Page:American Anthropologist NS vol. 1.djvu/469

 4*0 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [n. s., i, 1899

records show that the human cranium has increased in capacity and changed in form from that of Pithecanthropus erectus to that of enlightened man ; that the arms and hands have shortened and acquired greatly increased amplitude of movement ; that the jaws have condensed from prognathic type to the human form ; that the pelvis and leg bones have become better adapted to the erect attitude, while the opposable toe has lost its function — though even the most advanced skeletons retain vestiges of prim- itive character. Summarily, these changes represent a process of cephalization, discussed long ago by Dana as manifested chiefly by lower organisms, and more recently by Marsh as manifested chiefly by the higher vertebrates; but the student of human structure can go further and find easier way than the zoologist, since the cephalization of mankind is incomparably more pronounced than that of the subhuman organisms. The average capacity of recent European crania is much above the average among the cave men of Europe ; the skulls of modern dissecting rooms are decid- edly better developed than those of ancient ossuaries ; the crania of the Incas found by Pizarro appear to be persistently larger than those of the pre-Incan Peruvians ; even in the history of America, to judge from the best portraits extant, the cranial conformation has changed from the retreating type of Washington and his con- temporaries to the full-forehead type of the living statesman. The data are less complete than might be desired ; but whereso- ever there are measurements for comparison their testimony is consistent — they tell of progressive increase in cranial capacity among all peoples, with decrease among none. And the records show that cranial capacity is correlated with culture-grade so closely that the relative status of the peoples and nations of the earth may be stated as justly in terms of brain-size as in any other way — for while brain-structure would doubtless afford better criteria, the data are lacking. The most conspicuous fact of somatic development is cranial growth ; yet the process of cephalization is manifested hardly less strikingly in the reduction

�� �