.5 cm. In view of the fact that the stature of northern male Indians generally is around 166-168 cm., I would suspect the stature of the Chipewyan Cree of being atypical. In view of this situation, and the new data available in this study, we may restate in Table 64 the metrical comparison between the Cree and Labrador Eskimo, using Shapiro's statistical device, 1 and giving Boas' figures for stature and cephalic index as alternates. It will be seen from this table that by the use of different figures, and with six additional measurements, it is possible to get average differences exceeding 2.6. In interpreting the size of this difference 1 This consists merely of calculating for each measurement and index the absolute differences between the various groups, and the averages of these absolute differences, disregarding signs, for the various groups. The quality of the sample is disregarded. 118 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Table 64. — Comparison between Means of Cree Indians and Labrador Eskimo males Cree Labrador Measurements Grant Boas Strong Dif. Others Dif. Stature 161.0 168.5 158.4 2.6(10.1) 157.0 4.0(11.5) Head length 193.2 192.2 1.0 192.9 0-.3 Headbreadth 150.0 148.3 1.7 151.5 1.5 Cephalic index 77.6 79.8 77.3 0.3(2.5) 78.6 1.0(1.2) Face height 124.6 121.3 3.3 Facebreadth 144.6 141.7 2.9 144.9 0.3 Facial index 86.1 83.7* 2.4 Ceph.-fac. index 96.6 95.7 0.9 95.8 0.8 Average differences 1.57(3.18) 1.70(2.66) Nose height 54.7 57.0 2.3 52.0 2.7 Nose breadth 38.2 38.0 0.2 38.3 0.1 Nasal index 69.2 67.0 2.2 73.8 4.6 Ear length 65.6 70.9 5.3 Ear breadth 35.2 37.4 2.2 Ear index 53. k 53.0 0.4 Average differences 1.83(2.64) 1.91(2.61) ♦Calculated from the means. I shall do no more than quote Seltzer's remarks regarding the differ- ence of 2.29 which he found in comparing the Smith Sound Eskimo and the Chipewyan Indians by the same method: This is not a small average difference, but still not excessively large. The difficulty arises in reconciling the exceedingly small stature of the Smith Sound Eskimos (157.4 cm.) with the much taller Chipewyans who have a mean of 166.4 cm. This great stature difference of 9 cm., in my opinion, is sufficient grounds for calling in question the Chipewyan origin of the Smith Sound Eskimo (p. 361). I may add that, just as the modern Labrador Eskimo are not entirely typical of the prehistoric Labrador Eskimo, so the Cree at Chipewyan may not be like the prehistoric Cree. According to Grant, the Post at Chipewyan was established in 1789, and it seems likely, therefore, that these Cree have been influenced by civilization as long as have the Labrador Eskimo. Until more data are at hand I see no reason for accepting the band of Cree at Chipewyan as unchanged representatives of the Cree as a whole or of that portion of the Cree that may have given rise to the "Eschato-Eskimo." Finally, without claiming more than an elementary knowledge of statistics, I venture to suggest that the statistical device employed by Shapiro and Seltzer has all the defects, and more, of the coefficient of racial likeness which Seltzer has condemned (1937). VI. GENERAL DISCUSSION One of the objects of this study has been to present a critical analysis of the measurements under consideration. I have felt that the anthropometry of the Arctic region will advance more rapidly if we recognize the deficiencies of the data, rather than minimize them — a general impulse, not to say tendency, where one is working up the material of a colleague. To this end I have tried to be critical likewise of the comparative data. In connection with the latter I would like to emphasize again the fact that the great majority of our skeletal collections from the far north are restricted to skulls without associated cultural objects. The chances of correct sex identification decrease considerably in the absence of the skeleton and the mean measurements of the two sexes vary accordingly (see p. 28). By ignoring cultural associa- tions we miss one of the few indications of time. If we complicate this situation still further upon measuring the material by introducing new definitions of landmarks, etc., there is little wonder that metrical differences appear in the results. Passing on to the living of the far north, we encounter even greater difficulties. For one thing, the majority of measurements, usually on small groups, have been taken by those with limited anthropo- metric experience, much as in Strong's case. To this must be added the unfavorable working conditions encountered in these regions, and their attendant influence upon technique; the uncertainty of detecting mixed-bloods; the change in physical type following acculturation, etc. Although these difficulties are quite well known to most workers in this field, there is a general tendency, especially noticeable here, and encouraged by modern biometric procedures, to be uncritical of measurements. Once having accepted the figures it is an easy step, of course, to generalize from the metrical similarities. Started upon this course, too, the time element means nothing. In brief, one has to discount the attempts of the physical anthropologist toward the solution of the Eskimo problem because of the unsatis- factory nature of his present material. Morant's recent (1937) analysis of Eskimo skull measurements by means of the coefficient of racial likeness is a case in point. In dealing with Labrador I have found it necessary to review the evidence upon which Seltzer claims close relationship between 119 120 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador the Eskimos of this region and the Cree Indians of central Canada. I have set forth arguments against the procedures by which this relationship has been established in the discussion concluding the last chapter. I object chiefly to drawing such far-reaching con- clusions from such unequal material, as described above; in other words, to concluding from the similarity of a few measurements taken on small samples of widely separated modern groups, speaking different languages (Eskimo, Algonkian Cree) and undergoing different stages of acculturation (Whites), that they must have had a common ancestry a little over 1,000 years ago (according to Jenness' theory; see p. 21). I have not attempted to analyze the material upon which Shapiro (1931) has based a similar connection between the Chipewyans of Athapascan Indian stock and the Western Eskimo. However, the same general opposing arguments would apply. I may add that Shapiro (1934) has also studied skull measurements by the same method and, being thus able to ignore stature and other features, has found a close similarity between the Western Eskimo and the Algonkins and Iroquois of the United States and Canada. This similarity has not been confirmed by von Bonin and Morant's (1938) analysis of the same data by means of the coefficient of racial likeness: . . . .comparison of the six calvarial measurements suggested that seventy- eight of the 112 comparisons between the American Indian and Eskimo series would give reduced coefficients of racial likeness greater than 19. ' It was found that thirty-one of the remaining thirty-four comparisons also give values above the same limit, leaving the following three reduced coefficients: Western Eskimo (220.0) and Arikara (49.1)— 7.07±0.31 (15); Western Eskimo (220.0) and Western Algonkin (44.1)— 15.91±0.33 (15); Point Hope Eskimo (125.1) and East-Central Algonkin (58.5)— 17.32±0.31 (15) (pp. 117-118). In thus criticizing Shapiro's and Seltzer's methods I do not wish to minimize the contribution they have made in calling attention to the unusual similarity between the sets of measurements of these widely scattered groups. Part of the strength of their argument does not appear on the surface; namely, that it is almost impossible to find like agreement between the Eskimos and other Indian groups. Of course this is less surprising in view of the fact that the Algonkins and Athapascans are neighbors of the Eskimos. However, granted that further material will maintain a certain 1 These authors classify the C.R.L. into three groups: less than 5, 5-10, and 10-19, which presumably indicate close resemblance, moderate resemblance, and slight resemblance, respectively. General Discussion 121 similarity, there remains the problem of interpretation. Are the differences small enough to have been developed from a common parentage in the central regions of Canada during the short interval allotted? Or can they be accounted for by the intermixture of neighboring groups? Or do they indicate a convergent evolution of more remotely related groups? The answer to these questions cannot yet be stated categorically and is better left to future investigation than to speculation. Throughout this study I have emphasized the differences between the living Labrador Eskimos and their early historic and proto- historic ancestors. These differences would probably be more obvious if we had skeletal measurements on the modern population for comparison with the ancient. As it is, we find, for example, that there is an indicial difference in head shape between these two groups, of more than five units, on the average. I have tried to explain this indicial difference by the extreme development of the temporal muscles in the living (p. 92), but find it impossible to reconcile all the facts. For instance, all reliable measurements on the skull, regardless of race, show a higher cranial index for the females than the males. This relationship is preserved in most living Indian groups (cf. Grant's Chipewyans), but is reversed in the Eskimos (see p. 91) j 1 in other words, the Eskimo woman, start- ing with a relatively rounder skull than the man, has a relatively longer head in life, in spite of using her masticatory apparatus more than he does in chewing hides. Although it is hard to see how this result comes about, we are asked to believe that by taking on an Eskimo culture a group of northern Indians achieved a relative lengthening of the women's heads as compared to the men's. Returning to the indicial differences in head shape mentioned above, we must not lose sight of the fact that the old Labrador Eskimos were very dolichocranic. Moreover, it seems well estab- lished by Strong's early nineteenth century (recent grave) series that the Labrador Eskimo skull was rounder 75 years ago at the mission stations than in the prehistoric period. I have attributed this change in head shape, together with a possible decrease in stature, to altered diet. I do not believe that it can be satisfactorily explained otherwise. There is a growing body of evidence from 1 Jenness (1923) has noted this reversal in the Eskimos, for he says: "In regard to sexual differences the cephalic indices of the women seem to be everywhere slightly lower than those of the men, the difference varying from about 1 to 2.5. Such skull measurements as are available give a directly opposite result." (p. B57.) 122 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador other racial groups showing that both head shape and stature are rather easily changed when the environment, and especially nutrition, is altered. 1 The substance of this argument, then, is that measurements on living Eskimos that have been in contact with civilization for upwards to 100 years are of minor value in tracing Eskimo relation- ships. Not only is this true because of the physical changes attrib- utable to acculturation, but also, of course, because measurements on the living cover such a brief period of time and are not strictly comparable with those on the skeleton. The data on the prehistoric Labrador Eskimo skeletons here presented establish more firmly the fact that the physical type represented is much the same as that predominant in Greenland; it differs materially from that of the "western longheads" (Old Igloos). 2 Also, this type contrasts rather clearly with the Thule, at least with that of the late survivors. Assuming that Labrador was originally populated by Thule people of a physical type seen in late survivors elsewhere, it is safe to say that the type did not survive here. Whether or not the Labrador and Greenland physical type was derived from a mixture of Thule and Dorset peoples, or is a representative of the latter alone, cannot be stated until the Dorset physical type is identified. That some such explanation may be forthcoming, however, is suggested by recent investigations which have shown a wider distribution of Dorset culture elements in the eastern Arctic than was heretofore known (personal com- munication from Mr. Collins). Although in general, and on a metrical basis, the Eskimos of Labrador and Greenland have a similar physical type, we must 1 Krogman (1938) has summarized this literature (pp. 233-236). He says in part: "Finally, we must give attention to a factor, or a set of factors, that is as difficult to evaluate as it is to describe: the environment, whatever connotations this term may have. Both Ripley and Buxton agree that local shortness of stature among a people generally tall may be due to so-called 'misery spots.' The com- bined effects of disease and undernourishment may result in a stunting of the pre- sumably 'racial' growth pattern." (p. 235.) "In a very definite sense food and health are part of the environment. There 'are several suggestive studies to demonstrate the effect of these two factors. Neu- bauer fed rats an inadequate diet and found that avitaminosis, prenatal or post- natal, resulted in a definite tendency to brachycephaly. Bakwin and Bakwin found in children who had suffered from intestinal intoxication during the first year of life a marked diminution in the transverse diameters of face and thorax " (p. 236.) 2 Morant (1937) found a C.R.L. of 6.10±0.49 between the Old Igloos and Greenland. This presumably denotes moderate resemblance. General Discussion 123 not forget that the skeletal dimensions of these two groups in some instances differ significantly; indeed, the Labrador skeleton on the average is uniformly smaller than that from Greenland. This fact, whatever it may mean, needs to be taken into consideration in establishing the relationships of these groups. VII. CONCLUSIONS Briefly stated, the following are the main points developed in the course of the present study: Skeleton (1) Errors in sexing contribute considerably to the metrical differences between series of Eskimo skulls. (2) Personal error in measuring Eskimo skulls is due largely to differing interpretations of landmarks. (3) Comparisons between skeletal series of prehistoric Labrador, Greenland, Thule, and Old Igloo Eskimos show the closest metrical resemblance to be between those of Labrador and Greenland. (4) The old Labrador Eskimo skeletons differ from all others in the eastern Arctic in being uniformly smaller, on the average. (5) Pearson's formulae for stature reconstruction fail to predict Eskimo stature from the long bones by at least 3 cm. (6) The application of this correction factor to the data on reconstructed Eskimo stature clarifies the distribution of stature among the Eastern Eskimo in prehistoric times: the Thule people were taller (164-166 cm.) than the Labrador-Greenland people (160-162). (7) Comparison of the recent grave series (mid-nineteenth century) of Labrador Eskimos with those from prehistoric times shows that the former have shorter and smaller heads with longer and narrower faces, relatively higher orbits, relatively narrower alveolar arches, and slightly lower stature. Living V^ (8) Of Strong's measurements on the living the three involving the landmark nasion (menton-nasion, forehead height, and nose height) are the least reliable; errors in technique somewhat affect the reliability of four other measurements (sitting height, head length, head breadth, and face breadth). The remaining eight measurements are judged to be fairly reliable. (9) The physical differences between the modern and ancient Eskimos of Labrador, as witnessed chiefly by the change in head shape and the decrease in stature, are due for the most part to altered diet. 124 Conclusions 125 (10) As far as can be judged from Strong's inadequate Indian sample, the northern bands of the Montagnais-Naskapi differ from those to the south, as described by Hallowell, and are, if anything, less distinct from the Eskimos. (11) Taking into consideration the defects of the data on the living Eastern Eskimos and northern Indians, there is little justi- fication for drawing far-reaching conclusions from the metrical similarities or differences shown by these data. APPENDIX Al Measurements of Individual Skulls 4 E J ti * z m ■h- j) m V 6 a g S . ii 3 T3 J3 X l <« A-0 J5 X «*"2 S t •3.2 'S 9 2 o O < Jt3 PQjb 6 3 J tt.S mi\ OS Field Museum Recent grave series • male 192005 Y 186 136* 134 73.1 72.0 98.5 83.2 152.0 192006 69 181 134 134 7k. 7k. 100.0 85.1 149.7 192007 192 139 142 72. k 7k-0 102.2 85.8 157.7 192008 73 186 134 138 72.0 7k. 2 103.0 86.2 152.7 192009 43 177 139 135 78.5 76.3 97.1 85. k 150.3 192010 37 184 134 130 72.8 70.6 97.0 81.8 149.3 192011 50 196* 128* 132 65.3 67.3 103.1 81.5 152.0 192012 44 190 134 70.5 192013 21 180 139 130 77.2 72.2 93.5 81.5 149.7 192015 42 192 (130) (67.7) 192016 M 179 130* i3i 72.6 73.2 100.8 8k.8 146.7 192017 Y 185 131 135* 70.8 73.0 103.0 85. k 150.3 Recent grave series: female 192018 M 169 131 125 77.5 7k. 95. k 83.3 141.7 192019 66 192020 47 188 134 71.3 192022 50 174 132 75.9 192023 37 179 125 134* 69.8 7k 9 107.2 88 2 146.0 192024 0? 187 (126) (67.3) 192025 52 174 134 126 77.0 72 k 9k. 81 8 144.7 192026 45 179 128 71.5 Old stone grave series: male 192001 189 136 134 72.0 70.9 98.5 82.5 153.0 192028 M 185 136 132 73.5 71. k 97.0 82.2 151.0 192033 Y 178 (132) 129 (7k. 2) 72.5 (97.7) (83.2) (146.3) 192036 M 194 140 140 72.2 72.2 100.0 83.8 158.0 192038 M 190 (140) 142 (73 . 7) 7k. 7 (101. k) (86.1) (157.3) Peabody Museum 2708J Y 185 138 137 7k. 6 7k. 99.3 8k- 8 153.3 47871 Y 188 131 134 69.7 71.3 102.3 8k. 151.0 47990 M 189 128 141 67.7 7k- 6 110.2 89.0 152.7 47992 M 181 141 138 77.9 ^76.2 97.9 85.7 153.3 47993 Y 189 130 134 68.8 m.9 103.1 8k- 151.0 57326 M 186 132 133 71.0 71.5 100.8 83.6 150.3 57328 M 192 133 142 69.3 7k. 106.8 87. k 155.7 57331 M 193 140 130 72.5 67. k 92.8 78.1 154.3 57333 Y 187 144 138 77.0 73.8 95.8 83. k 156.3 57335 194 (132) 136 (68.0) 70.1 (103.0) (83. k) (154.0) 57336 174 131 130 75.3 7k. 7 99.2 85.2 145.0 57337 192 138 130 71.9 67.7 9k. 2 78.8 153.3 57339 M 200 129 138 6k-5 69.0 107.0 88.9 155.7 57358 M 189 134 70.9 58795 Y 184 132 136 71.7 73.9 103.0 86.1 150.7 59657 190 135 138 71.0 72 6 102.2 8k 9 154.3 * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. t Except where age is known, three age groups have been distinguished: Y, young adult (up to 35); M, middle-aged (35-50); O, old (50-). JA few measurements on this skull were reported by Wyman (1868). 126 Appendix Al 127 Measurements of Individual Skulls — Continued <£ £ . 1 n.5 II University of Gottingen (Spengel, 1874) 371 Adult 195 135 ... 69.2 372 Adult 190 132 ... 69.5 373 Adult 180 128 ... 71.1 Collection? (Virchow, 1880) Adult 201 139 ... 69.2 Lausanne Museum (Schenk, 1899) 1 M 192 134 134 2 O 190 138 134 Paris Museum of "Comparative Anatomy" (Sergi, 1901)§ 10241 Y 182 136 ... 7U.8 10244 M 196 144 ... 7S.5 University of Cambridge (Duckworth, 1895) 69.8 69.8 100.0 82.2 153.3 72.6 70.5 97.1 81.7 154.0 1868 Adult 183 138 145 ~7sS^ 79.2 105.1 90.3 155.3 1869 Adult 202 133 140 65.8 69.8 105.3 88.6 158.3 1870 Adult 171* 128* 71>.7 1871 Adult 181* 130 i39 71.8 76.8 106.9 89. i 150.0 Dresden Museum (Oetteking, 1908)11 1440 Adult 185 138 138 71>.6 7^.6 100.0 85. h 153.7 3918 Adult 183 132 139 72.1 75.9 105.3 88.2 151.3 3922 Adult 188 137 134 72.9 71.8 97.8 82.5 153.0 3923 Adult 185 131 139 70.8 75.1 106.1 88.0 151.7 3925 Adult 178 130 128 78.0 71.9 98.5 88.1 145.3 Field Museum Old stone grave series. : female 192027 M 178 (130) 134 {78.0) 75.3 (103.1) (87.0) (147.3) 192029 Y 180 134 125 7U.U 69. U 98.3 79.6 146.3 192030 M 130* 134 108.1 192031 O i90 126 130 66.8 68.1 103.2 82.3 148.7 192032 188 (132) 132 (70.2) 70.2 (100.0) (82.5) (150.7) 192034 Y 183 132 72.1 192037 M 181 Peabody Museum 47873 M 179 130 133 72.6 7k- 3 102.3 86.1 147.3 47874 Y 173 130 121 75.1 69.9 93.1 79.9 141.3 47875 M 176 122 126 69.8 71.6 103.3 8U.6 141.3 47989 O 180 126 70.0 47994 M 188 i26 122 67.0 6U.9 96.8 77.7 145.3 47995 Y 175 126 122 72.0 69.7 96.8 81.1 141.0 47996 M 182 134 128 78.6 70.8 95.5 81.0 148.0 47997 179 (128) 124 (71 .5) 69.3 (96.9) (80.8) (143.7) 47999 O 178 128 122 71.9 68.5 95.8 79.7 142.7 57327 Y 180* 130 128 72.2 71.1 98.5 82.6 146.0 57329 Y 174 131 122 75.8 70.1 98.1 80.0 142.3 57332 Y 184 132 127 71.7 69.0 96.2 80. k 147.7 57338 M 181 131 134 72. k. 7U.0 102.3 85.9 148.7 * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. t Except where age is known, three age groups have been distinguished: Y, young adult (up to 36) ; M, middle-aged (35-50); O, old (50-). J Sex of 10241 unknown; 10244 stated to be female. r Spx identification made in Germany at request of Dr. Oetteking (1937). 128 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Measurements of Individual Skulls — Continued z m u m < 0/9 J K c * < E Si T3 C o l .2 75.3 101.5 86. k 148.0 57344 Y 172 130 132 75.6 76.7 101.5 87 .h 144.7 57345 180 124 130 68.9 72.2 10U.8 85.5 144.7 57346 184 130 138 70.6 75.0 106.2 87.9 150.7 57351A 190 132 69.5 57475 Y 181 126 128 69.6 70.7 101.6 83. i 145.0 57476 Y 179 130 126 72.6 70. k 96.9 81.6 145.0 58794 Y 180 122 127 67.8 70.6 lOlt.l 8U.1 143.0 59658 Y 169 128 128 75.7 75.7 100.0 86.2 141.7 University of Gottingen (Spengel, 1874) 374 Adult 188 135 71.8 375 Adult 178 134 75.8 University of Cambridge (Duckworth , 1895) 1872 Adult 181 133 139 73.5 76.8 10k. 5 88.5 151.0 1873 Adult 180 128 129 71.1 71.7 100.8 83.8 145.7 Dresden Museum (Oetteking, 1908) M 3917 Adult 180 131 135 72.8 75.0 103.0 86.8 148.7 3920 Adult 174 129 133 n.i 76. U 108.1 87.8 145.3 3921 Adult 178 135 128 75.8 71.9 9)*.8 81.8 147.0 3924 Adult 171 126 128 73.7 7k-8 101.6 86.2 141.7 t Except where age is known, three age groups have been distinguished: Y, young adult (up to 35); M, middle-aged (35-50); O, old (50-). ^ISex identification made in Germany at request of Dr. Oetteking (1937). APPENDIX A2 Measurements of Individual Skulls i I J i j ! 3 I a 3 s t d 2 c c a H 1 I 3 J3 3 c > f i £ S ■ 2 > < •o 1 1 « 1 n j pq Field Museum Recent grave series: male 192005 91 (114) (61) 136* (83.8) (U.8) (99) (99) 192006 93 1301f 77 133 97.7 57.9 98 102 192007 98 124 If (75) 140 88.6 58.6 105 113 192008 90 129 (76) 130 99.2 (58.5) 104 (100) 192009 86 131 76 130 100.8 58.5 93 91 192010 96 135 82 135 100.0 60.7 99 105 192011 98 111* 192012 89 192013 90 i30 77 i27 102. U 60.6 97 97 192015 92 192016 92 i24 73 96 93 192017 92 (117) (68) 105 Recent grave series: female 192018 85 69 130* 53.1 96 94 192019 86 192020 96 i26 77 i26 100.0 61 1 192022 90 192023 94 ioo 192024 82 192025 86 i20 72 i25 96.0 57 6 96 '89 192026 84 Old stone grave series: male 192001 94 72 134 53.7 105 101 192028 99 99 192033 96 iu 73 102 98 192036 98 131 77 147* 89.1 52.1 107* 109* 192038 98 1151 71 103 103 Peabody Museum 2708 92 125 74 141 88.6 52.5 106 97 47871 98 70 126 55.6 102 102 47990 92 72 (136) (52.9) 109 104 47992 91 i28 78 136 91>.l 57. U 108 101 47993 98 117 72 129 90.7 55.8 101 100 57326 92 74 136 5k. k 103 104 57328 90 79 (145) (5U.5) 111 111 57331 90 69 133 51.9 88 93 57333 97 79 140 56. k 91 94 57335 94 73 142 51. k 103 105 57336 91 69 133 51.9 100 99 57337 94 79 137 57.7 104 107* 57339 92 80 143 55.9 113 110 57358 99 73 140 52.1 101 103 58795 94 122 72 128 95.8 56.2 103 100 59657 95 79 133 59. h 102 10 1 * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. H Measurement altered by tooth wear. 129 130 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Measurements of Individual Skulls — Continued University of Gottingen (Spengel, 1874) 371 98 ... 74 133 372 100 ... 70 136 373 91 ... 73 129 55.6 51.5 56.6 Collection? (Virchow, 1880) 120 141 85.1 University of Cambridge (Duckworth, 1895) 1868 1869 1870 1871 Lausanne Museum (Schenk, 1899) 1 97 ... 74 137 2 97 ... 74 134 Paris Museum of "Comparative Anatomy" (Sergi, 1901) 10241 ... 124 76 134 92.5 56.7 10244 ... 123 76 150 82.0 50.7 Dresden Museum (Oetteking, 1908) 5U.0 55.2 101 107 106 102 104 103 100 1440 106 75 136 55.1 102 98 3918 99 71 104 102* 3922 93 78 i34* 58.2 102 95 3923 93 i23 72 134 91 8 53.7 103 100 3925 97 126* 78 145 86 9 53.8 101 100 Field Museum Old stone grave series: female 192027 96 71 (126) (56.3) 99 99 192029 90 65 129 50. U 100 97 192030 94 68* 128 53.1 98 100 192031 87 65 126* 51.6 99 98 192032 96 74 134 55.2 107 107 192034 85 # • • 99* 192037 94 i23 73 Peabody Museum 47873 92 120 74 129 93.0 57. U 104 105 47874 86 65* 87 89* 47875 85 70 i23 56.9 97 93 47989 90 iis 71* 128 89 8 55.5 93 92* 47994 93 mil 73 127 87 h 57.5 97 99 47995 88 115 70 133 86 5 52.6 100 97 47996 90 67 133 50. h 97 96 47997 86 65 122 53.3 90 89 47999 89 97 57327 93 69 96* ioi* 57329 85 65 i21 53.7 87 87 57332 86 nf. annrnt mat.P! pat. 69 mat.nd n 128 ipRsurempnt i are ihown 53.9 in Darenth 92 eses and h 104 ftve not 1 included in the calculations. % Measurement altered by tooth wear. Appendix A2 131 Measurements of Individual Skulls — Continued l t-. H T 4# 3 OS .L. . ■ £ * 6 . 1 3 I J ■ jS «5 — .H « et u fc 2 < ca h C n n Peabody Museum — Continued 57338 93 117 71 102 95 57341 88 (113) 69 124 (91.1) 55.6 100 98 57343 95 (105) 65 128 (82.0) 50.8 101 95 57344 90 ... 69 132 52.3 99 97 57345 88 ... (68) 130 (52. 3) 103 (94) 57346 91 ... 66 123 53.6 99 98 57351A 90 104* 57475 90 111 70 131 81*. 7 58. U 105 103 57476 92 ... 71 135 52.6 101 102 58794 87 109 65 99 97 59658 89 ... 74 127 58.3 92 95 University of Gottingen (Spengel, 1874) 374 94 ... 70 135 51.8 375 97 ... 75 128 58.6 University of Cambridge (Duckworth, 1895) 1872 106 98 1873 97 91 Dresden Museum (Oetteking, 1908) 3917 86 116 72 136 85.3 52.9 100 94 3920 85 ... 63 120 .... 52.5 93 96 3921 89 120 73 124 96.8 58.9 94 92 3924 91 120 64 131* 91.6 1*8.8 100 96 * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. o < Field Museum 192005 192006 192007 192008 192009 192010 192011 192012 192013 192015 192016 192017 35.0 31.5 36.0 35.8 38.0 36.5 38^0 192018 192019 192020 192022 192023 192024 192025 192026 38.2 36!6 33. OR 34. OL 35.0 192001 192028 .... 192033 36.0 192036 .... 192038 35.0 Peabody Museum 2708 37. OL 47871 35.5 47990 32.5 47992 35.5 47993 36.2 57326 35.2 57328 37.2 57331 36.5 57333 38.5 57335 34.0 57336 34.2 57337 36.8 57339 40.8 APPENDIX A3 Measurements of Individual Skulls Recent grave series: male 40.0 39.5 38. 5* 37.0 40.0 37.0 3.ltL 49 Old stone grave series: male 41.0 38^8 4o!o 41.5 39.0 39.5 37.2 40.5 39.5 42. OL 38.2 40.0 40.0 39.5 40.2 45.0 85.lt 92.8 87.5 89. 2L 91.0 82.3 95. K 89. k 89.1 88. 1L 95.5 96.2 85.0 86.6 91.5 90.7 50 25 50.0 50 53 50 52 51 50 55 50 51 54 50 55 51 50 55 58 20 23 22 23 22 24 18 22 22 25 21 22 24 21 22 22 ltO.O U3.U U.O U-2 1*3.1 U8.0 32.7 U.O K3.1 U6.3 K2.0 kO.O U7.0 1*2.0 uo.o 37.9 51" 57 58 52 60 54 53 50 58 48 5i 53 52 51 56 55 49 54 55 52 52 58 60 54 54 58" 56 64 61 64* 62 64 65 62 56" 60 64 60 68 61 57 67 65 125.5 107.0 110.3 119.2 106.7 120.U 117.0 55 62 112.7 112.0 103.1 133.3 117.6 128.3 117.3 111.8 119.6 118.2 67 136.7 64 118.5 63 in. 5 63 121.2 58 111.5 65 112.1 66* 110.0 63 116.7 61 113.0 54 (62) (1H. 8) 52" 65 112.1 62 110.7 L=left orbit R= right orbit ♦Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. 132 Appendix A3 133 Measurements of Individual Skulls — Continued u o o o 55 z Z J Peabody Museum- -Continued 57358 35.0 40.5 86.lt 50 25 50.0 58795 33.5 37.5 89.3 52 22 1*2.3 56 59657 38.5 38.5 100.0 52 23 U.t 57 University of Gottingen (Spengel, 1874) 371 372 373 Collection? (Virchow, 1880) .... 37.0 44.0 81*. 1 54 24 W4 University of Cambridge (Duckworth, 1895) 1868 36.0 39.0 92.3 48 1869 38.0 43.0 88. 1* 1870 1871 24 50.0 Lausanne Museum (Schenk, 1899) 1 56 23 1*1.1 2 52 24 1*6.2 Paris Museum of "Comparative Anatomy" (Sergi, 1901) 10241 35.0 40.0 87.5 55 21 88.2 10244 35.0 40.0 87.5 56 22 89.8 65 116.1 Dresden M Museum (Oetteking, 1908) 1440 37.0 40.0 92.5 52 23 U.2 54 63 116.7 3918 36.0 53* 26 1*9.0 52 66 126.9 3922 36.0 41^0 87.8 54 22 1*0.7 50 62 121*. 3923 35.0 39.0 89.7 50 21 1*2.0 55 68 123.6 3925 37.0 56 22 39.3 52 66 126.9 Field Museum Old stone grave series : female 192027 34.5 38.5 89.6 50 24 1*8.0 52 61 117.3 192029 34.8 39.2 88.8 48 22 1*5.8 49 58 118.1* 192030 37. 0L 39. 5L 93.71, 48 21 1*3.8 192031 35.0 38.8 90.2 49 24 1*9.0 51 63 128.5 192032 36. 0L 40. 0L 90. OL 50* 54* 192034 192037 34^5 37^0 98.2 52 22 1*2.8 52 65 125.0 Peabody Museum 47873 35.2 40.5 86.9 50 22 u.o 55 65 118.2 47874 32. OR 35. OR 91.1*R 47 20 1*2.6 51 47875 33.5 35.0 95.7 53 22 1*1.5 50 62 121*. 47989 34.5 37.5 92.0 49 23 1*6.9 50* 47994 34.8 38.0 91.6 43 22 51.2 55 63 111*. 5 L — left orbit R — right orbit * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. 134 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador • Measurements op Individual Skulls — Continued o o o o 55 55 55 2 PQ < Peabody Museum— -Continued 47995 35.0 37.0 91+. 6 49 24 1+9.0 50 62 12I+.0 47996 37.0 40.8 90.7 48 22 1+5.8 49 56 lll+.S 47997 34.5 36.0 95.8 44 21 1+7.7 51 47999 48 57327 46 22 1+7.8 55* 64 116.1+ 57329 32!5 35^5 91.5 48 19 39.6 49 54 110.2 57332 32.0 39.2 81.6 49 25 51.0 56 67 119.6 57338 34.2 39.0 87.7 51 23 1+5.1 (51) 64 (125.5) 57341 35.2 36.0 97.8 49 19 38.8 53 61 115.1 57343 32.0 37.0 86.5 48 19 89.6 50 57 111+.0 57344 35.0 38.5 90.9 48 20 1+1.7 54 67 121+.1 57345 38.5 40.0 96.2 54 21 38.9 57346 34.0 38.0 89.5 48 23 1+7.9 53 61 115.1 57351A 57475 34^2 3S.2 89.5 50 22 U.O 53 61 115.1 57476 34.5 38.0 90.8 50 22 U.O 55 66 120.0 58794 36. 0L 39. 0L 92. 8L 44 23 52.3 52 56 107.7 59658 37.8 42.0 90.0 50 23 1+6.0 54 64 118.5 University of Gottingen (Spengel, 1874) 374 375 University of Cambridge (Duckworth, 1895) 1872 37.0 41.0 90.2 57 23 ho.h 1873 36.0 38.0 91+. 7 50 22 u.o Dresden Museum (Oetteking, 1908) 3917 37.0 37.0 100.0 51 27 52.9 49 63 128.6 3920 33.0 37. OR 89. 1R 45 19 1+2.2 48 59 122.9 3921 39. OR 39. OR 100. OR 50 19 38.0 51 63 128.5 3924 35.0 50 21 1+2.0 50 63 126.0 L — left orbit R =» right orbit * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are sh.own in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. APPENDIX Bl Measurements of Individual Humeri i •z *s t. j =3? 3- i X 1 |1 fi*E 35 4 1 SS djl 5s •o2 o s S3 3? 31 S i? S? 21 Right Left Field Museum Recent grave series: male 192005 300 23 17 73.9 293 23 17 73.9 192006 303 22 16 72.7 293 24 16 66.7 192007 275 25 18 72.0 270 24 18 75.0 192008 309 25 18 72.0 301 23 17 73.9 192009 298 19 17 89.5 192010 3i3 24" i(i" 66.7 313 23 16 69.6 192011 304 24 18 75.0 296 22 17 77.3 192012 303 23.5 18 76.6 296 22 18 81.8 192014 297 24 19.5 81.2 289 23 18 78.3 192015 298* 22 19 86. U 192016 305 26 19 73.1 192017 316 26 19 Recent < 78.1 grave series: 3i6 female 25 i9.5 78.0 192018 295 22 17 77.8 294 21 17 81.0 192019 264 21 15 71. i 256 21 15 71. k 192020 292 19 14.5 76.8 284 18 14.5 80.6 192023a 280 20 13 65.0 275 19 14 73.7 192024 279 21 16 76.2 192025 275 20^5 U.5 65.8 270 20 13 65.0 192026 253 18 14 77.8 245 18 14 77 .8 Old stone grave series: male 192001 291 22 16 72.7 282 20 15 75.0 192004 307 20 19 95.0 192033 302 22" i^5 8U.1 296 21 18 85.7 Peabody Museum 47992 298 21 14 66.7 47998C1 294 21 18 85.7 287 21 is' ' 85.7 47998C2 294 21 16 76.2 47998C3 286 21 i6" 76.2 57352-2 297 27 19 70. k 57354 304 25 20 80.0 57360-1 285 2i" is" 85.7 282 20 17 85.0 61604 297 25 19 76.0 296 23 19 82.6 Museum of the American Indian (Oetteking, 1931) 897 298 22 17 77.3 Field Museum Old stone grave series : female 192029 266 18 14 77.8 262 17 14 82. U 192039 275 23.5 16 68.1 Peabody Museum 47998C4 295 19 13 68. k 57348 286 26" i3" 65.0 277 20 13 65.0 57352-1 303 20 16 80.0 57356 273 2l' ' 16" 76.2 268 20 15 75.0 57360-2 265 20 14 70.0 * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parenthe included in the calculations. 135 1 and have not been APPENDIX B2 Measurements of Individual Radii; Relationships of Individual Long Bones K k a Field Museum 192005 192006 192007 192008 192009 192010 192011 192012 192014 192015 192016 192017 192018 192019 192023 192023a 192024 192025 192026 192004 192033 192036 193 216 222 224 Right Recent grave series: 220 73.3 70.2 69.9 71.6 222 73.3 218 69.0 182 68 i90 67 197 71 235 Peabody Museum 47992 47998G1 . . . 47998G2 202 57352-1 . . . 57352-2 220 57354 61604 Museum of the American 897 Field Museum 192029 192037 Peabody Museum 47998G3 57348 208 72.7 57356 190 69.6 78.8 82.0 76.7 75.8 81.1 83.0 78.8 79.3 80.3 77.1 79.7 79.3 71 73 71 69 72 71* 71 73 71 69 72 ■a k* male 214 2i3 224 2i5 2i6 Recent grave series: female 76.7 7k.7 207 77.2 71.7 182 78.0 77.5 72.5 187 78 3 75. k 71.0 i92 Old stone grave series: male 82.9 ...'. 233 203 v 215 211 218 230 70 Indian (Oetteking, 1931) 79.0 Old stone grave series: female 75.1 72.7 80.2 208 '.'.'.' '.'.'.'. i92 Left 70. h 71.1 68.0 71.1 75 78.U 82. U 77.2 75.7 81.2 82.2 78.8 78.0 79.8 76. h. 79.0 79.7 77. k 76.1 76.9 77.1 79. k 77.7 80. 69.6 71.6 69.9 68.U 72.7 72.3 73.1 70.0 70.5 71.lt 75.U 68.6 71. \ 69.2 70.9 70.2 71.5 70.lt 71.6 71.6 136 APPENDIX B3 Measurements of Individual Femora 1 g ■ 1 d Z 4 i i | 1 i a i s s 4 a < 3 1 a as- 39 I E Right Field Museum Recent grave series, : male 192005 422 419 28.5 25 87.7 31 26 88.9 192006 412 412 32 27 ftM 31 26 88.9 192007 391 387 28.5 25 87.7 31 23 7k .2 192008 443 442 31 26 88.9 30 26 86.7 192009 410 408 27 26 96. S 31 23 7U.2 192010 438 435 35.5 27.5 77.5 31 26 88.9 192011 411 406 29.5 25 8U.7 30 22 78.3 192012 427 425 31 27 87.1 29 26 89.6 192014 411 406 33 28 8U.8 34 27 79. U 192015 417 415 26 26 100.0 33 23.5 71.2 192016 440 439 34 27.5 80.9 34 27 79. U 192017 435 434 29 Recent grave 29 series: 100.0 female 35 25 71. U 192018 396 395 28 29 108.6 31 25 80.6 192019 373 368 25 23 92.0 28 21 75.0 192022 408 401 26 22 8U.6 29 21 72. A 192023 391 387 25 24 96.0 29 21 72. k 192023a 390 386 27 25 92.6 30 22 78.8 192024 409 406 28 27 96. k 32 23 71.9 192025 392 387 25 22 88.0 25 21 8U.0 192026 349 348 23.5 21 89. k 25 20.5 82.0 Old stone grave series: male 192004 438 436 29 26 89.6 31 25.5 82.2 192036 446 444 32 29 90.6 38 25 65.8 Peabody Museum 47998A1 434 433 32 28 87.5 33 26 78.8 47998A2 430 429 33 30 90.9 36 26 72.2 47998A3 421 415 30 27 90.0 32 25 78.1 47998B 403 395 25 26 101+.0 30 22 73.8 47998A4 410 402 25 27 108.0 31 24 77. k 57352-1 (435) 435 29 26 89.6 31 24 77. U 57352-2 434 432 33 28 81>.8 33 26 78.8 61604 422 420 32 27 81>.U 34 23 67.6 Museum of the American Indian (Oetteking, 1931) 897 429 424 32 29 90.6 Field Museum 192029 370 366 192037 397 395 Peabody Museum 47998A5 385 383 57360-1 386 382« Old stone grave series: female 25 26 26 25 23 24 25 23 92.0 92.3 96.2 92.0 32 27 29 30 31 30 21 22 21 19 93.7 77.8 75.9 70.0 61.3 * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. 137 138 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Measurements of Individual Femora — Continued B §4 H .£ a Left Field Museum 192005 192006 192007 192008 192009 192010 192011 192012 192014 192015 192016 192017 Recent grave series: male 423 411 390 442 412 436 409 424 413 419 440 435 421 409 386 440 410 433 405 423 410 415 438 434 28 31 28 31.5 26 34.5 28 29.5 32 26 35.5 30 26 26 24 26.5 25.5 29 24 27 28 28 29 29 88. 9 85.7 8k. 1 98.1 8k.O 85.7 91.5 87.5 107.7 81.7 96.7 32 31 32 31 30 31 32 29 36 34 33 33 26.5 25 22 26 23 26 23 25 27 24 28 26 82.8 80.6 68.8 83.9 76.7 83.9 71.9 86.2 75.0 70.6 8k. 8 78.8 Recent grave series: female 192018 192019 192022 192023 192023a 192024 192025 391 376 409 387 390 406 386 390 373 402 385 385 403 381 27 25 26 25 27 29 25 29.5 23 23 24 26 27 22 109.2 92.0 88.5 96.0 96.3 93.1 88.0 33 28 27 30 29 32 25 25 21 21 23 23 24 21 75.8 75.0 77.8 76.7 79.3 75.0 8k. 192004 192033 192036 442 s1 420 450 Peabody Museum 47992 47998A1 47998A2 47998A3 47998A4 57352-3 57360-2 417 440 440 402 419 437" 428 Old stone grave series: male 437 29.5 26 88.1 414 28 26 92.8 445 31 30 96.8 412 437 437 396 411 433" 426 29 32 33 26 30 30 32 27 29 27 26 27 27 27 93.1 90.6 81.8 100.0 , 90.0 ^so.o 8k. k 32 34 36 32 36 33 31 32 33 24 24 25 25 26 26 21 25 24' 75.0 70.6 69. k 78.1 72.2 78.8 67.7 78.1 72.7 Museum of the American Indian (Oetteking, 1931) 897 426 423 30 29 96. 33 29 87.9 Field Museum Old stone grave series: j female 192029 370 366 25 22.5 90.0 26 20 76.9 192037 397 391 24 28 21 75.0 Peabody Museum 47998A5 384 382 26 26 100.0 29 22 75.9 47998A6 411 402 23 26 113.0 29 20 69.0 57360-1 387* 385* 25 24 96.0 30 21 70.0 * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parentheses and have not been included in the calculations. APPENDIX B4 Measurements of Individual Tibiae Field Museum 192005 192006 192007 192008 192009 192010 192011 192012 192014 192015 192016 192017 192018 192019 192020 192023 192023a 192024 192025 192026 330 338 297 335 331 361 320 337 326 320 350 344 303 284 305 302 299 318 292 192036 Peabody Museum 2707A . . . 47992 331 47998D1 344 47998D2 317 57352-1 344 57352-2 359 57360-1 349 29.5 28.5 27 28 28 31 29.5 30 30 28 29 31 28 23 26 25 26 27 23. s V T3 1 i a i ■ •o 3 1 £ s J ■3 1 >> 4 1 3 3 HT a M E c < 3 Left i Recent grave series : male 21 71.2 330 29.5 19.5 66.1 18 63.2 337 29.5 18 61.0 21 77.8 298 26 21 80.8 20 71. k 333 29 21 72. k 19.5 69.6 333 27 19 70. K 20.5 66.1 356 31 19.5 62.9 21 71.2 319 29 21 72. k 18 60.0 330 28 19 67.8 22 78.3 327 31 22 71.0 19 67.8 317 28.5 19 66.7 23.5 81.0 346* 29.5 24 81. U 21 67.7 346 31 21 67.7 Recent grave series: female 16 57.1 302 28 16.5 58.9 19.5 8U.8 284 23 19 82.6 16 61.5 306 25 17 68.0 18 72.0 296 23 18 78.8 18 69.2 297 25 18 72.0 21 77.8 320 27 21 77.8 15 68.8 296 24 15 62.5 285 23 17 78.9 368 29 Old stone grave series: male 24 82.8 29 30 27 28 30 32 22 21 20 22 23 26 75. 70, 7k- 78. 76. 81. 338 333 358 350 27 30 30 32 Museum of the American Indian (Oetteking, 1931) 897 335 32 20 62.5 Field Museum 192029 275 192037 317 Peabody Museum 2708C 327 47998D3 . . . 57348 319 57356 300 57360-2 314 57360-3 Old stone grave series: female 24 19 79.2 25 20 80.0 26 19 78.1 25" 19" 76.0 26 18 69.2 25 18 72.0 312 320 296 315 325 26 24 26 25 28 21 21 22 25 * Measurement approximate; estimated measurements are shown in parcnthe included in the calculations. 139 19 19 18 18 19 77.8 70.0 73.3 78.1 73.1 79.2 69.2 72.0 67.8 i and have not been APPENDIX CI Individual Measurements on the Living a 3 9> I 1 1 "3 § 8 0> z < n 3 K m n O Strong Eskimo: . Male 9 20 1 161.1 85.0 52.8 194 142 73.2 10 22 Hebron 169.7 89.0 52. U 204 144 70.6 13 44 Ramah 155.2 82.5 5S.2 200 144 72.0 19 old 1 161.0 81.0 50.3 194 148 76.3 21 31 Hebron 156.0 (98.0) 202 164 81.2 26 29 Nain 157.0 83.0 52.9 184 147 79.9 28 57 Hebron 148.0 74.0 50.0 201 152 75.6 29 18 Nain 151.0 72.0 1+7.7 184 151 82.1 30 22 Nain 149.0 74.0 1+9.7 177 148 83.6 73 25 1 158.1 84.0 53.1 180 145 80.6 77 58 7 154.2 78.9 51.2 182 148 81.8 79 66 ? 157.1 84.1 53.5 199 150 75. J+ 80 45 7 162.5 84.0 51.7 192 146 76.0 85 38 7 158.7 84.5 53.2 196 145 71+.0 98 70 7 158.2 78.5 1+9.6 192 156 81.2 99 57 7 155.8 82.6 53.0 192 148 77.1 100 60 (n.) 7 156.2 81.5 52.2 191 133 69.6 101 35 7 172.1 87.2 50.7 202 146 72.3 102 62 ?' 158.7 80.8 50.9 199 144 72. A 104 25 7 158.8 82.2 51.8 185 147 79. 4 106 20 7 163.4 86.1 52.7 194 149 76.8 109 44 7 162.8 82.6 50.7 187 152 81.3 113 52 7 157.3 78.4 1+9.8 191 148 77.5 114 23 7 158.3 81.4 51. 1+ 200 150 75.0 116 78 7 154.3 77.2 50.0 197 148 75.1 117 38 7 164.0 84.2 51.3 198 151 76.3 120 19 7 155.8 78.5 50. If. 188 154 81.9 128 54 Okak 158.9 84.9 53.1+ 198 149 75.2 131 24 Nain 157.2 80.2 51.0 192 150 78.1 133 23 Nain 158.0 83.7 53.0 192 148 77.1 134 31 Hebron 158.3 82.8 52.3 187 144 77.0 146 69 Hopedale 172.0 85.0 4*4 188 148 78.7 151 26 Okak 144.0 70.7V ^9.1 186 150 80.6 158 25 Okak 162.1 85.1 52.5 191 153 80.1 161 30 Nain 157.2 83.1 52.9 192 153 79.7 164 43 Nain 153.5 81.9 53. 1+ 196 155 79.1 167 66 Okak 169.4 84.0 1+9.6 194 148 76.3 171 63 Nain 151.3 82.7 51+. 6 186 141 75.8 173 68 Nain 163.7 81.1 1+9.5 191 134 70.2 175 25 Nain 155.3 80.2 51.6 180 147 81.7 178 54 Nain 159.5 83.5 52. 1+ 197 153 77.7 179 63 Okak 146.1 75.9 52.0 187 145 77.5 186 44 Nain 163.7 85.3 52.1 197 151 76.6 187 39 Okak 163.4 80.6 1+9.3 186 152 81.7 188 38 Nain 156.5 82.0 52. 1+ 184 149 81.0 189 75 Zoar 154.2 81.0 52.5 191 149 78.0 190 43 Nain 157.7 83.3 52.8 188 146 77.6 191 24 Hopedale 159.4 85.0 53.3 190 150 78.9 192 34 Nain 165.5 86.9 52.5 195 149 76. 1+ 140 Appendix CI 141 Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued 3 ! £ g heigh it. heigl length •o I e u 1 JS .5 *o •a J3 •z < s S 1 S -5 8 S5 (2 s j EC ft ■ Strong- -Continued 193 58 Zoar 157.9 81.2 51. k 199 153 76.9 196 59 Okak 151.3 79.4 52.5 186 144 77. k 207 36 ? 158.0 77.4 1*9.0 192 146 76.0 208 30 9 159.5 81.4 51.0 200 152 76.0 210 34 7 152.2 77.4 50.8 188 146 77.6 211 44 7 158.0 81.8 51.8 192 136 70.8 215 38 ?' 157.0 81.7 52.0 203 154 75.9 216 31 ? 154.9 78.5 50.7 199 151 75.9 217 19 7 167.3 88.2 52.7 194 156 80. k Lee 10 40 Francis Har. 153.4 82.3 5S.6 192 154 80.2 40 25 Hopedale 160.7 82.0 51.0 194 146 75.2 47 51 Hopedale 154.3 80.2 52.0 184 138 75.0 51 29 Hopedale 154.3 77.3 50.1 187 147 78.6 52 25 Hopedale 158.7 90.5 57.0 192 149 77.6 53 38 Hopedale 163.8 83.9 51.2 191 152 79.6 54 59 Nain 155.8 79.2 50.8 194 149 76.8 55 41 Manaska Is. 156.0 84.1 53.9 196 150 76.5 59 25 Davis In. 167.3 89.1 53.2 196 154 78.6 Sornberger 1 35 Nachvak 154.8 81.8 52.8 197 148 75.1 3 35 Ungava Bay 157.0 83.5 53.2 199 145 72.9 6 37 Okak 158.5 84.6 53. k 195 165 8U-6 8 42 Nain 155.5 83.0 58. k 191 146 76. U 14 17 Hamilton In. 151.8 81.0 58. k 187 143 76.5 17 48 C. Harrison 162.1 87.9 5U.2 207 166.5 80. U 18 21 Webeck Har. 162.2 83.6 51.5 199 168 8U.U 19 16 ?Webeck 154.5 80.5 52.1 188 164 87.2 20 60 Hamilton In. 149.7 79.3 53.0 200 158 79.0 21 30 Hamilton In. 157.5 87.0 55.2 191 156 81.7 22 25 Hamilton In. 156.5 83.4 53.8 185 150 81.1 23 20 Hamilton In. 152.3 83.5 51^.8 189 154 81.5 25 50 Hamilton In. 153.0 81.0 52.9 194 150 77.3 27 58 Hamilton In. 151.8 79.0 52.0 187 150 80.2 29 25 Hamilton In. 152.5 i 52.0 53.8 179 160 89.U 30 30 Hamilton In. 151.8 84.0 55.3 181 152 8k. 32 19 Black Brook 158.0 84.1 58.2 190 157 82.6 Pittard (1901) 1 52 7 157.0 195 146 7U.9 2 28 ? 148.8 198 154 77.8 3 29 7 160.0 200 146 73.0 4 32 7 161.8 197 146 7h. 1 5 46 7 161.7 198 146 73.7 6 20 7 159.0 195 150 76.9 7 18 ? 161.5 189 150 79. k 8 42 7 155.6 188 149 79.2 Virchow (1880) 35 7 163.5 199 149 71>.9 21 7 155.0 188 146 77.6 . . 40 7 160.5 205 152 7k.l 142 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued B & S ■s ~s CI) 0> i 9 a B z < S 2 in tf ffi a Strong Indian: Male 1 20-30 7 166.2 85.4 51. U 188 144 76.6 2 25-35 9 177.4 89.4 50.lt 190 146 76.8 3 20-30 ? 168.2 84.6 50.3 188 148 78.7 4 25-40 7 157.6 81.0 51. h 196 148 75.5 32 34 ? 162.6 84.5 52.0 180 137 76.1 33 33 ? 163.2 86.1 52.8 184 131 71.2 34 55-60 7 184 140 76.1 39 30-35 7 168.2 85^6 50.9 191 154 80.6 40 25-30 ? 155.1 77.7 50.1 187 145 77.5 42 40-50 7 165.3 87.0 52.6 201 137 68.2 43 50-60 7 162.5 83.1 51.1 194 155 79.9 Strong Eskimo: Female 12 24 Nain 154.0 83.0 58.9 182 134 73.6 14 30 Hebron 153.9 84.0 51^.6 184 143 77.7 16 39 Nain 147.0 81.6 55.5 184 135 78. U 22 37 Davis In. 142.0 71.0 50.0 186 150 80.6 52 32 7 150.5 83.4 55. h 182 146 80.2 54 67 7 148.6 79.5 53.5 192 140 72.9 55 50 7 154.1 84.6 51^.8 184 130 70.6 56 64 ? 147.6 77.5 52.5 188 142 75.5 57 45 ? 151.4 80.7 53.3 186 144 77. U 59 31 ? 148.5 79.7 53.7 180 134 n.k 60 59 ? 140.1 72.6 51.8 172 134 77.9 61 49 ? 148.0 76.1 51. U 186 148 79.6 62 50 ? 145.3 80.7 55.5 184 130 70.6 63 51 7 143.6 78.2 5h- k 181 142 78. U 64 58 7 149.2 77.6 52.0 187 138 73.8 65 66 7 151.5 82.3 5k. 3 194 148 76.3 66 25 ? 152.1 80.0 52.5 187 137 73.3 67 48 ? 148.3 79.1 53.3 186 136 78.1 68 39 7 146.3 71.6 k8.9 184 134 72.8 70 31 7 151.0 79.6 52.7 182 134 78.6 71 42 ? 146.6 80.3 5U.8 178 143 80.8 72 30 ?' 148.6 78.6 52.9 178 135 75.8 76 74 7 143.9 77.3 58.7 186 132 71.0 88 71 7 141.0 73.0 V$J. 8 190 140 73.7 90 22 7 151.4 77.1 50.9 182 147 80.8 91 64 ? 150.0 78.2 52.1 182 142 78.0 92 73 7 144.0 77.3 53.7 188 137 72.9 93 45 ? 148.6 77.6 52.2 188 150 79.8 94 26 7 148.6 80.2 5k-0 186 135 72.6 95 36 7 151.1 82.3 5k.5 184 144 78.3 96 25 7 152.6 81.8 53.6 184 140 76.1 97 22 ? 145.8 78.0 58.5 179 140 78.2 110 25 ?' 145.1 74.0 51.0 170 140 82. k 111 56 ? 136.4 75.9 55.6 180 141 78.3 112 17 ? 152.3 80.3 52.7 178 147 82.6 118 18 ? 152.1 80.3 52.8 188 151 80.3 119 24 7 142.8 74.5 52.2 176 132 75.0 121 56 ? 154.0 71.0 U6.1 189 148 78.3 127 33 Hebron 150.6 83.8 55.6 175 135 77.1 129 29 Hebron 145.0 78.3 5U.0 186 142 76.3 Appendix CI 143 Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued ! ft <: 3 3 3 M a ■a 55 •B i « 1 m J 1 I a I O Strong- -Continued 130 59 Nain 145.3 78.4 5I*.0 190 144 75.8 132 55 Hebron 145.0 78.5 5^.1 188 142 75.5 136 53 Nain 146.0 77.8 53.3 187 150 80.2 148 44 Nain 142.7 77.0 5U.0 187 144 77.0 149 28 Nain 155.4 81.2 52.2 192 147 76.6 150 26 Nain 144.2 75.9 52.6 180 144 80.0 152 51 Nain 149.1 79.9 53. 6 189 149 78.8 153 43 Nain 138.7 75.2 5U.2 179 144 80. U 154 21 Nain 145.6 77.7 53. U 172 144 83.7 159 21 Nain 146.0 80.8 55.3 176 142 80.7 160 29 Nain 150.5 83.7 55.6 181 144 79.6 163 52 Nain 144.6 79.1 5U.7 186 143 76.9 165 25 Nain 147.1 79.4 5k.O 180 137 76.1 166 50 Nain 147.9 80.8 51>.6 184 146 79.3 168 42 Nain 154.0 79.1 51.U 191 148 77.5 169 62 Nain 155.7 82.2 52.8 189 143 75.7 170 77 Nain 141.6 71.1 50.2 184 139 75.5 172 66 Okak 153.3 80.2 52.3 194 144 7k. 2 174 35 Hebron 148.4 81.5 5U.9 186 147 79.0 176 31 Hebron 149.5 83.4 55.8 189 151 79.9 177 34 n. Zoar 153.2 81.2 53.0 184 139 75.5 180 72 Nain 146.2 76.1 52.0 190 148 77.9 182 63 Okak 149.4 79.6 53.3 190 143 75.3 184 56 Okak 152.5 81.2 58.2 193 147 76.2 185 63 Zoar 148.3 78.3 52.8 195 145 7U.k 194 69 Okak (144.0) (73.9) 196 145 7U.0 198 72 ? 151.8 77.0 50.7 192 146 76.0 199 71 7 149.6 76.0 50.8 194 142 73.2 200 18 1 153.5 79.2 51.6 182 142 78.0 201 59 1 146.8 74.9 51.0 182 141 77.5 202 66 1 150.3 76.5 50.9 190 141 7U.2 203 38 1 148.6 77.3 52.0 187 145 77.5 204 23 1 140.9 75.1 58.3 179 145 81.0 206 33 ? 153.5 80.5 52. U 188 144 76.6 209 26 1 145.0 75.1 51.8 183 147 80.3 212 44 1 145.7 74.1 50.8 196 145 7k.O 213 32 1 149.0 79.2 53.2 180 144 80.0 214 34 1 156.7 79.1 50.5 189 150 79. U 219 ? 1 148.7 85.5 57.5 186 148 79.6 Lee 12 50 Francis Har. 141.4 79.0 55.9 193 148 76.7 39 46 Hopedale 161.1 86.4 53.6 194 141 72.7 41 20 Hopedale 138.6 74.6 53.8 172 144 83.7 44 40 Hopedale 147.3 80.9 5U.9 185 144 77.8 45 20 Hopedale 150.0 78.8 52.5 188 143 76.1 46 42 Hopedale 152.3 82.0 53.8 192 142 7U.0 48 64 Hopedale 151.1 73.4 U8.6 185 142 76.8 49 20 Hopedale 150.9 81.9 5U.8 184 148 80. U 56 57 32 69 Manaska Is. Aillik 153.6 149.9 84.9 79.5 55.3 53.0 193 189 152 147 78.8 77.8 144 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued S s 3> bfi 1 5 | % g X < PQ w 53 X X m Sornberger 5 17 Nachvak 137.4 78.5 57.1 185 124 67.0 9 38 Davis In. 152.4 85.0 55.8 192 160 88.8 24 25 Hamilton In. 144.0 75.2 52.2 (143) (135) 26 17 Hamilton In. 148.0 79.9 5k.O 190 144 75.8 Pittard (1901) 1 17 ? 161.2 186 144 77. k 2 old 7 155.2 196 147 75.0 4 19 ? 147.5 190 142 7k-7 6 52 h 160.6 197 144 73.1 7 25 ? 158.4 191 143 7U.9 8 old ? 150.8 196 145 7h.O Virchow (1880) 24 ? 152.4 192 131 68.2 ? 144.8 189 143 75.7 Strong Indian: Female 5 20-30 1 149.5 80.1 53.6 180 142 78.9 6 30-40 1 159.6 81.3 50.9 180 136 75.6 7 20-30 1 144.0 73.3 50.9 182 142 78.0 8 30-35 1 157.7 82.7 52. k 184 144 78.8 37 20-25 ? 153.0 82.0 58.6 188 148 78.7 38 20-25 9 154.3 78.1 50.6 188 147 78.2 41 25-30 ? 155.3 82.0 52.8 187 149 79.7 APPENDIX C2 Individual Measurements on the Living I J E 9 J 8 E N X 5 E ' JC K S4S c be J I ! o z ac K.S S=3 £3 S-o O.S 3 S H Strong Eskimo: Male 9 124 63.9 112 78.9 140 98.6 112 80.0 187 7U.9 10 117 57.U 110 76. k 142 98.6 124 87.3 216 65.7 13 118 59.0 112 77.7 148 102.8 114 77.0 202 73.3 19 131 67.5 142 95.9 125 88.0 222 6U.0 21 142 70. S 152 92.7 122 80.3 206 73.8 26 121 65.8 131 89.1 100 76.3 198 66.2 28 143 71.1 133 87.5 122 91.7 210 63.8 29 144 78.3 148 98.0 116 78.lt 190 77.9 30 138 78.0 137 92.6 112 81.8 182 75.3 73 124 68.8 iio 75.9 138 95.2 114 82.6 178 77.5 77 121 66.5 102 68.9 140 9k- 6 120 85.7 2 04 68.6 79 128 6U.8 107 71.7 146 97.3 127 87.0 209 69.8 80 118 61. k 104 71.2 142 97.3 118 83.1 190 7U-7 85 126 6U.S 104 71.7 147 101. U 122 88.0 201 73.1 98 139 72. U 108 69.2 144 92.3 117 80.6 214 67.3 99 141 73. U 102 68.9 140 9U-6 106 75.7 198 70.7 100 152 79.6 105 78.9 138 103.8 112 81.2 191 72.2 101 136 67.8 108 73.3 148 ioi.it 124 83.8 206 71.8 102 129 6U.8 104 72.2 138 95.8 115 83.3 213 61t.8 104 121 65. U 102 69. A 126 85.7 108 81t.9 188 67.0 106 126 6U.9 110 73.8 136 91.3 114 83.8 212 61t.2 109 136 72.7 107 70. U 140 92.1 104 71t.S 194 72.2 113 136 71.2 108 73.0 132 89.2 108 81.8 198 66.7 114 136 68.0 114 76.0 135 90.0 121 89.6 195 69.2 116 147 71>.6 102 68.9 143 96.6 108 7U.8 207 69.1 117 137 69.2 107 70.9 138 91. U 109 79.0 201 68.6 120 141 75.0 104 67.5 131 85.1 112 81t.7 198 66.2 128 133 67.2 108 72.5 141 9^.6 113 80.1 i !02 69.8 131 135 70. S 104 69.3 140 93.3 118 81t-3 198 70.7 133 142 71t.O 108 73.0 144 97.3 102 70.8 193 71t.6 134 128 68. U 104 72.2 133 92. U 108 81.2 198 67.2 146 137 72.9 104 70.3 150 101. u 108 72.0 £ !07 72.5 151 114 61.3 107 71.3 143 95.3 111 77.6 158 145 75.9 111 72.5 145 9U.8 117 80.6 161 129 67.2 106 69.3 145 9 k. 8 115 79.3 164 143 73.0 104 67.1 143 92.2 115 80.lt 167 131 67.5 108 73.0 144 97.3 121 8U.0 171 126 67.6 107 75.9 144 102.1 111 77.1 173 127 66.5 98 73.1 134 100.0 109 81.3 175 136 75. U 108 73.5 141 95.9 106 7 It. 5 178 138 70.0 100 65. U 148 96.7 115 77.7 179 129 68.9 100 69.0 139 95.2 112 80.6 186 134 68.0 103 68.2 154 102.0 120 77.9 187 129 69.3 103 67.8 142 93. k 117 81.7 188 137 71t.lt 94 63.1 147 98.6 116 78.8 189 138 72.2 101 67.8 145 97.3 112 77.2 190 124 66.0 102 69 . .9 142 97.3 107 75.lt 191 135 71 .0 103 68.7 138 92.0 110 79.7 145 146 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued £ •* T I 2 S 2KB Strong — Continued 192 193 196 207 208 210 211 215 216 217 129 134 130 128 130 129 135 133 139 127 66.2 67.3 69.9 66.7 65.0 68.6 70.3 61.1 69.8 65.5 101 108 100 101 111 104 108 108 103 110 67.8 70.6 69. k 69.2 73.0 71.2 79. k 70.1 68.2 70.5 148 150 138 140 144 134 146 151 145 148 99.3 98.0 95.8 95.9 9k.7 91.8 107. k 98.0 96.0 9k- 9 128 115 109 110 122 104 120 122 119 113 86.5 76.7 79.0 77.8 8A.7 77.6 82.2 80.8 82.1 76. k Lee 10 40 47 51 52 53 54 55 59 146 135 137 134 142 141 147 147 149 U.8 92.5 99.3 91.2 95.3 92.8 98.6 98.0 96.8 Sornberger 1 3 6 8 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 27 29 30 32 145 143 156 145 137 154 155 146 148 154 149 147 144 143 139 138 144 98.0 98.6 9k. 5 99.3 95.8 92.5 92.3 89.0 93.7 98.7 99 K 3 95. It 96.0 95.3 86.2 90.8 91.7 Pittard (1901) 141 144 145 139 142 149 141 139 72.3 72.7 72.5 70.6 71.7 76. k 7U.6 73.9 109 112 118 115 120 112 121 119 7k. 6 72.6 80.8 78.8 82.2 7k. 7 80.7 79.9 147 145 146 149 142 146 140 142 100.7 9k. 1 100.0 102.0 97.3 97.3 93.3 95.3 Appendix C2 147 Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued 3 I B '3 1 § c i x 5 e O g d 3 •c ! fc.S d 1 9 u i 1 B 1 •3 d o M 'E o O 1 c o c s "8 1 1 Virchow (1880) 123 61.8 147 98.7 116 78.9 194 75.8 124 66.0 141 96.6 123 87.2 198 71.2 121 59.0 152 100.0 136 89.5 191 79.6 Strong Indian: Male 1 123 65. U 114 79.2 148 102.8 120 81.1 188 78.7 2 123 6 k. 7 106 72.6 146 100.0 114 78.1 194 75.2 3 130 69.2 108 73.0 142 95.9 103 72.5 184 77.2 4 133 67.8 104 70.3 134 90.5 112 83.6 180 7k. k 32 109 60.6 102 7k. k 134 97.8 106 79.1 193 69. k 33 116 68.0 112 85.5 140 106.9 96 67.8 199 70. k 34 113 80.7 141 100.7 119 8k. k 194 72.7 39 i23 ftM 110 71. k 144 98.5 104 72.2 185 77.8 40 130 69.5 109 75.2 137 9k- 5 112 81.8 178 77.0 42 136 67.7 106 77. k 150 109.5 108 72.0 189 79. k 43 115 59.3 96 61.9 143 92.2 108 7k. 8 192 7k. 5 Strong Eskimo: Female 12 115 63.2 103 76.9 132 98.5 110 83.3 184 71.7 14 120 65.2 101 70.6 134 93.7 112 83.6 190 70.5 16 116 63.0 104 77.0 138 102.2 108 78.8 178 77.5 22 140 75.8 132 88.0 102 77.3 186 71.0 52 124 68.1 ioi 73.8 133 91.1 108 81.2 174 76. k 54 128 66.7 106 75.7 138 97.8 104 75. k 198 69.7 55 138 75.0 104 80.0 140 107.7 110 78.6 183 76.5 56 138 78. k 102 71.8 130 91.5 110 88.8 188 69.1 57 119 6U.0 112 77.7 142 98.6 110 76.8 186 76.8 59 112 62.2 103 76.9 122 91.0 106 86.9 187 65.2 60 100 58.1 100 7k. 6 126 9k. 96 76.2 172 73.2 61 127 68.2 106 71.6 132 89.2 110 88.3 189 69.8 62 118 6k.l 106 81.5 123 9k. 5 104 82.9 186 66.1 63 135 7k- 6 102 71.8 130 91.5 101 76.9 177 78. k 64 108 57.8 101 73.2 134 97.1 105 78.k 183 73.2 65 119 61.3 108 73.0 134 90.5 108 80.5 187 71.6 66 116 62.0 105 76.6 138 100.7 108 78.8 181 76.2 67 126 67.7 106 77 . 9 140 102.9 111 78.5 200 70.0 68 124 67.k 98 73.0 129 96.3 110 8k. 5 183 70.5 70 130 71. k 106 79.1 133 99.2 99 7k. k 176 75.6 71 121 68.0 102 71.3 130 90.9 102 77.7 181 71.8 72 108 60.7 101 7k. 8 134 99.2 104 77.6 187 71.6 76 123 66.1 100 75.8 136 108.0 110 80.9 194 70.8 88 124 65.3 104 7k. 8 134 95.7 107 79.8 198 67.6 90 136 7 k. 7 110 7k. 1 132 89.8 108 81.8 186 71.1 91 123 67.6 98 69.0 125 88.0 94 75.2 187 66.7 92 129 68.6 96 70.1 133 97.1 111 83. k 196 67.0 93 134 71.3 106 70.7 137 91.3 102 7k. k 193 71.8 94 116 62. k 99 78.3 131 97.0 103 77.1 183 71.8 95 119 6k- 1 106 73.6 132 91.7 102 77.3 195 67.0 96 127 69.0 102 72.8 127 90.7 110 85.8 185 68.6 97 154 86.0 99 70.7 112 80.0 103 92.0 184 60.7 110 130 76.5 100 71. k 121 85.7 100 81.8 185 65.6 148 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued i % .5! 1 1 d il « .a x %4 a B 'S [end i>tal z X a s fa.S a o.S 5 6 2 H Strong- -Continued Ill 113 62.8 96 68.1 124 87.9 102 81. k L85 67.0 112 130 73.0 102 69. k 132 89.8 110 82.6 L86 71.0 118 140 7k. 5 106 70.2 134 88.7 110 82.1 L99 67.3 119 116 65.9 97 73. k 119 90.2 95 79.8 176 67.6 121 128 67.7 104 70.3 130 87.8 113 86.2 184 70.6 127 129 73.7 100 7U.1 120 88.9 94 78.3 L84 65.2 129 128 68.8 104 78.2 131 92.2 107 80.2 176 7k- k 130 133 70.0 103 71.h 112 77.8 110 98.2 L95 57. k 132 127 67.6 100 70. h 137 96.5 104 75.9 : 100 68.5 136 142 75.9 106 70.7 148 98.7 114 77.0 L98 7k. 7 148 139 7 k- 3 103 71.5 139 96.5 113 81.3 L93 72.0 149 136 70.8 106 72.1 132 89.8 104 78.8 191 69.1 150 132 73.3 95 66.0 133 92. k 103 77. k 152 122 6k. 6 100 67.1 141 9k. 6 111 77.3 153 128 71.5 98 68.0 140 97.2 112 80.0 154 137 79.6 99 68.8 132 91.7 108 81.1 159 119 67.6 98 69.0 131 92.2 104 78.5 160 132 72.9 101 70.1 136 9k- k 107 78.7 163 135 72.6 102 70.6 142 99.3 116 81.7 165 125 69. k 107 78.1 134 97.8 109 81.3 166 134 72.8 104 71.2 142 97.3 113 79.6 168 125 65. k 109 73.6 138 93.2 104 75. k 169 134 70.9 97 67.8 136 95.1 112 82. k 170 123 66.8 98 70.5 135 97.1 114 8k. k 172 128 66.0 102 70.8 138 95.8 110 79.7 174 130 69.9 100 68.0 133 90.5 104 78.2 176 135 71. k 100 66.2 134 88.7 106 79.1 177 119 6h.7 102 73. k 136 97.8 109 80.1 180 129 67.9 106 71.6 143 96.6 113 79.0 182 133 70.0 109 76.2 135 9k.k 115 85.2 184 133 68.9 107 72.8 144 98.0 121 8k. 185 129 66.2 103 71.0 142 97.9 103 72.5 194 130 66.3 105 72. k 141 97.2 111 78.0 198 130 67.7 102 69.9 149 102.0 114 76.5 199 129 66.5 107 7k. 6 142 100^0 120 8k. 5 200 121 66.5 98 69.0 134 9k. .V 107 79.8 201 120 65.9 98 69.5 129 91.5 100 77.5 202 124 65.3 101 71.6 114 80.1 110 96.5 203 123 65.8 102 70.3 135 93.1 110 81.5 204 120 67.0 102 70.3 134 92. k 108 80.6 206 120 63.8 100 69. k 138 95.8 110 79.7 209 130 71.0 101 68.0 132 89.8 107 81.1 212 125 63.8 103 71.0 132 91.0 106 80.3 213 113 62.8 101 70.1 130 90.3 108 88.1 214 126 66.7 101 67.3 138 92.0 108 78.3 219 119 6U.0 107 72.3 140 9k- 6 110 78.6 Lee 12 134 90.5 39 133 9k. 3 41 124 86.1 44 135 93.8 Appendix C2 149 Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued i ! 9 3 Z X Lee — Continued 45 46 48 49 56 57 Sornberger 5 9 24 26 Pittard (1901) 129 137 133 132 140 136 69. k 69.9 70.0 67.0 73. 3 69. k 115 113 115 111 112 110 £.£ 79.9 76.9 80.3 77.1 78.3 75.9 128 126 133 131 142 139 138 144 141 140 134 141 137 137 136 141 89.5 88.7 93.7 88.5 93. A 9k-6 110. If 90.0 97.2 93.1 95.9 96.5 95.1 95.1 97.2 Virchow (1880) 121 63.0 113 59.8 Strong 5 6 7 8 37 38 41 114 122 119 132 113 119 111 63.3 67.8 65. k 71.7 60.1 63.3 59. k 106 102 106 104 103 102 109 137 132 10k- 6 92.3 Indian: Female 73.9 75.0 73.9 72.2 69.6 69. k 73.2 140 130 130 140 128 128 144 97.9 95.6 91.5 97.2 86.5 87.1 96.6 117.0 85. k 116.5 88.2 104 100 100 104 100 100 109 7U.2 7U.5 7k. 5 73.6 78.1 78.1 75.0 192 177 177 170 172 174 177 177 171 71. k 7k. 6 79.1 76.5 75.6 80. k 72.3 72.3 8k- 2 APPENDIX C3 Individual Measurements on the Living Strong 9 10 13 19 21 26 28 29 30 73 77 79 80 85 98 99 100 101 102 104 106 109 113 114 116 117 120 128 131 133 134 146 151 158 161 164 167 171 173 175 178 179 186 187 188 189 Eskimo: Male 125 124 129 126 136 129 148 127 135 128 135 132 130 129 71 75 77 72 85 68 78 75 64 69 74 88 65 80 84 70 78 87 72 68 85 56 72 76 72 76 69 72 82 85 85 84 74 73 81 72 79 84 82 77 75 68 88 77 83 73 59 60 64 54 54 54 56 45 52 56 63 66 56 59 71 55 52 58 73 57 58 69 60 51 67 61 65 54 54 51 52 57 53 55 55 58 59 55 65 56 57 52 56 57 55 55 40 32 41 35 40 38 41 36 32 40 41 42 41 34 39 34 37 41 39 36 35 41 37 43 39 35 37 34 34 39 36 40 37 38 36 41 37 34 39 32 42 34 40 36 37 39 67.8 53.3 6h.l 6U.8 71*. 1 70. U 73.2 80.0 61 71 65. 63, 73. 57. 5U. 61.8 71.2 70.7 53. h. 63.2 60.3 59. k 61.7 8K.3 58.2 57. h. 56.9 63.0 63.0 76.5 69.2 70.2 69.8 69.1 65. | 70.7 62.7 61.8 60.0 57 73. 65 71. 63, 67. 70. 74 69 72 71 70 72 64 56 76 74 76 77 76 74 76 74 69 74 64 65 72 70 65 80 67 64 69 63 66 68 74 60 70 63 70 77 84 81 68 83 69 77 70 65 72 38 40 35 41 30 27 33 31 30 40 34 45 36 37 35 35 41 40 40 39 40 36 41 38 40 35 38 34 34 43 55.. 9 5U-0 50.7 56.9 U2.2 38.6 U5.8 U8.h 53.6 52.6 A5.9 59.2 U6.8 U8.7 1,7.3 U6.0 55. h. 58.0 51+. 60.9 61.5 50.0 58.6 58.5 50.0 52.2 59.lt U9.3 5U.0 65.2 11 15 9 35V52.5 40 5U . 33 39 36 43 38 45 37 40 45 35 40 36 39 35 55.0 55.7 57.1 61. h 1*9. h 53.6 U5.7 58.8 5k.O 50.7 51.9 51. U 60.0 1*8.6 12 12 11 12 11 10 9 11 10 11 10 10 10 9 12 12 9 14 10 11 10 9 10 12 12 14 9 9 10-12 8 10 9 9 9 11 8 9 + 3 mkd. 3 not mkd. f — i ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? h 8 10 17 16 5 3 9 8 3 11 2 1 5 10 1 32 7 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 9 2 12 1 1 14 10 12 3 1 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + pres. tr. + + tr. + + + {The measurements involving the landmark nasion should be used with care. 150 Appendix C3 Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued 151 s s 2 Strong- 190 191 192 193 196 207 208 210 211 215 216 217 Lee 10 40 47 51 52 53 54 55 59 Sornberger § I 1 -Continued 122 123 132 138 135 126 135 126 133 131 131 116 119 129 118 128 122 128 120 119 124 131 124 124 115 120 126 120 118 115 119 115 118 124 118 117 115 110 Pittard (1901) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 3 6 8 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 27 29 30 32 86 97 79 81 67 72 91 76 75 93 84 84 80 71 70 82 61 91 81 63 79 84 78 87 72 69 72 56 67 54 52 58 64 56 59 55 54 51 48 53 50 55 54 48 56 53 52 51 46 50 59 54 57 49 49 52 53 48 49 51 52 44 55 54 50 48 44 51 54 53 51 53 51 50 52 43 36 37 45 35 38 40 35 43 38 40 40 41 37 37 35 38 36 39 41 38 40 44 37 41 35 42 41 35 43 37 37 40 42 37 35 37 34 39 41 36 40 37 35 36 36 79.6 69.2 6S.8 70.8 62.5 6It.Jt 72.7 61*. 8 81*. 8 79.2 75.5 80.0 7k. 5 68.5 77.1 62.5 71.7 69.2 76.5 89.1 76.0 67.8 81.5 6U.9 88.7 71. k 80.8 77.1* 72.9 87.8 72.5 71.2 90.9 76. U 68.5 70.0 77.1 77.8 76.5 75.9 67.9 78. U 69.8 68.6 72.0 69.2 80 67 73 77 70 68 67 70 74 66 67 74 75 70 71 65 70 60 65 66 43 34 38 37 38 35 32 39 41 38 36 39 41 37 43 36 38 38 37 39 58.8 50.7 52.0 U8.0 5U.3 51.5 1*7.8 55.7 55.U 57.6 58.7 52.7 5 It. 7 52.8 60.6 55.lt 5A.8 6S.8 56.9 59.1 3 10 9 9 10 11 10 10 10 12 11 13 £ I 1 5 8 4 1 1 4 2 1 tr. + mkd. faint J The measurements involving the landmark nasion should be used with care. 152 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued Numbci Menton Forehea | O z 1 o z i z a £ w 2 B 1 w a (It m a w G "3 Si "3 Oh Virchow (1880) 125 69 59 37 62.7 62 ? 131 67 57 38 66.6 65 j 127 64 60 42 70.0 70 ? Strong Indian: Male 1 . . 70 54 43 79.6 68 35 51.5 17 ? 1 2 66 63 42 66.7 67 34 50.7 14 6 + 3 . . 64 54 45 83.3 60 35 58.8 15 tr. 4 58 52 38 73.1 65 35 53.7 15 — 32 71 59 40 67.8 67 33 1+9.2 13 mkd. 33 . 75 53 70 37 52.8 13 mkd. 34 . 78 58 37 63.8 71 39 5k-9 i ? 39 69 58 39 67.2 67 33 1+9.2 io — 40 57 60 34 56.7 61 33 5k.l 10 — 42 66 61 42 68.8 62 38 61.8 13 — 43 . 70 58 36 62.1 69 39 56.5 15 tr. Strong Eskimo : Female 12 75 55 37 67.3 62 33 58.2 14 ? mkd. 14 . 75 55 36 65.U 63 33 52. k 11 ? not mkd 16 75 53 36 67.9 64 38 59. h 13 6 mkd. 22 72 44 33 75.0 51 25 h9.0 ? 7 52 61 57 34 59.6 61 33 51.1 io 23 7 54 66 71 37 52.1 74 36 1+8.6 15 9 + 55 71 58 38 65.5 67 33 1+9.2 12 10 + 56 . 69 59 37 62.7 65 35 53.8 10 7 + 57 66 55 34 61.8 65 36 55.2 13 4 + 59 . 81 50 31 62.0 56 32 57.1 11 7 60 60 59 36 61.0 71 36 50.7 12 13 — 61 79 61 29 1+7.5 66 35 53.0 13 6 — 62 72 55 37 67.3 65 35 53.8 13 9 + 63 . 57 62 37 59.7 64 34 53.1 13 22 + 64 73 61 31 50.8 63 37 58.7 12 20 65 70 59 35 59.3 73 36 . 1+9.3 10 9 + 66 70 55 37 67.3 63 34 ^5J+.0 11 + 67 88 62 35 56. U 67 32 $.8 11 3 + 68 74 55 29 52.7 69 39 56.5 12 6 70 69 59 31 52.5 61 34 55.7 10 + 71 68 56 33 58.9 68 32 1+7.0 10 18 + 72 73 57 34 59.6 64 36 56.2 12 20 + 76 . 76 52 37 71.2 73 34 1*6. 1> 10 19 + 88 56 59 34 57.6 68 34 50.0 12 8 90 69 57 34 59.6 51 36 70.6 11 4 _ 91 62 59 32 5k. 2 74 40 51+. 14 24 + 92 . 84 53 38 71.7 77 35 J+5.1+ 12 25 + 93 . 79 54 31 57 4 74 41 55. 1+ 11 22 + 94 64 53 33 62.3 64 35 51+. 7 10 2 + 95 . 82 61 33 51+. 1 54 31 57.1+ 12 + 96 69 54 33 61.1 58 33 56.9 10 8 -j. 97 64 55 35 63.6 55 32 58.2 10 1 — t The mea surements involving the landmark nasion should be used with care. Appendix C3 Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued 153 1 1 1 1 M I M 8 i a li 1 e 1 I 8 c M % 3 .-: 75 s 2 £ z 55 s W m ■ H K Strong — Continued 110 68 55 32 58.2 61 32 52. U 12 ? ? 111 63 55 34 61.8 67 38 56.7 14 32 — 112 65 58 30 51.7 66 34 51.5 10 1 + 118 84 60 35 58.8 67 36 58.7 13 4 — 119 65 51 30 58.8 57 33 57.9 12 2 + 121 67 56 31 55. k 82 44 53.5 10 3 + 127 73 54 30 55.6 60 34 56.7 10 4 + 129 65 47 31 66.0 62 37 59.7 10 2 — 130 76 52 34 65. k 70 36 51. k 10 20 + 132 84 53 34 6U.2 63 38 60.8 12 2 — 136 83 51 35 68.6 79 46 58.2 10 — 148 72 60 32 58.8 66 39 59.1 9 10 + 149 84 47 37 78.7 65 37 56.9 10 4 + 150 1( >9 74 51 29 56.9 60 36 60.0 11 + 152 1] 18 82 50 33 66.0 67 38 56.7 10 6 + 153 15 !6 65 54 29 58.7 60 30 50.0 10 + 154 IS !8 68 52 28 58.8 66 31 U7.0 10 ?t — 159 15 !3 81 51 35 68.6 74 40 5^.0 10 — 160 11 2 75 52 32 61.5 62 33 58.2 10 4 mkd 163 15 !0 78 51 32 62.7 73 30 kl.l 10 14 + 165 11 .1 70 51 32 62.7 76 38 50.0 10 3 — 166 15 !5 68 51 33 6k.7 67 33 U9.2 11 1 mkd 168 15 !6 81 56 34 60.7 64 35 5b. 7 12 1 + 169 U 12 78 58 34 58.6 73 34 U6.6 10 — 170 15 »4 69 61 38 62.3 74 41 55. U 11 32 + 172 15 14 75 56 33 58.9 71 36 50.7 10 5 + 174 15 !6 79 55 33 60.0 67 35 52.2 10 16 — 176 14 10 82 60 31 51.7 63 33 52. k 10 17 + 177 15 4 81 56 35 62.5 64 31 U8.U 11 8 — 180 15 3 86 55 36 65. k 77 37 U8.0 10 13 + 182 IS tO 72 51 39 76.5 68 39 57.2 11 9 — 184 IS 12 83 56 42 75.0 67 43 6U.2 12 3 mkd 185 15 !5 80 50 39 78.0 82 42 51.2 10 13 + 194 15 •9 73 56 35 62.5 68 39 57. k 10 17 tr. 198 15 !9 80 60 38 68.3 77 47 61.0 12 12 + 199 15 !0 73 53 41 77. 4 70 34 U8.6 11 6 tr. 200 11 5 . 68 47 31 66.0 63 34 51>.0 8 — 201 1] 8 76 53 36 67.9 70 34 U8.6 10 1 + 202 IS 14 75 59 33 55.9 70 37 52.8 11 8 + 203 15 !4 77 54 35 6U.8 65 33 50.6 10 2 tr. 204 11 5 70 52 35 67.3 65 31 U7.7 11 1 — 206 15 3 81 56 35 62.5 68 32 U7.0 10 — 209 11 9 75 48 35 72.9 57 36 63.2 12 4 tr. 212 15 '5 76 55 37 67.8 64 33 51.6 10 1 mkd. 213 15 !2 72 50 36 72.0 66 34 51.5 10 4 + 214 l'c 12 82 50 34 68.0 68 35 51.5 10 + 219 1C 15 90 47 35 7U.5 70 36 51.lt 10 3 + JTh« met isurements nvolving the landmark nasion should be used with care. tSup ernui nerary teeth. 154 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Individual Measurements on the Living — Continued Lee 12 113 . 51 37 72.5 1 39 117 49 33 67.3 ' 1 41 111 49 38 77.6 \ ? 44 111 43 34 79.1 ' h 45 112 46 36 78.3 1 46 116 . 46 33 71.7 h 48 111 51 33 6k.7 ° h 49 115 46 30 65.2 ' i 56 115 47 36 76.6 h 57 117 . 52 37 71.2 1 Sornberger 5 106 i 51 46 40 87.0 1 9 116 ' 16 48 39 81.2 'l 24 99 ' 19 48 33 68.8 \ i 26 108 ' r4 47 34 72.3 h Pittard (1901) 1 . 44 32 72.7 63 35 55.6 1 2 51 36 70.6 ( 53 35 55.6 ' 7 4 47 37 78.7 ( 52 34 5A.8 7 6 52 38 73.1 < 58 38 55.9 ? 7 45 32 71.1 ( 50 39 65.0 7 8 50 36 72.0 ' 11 36 50.7 7 Virchow (1880) 121 ' ri 53 32 60.3 ( 50 7 117 ( 50 51 35 68.6 ( 59 7 Strong Indian: i female 5 ( 54 57 39 68. k 17 7 7 6 < 56 59 44 7k-6 13 6 - 7 ( 50 58 44 75.9 16 7 7 8 < 58 59 39 66.1 ... .... 15 ? 7 37 ( 58 53 36 67.9 ( 55 S2^~U9.2 12 6 - 38 ( 59 50 33 66.0 ( 56 35 53.0 10 41 j 55 59 36 61.0 i 58 32 55.2 12 X The measurements involving the landmark nasion should be used with care. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1893. Census of Newfoundland and Labrador, 1891. Table I, Population, etc. St. John's, Newfoundland. 1903. Census of Newfoundland and Labrador, 1901. Table I, Population, etc. St. John's, Newfoundland. 1914. Census of Newfoundland and Labrador, 1911. Table I, Population, etc. St. John's, Newfoundland. 1922. Interim report of the census of 1921. St. John's, Newfoundland. 1923. Census of Newfoundland and Labrador, 1921. Table I, Population, etc. St. John's, Newfoundland. 1937. Tenth census of Newfoundland and Labrador, 1935. Vol. 1, Population by districts and settlements, St. John's, Newfoundland. Bessels, Emil 1875. Einige Worte tiber die Inuit (Eskimo) des Smith-Sundes, nebst Bemer- kungen iiber Inuit-Schadel. Archiv fur Anthropologie, Bd. 8, pp. 107-122. Bird, Junius 1934. (Mention of work in Labrador under heading "Science in the Field and in the Laboratory.") Natural History, American Museum of Natural History, New York, vol. 34, p. 763. Birket-Smith, Kaj 1925. Preliminary report of the Fifth Thule Expedition: physical anthropology, linguistics and material culture. Compte-Rendu de la XXIe Session, 2e partie, Congres International des Americanistes, Goteborg, 1924, pp. 190-205. 1929. The Caribou Eskimos. Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921-24, vol. 5, Copenhagen. Boas, Franz 1895. Zur Anthropologie der nordamerikanischen Indianer. Zeitschrift fiir Ethnologie, Bd. 27, pp. 366-411. 1901. A. J. Stone's measurements of natives of the northwest territories. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, New York, vol. 14, art. 6, pp. 53-68. Bonin, Gerhardt von, and Morant, G. M. 1938. Indian races in the United States: a survey of previously published cranial measurements. Biometrika, vol. 30, pp. 94-129. Cilley, J. P., Jr. [1906?] Bowdoin boys in Labrador. Rockland, Me. (A. J. Huston). Collins, H. B., Jr. 1932. Caries and crowding in the teeth of the living Alaskan Eskimo. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 451-462. 1934. Eskimo archaeology and somatology. American Anthropologist, vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 309-313. 1937a. Archaeology of St. Lawrence Island, Alaska. Smithsonian Miscella- neous Collections, vol. 96, No. 1, 431 pp. 1937b. Culture migrations and contacts in the Bering Sea region. American Anthropologist, vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 375-384. Coon, C. S. 1931. Tribes of the Rif. Harvard African Studies, vol. 9, Cambridge. Delabarre, E. B. 1902. Report of the Brown-Harvard expedition to Nachvak, Labrador, in the year 1900. Bulletin of the Geographical Society of Philadelphia, vol. 3, pp. 65-212. 155 156 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Deniker, J. 1913. Races of man. London. Duckworth, W. L. H. 1895. On crania of Eskimo in the University Museum, exhibited by Prof. A. Macalister. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, vol. 25, pp. 72-144. Also No. 23 in Studies from the Anthropology Laboratory, the Anatomy School, Cambridge, 1904, pp. 181-183. and Pain, B. H. 1900. An account of some Eskimo from Labrador. Proceedings of the Cam- bridge Philosophical Society, vol. 10, pp. 286-291. Also No. 34 in Studies from the Anthropology Laboratory, the Anatomy School, Cambridge, 1904, pp. 268-273; see pp. 196-197 for corrections. FlSCHER-MOLLER, K. 1937. Skeletal remains of the Central Eskimos. Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition, 1921-24, vol. 3, No. 1, 96 pp. 1938. Skeletons from ancient Greenland graves. Meddelelser om Gr0nland, Bd. 119, No. 4, 30 pp. Furst, CM. 1908. Der Torus mandibularis bei dem Eskimos und andern Rassen. Ver- handlungen der Anatomische Gesellschaft von Berlin, Bd. 22, pp. 295-296. and Hansen, Fr. C. C. 1915. Crania Groenlandica. Copenhagen. Goldstein, M. S. 1932. Caries and attrition in the molar teeth of the Eskimo mandible. Ameri- can Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 16, pp. 421-430. Gower, C. D. 1923. A contribution to the morphology of the apertura piriformis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 6, pp. 27-36. Grant, J. C. B. 1930. Anthropometry of the Chipewyan and Cree Indians of the neighbourhood of Lake Athabaska. Bulletin 64 (Anthropological Series No. 14), Canada Department of Mines and Resources, National Museum of Canada. Hallowell, A. I. 1929. The physical characteristics of the Indians of Labrador. Journal de la Societe des Americanistes de Paris, T. 21, No. 5, pp. 337-371. Hansen, Soren 1893. Bidragtil Vestgonlaendenes Anthropologi. Meddelelser om Gr0nland, Bd. 7, pp. 163-248. 1914. Contributions to the anthropology of the East Greenlanders. Meddel- elser om Gr0nland, Bd. 39, pp. 151-179. Hawkes, E. W. 1916. The Labrador Eskimo. Memoir 91 (Anthropological Series No. 14), Canada Department of Mines, Geological Survey. Hooton, E. A. 1918. On certain Eskimoid characters in Icelandic skulls. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 1, pp. 53-76. Howells, W. W. 1936. Some uses of the standard deviation in anthropometry. Human Biology, vol. 8, pp. 592-600. 1938. The techniques of measuring auricular height in the living. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 185-198. Bibliography 157 Hrdlicka, Ales 1910. Contribution to the anthropology of Central and Smith Sound Eskimo. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, New York, vol. 5, No. 2, 280 pp. 1916. Anthropology of the Chippewa. Holmes Anniversary Volume, Washing- ton, pp. 198-227. 1920. Anthropometry. Philadelphia. 1924. Catalogue of human crania in the United States National Museum collections: the Eskimo, Alaska and related Indians, North Eastern Asiatics. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, vol. 63, art. 12, pp. 1-51. 1928. Catalogue of human crania in the United States National Museum collections: Australians, Tasmanians, South African Bushmen, Hottentots and Negro. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, vol. 71, art. 24, pp. 1-140. 1930. Anthropological survey in Alaska. 46th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 374 pp. 1931. Anthropology of the Sioux. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 16, pp. 123-170. 1933. The Eskimo of the Kuskokwim. American Journal of Physical Anthro- pology, vol. 18, pp. 93-145. 1935. The Pueblos, with comparative data on the bulk of the tribes of the Southwest and northern Mexico. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 20, pp. 235-460. 1937. The gluteal ridge and gluteal tuberosities (3rd trochanters). American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 127-198. Hutton, S. K. 1912. Among the Eskimos of Labrador. London. [1926.] Health conditions and disease incidence among the Eskimos of Labra- dor. 74 pp. Poole, England. Jenness, Diamond 1923. The Copper Eskimos. Part B: Physical characteristics of the Copper Eskimos. Report of the Canadian Arctic Expedition 1913-18, vol. 12, 87 pp. 1933. The problem of the Eskimo. Chapter X: The American Aborigines, their origin and antiquity, pp. 373-396. Toronto. 1937. The Indian background of Canadian history. Bulletin 86 (Anthro- pological Series No. 21), Canada Department of Mines and Resources, National Museum of Canada. 46 pp. KOHLMEISTER, BENJAMIN, and KOCH, GEORGE 1814. Journal of a voyage from Okkak, on the coast of Labrador, to Ungava Bay, westward of Cape Chudleigh; undertaken to explore the coast, and visit the Esquimaux in that unknown region. London. Krogman, Wilton Marion 1938. Cranial types from Alisar Huytik and their relations to other racial types, ancient and modern, of Europe and Western Asia. Oriental Institute Publications, vol. 30, pp. 213-293. Larsen, Helge 1934. D0demandsbugten. Meddelelser om Gr0nland, Bd. 102, No. 1. MacGregor, William [1909?] Reports of official visits to Labrador, 1905 and 1908, by the Governor of Newfoundland. St. John's, Newfoundland. Mathiassen, Therkel 1927. Archaeology of the Central Eskimos. Report of the Fifth Thule Expedi- tion 1921-24, vol. 4, Copenhagen. 158 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador 1936. The Eskimo archaeology of Julianehaab District. With a brief summary of the prehistory of the Greenlanders. Meddelelser om Gr0nland, Bd. 118, No. 1. MORANT, G. M. 1926. • Studies of Palaeolithic man. Annals of Eugenics, vol. 1, pts. Ill and IV, pp. 257-276. 1937. A contribution to Eskimo craniology based on previously published measurements. Biometrika, vol. 29, pts. I and II, pp. 1-20. Oetteking, Bruno 1908. Ein Beitrag zur Kraniologie der Eskimo. Abhandlungen und Berichte des Konigliche Zoologischen und Anthropologisch-Etnographischen Museums zu Dresden, Bd. 12, No. 3, 54 pp. 1931. A contribution to the physical anthropology of Baffin Island, based on somatometrical data and skeletal material collected by the Putnam Baffin Island Expedition of 1927. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 15, pp. 421-468. Otis, G. A. 1876. Check list of preparations and objects in the section of human anatomy of the United States Army Medical Museum for use during the International Exhibition of 1876, in connection with the representation of the medical department. U. S. Army Medical Department Exhibits, No. 8. 135 pp. 1880. List of the specimens in the anatomical section of the United States Army Medical Museum. Vol. 8, 194 pp. Packard, A. S. 1891. The Labrador coast. New York. Parry, W. E. 1824. Journal of a second voyage for the discovery of a northwest passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific; performed in the years 1821-22-23, in His Majesty's ships "Fury" and "Hecla." London. Pearson, Karl 1899. IV. Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution. V. On the reconstruction of the stature of prehistoric races. Philosophical Trans- actions of the Royal Society of London, Series A, vol. 192, pp. 170-244. 1914. Tables for statisticians and biometricians. Cambridge. Pedersen, P. O. 1938. Investigations into dental conditions of about 3000 ancient and modern Greenlanders. The Dental Record, vol. 58, pp. 191-198. Pittard, Eugene ^ 1901. Contribution a l'etude anthropologique des" Esquimaux du Labrador et de la Baie d'Hudson. Bulletin de la SociSte Neuchateloise de Geographic T. 13, pp. 158-176. POULSEN, KNUD 1909. Contributions to the anthropology and nosology of the East-Green- landers. Meddelelser om Gr0nland, vol. 28, pp. 133-150. Price, W. A. 1937. Changes in facial and dental arch form in native groups following adop- tion of modernized foods (abridged abstract). Abstract No. 4, Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 22, No. 3, and Supplement, p. 4. Ray, P. H. 1885. Report of the International Polar Expedition to Point Barrow, Alaska. Washington. Bibliography 159 RlDGVVAY, R. 1912. Color standards and color nomenclature. Washington. Russell, Frank, and Huxley, H. M. 1899. A comparative study of the physical structure of the Labrador Eskimos and the New England Indians. Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 48th meeting, held at Columbus, Ohio, pp. 365- 379. Schenk, Alexandre 1899. Note sur deux cranes d'Esquimaux du Labrador. Bulletin de la Societe Neuchateloise de Geographie, T. 11, pp. 166-175. Seltzer, Carl C. 1933. The anthropometry of the Western and Copper Eskimos, based on data of Vilhjalmur Stefansson. Human Biology, vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 313-370. 1937. A critique of the coefficient of racial likeness. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 23, pp. 101-109. Sergi, G. 1901. Crani Esquimesi. Atti della Societa Romana di Antropologia, vol. 7, fasc. 3, pp. 93-102. Shapiro, H. L. 1931. The Alaskan Eskimo. A study of the relationship between the Eskimo and the Chipewyan Indians of Central Canada. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. 31, pt. VI, pp. 347-385. 1934. Some observations on the origin of the Eskimo. Proceedings of the Fifth Pacific Science Congress, Victoria and Vancouver, B.C., Canada, 1933. B2, 3, pp. 2723-2732. Speck, F. G. 1931. Montagnais-Naskapi bands and early Eskimo distribution in the Labra- dor peninsula. American Anthropologist, vol. 33, pp. 557-600. Spengel, J. W. 1874. Die von Blumenbach gegriindete anthropologische Sammlung der Universitat Gottingen. Die anthropologischen Sammlungen Deutschlands, 93 pp., pt. II, 1877. Steensby, H. P. 1910. Contributions to the ethnology and anthropogeography of the Polar Eskimos. Meddelelser om Gr0nland, vol. 34, pp. 253-406. Stevenson, P. H. 1929. On racial differences in stature long bone regression formulae, with special reference to stature reconstruction formulae for the Chinese. Bio- metrika, vol. 21, pp. 303-321. 1931. Conversion of non-metric data to form suitable for statistical comparison. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 16, pp. 91-96. Stewart, T. D. 1931. Incidence of separate neural arch in the lumbar vertebrae of Eskimos. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 51-62. 1932. The vertebral column of the Eskimo. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 123-136. 1933. The tympanic plate and external auditory meatus in the Eskimo. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 481-496. 1936a. New measurements on the Eskimos and Indians of Labrador. Abstract No. 15, Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Meeting of the American Associ- ation of Physical Anthropologists. American Journal of Physical Anthro- pology, vol. 21, No. 2, and Supplement, p. 10. 160 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador 1936b. Anthropometric nomenclature. Part I. The cephalic (length-breadth) index. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 22, pp. 97-140. 1938. Change in physical type of the Eskimos of Labrador since the 18th century. Abstract No. 9, Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 493-494. Strong, W. D. 1930. A stone culture from northern Labrador and its relation to the Eskimo- like cultures of the Northeast. American Anthropologist, vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 126-144. Suk, V. 1927. On the occurrence of syphilis and tuberculosis amongst Eskimos and mixed breeds of the north coast of Labrador (a contribution to the question of the extermination of aboriginal races). Publications de la Faculte des Sciences de l'Universite Masaryk. Sullivan, L. R. 1920. Anthropometry of the Siouan tribes. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. 23, pt. 3, pp. 85-174. 1923. Essentials of anthropometry. Handbook of the American Museum of Natural History, 72 pp. Tocher, J. F. 1902. Note on some measurements of Eskimo of Southampton Island. Man, vol. 2, No. 115. Virchow, R. 1880. Eskimos von Labrador. Verhandlungen der Berliner Gesellschaft fur Anthropologic, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte, pp. 253-274. Published as a supplement to Zeitschrift fur Ethnologie, Bd. 12. Wilder, H. H. 1920. A laboratory manual of anthropometry. Philadelphia. Wyman, Jeffries 1868. Observations on crania. Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History, vol. 11, pp. 440-462. Young, Arminius [1931.] One hundred years of mission work in the wilds of Labrador. London. INDEX Admixture, Eskimos with Whites, 72- 75, 77, 80, 84; Eskimos with Indians, 16; Indians with Whites, 15, 16 Age, distribution of, in series of living, 81, 82, 140-144; in series of skulls, 31, 126-128 Alveolar arch, breadth of, 29, 30, 38- 41, 43, 132-134; index, 38-41, 43, 132-134; length of, 29, 30, 38-41, 43, 132-134 Alveolar point, definition of, 30 Alveolar point-nasion height, 29, 30, 34-36, 41, 43, 129-131 Antero-posterior maximum diameter of skull, 28-33, 41, 43, 126-128 Anthropometry, instruction in, 12, 25, 76 Antiquity of Eskimos in Labrador, 19 Arthritis, hypertrophic, 66 Auditory meatus, external, 45, 46 Barren Ground Band, measuring mem- bers of, 76; origin and history of, 16 Basion-alveolar point diameter, 29, 30, 35-37, 42, 43, 129-131 Basion-bregma height, 29, 30, 32-34, 41-43, 126-128 Basion-nasion diameter, 29, 30, 35-37, 41-43, 129-131 Benches, height of, for obtaining sitting height, 86, 87 Bessels, Emil, 11, 25, 27, 28 Bigonial diameter in living, 99, 114, 116, 145-149 Bird, Junius, 19 Birket-Smith, Kaj, 19, 69, 98, 103, 116, 117 Birthplace of subjects measured, 82 Bizygomatic maximum diameter, in living, 97, 98, 114-116, 118, 145-149; on skull, 28-30, 35, 36, 42, 43, 129- 131 Boas, Franz, 10, 80, 81, 85, 89, 90, 92, 97, 98, 103, 117, 118 Von Bonin, Gerhardt, and Morant, G. M., 120 Breadth-height index on skull, 32, 33, 41, 43, 126-128 Caribou Eskimo, theories concerning, 19-21 Cephalic index, 90-92, 115-118, 140- 144; relationship to cranial index, 91, 92, 121 Cephalo-facial index, 98, 99, 115, 116, 118, 145-149 Chipewyans, measurements on living, 23, 24, 84-110, 117, 118, 120 Chippewa, measurements on living, 93- 96, 101, 102, 104, 108-110 Cilley, J. P., Jr., 11 Coefficient of racial likeness, 118, 120, 122 Collins, H. B., Jr., 14, 21-24, 66, 69, 113, 122; and Stewart, T. D., 64, 93- 96, 101, 102, 104, 108-110 Coon, C. S., Ill Cranial contours, 44, 46-48 Cranial index, 29, 30, 32-34, 41, 43, 91 Cranial module, 32-34, 43, 126-128 Cree, measurements on living, 23, 24, 84-110, 117, 118, 120 Cultural relationships of Labrador Eskimo, 17 Culture, see Dorset, Thule, Stone Davis Inlet Band, measuring members of, 76; origin and history of, 16 Definition, of alveolar point, 30; of inferior nasal landmark, 30, 31; of median orbital landmark, 31, 37 Delabarre, E. B., 73 Deniker, J., 91 Dental caries, 14, 113 Diameter, see under names Diet, effect on Eskimos of change in, 14, 15, 121, 122 Dorset culture, 18, 21, 22, 122 Duckworth, W. L. H., 10, 80-82, 85- 110, 127, 128, 130, 131, 133, 134 Ear, breadth of, 109, 110, 114, 118, 150- 154; index, 110, 118, 150-154; length of, 108, 109, 114, 118, 150-154 Ear exostosis, absence of, 46 Epidemics, 72 Error, due to sexing, 54, 67; personal, 26-31, 54, 78-83, 89 Facial index, total, on skull, 35, 36, 43, 129-131; upper, on skull, 35, 36, 41, 43, 129-131 Femur, dimensions of, 57-59, 137, 138 Field, Henry, 76; Stanley, 12 Field Museum, 9, 12, 78, 126-139 Fischer-M0ller, K., 22, 25, 32, 33, 35- 39, 52-54, 56, 57, 67, 68 Food, European, use of among Eskimos, 13 Forehead height, 104, 114, 150-154 Formula, of Pearson, for reconstructing stature, 62-64; of Stevenson, for com- paring non-metrical data, 48, 54 Frontal minimum diameter, in living, 95, 96, 114, 115, 145-149; on skull, 29, 34-36, 43, 129-131 161 162 Eskimos and Indians of Labrador Fronto-parietal index, 96, 97, 145-149 Furst, C. M., 52 Fiirst, C. M. and Hansen, Fr. C. C, 11, 27, 28, 42 Goldstein, M. S., 113 Gonio-zygomatic index in living, 100, 145-149 Gower, C. D., 31 Grant, J. C. B., 84-110, 117, 118, 121 Greenland, comparison of cranial series from, 42; measurements on living Eskimos from, 91, 92, 99, 100, 116; measurements on skulls from, 28, 30, 32-41 Hallowell, A. I., 10, 15, 80, 84-108, 111 Hansen, S0ren, 67, 68, 91, 92 Hantzsch collection, Dresden, 11 Hawkes, E. W., 70, 71 Hayes collection, Washington, 25, 27 Head, breadth of in living, 89, 114-116, 118, 140-144; height of in living, 93-95, 114, 145-149; length of in liv- ing, 87, 88, 114-116, 118, 140-144 Height-length index in living, 95, 145- 149 Hettasch, Paul, 12 Hickson, Thomas, 73 Hooton, E. A., 11, 44, 52, 76 Howells, W. W., 93, 106, 115 Hrdlicka, A., 22, 25-33, 35-39, 44, 53, 57, 62-64, 76, 85, 87, 91, 93-96, 99- 102, 104-109, 110, 116 Humerus, dimensions of, 54, 55, 135 Hutton, S. K., 11, 14, 15, 53, 66, 71, 75 Index, see under names Instruments, anthropometrical, 41, 57, 76 Jenness, D., 18, 20, 21, 99, 100, 116, 120, 121 Jugular fossae, 49 Kohlmeister, B. and Koch, G., 15 Krogman, W. M., 122 Landmarks, definition of, 94, 119; inter- pretation of, 30, 31, 78 Langford, E. K., 12, 76, 78-80, 89 Larsen, Helge, 69 Lateral maximum diameter on skull, 28-30, 32, 33, 41, 43, 126-128 Lee, Leslie A., 11, 85-110, 141, 143, 146, 148, 149, 151, 154 Length-height index on skull, 32, 33, 41, 43, 126-128 Little John, dwarf of Okak, 53 Living, circumstances surrounding col- lection of data on, 76, 77; deficiencies of data on, 119 Long bones, inter-relationships of, 61, 62, 136; see under individual bones Longevity, 75 Long Shan, 16 MacGregor, Sir William, 73-75 MacMillan, Donald B., 12 Mantish, 16 Martin, C. A., 74 Mathiassen, Therkel, 17, 18, 21, 23 Mean height index, 32-34, 41, 43, 126-128 Mean sigma, 106, 115 Menton-crinion diameter, 100-102, 114, 145-149 Menton-nasion diameter, in living, 103, 104, 114, 115, 118, 150-154; on skull, 29, 34-36, 43, 129-131 Methods of measuring, 25, 26, 28, 30, 31, 47, 57, 93, 94 Michelson, Truman, 79, 80, 89 Microcephaly, 52, 53 Mixed-bloods, see Admixture Module, cranial, 32-34, 43, 126-128 Montagnais-Naskapi, history of, 23 Moore, R. D., 63, 93-96, 99-102, 104, 108-110 Morant, G. M., 26, 30, 42, 122 Moravian missionaries, 12, 13 Moravian missions, history of, 70, 71 Nasal breadth, in living, 106, 107, 114- 116, 118, 150-154; on skull, 29, 30, 37-39, 41, 43, 132-134 Nasal height, in living, 105, 106, 114- 116, 118, 150-154; on skull, 29, 30, 37-39, 41, 43, 132-134 Nasal index, in living, 107, 108, 115, 116, 118, 150-154; on skull, 38-40, 41, 43, 132-134 Nasion, difficulty in locating, 77, 78, 101-106 Oetteking, Bruno, 10, 11, 44, 46, 127, 128, 130, 131-139 Old gi