CHAPTER VI.
THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERS AND RACE-AFFINITIES OF THESE
ISLANDERS.[80]
[80] My observations on the physical characters of these islanders were embodied in a paper read before the Anthropological Institute in July, 1885. They were to be published in the Journal of that society.
I will in the first place briefly refer to the position assigned to these islanders in the classification of the different races of man. Professor Flower, in a recent address,[81] divided the different varieties of the human species into three principal divisions, the Ethiopian, the Mongolian, and the Caucasian, a system of classification which, although often advanced and as often disputed, has now been preferred to other more complicated methods of classifying the different varieties of man. Around or between these three types all existing varieties can be ranged.
[81] The President’s Anniversary Address to the Anthropological Institute, Jan. 27th, 1885.
The Solomon Island natives are usually referred to the Melanesian group of the Ethiopian division, a group which includes the Papuans of New Guinea and the majority of the inhabitants of the islands of the Western Pacific; but my observations on the physical characters of these natives have shown that the type of a Solomon Island native varies considerably in different parts of the group, in some islands approaching the pure Papuan, in others possessing Polynesian affinities, and in others showing traces of the Malay. The prevailing characters, however, are distinctly Melanesian or Papuan. The Melanesians, who, according to Professor Flower, are chiefly distinguished from the African negroes by the well developed glabella and supra-orbital ridges in the male, greatly excel the true African negroes, the Hottentots and Bushmen, and the Negritos of the Andaman and Philippine Islands, who are included in the Ethiopian division, in all that affects their social condition. In their usuages, their rites, their dwellings, their agriculture, their canoes, and in many other respects, the Melanesian or Papuan peoples display a far greater intellectual capacity than we find exhibited by the other members of the Ethiopian division.
I cannot here enter at length into the question of the peopling of the various groups of islands in the Pacific. It is a question on which conclusions drawn from the linguistic and physical characters of the inhabitants of these islands do not always agree. Professor Keane[82] holds that the three principal divisions of the varieties of man are represented in this region; the Caucasian in the Polynesians inhabiting the islands of the south-central Pacific (Marquesas, Samoa, Tonga, &c.); the Mongolian in the Micronesians of the islands of the north-central Pacific (Gilbert, Marshall, Caroline, Ladrone Islands); and the Ethiopian, or as he terms it the Dark Type, in the Papuans of the Western Pacific (to whom he restricts the name Melanesian), New Guinea, and the adjacent islands of the Indian Archipelago. It is to the different mingling of these three principal types, that the widely varying characters of the peoples dwelling in the several regions of the Pacific are attributed. According to Professor Keane, the Polynesians of the south-central Pacific are almost purely Caucasian, without a trace of Mongolian blood. This view, however, is not supported by Professor Flower who contends that the combination of the Mongolo-Malayan and Melanesian characters, in varying proportions and under varying conditions, would probably account for all the modifications observed among the inhabitants of the Pacific Islands.
[82] Vide a series of three papers in vol. XXIII. of “Nature” on the Indo-Chinese and Oceanic Races.
The theory advanced by Professor Keane with reference to the peopling of the Pacific Islands, is one on which some of my observations in the Solomon Islands, although not directly connected with the subject, have some bearing. The primitive Negrito race, as now exhibited in the Andaman Islander, according to this view is the original stock of all the dark races. From its home in the Indian Archipelago, it extended westwards to Africa across the now lost continent of Lemuria, and eastwards “across a continent of which the South Sea Islands are a remnant—to become slowly differentiated into the present Papuan or Melanesian peoples of those islands.” Subsequently, the Caucasians of southern Asia, impelled before the southerly migration of the Mongols from higher Asia, occupied the islands of the Indian Archipelago and extended eastwards to their present homes in the south-central Pacific (Samoa, Tonga, the Marquesas, Society Islands, &c.). The Mongols following close upon them, finally reached the groups of islands together known as Micronesia in the north-central Pacific (Ladrone, Caroline, Marshall, Gilbert Islands, &c.).
The reference to the supposed sunken continents in the Indian and Pacific Oceans, which served as stepping-stones in these migrations, merits my attention. From our most recent knowledge of the geological structure of tropical islands, to which my observations in the Solomon Islands have in some measure contributed, it may be inferred that there is but little geological evidence to support the view of the existence of these submerged continents. The theory of subsidence, on which Mr. Darwin’s explanations of atolls was based, cannot now be urged in support of prolonged periods of subsidence in the tropical regions of the Indian and Pacific Oceans. The groups of atolls, which there occur, were formed, as shown by recent investigations, around and over oceanic peaks of volcanic formation, and independently of any movement of subsidence.[83]
[83] Vide the writings of Murray, Agassiz, Geikie, and others. In my volume of geological observations, to be shortly published, I have referred at length to this subject.
With reference to the migration eastwards of the Eastern Polynesians, I would allude to a piece of evidence which was advanced by Mr. Hale in support of the view that the island of Bouro in the Malay Archipelago was the starting-point of the migration. Quiros, the Spanish navigator, was informed in 1606 by a native captured at Taumaco, near the Santa Cruz Group, that there was a large country named Pouro in the vicinity of that region. This Pouro, however, was without doubt the neighbouring island of St. Christoval (one of the Solomon Group) which retains the native name of Bauro at the present day, and as we learn from Gallego’s journal,[84] was called by the natives Paubro rather over three centuries ago. Mr. Hale, however, who of course was not acquainted with the native name of St. Christoval, endeavours to identity this Pouro, of which Quiros was informed, with the distant Bouro of the Indian Archipelago. (Vide note xv. of the Geographical Appendix). . . . The foregoing remarks have not been offered with any object of criticising a view on which I am not competent to speak. The misconception having come under my notice, I considered it my duty to refer to it.
In the course of my researches I came upon a circumstance which appears to point in an unmistakeable manner to the Indian Archipelago as being the highway by which the Eastern Polynesians have reached the Pacific. The circumstance, to which I refer, is that it is possible to trace the native names of some of the common littoral trees, such as the Pandanus, Barringtonia speciosa, &c., from the Indian Archipelago across the central Pacific to the Austral and Society Islands. In illustration, I will take Barringtonia speciosa, referring the reader, however, for the other trees to page 186 of this work. In the Indian Archipelago, I find the native names of this tree to be Boewa boeton and Poetoen.[85] In the islands of Bougainville Straits in the Solomon Group, it is known as Puputu. In Fiji, it is known as Vutu;[86] in the Tongan Group, as Futu;[87] and in the Hervey and Society Islands as E-Hoodu[88] or Utu.[89] It is interesting to notice the modifications which the name of this tree undergoes, as one follows it eastward from the Indian Archipelago to the centre of the Pacific Ocean, a distance of between 4,000 and 5,000 miles; and it is equally instructive to reflect that without the intermediate changes, intermediate it should be added in a geographical as well as in an etymological sense, the names at the end of the series would scarcely seem to be related. The Indian Archipelago would appear to be the home of this littoral tree, which on account of the buoyancy of its fruits has not only been spread over Polynesia, but has reached Ceylon and Madagascar.[90] From its home in the Indian Archipelago, it has therefore extended to the eastward as far as the central Pacific, and to the westward nearly across the Indian Ocean. . . . It is obvious that much information of this kind might be collected which would be of considerable value to philologists; and even in the case of this single tree I have only, so to speak, broken the ground. The tedious character of the research necessary to collect the scanty information I have obtained on this subject, will be amply compensated for, if my remarks should prove suggestive to residents in the different islands of the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
[85] “De Inlandsche Plantennamen,” by G. J. Filet (vide reference on page 186).
[86] “Year in Fiji,” by J. Horne: p. 70. (1881.)
[87] “Ten years in South-Central Polynesia,” by the Rev. T. West: p. 146. (1865.)
[88] “Observations made during a Voyage round the World,” by J. R. Forster. (1778.)
[89] “Jottings from the Pacific,” by Wyatt Gill: p. 198. (1885.)
[90] “Report on the Botany of the Challenger,” by W. Botting Hemsley: vol. I., part iii., p. 152.
The physical characters of a typical Solomon Islander.—Notwithstanding the variety in some of the characters of these natives, it is not a difficult matter to describe a typical individual who combines their most prominent and most prevalent characteristics. Such a man would have a well-proportioned physique, a good carriage, and well-rounded limbs. His height would be about 5 feet 4 inches; his chest-girth between 34 and 35 inches; and his weight between 125 and 130 pounds. The colour of his skin would be a deep brown, corresponding with number 35 of the colour-types of M. Broca;[91] and he would wear his hair in the style of a bushy periwig in which all the hairs are entangled independently into a loose frizzled mass. His face would have a moderate degree of subnasal prognathism, with projecting brows, deeply sunk orbits, short, straight nose, much depressed at the root but sometimes arched, lips of moderate thickness and rather prominent, chin somewhat receding. His hairless face would have an expression of good humour, which is in accord with the cheerful temperament of these islanders. The form of his skull would be probably mesocephalic. The proportion of the length of the span of the extended arms to the height of the body, taking the latter as 100, would be represented by the index 106·7. The length of the upper limb would be exactly one-third the height of the body; and the tip of his middle finger would reach down to a point about 31⁄3 inches above the patella. The length of the lower limb would be slightly under one-half (49⁄100) of the height of the body; and the relations of the lengths of the upper and lower limbs to each other would be represented by the intermembral index 68. I was only able to obtain the measurement of six women who belonged to the small islands of Ugi and Santa Anna, off the St. Christoval coast. Their average height was 4 feet 101⁄2 inches, which corresponds with the rule given by Topinard in his “Anthropology,” that for a race of this stature 7 per cent of the height of the man (5 feet 31⁄2 inches, in this part of the group) must be subtracted to obtain the true proportional height of the woman. The hair of the women has the same characters as that of the men. Their figures have not usually that breadth of hip which the European model would possess. The general appearance of the younger women is not unattractive, but they soon lose their good looks after marriage. In Bougainville Straits, it was often possible to notice amongst the wives of the chiefs two castes of women of very different appearance, the one with elegant figure and carriage, slim limbs and more delicately cut features, the other more clumsily proportioned with stout ungainly limbs and a coarse type of features.
[91] The colour-types employed were those given in the “Anthropological Notes and Queries,” published by the British Association in 1874.
| 1 | 3 | 2 |
4
- Women of Santa Anna.
- Men of Ugi wearing Sunshades.
- Man of Ugi.
- Man of Ugi.
[To face page 102.
I found that two constant variations in the type of the Solomon Island native are presented by the natives of the islands of Bougainville Straits (including Choiseul Bay), and the natives of St. Christoval and its adjoining islands at the opposite end of the group. In the former region there exists a taller, darker, more robust, and more brachycephalic race; whilst in the latter locality the average native is shorter, less vigorous, of a lighter hue, and his skull has a more dolichocephalic index. From 35 to 40 natives were examined in each region, and some of the principal distinctions may be thus tabulated:
| Average Height. |
Colour of Skin. | Cephalic Index of living subject. |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| St. Christoval, | 5 | ft. | 31⁄2 | in. | Colour-types, | 35 & 28 | 76 | |
| Bougainville Straits, | 5 | „ | 41⁄4 | „ | Col„ur-ty„es, | 35 & 42 | 80 | ·7 |
In the districts of Urasi and the Uta Pass on the north coast of Malaita,[92] there would appear to exist an almost brachycephalic race, of a lighter hue than is possessed by the natives of Bougainville Straits. Differences are in fact constant in their localities throughout the group, the most marked that came under my observation being between the natives of Bougainville Straits and those of St. Christoval at the opposite end of the group, as already alluded to. D’Urville, the French navigator, who visited this group in 1838, contrasts in a similar way the natives of St. Christoval and Isabel with those of Bougainville. The former appeared to him small and feeble in comparison with the more vigorous, sturdier, and much blacker natives of the latter island. He was particularly struck with the diminutive and wretched appearance of the natives of Isabel around “Thousand-Ships Bay,” as compared with the vigorous well-made natives of Bougainville.[93] . . . . . In some islands of small size, we find the natives markedly different from those around them. In the small island of Santa Catalina, off the eastern end of St. Christoval, the natives are distinguished from all others in this part of the group, by their finer physique, lighter colour, and greater height. They do not appear to intermarry much with the surrounding tribes; but they are, strange to relate, in friendly communication with the natives of some district on the coast of Malaita, with whom they probably intermarry. On the coasts of Guadalcanar there would appear to be some of the finest types of the Solomon Islander. Unfortunately, I had but little opportunity of observing them.
[92] I was indebted to the Hon. Curzon-Howe, Government Agent of the labour schooner “Lavina,” for the opportunity of examining these Malaita natives.
[93] “Voyage au Pole Sud et dans l’Océanie,” (Tome V., p. 105, hist. du voyage.)
Having briefly referred to some of the general facts resulting from my observations on the physical characters of these islanders, I now come to refer to the observations themselves. They were confined for the most part to the natives of the opposite extremities of the group—at the eastern extremity to the natives of St. Christoval and of the adjoining small islands of Ugi, Santa Anna, and Santa Catalina; and towards the opposite extremity to the natives of the islands of Bougainville Straits, which include Treasury Island, the Shortland Islands, Faro Island, together with Choiseul Bay. Observations, although fewer in number, were also made on the natives of the following intermediate islands, viz., Malaita, the Florida Islands, and Simbo or Eddystone Island.
All the measurements, unless otherwise stated, refer to male adults.
STATURE.
| Height in feet and inches. | Number of Measurements. |
||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | feet | 11 | 1⁄2 | inches | to | 5 | feet | 0 | inches. | 2 | |
| 5 | „ | 0 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 1 | „ | 5 | ||
| 5 | „ | 1 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 2 | „ | 6 | ||
| 5 | „ | 2 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 3 | „ | 13 | ||
| 5 | „ | 3 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 4 | „ | 18 | ||
| 5 | „ | 4 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 5 | „ | 9 | ||
| 5 | „ | 5 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 6 | „ | 10 | ||
| 5 | „ | 6 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 7 | „ | 6 | ||
| 5 | „ | 7 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 8 | „ | 2 | ||
| 5 | „ | 8 | „ | — | 5 | „ | 8 | 1⁄2 | „ | 1 | |
| Total, 72 | |||||||||||
The foregoing table includes all the measurements of height which I obtained in the various parts of the group. The range of these 72 measurements is 4 feet 111⁄2 inches to 5 feet 81⁄2 inches. Fifty of these are gathered together between 5 feet 2 inches and 5 feet 6 inches. Arranging the whole series in order, I find that the value of the central number (36th) is 5 feet 4 inches; of the quarter-points, the value of the 18th is 5 feet 3 inches, and of the 54th, 5 feet 51⁄2 inches; and the values of the 9th and 63rd in the scale are 5 feet 11⁄4 inches, and 5 feet 6 inches respectively. There is a disturbing element in this series, which is probably the result of combining in the same series the natives of the Bougainville Straits islands and those of St. Christoval, the latter being rather shorter, as noticed below. We may, however, take the value of the median as representing the average height of a native of the Solomon Islands, viz., 5 feet 4 inches, or 1·625 mètres, which is somewhat below the medium height of the human race, as stated by Topinard at 1·65 mètres. It is, however, in a marked degree in excess of the height which Mayer gives for the Papuans, viz., 1·536 mètres (vide Topinard’s Anthropology).
Deviations of a constant character are found in different parts of the group, and often in different districts of the same island. The natives of the islands of Bougainville Straits, for instance, are noticeably taller than those of St. Christoval at the opposite end of the group, the averages of about thirty measurements in each region, differing by from one half to three quarters of an inch. This difference of height in these two localities is accompanied by other important changes in the physical characters which will be subsequently referred to.
The range of my measurements may be contrasted with those obtained by Miklouho-Maclay on the coast of New Guinea (vide “Nature,” Dec. 7th, 1882).
| Papua-Koviay coast, | 1·75 to 1·48 | mètres. |
| Maclay coast, | 1·74 to 1·42 | „ |
| Solomon Islands, | 1·74 to 1·51 | „ |
CHEST-GIRTH.
The range of the eighteen measurements given in the subjoined table is 311⁄2 to 37 inches: and since half of these are included between 34 and 35 inches, we may consider these as the limits of the average chest-girth of the natives in the portions of the group in which the measurements were made, viz., the islands of Bougainville Straits and St. Christoval, with its adjoining islands.
| Girth in inches. |
Number of Measurements. |
Stature taken as 100. |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 | ... | 1 | |||||
| 31 | 1⁄2 | to | 32 | 1 | 52-53 | ... | 3 |
| 32 | to | 33 | 3 | 53-54 | ... | 7 | |
| 33 | to | 34 | 3 | 54-55 | ... | 3 | |
| 34 | to | 35 | 9 | 55-56 | ... | 2 | |
| 35 | to | 36 | 0 | 56-57 | ... | 1 | |
| 36 | to | 37 | 2 | 57·2 | ... | 1 | |
| Total, 18 | Total, 18 | ||||||
Taking the average height (5 feet 4 inches) as 100, the proportion, which a chest girth of 341⁄2 inches would bear, would be 53·9. This very closely corresponds with the values of the median of the accompanying series, which itself agrees with the value of the average of the indices. This index of chest-girth may be compared with results given by Topinard:
| Englishmen, | 54·0 |
| Negroes, | 52·3 |
| New Zealanders, | 51·4 |
| Solomon Islanders, | 53·9 |
WEIGHT OF BODY.[94]
[94] Mr. Evered, ships-steward assistant, obtained these weights for me.
Twelve natives of the Shortland Islands were taken promiscuously and weighed, the following being the results, stated in pounds:—100, 103, 116, 117, 120, 120, 123, 130, 148, 148, 150, 154. The mean of these numbers is 127; and the average weight would probably vary between 125 and 130 pounds, or between 57 and 59 kilogrammes. This probable average weight is quite in accordance with the size and build of a typical Solomon Island native; and agrees with the general rule that the weight in pounds ought to be about twice the height in inches; the average height being 64 inches, and the average weight 125 to 130 lbs.
LENGTH OF LIMBS.
The points of measurement employed were:—
(a) For the upper extremity: (1) a point half an inch outside, and on the level with the apex of the coracoid process of the scapula; (2) the centre of the hollow of the elbow on a line drawn from the interspace between the head of the radius and the external condyle of the humerus (indicated by a dimple when the fore-arm is extended) to immediately below the internal condyle; (3) the centre of a line joining the apices of the styloid processes of the radius and ulna on the front of the wrist.
(b) For the lower extremity: (1) a point on the middle of the front of the thigh on a level with another point midway between the anterior superior spinous process of the ilium and the upper edge of the great trochanter; (2) a point on the “ligamentum patellæ” on a level with the upper edge of the external tuberosity of the tibia; (3) the centre of the front of the ankle on a level with the base of the internal malleolus.
(1) The intermembral index, or the ratio between the length of the upper and lower limbs, taking the latter as 100. From the table subjoined, it will be seen that the range of 26 indices is 64 to 73. Eleven of these lie between 67 and 68: and since the average of my numbers, which is 68, corresponds with the value of the median of the series, we will take this index of 68 as representing the average ratio of the lengths of the two limbs compared together.
| Intermembral index. |
Number of measurements. |
|---|---|
| 64 | 1 |
| 65 | 2 |
| 66 | 3 |
| 67 | 6 |
| 68 | 5 |
| 69 | 3 |
| 70 | 1 |
| 71 | 3 |
| 72 | 1 |
| 73 | 1 |
| Total, 26 | |
(2) The index of the fore-arm and arm, or the ratio between the lengths of the fore-arm and arm, taking the latter as 100. The range of 27 indices is 79 to 100. Of these 16 are included between 87 and 91; and the average of the numbers is 88.
| Indices. | Number of Measurements. |
|---|---|
| 79 | 1 |
| 80 | 1 |
| 82 | 2 |
| 83 | 2 |
| 84 | 1 |
| 86 | 1 |
| 87 | 6 |
| 88 | 2 |
| 89 | 1 |
| 91 | 7 |
| 95 | 1 |
| 100 | 2 |
| Total, 27 | |
(3) The index of the leg and thigh, or the ratio between the lengths of the leg and thigh, taking the latter as 100. The range of 27 indices, as shown in the subjoined table, is 68 to 97. Of these, two-thirds are included between 74 and 83: and since the value of the median, which is 80, corresponds nearly with the average of the numbers, we may take it as representing the average proportion which the leg bears to the thigh amongst these natives.
| Indices. | Number of Measurements. |
|---|---|
| 68 | 1 |
| 69 | 1 |
| 70 | 1 |
| 72 | 1 |
| 73[108] | 1 |
| 74 | 2 |
| 75 | 2 |
| 78 | 1 |
| 79 | 1 |
| 80 | 3 |
| 81 | 2 |
| 82 | 2 |
| 83 | 4 |
| 88 | 3 |
| 92 | 1 |
| 97 | 1 |
| Total, 27 | |
(4) The index of the arm and thigh, or the ratio between the lengths of the arm and thigh, taking the latter as 100. The range of 27 indices is 56 to 73. Of these, three-fourths are grouped between 61 and 69. The average of the figures is 65, and the median of the series is 66.
| Indices. | Number of Measurements. |
|---|---|
| 56 | 1 |
| 57 | 1 |
| 60 | 1 |
| 61 | 2 |
| 62 | 2 |
| 63 | 3 |
| 64 | 2 |
| 65 | 1 |
| 66 | 3 |
| 67 | 4 |
| 69 | 3 |
| 70 | 1 |
| 71 | 1 |
| 73 | 2 |
| Total, 27 | |
(5) The proportion of the length of the upper limb to the height of the body, taking the latter as 100.
| Indices. | Number of Measurements. |
|---|---|
| 32 | 1 |
| 32-33 | 10 |
| 33-34 | 10 |
| 34-35 | 4 |
| 35-36 | 2 |
| Total, 27 | |
These 27 indices range between 32 and 36: three-fourths of them are included between 32 and 34. Since the average of the numbers, which is 33·3, nearly corresponds with the value of the median, we may take it as representing the proportion which the length of the upper limb bears to the height of the body amongst these natives.
(6) The proportion of the length of the lower limb to the height of the body, taking the latter as 100. The range of these 27 indices is 46·9 to 51·6. Two-thirds of the total number are included between 48 and 50; and since the average of the numbers, which is 49·1, corresponds nearly with the value of the middle index of the series, we may take it as representing the proportion that the lower limb usually bears to the height of the body amongst these natives.
| Indices. | Number of Measurements. |
|---|---|
| 46·9 | 1 |
| 47-48 | 4 |
| 48-49 | 8 |
| 49-50 | 10 |
| 50-51 | 3 |
| 51·6 | 1 |
| Total, 27 | |
(7) The span of the outstretched arms.—The following indices—69 in all—show the ratio of the span of the arms to the height of the body, taking the latter as 100:—
| Indices. | Number of Measurements. |
|---|---|
| 100-100 | 1 |
| 101-102 | 4 |
| 102-103 | 2 |
| 103-104 | 4 |
| 104-105 | 5 |
| 105-106 | 5 |
| 106-107 | 18 |
| 107-108 | 11 |
| 108-109 | 6 |
| 109-110 | 9 |
| 110-111 | 3 |
| 112·6 | 1 |
| Total, 69 | |
The range of these indices is 100 to 112·6; and the indices of greatest frequency are those included between 106 and 107. Placing all the indices in their order, I find that the value of the central of the series is 106·7, and of the quarter-points 105·2 and 108·6 respectively. Taking 106·7 as representing the average proportion which the span of the arms bears to the stature amongst these natives, I may compare it with similar results given for other races in Topinard’s Anthropology:—
| American soldiers (10,876), | 104·3 |
| Solomon Islanders (69), | 106·7 |
| Negroes (2020), | 108·1 |
(8) Distance of the tip of the middle finger from the upper edge of the patella.
| Distance. | Number of Measurements. |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | inches. | 2 | |||
| 2 | to | 3 | „ | 6 | |
| 3 | to | 4 | „ | 11 | (9 of these at 31⁄2 inches). |
| 4 | to | 5 | „ | 2 | |
| Total, 21 | |||||
From this table it will be seen that amongst 21 natives the tip of the finger never approached the patella nearer than two inches, and was never farther removed than five inches. The value of greatest frequency is 31⁄2 inches, and it may be taken as approximating to the average distance. Comparing it with the average stature (64 inches) taken as 100, we obtain the index 5·46; but by comparing the distance of the middle finger above the patella with the stature as 100 in each individual measurement, we obtain a more reliable average index somewhat smaller than the preceding.
| Indices. | Number. |
|---|---|
| 3·12-4·00 | 4 |
| 4·00-5·00 | 5 |
| 5·00-6·00 | 9 |
| 6·00-7·00 | 1 |
| 7·00-7·94 | 2 |
| Total, 21 | |
In this table the indices range between 3·12 and 7·94: nearly half are included between 5·00 and 6·00; the value of the median is 5·24, and the average of the numbers is 5·19. Accepting the value of the median as our average index for these natives, it may be compared with similar results for other races given in Topinard’s Anthropology:
| American soldiers (10,876), | 7·49 |
| Negroes (2020), | 4·37 |
| Solomon Islanders (21), | 5·24 |
I will conclude my remarks on the length of the limbs by giving from the preceding “data” the limb measurements of a Solomon Island native of average height:
| Height of body, | 64 | in. | - | Index of height, and length of upper limb, 33·3. | |||||
| Intermembral index, 68. | - | Length of upper limb, | 21 | 1⁄3 | „ | ||||
| Length of arm, | 11 | 1⁄3 | „ | - | Index of arm and fore-arm, 88. | ||||
| Length of fore-arm, | 10 | „ | |||||||
| Length of lower limb | 31 | 1⁄3 | „ | Index of height, and length of lower limb, 49. | |||||
| Length of thigh | 17 | 1⁄3 | „ | - | Index of thigh and leg, 80. | ||||
| Length of leg | 14 | „ | |||||||
The form of the skull as indicated by the relation to each other of its length and breadth.—A hundred measurements, which I made of the heads of natives in this group,[95] in order to obtain their proportional breadth, taking the length as 100, gave indices varying between 69·2 and 86·2. The whole series, however, displays a tendency to grouping around different medians, and thus points to the important inference that we cannot accept one type of the skull as a distinctive character of the Solomon Islander. As shown in the subjoined table, which gives the indices corrected to actual skull-measurements by subtracting two units as proposed by M. Broca, there would appear to be a marked preponderance of mesocephaly; but from my measurements being limited both in number and locality, the safest conclusion to draw will be the most general one, viz., that all types of skulls, brachycephalic, mesocephalic, and dolichocephalic, are to be found prevailing amongst the islands of the Solomon Group, the particular type being often constant in the same locality.[96] If my measurements had been five times as numerous, and had been spread equally over the group, I might somewhat narrow my conclusions; and in truth brachycephaly might have formed a more important factor in the series, if I had measured the heads of the same number of natives from the north coast of Malaita which I measured in the districts of St. Christoval and of Bougainville Straits. In the subjoined table I have accepted all indices below 75 as dolichocephalic, those between 75 and 80 as mesocephalic, and those above 80 as brachycephalic.