Studies in Irish craniology (Aran Islands, Co. Galway) : a paper read before the Royal Irish Academy, December 12, 1892 / by A.C. Haddon.
- Alfred Cort Haddon
- Date:
- 1893
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Studies in Irish craniology (Aran Islands, Co. Galway) : a paper read before the Royal Irish Academy, December 12, 1892 / by A.C. Haddon. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.
6/84 page 762
![To save space I have put the measurements given hy Dr. Davis of these two calvarise side hy side ; those of skull 209 are printed in heavy type. Inti, capac. 63’5; circ. 20’7; fronto-occip. arch 14, 15; frontal 4-8 ; parietal 4-9 ; occip. 4-3; longit. diam. 7-1, 7’4; trans. iam. 5‘5 par., 5‘5 par.; widest frontal breadth at coronal suture 4*7, 4‘6; most divergent par. breadth 4-9, 5’2 ; occipital [asterionic] 4-4, 4‘3; height 4-9, 5'1; intermastoid arch 15; Busk’s frontal radius 4'6 ; parietal do. 4-8; occip. do. 4-3. Length-breadth, index 77, 74; length-height, index, 69, 69. Owing to the courtesy of Professor C. Stewart I have been able to measure these two specimens, and they will subsequently he referred to under the numbers 208 and 209 respectively, which are their cata- logue numbers in the museum of the Koyal College of Surgeons, London. Methods. It is unfortunate that, even at the present time, it should be necessary to indicate what method of taking any given measurement has been employed. It is true we have a so-called “ Prankfort Agree- ment,” but what is required is a Franco-German agreement. In the majority of the measurements I have adopted, the name given sufficiently indicates the points of measurement. In all cases, except where otherwise stated, I have made direct measurements, and not according to the German recommendation, viz. that, wherever pos- sible, the measurements of the skull should he taken in relation with the horizontal plane adopted hy the Frankfort Congress. With regard to the latter point I can only endorse the criticism made hy Dr. Garson in his Paper on “ The Frankfort Craniometric Agreement, with Critical Kemarks thereon” (Journ. Anthrop. Inst, xiv., 1884, p. 64). The auriculo-hregmatic arc and the bi-auricular breadth I take as he suggests, “ where the auriculo-hregmatic lines cross the prolonga- tion ridges backwards of the zygomatic arches” {Ihid.y p. 76). The auriculo-cranial, auriculo-nasial, and auriculo-alveolar radii are taken with Cunningham’s modification of Busk’s instrument (cf. C. P. Browne, these Proceedings, antea, p. 397). The palato-maxUlary length and breadth were taken from the points advocated hy Sir ‘W. H. Flower, and for these I find the compas glissiere very con- venient.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b22473178_0008.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
