GN ANTHROPOLOGY •%! mi^s'if^^.\'-r A CONTRiBU'iiO.N lU TONGA X >^ ^ \r ATOT or:\- i;.\-l-.lJ Memoirs of the Bernice I'auaiu bisiiop Museum Volume YII.I- -Number 4 Digitized by the Internet Archive I in 2008 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/contributiontotoOOsullrich .u:tm^^mmrm^^ A CONTRIBUTION TO TONGAN SOMATOLOGY \ By Louis R. | Sull ivan RASED OX TIIK FIELO STUDIES OF K. W. CIFFOKD AND W. C. MCKKUN Memoirs of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum Volume VIII — Number 4 WITH PLATES XXXVI-XXXIX BAYARD DOMINICK EXPEDITION Publication Number 2 honolulu, hawaii Bishop Museum Press 1922 0^ X A CONTRIBUTION TO TONGAN SOMATOLOGY By LOUIS R. SULLIVAN Based on the field studies of E. W. Gifford and W. C. McKern INTRODUCTION THE somatological studies in Tonga followed the plan previously used for Samoa.' The field records were made by E. W. Gifford and W. C. McKern, assisted by Delila S. Giflford and show evidence of unusual care and discrimi- nation; the mathematical computations were prepared by my wife, Bessie P. Sul- livan. By arrangement between the American Museum of Natural History and the Bishop Museum the analysis of the data and the preparation of the results for publication constitute my share of the work. Mr. Gifford and Mr. McKern call attention to the assistance rendered by many individuals in Tonga and especially to the kindness shown by Their Majesties Queen Charlotte Tupou and Prince Consort W'illiam Tungi, who permitted them- selves to be measured, thus graciously setting an example that was gladly followed by their loyal subjects. The Privy Council also greatly aided the expedition by instructing the Minister of Police, Mr. Job Koho, to provide the required number of persons for each day's examinations. The material on which this paper is based consists of complete descriptions and measurements of 225 persons, 121 men and 104 women. Of these 10 were of mixed racial descent and their records were therefore discarded. Of the remaining 215, 184 were adults more than twenty years of age and 31 adolescents. The averages of non-quantitative descriptions are based on observations of young and old from the age of sixteen upward; the averages of all measurements except stature are based on measurements of persons of both sexes eighteen years old and upward. By nativity the individuals examined are distributed as follows : Niuatopu- tapu 4; Niuafoou i; Vavau group 25; Haapai group 40 (in detail, Haano 8, No- muka 2, Uiha 4, Lifuka 6, other places 20) ; Tongatabu 148 (Nukualofa 47, other places loi); Eua 5; elsewhere 2. The material was not consciously selected and represents persons of all social classes and occupations. It may be regarded as a fair qualitative sample of the Tongan people. 'Sullivan, L. A., A contribution to Samoan somatology: B. P. Bishop Mus. Mem. vol. viii, Xo. 2, 1921. [3] T6S^ ANTHROP, 769 234 Memoirs Bernice P. Bishop Museum According to the Tongan census of 1920 there were at that time 23,128 Tongans in the group. Census returns for the past twenty years show that as a whole the Tongan population is increasing slowly. A temporary decrease was shown in the reports for 19 18 and 19 19, hut returns for 1920 show a slight increase. It is of interest to notice also that there has been considerably less mod- ern mixture with other races than in many other Polynesian groups. 'I'he census of 191 7 records only 300 mixed bloods. How accurate this may be I do not know, but since the same census records only 347 Europeans and 529 other Pacific islanders, it is apparent that there have been fewer opportunities and temptations to marry outside the race than there have been in many other places where the aboriginal inhabitants are greatly outnumbered by the Europeans or Orientals. These facts should be borne in mind. t4] Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 235 METHOD All measurcnients were taken in accordance with the reji^ulations of the International Agreement. The technicjue is described in some detail in my previous paper^ but for the sake of convenience is here repeated in outline. Each measure- ment and index is numbered, and in the tables throughout this paper these numbers refer consistently to the same measurements. AXTIIROI'OMKTRIC CuARACI'KRS 1. Stature: recorded to the nearest centimeter (shoes removed). 2. Maximum head lengfth : from the glabella to the opisthocranium. 3. Maximum head width. 4. Mininuim frontal diameter: transverse. 5. Maximum face width or bizyg;omatic diameter. 6. Bis:onial diameter at the angle of the mandible avoiding as nuich of tile muscles as possible. 7. .\natomical face lieight : nasion to gnathion. 8. Nose height nasion to subnasale. 9. Nasal width : alare to alare. 10. Physiognomic ear length or height. 11. Physiognomic ear breadth. INDICES 12. Cephalic or length-breadth index = n-.easurement No 3 X 100 measurement No. 2 IT tT\ r . • t 1 • 1 measurement No. 4 X 100 13. Transverse fronto-panetal nidex = ^\ measurement No. 3 14. Transverse cephalo-facial index ^ '"^^^"'"^'"'^"^ No. 5 X 100 measurement No. 3 , e -7 i.- r * 1 • 1 measurement No. 4 X 100 15. Zygomatico-irontal mdex = -^ . measurement No. 5 (Sometimes designated as the jugo-frontal index) measurement No. 6 X 100 16. Zygomatico-mandibular index measurement No. 5 (Sometimes designated as the jugo-mandibular index) measurement No. 7 X 100 17. Anatomical facial index measurement No. 5 18. Nasal index ^"measurement No. 9 X 100 ■ measurement No. 8 19. Physiognomic ear index .- nieasurement No. 11 X 100 measurement Xo. 10 The anthropometric data were supplemented by observations on characters not quantitatively measurable. In view of the widespread misconception as to the nature of these characters and their value in somatology, it seems desirable to 'Op. cit. [5] 236 Memoirs Bernicc P. Bishop Museum point out in some detail just what has been attempted in describing characters that do not lend themselves readily to measurement. The fact that anthropologists have carelessly spoken of "types" of hair form, hair color, or eye color has given the erroneous impression — not only to the general reader but to many anthropologists as well — that these types actually exist in nature and that it is possible, for example, to arrange all human eyes in four, five, or six color groups. Although it is universally recognized that all characters that lend themselves to actual meas- urement show a continuous variation with a tendency for a large percentage of the individuals measured to cluster around a median or mean point, yet it is difficult to dislodge the idea that other characters such as color or form, which cannot be accurately measured with existing apparatus, have a discontinuous distribution. The body height or stature of the Scots, for example, ranges from 158 centimeters to 186 centimeters and averages about 172 centimeters. Very few Scotchmen are as short as 158 centimeters and very few are as tall as 186 centimeters. In pro- gressing from the extremes towards the mean the number of individuals at each step increases. It is apparent to anyone who has endeavored to classify characters which do not lend themselves to measurement that in them he is dealing with exactly the same type of continuous variation. When the metric rod cannot be applied, standards are set up along the range of variation, separated widely enough to permit of distinguishing each from the standard preceding or following it, and an endeavor is made to classify the material on this basis. The attempt to classify all existing forms of hair as straight, low waves, deep waves, curly, frizzly, or woolly, produces results very similar to those which might be expected if the stature of all men were measured with a rod graduated in 10 centimeter intervals from 130 to 190 centimeters. A man's stature would be recorded as 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, or 190 centimeters; yet it is obvious that the stature of many men would actually be 135, 136, or 137 centimeters. The rod is not graduated finely enough to record the true distribution of the measurements. In a sense hair classes may be compared with these lo-centimeter intervals. For example, straight hair might well correspond with the 130-centimeter mark and woolly hair with the 190-centi- meter mark or vice versa. But at this point the analogy breaks clown. It is not certain that low waves, deep waves, and other hair forms correspond exactly to the 140- and 150-centimeter points. Roughly they probably do. But by far the great- est diflference in the two methods and one that should always be kept in mind in the analysis of data is that in the classification of these descriptive or attribute characters, so called, the "metric rod" exists only in the mind of the observer and is by no means a vmiform or universal standard. This lack of a fixed standard makes difficult not only the comparison of small differences found by different observers, but also to a lesser extent those found at different times by the same observer. As the standard is purely visual, constructed largely upon the expe- [6] Sullivan — Tougan Somatology 2},'] riences of each observer, it necessarily fluctuates constantly, varying with new experiences. Despite the varying- standards many of these non-measurable characters have proved to be of such great value in jointing out racial similarities and differ- ences that no general somatological study is justified in omitting them. In ]X)inting out the sources of error in data of this sort it is not my purpose to belittle their value or to imply that the size of the error is uniform for all characters. Although two observers might disagree as to whether a given sample of hair were low- waved, or straight, yet they would be nmch less likely to disagree as to whether it were straight or deeply waved, and still less likely to disagree as to whether it were straight or curly. The same considerations apply to color. Recognizing then the fact of the continuous variation in these characters, I have described them as if they were discontinuous. For purposes of this paper hair form is classified as straight, low-waved, deep-waved, curly, frizzly, and woolly, and the color is designated as black, dark brown, reddish-brown, light brown, blond, golden, red, and gray. The amount of beard on the ujjper cheek, lower cheek, and chin and the amount of lK)dy hair on the chest, forearm, and leg was described as none, slight, medium, and heavy. Eye color is classified as black, dark brown, and light brown, blue, gray, blue-brown, and gray-brown. The amount of conjunctival ])igment is classified roughly in accordance with the appear- ance of the scelera — white and clear, muddy, speckled, or mottled. The develop- ment or lack of development of the epicanthic (Mongoloid) eye fold is described as absent, slight, medium, or marked. The elevation of the nasal bridge has been FiGURK 1. Diagram illustrating terminology used to describe the form of the nostrils : A, antero-posterior nostrils ; B, obliquely placed nostrils ; C, transverse nostrils. estimated in terms of low, medium, or high. The form and direction of the nos- trils are roughly classed, according to the direction of the long axis of each nostril, as antero-posterior, oblique, or transverse. (See figs, i and 2.) The slope of the forehead is estimated as vertical, moderate slope, or low. The development of the glabella is indicated by the terms smooth, medium, and prominent. The thickness [7] 238 Memoirs Bernicc P. Bishop Museum of the lijjs is recorded as thin, medium, or thick. Prog'nathism, which in a hving person is a complex and somewhat elusive character, is described as absent, slight, medium, or marked. In the ears the development of the lobes (small or large, attached or separate), the roll of the helix (rolled one-third, two-thirds, three- thirds, or flat), and the presence or absence of Darwin's tubercle were recorded. Particular care was taken to record the form of the upper incisor teeth with a view to determining the presence or absence of the shovel-shaped incisors. Although primarily described by Hrdlicka" as shovel-shaped this condition of the incisor and other teeth has more recently been described by the same author as keilodonty and koilomorphy. As the fossa is dependent on the formation of the rim, it will be sufficiently clear and less cumbersome to discuss this condition in terms of rim development or keilodonty. In this i)aper classes of no rim, trace of rim, medium rim, and marked rim correspond to Hrdlicka's classes of no shovel, plain trace, semi-shovel, shovel-shaped. The condition is well described by Hrdlicka:' "The lingual surface of the well developed shovel-shaped incisor is very striking. The usual moderate concavity from above downward is replaced by a triangular to rounded or oblong deep fossa. The base of the fossa is formed by the free edge of the tooth, its summit reaches uinvards near to the gum. The fossa is bounded laterally and generally also distally, hence on all sides by a stout rim of enamel." DESCRIPTION OF THE TONGANS The results of the seriation and averages are summarized in Tables I, II, and III. In Table I we find a fairly normal distribution in all anthropometric characters. The number of persons concerned in each character is so small that any departure from the normal cannot be regarded too seriously. Doubling the class interval is usually sufficient to smooth the curve. Even after doing this, however, the distribution of head length and face width present a somewhat skewed distribution. Indications of bimodality are also noticeable in the bigonial diameter, face height, and face index distribution. At present the significance or non-signifi- cance of these facts is not clear. ' Hrdlicka, Ales, Shovel-shaped teeth ; Am. Jour, of Phys. Anthr., vol. in, p. 429, 1920. ' Op. cit., p. 429. [8] Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 239 TABLE I. — SERIATION OF ANTHROPOMETRIC CHARACTERS IN ABSOLUTE NUMBERS STATURE Centimeters 130 1 2 3 4 Male Female 1 1 1 4 2. HEAD LENGTH Millimeters Male Female 170 1 2 3 4 1 2 1 2 1 3. HEAD WIDTH Millimeters Male Female 140 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 2 6 4. MINIMUM FRONTAL Millimeters Male Female 90 1 2 3 4 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 2 1 5 4 6 6 7 8 9 1 1 2 6 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 2 5 3 7 9 7 5 9 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 2 1 3 3 4 5 11 160 1 2 3 4 1 1 1 7 7 7 6 4 180 1 2 3 4 2 9 4 6 5 4 12 4 150 1 2 3 4 6 6 6 10 13 8 8 4 2 6 100 1 2 3 4 8 4 10 11 14 7 7 7 7 7 5 6 7 8 9 5 3 5 1 5 5 4 3 2 6 6 7 8 9 2 9 5 4 7 2 4 9 3 5 5 6 7 8 9 12 15 7 8 6 9 3 2 1 6 7 8 9 14 8 5 6 3 10 5 5 4 4 170 1 2 3 4 9 3 7 6 10 190 1 2 3 4 10 9 5 7 5 4 4 1 160 1 2 3 4 5 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 110 11 12 13 14 7 4 2 1 2 1 2 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 180 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4 8 8 3 3 2 4 1 1 1 Total 92 1 88 5 6 7 8 9 200 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4 3 4 2 7 1 2 2 4 1 4 1 1 1 1 210 1 11 12 13 1 14 5 6 7 8 9 170 1 2 3 4 2 Total 117 97 Total 117 97 15 16 17 18 19 3 1 1 Total 116 96 [9] 240 Memoirs Bernice P. Bishop Miiscimi 5. FACE WIDTH 6. BIGONIAL Millimeters Male Female Millimeters Male Fem 120 .... 90 3 1 , 1 2 9 1 2 i 3 3 3 1 4 4 1 4 2 2 3 5 4 3 6 1 6 9 10 7 1 7 1 11 8 2 8 2 3 9 1 9 6 7 130 6 100 9 14 1 2 5 1 7 7 2 2 4 2 10 5 3 4 6 3 8 4 4 6 4 9 4 3 3 ^ 5 4 3 6 1 6 6 5 5 7 1 10 7 4 4 8 7 10 8 9 9 8 3 9 5 140 8 3 110 5 1 9 6 11 8 1 2 11 4 12 3 3 / 2 13 2 4 6 4 14 1 5 7 3 15 4 1 6 6 2 16 2 / 8 17 8 2 18 1 9 7 2 19 1 .... 150 4 Total 116 96 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 2 4 1 1 5 1 6 ' 7 1 8 1 9 2 .... Total 116 97 7. FACE HEIGHT Millimeters Male Female 100 1 2 3 "Z. Z 4 1 5 6 7 8 9 110 11 12 2 13 14 2 15 16 17 18 19 120 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 130 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 140 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 3 6 6 7 3 2 4 6 2 6 9 5 8 7 8 6 6 6 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 2 11 5 7 8 7 7 6 2 11 3 5 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 Total 116 97 8. NOSE HEIGHT Millimeters Male Female 40 1 2 3 Z... ..'. 4 5 6 7 1 8 2 9 3 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 5 5 7 15 15 13 6 7 11 7 9 5 4 Total 117 2 2 6 6 7 9 15 9 7 7 10 6 3 1 2 1 1 97 [10] Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 241 9- NOSE WIDTH 10. EAR HEIGHT II. EAR WIDTH 12. CEPHALIC INDEX illimete 30 1 2 3 4 rs Male Female Millimeters Male Female 50 1 2 : Millimeters Male Female 20 1 2 3 4 Index Male 70 1 2 3 1 4 2 Feiti "2 5 6 7 8 9 !"!.'. 1 4 1 10 7 6 5 6 2 1 7 2 1 8 2 2 9 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 1 3 5 6 5 7 3 8 10 9 15 2 8 4 8 8 40 1 2 3 4 3 10 9 11 12 15 10 13 22 10 60 3 9 1 2 8 2 14 6 3 8 13 4 13 9 30 1 2 3 4 5 9 4 7 7 19 18 12 25 18 80 19 1 13 2 12 3 14 4 6 9 10 9 9 5 5 6 7 8 9 15 5 9 6 10 3 8 2 6 5 9 12 6 9 5 7 12 6 8 11 6 9 4 3 5 6 7 8 9 13 11 16 11 10 2 9 2 3 2 5 6 6 3 7 4 8 2 9 2 4 6 4 4 2 SO 1 2 3 4 3 1 1 70 7 5 1 4 2 2 5 2 3 2 4 1 1 40 1 2 3 4 2 1 1 90 1 2 3 4 2 1 5 6 7 8 9 1 5 4 1 6 7 1 8 9 1 5 6 7 8 9 5 .... Total 117 97 80 1 1 2 3 4 5 Total 116 97 Total 117 97 Total 117 97 [II] 242 Memoirs Bcrnicc P. Bishop Museum 13. FRONTO-l'ARIETAL Index Male Female 55 6 7 8 9 2 14. CEPIIALO-FACIAL Index Male Female 80 1 2 3 4 2 15. ZVCOMATICO- Index Male 60 1 2 3 3 4 FRONTAL Female 16. ZVGMATICO-MAN Index Male 60 1 2 3 1 4 2 DIBUL Fema "3 60 1 1 2 1 2 4 1 3 3 2 4 6 6 5 1 2 6 2 3 7 2 5 8 6 10 9 6 9 5 1 6 4 7 2 8 6 9 3 "1 1 1 5 3 6 1 7 4 8 4 9 7 '2 3 4 7 5 11 2 6 17 15 7 9 11 8 14 10 9 12 12 90 13 9 1 14 11 2 19 8 3 8 11 4 15 14 70 14 1 6 2 15 3 10 4 11 3 3 9 11 7 70 7 1 12 2 10 3 11 4 17 9 13 8 9 9 70 11 8 1 10 12 2 7 5 3 4 3 4 2 6 5 4 3 6 6 4 7 10 5 8 2 9 4 5 9 6 8 7 5 8 5 9 6 15 15 10 6 3 5 6 6 5 7 10 8 4 9 2 11 4 6 4 5 5 6 2 7 1 8 9 100 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 80 5 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 3 2 1 80 1 5 2 1 3 1 4 .... 80 1 2 1 3 4 Total 116 97 5 6 7 8 9 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 9 .... Total 1 16 97 Total 116 97 Total 116 97 [I2J Sullivan — Toiigan Somatology 243 17. ANATOMICAL FACE lIKKillT Index Male I'eiiiale 70 1 .... 2 3 .... 4 .... 5 6 7 8 ""2 .... 9 80 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 "1 4 6 1 5 3 5 6 10 9 7 14 5 8 5 9 9 11 11 90 13 8 1 9 9 2 10 10 3 4 6 4 10 3 5 2 5 6 5 4 7 2 2 8 1 9 100 1 ....„ 2 2 2 3 4 .... 5 6 7 1 8 9 Total 116 97 18. NASAI, INDEX 19. EAR INDEX Index Male Female Index Male Feni 60 40 1 1 "1 1 2 2 1 3 1 3 "1 4 1 "2 4 1 5 2 1 5 1 2 6 5 7 6 2 6 7 4 7 5 4 8 5 7 8 5 9 9 2 1 9 9 9 70 4 8 50 11 ~7 1 6 11 1 10 4 2 2 5 2 16 16 3 6 6 3 11 10 4 3 3 4 9 8 — 5 6 5 5 6 5 6 6 5 6 13 5 7 7 4 7 4 3 8 5 3 8 3 1 9 8 3 9 1 3 — — 80 10 .S 60 5 2 1 7 3 . 1 2 1 2 7 4 2 3 2 1 3 1 4 4 3 — Total 116 97 5 2 1 6 1 7 4 3 8 1 1 9 3 1 90 1 2 2 1 3 4 5 6 1 7 8 1 9 .... 100 ..- 106 1 z Total 117 97 [13] 244 Memoirs Bernicc P. Bishop Museum TABLE II. — SUMMARY OF ANTHROPOMETRIC CHARACTERS OF TONGANS CHARACTER MALIC FEMALE 92 to 117 persons 88 to 97 persons Average E^ S. D. V Average Ea S. D. V 1 Stature 173.0 .54 5.21 3.01 162.5 .62 5.83 3.58 2 Head length 191.0 .63 6.89 3.60 184.1 .65 6.47 3.51 3 Head width 154.8 .39 4.26 2.75 150.0 .51 5.06 3.37 4 Min. frontal 104.8 .45 4.87 4.64 103.0 .47 4.65 4.51 5 Face width 143.5 .55 5.94 4.13 136.1 .61 6.03 4.43 6 Big-onial 104.8 .54 5.81 5.54 99.2 .49 4.80 4.83 7 Face height 128.2 .63 6.81 5.31 124.1 .58 5.79 4.66 8 Nose height 57.5 .36 3.91 6.80 56.7 .38 3.75 6.61 9 Nose width 44.4 .27 3.02 6.80 41.9 .29 2.86 6.82 10 Ear height 66.0 .42 4.57 6.92 64.5 .40 3.97 6.15 11 Ear width 34.5 .24 2.62 7.59 33.4 .23 2.35 7.03 12 Cephalic index 81.1 .29 3.14 3.87 81.6 .41 4.09 5.01 13 Fronto-parietal index 67.6 .32 3.51 5.19 68.7 M 3.22 4.68 14 Cephalo-facial index 92.8 .43 4.68 5.04 91.2 22 3.23 3.54 15 Zygomatico-frontal index 73.1 .39 4.23 5.78 75.4 .33 3.33 4.41 16 Zygomatico mandibular index 73.2 .42 4.56 6.22 72.5 .36 3.57 4.92 17 Facial index 89.2 .41 4.43 4.96 90.8 .43 4.32 4.75 18 Nasal index 77.6 .70 7.58 9.76 74.2 .62 6.15 8.28 19 Ear index 52.4 .36 3.93 7.50 51.8 .39 3.93 7.58 a In this table E = propable error of the average, S. D. = standard deviation, and V = coefficient of variation in percentage. TABLE III. — SUMMARY OF ATTRIBUTE CI-I.\RACTERS OF TONGANS CHARACTER MALE FEMALE Skin Color: Von Luschan's scale Unexposed Nos. 14, 15, 16 Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16 Exposed Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23 Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18, 22 Hair form: Number Percent Number Percent Straight 49 .41.5 33 34.4 Low waves 49 41.5 45 46.9 Deep waves 17 14.4 12 12.5 Curly : 3 2.5 S 5.2 Frizzly 1 1.0 Woolly Totals 118 96 Hair color: Number Percent Number Percent Black Ill 94.1 85 87.6 Dark brown 5 4.2 4 4.1 Reddish brown 1» .8 7* 7.2 Light brown Blond -0 Golden Red P .8 Gray 1 1.0 Totals 118 97 « Bleached with lime. [14] Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 245 CHARACTER MALES ONLY Amount of Beard: Upper cheek Lower cheek None 2.1 4.2 Scant 15.8 37,2 Medium 33.7 18.1 Heavy 48^4 404 Amount of body hair: On chest On forearm None 23.4 Scant 28.7 10.5 Medium 25.5 43.2 Heavy 22^3 46J MALE Eye color: Number Percent Number Black 4 34 15 Dark brown Ill 941 79 Light brown 3 2.5 2 Blue 1 Gray Blue-brown Gray-brown Total 118 97 Conjunctiva Number Percent Number Clear 22 18.8 41 Not clear 9.S 81.2 55 Total 117 96 Epicanthic eye fold Number Percent Number Absent 63 56.8 52 Trace 2,2> 29.7 26 Mediimi 9 8.1 14 Marked 6 54 5 Total Ill 97 Nasal bridge Number Per cent Number Low 21 21.7 29 Medium 81 704 64 High 9 7.8 2 Total Ill 95 Axes of nostrils a Number Percent Number Anterior-posterior 2 1.7 5 Oblique 90 78.3 66 Transverse 23 20.0 24 Total 115 95 Slope of forehead Number Per cent Number Vertical 70 60.3 81 Moderate 4,S 38.8 15 Low 1 .9 Tota l 116 96 a See figs, i and 2. [IS] Chin 19.4 30.6 50.0 On legs 7.2, 66.7 26.0 FEMALE Per cent 15.5 81.4 2.1 1.0 Per cent 42.7 57.3 Per cent 53.6 26.8 144 5.2 Per cent 30.5 674 2.1 Per cent 5.3 69.5 253 Per cent 84.4 15.6 246 Memoirs Bernicc P. Bishop Museum CII.\R.\CTKR C/labella Ntitiiber Smooth 55 Medium 48 Prominent 9 Total 112 Lips Number Thin 12 Medium 97 Thick 7 Total 116 Prognathism Number None 63 Slight 26 Medium 29 Marked Total 118 Ear lobe Number None 5 Small separate 48 Small attached 48 Large separate 9 Large attached 5 Total 115 Helix roll Number Flat Rolled fir.st Va 20 Rolled first % 67 Rolled throughout 31 Total 118 Darwin's tubercle Number Present 25 Keilodonty Number Lateral incisor teeth No rim 48 Trace of rim 49 Medium rim / 17 Marked rim \ Mesial incisor teeth No rim 66 Trace of rim 34 Medium rim ) -ia Marked rim j Total 114 MALF. FEM.XLE Per cent 49.1 42.8 8.0 Number 81 15 1 97 Per cent 83.5 15.5 1.0 Per cent Number Per cent 10.3 10 10.3 83.6 85 87.6 6.0 2 2.1 97 Per cent Number Per cent 53.3 45 46.4 22.0 36 37.1 24.6 15 15.5 1 1.0 97 er cent Number Per cent 4.3 2 2.1 41.7 37 38.5 41.7 44 45.8 7.8 8 8.3 4.3 5 5.2 96 Per cent Number Per cent 2 2.1 16.1 34 35.4 56.8 48 50.0 26.3 12 12.5 96 Per cent 21.4 Number 5 Per cent 5.2 'er cent Number Per cent 42.1 42.9 33 37 36.3 40.6 14.9 21 23.1 57.9 29.8 57 24 62.6 ' 26.4 12.3 10 10.9 91 [16] Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 247 The results summarized in Tables II and III show that the Tongans are among the tallest groups of mankind. The men average 173 centimeters or about 5 feet 8 inches in height. On the average the women are 10 centimeters, or 4 inches, shorter. 'IMie head is both long and broad yielding an average index of 81. 1 for the men and 81.6 for the women. There is no assurance, however, that these are the natural diameters of the Tongan head. In the skeletal material brought back by Gifford and McKern, seven crania were in a fair state of preservation. With the single exception of one cranium of a young child all of these crania showed a moderate to a pronounced degree of occipital flattening accompanied by marked asymmetry, pointing clearly to the fact that they had been artificially deformed. The cranial length-breadth indices were 82.7, 84.5, 86.0, 86.0, 88.2, and 93.7. These average 86.8. At my request inquiries were made by Gifford and McKern as to the preva- lence and methods of head deformation. The information shows that the Tongans in the past and to some extent at the present time shape the heads of children, but the description of the methods employed throws no light on the deformation seen in the crania. According to several informants the child was laid on a piece of tapa with the top of its head placed against a heavy block of squared wood, the pressure tending to flatten the top of the cranium. The deformation described above is decidedly not of this type. Since this procedure is said to have been continued for one month only, its effect may be considered as negligible. It is difficult to under- stand how it would have any appreciable effect even if continued indefinitely, since the amount of pressure involved must have been very slight. In the Tongan skeletal material that I examined, the tops of the crania show no evidences of flattening. The deformation on these Tongan crania is very simi- lar to that observed in the crania of many groups of Indians in the southwestern United States. Occipital flattening is usually thought to be accidental — at least in origin. When the effect of it was once recognized, conscious effort may have been made in certain groups to duplicate by artificial means the results obtained by accident. The hard beds and wooden pillows that are still in use among the Tongans suggest a possible explanation of the occipital flattening, as it is known that a certain amount of deformation or flattening is easily brought about by hard pillows, particularly in i)ersons who are naturally short headed. Examples of such accidental ^flattening of the occiput are numerous among the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans. The only difficulty involved in this ex])lanation is to account for the difference between the degree of deformation found in the living series and that in the cranial series. It is known that the crania are not modern. The average length-breadth index of these crania is nearly 6 points higher than the same index in the living. On the whole, while the implication is that deformation is not so prevalent at present as in the past, it seems better to base no generalization on the [17] 248 Memoirs Bernicc P. Bishop Museum form of the head. Directly or indirectly, minimum frontal diameter, transverse fronto-parietal index and cephalo-facial index would also be somewhat altered in persons with deformed occiputs. On account of the very close correspondence of Tongans and Samoans in cephalic index it is obvious that this caution should be extended to the Samoan data'* as well. The transverse and vertical diameters of the Tongan face and its component parts are so large that the face and nose may both well be described as massive. The skin is a medium yellowish-brown where it is unexposed to wind and sun. Figure 2. Tong^an nostrils arranged roughly according to the orienta- tion of the axes. Photographs hy Gifford and McKern. Exposed parts of the skin of a few of the persons were a very dark chocolate- brown. The hair may be described as black, of medium coarseness, and either straight or slightly waved. The beard is moderately developed and the amount of body-hair on the chest, arms, and legs may also be described as somewhat below the average. The eyes are dark brown in color and a considerable amount of con- junctival pigment is normal. The epicanthic eye fold is typically absent, but nearly 30 per cent showed what is termed a "trace" of this fold, and a few marked examples of it were noted. ' B. P. Bishop Mus. Mem. vol. viii, No. 2, 1921. [18] Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 249 The eyes of Tongans as a group are less wide open than are the eyes of Caucasian peoples. The types illustrated in Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6 in Plate xxxvi, A, are most common. They are characterized by being placed somewhat obliquely with just a suggestion of an epicanthic fold, and by a slightly thickened and bevelled lower lid. No. 8 has a well-marked epicanthic fold and No. 7 a definite trace of it. The nose of the Tongan is worthy of some detailed description and com- parison. As judged by the standard of the European nose the nasal bridge of Tongans cannot be said to be highly arched. (See PI. xxxviii, A and B.) It is j)revailingly of medium or low elevation from the face. The nostrils are some- what oval in shape with the long axis tending to run in an oblique or transverse direction. Although, as expressed by the nasal index, the Tongan has what is usually termed a moderately broad or mesorrhine nose, yet by absolute measurement the nasal width is exceeded only by that of a few Negroid groups. (See Pis. XXXVI and xxxix.) In Table IV I have given some comparative data on the range of the nasal index for given widths of nose. It is not at all unusual to find groups with identical nasal widths varying by 20 points in nasal index. This leads me to believe that unless the absolute diameters are somewhat nearly alike in two groups a correspondence in nasal index should not be taken too seriously. The enormous proportions of the Tongan (and also of the Samoan) nose are approached only by certain American Indian groups. The Tongans, the Samoans, the Chip- pewa Indians, the Egyptians, the Ilokos, the Kirghez, the Khotan, and the Polish Jews have nasal indices averaging from 72.6 to 78.0. Does it follow that their noses are very similar? Not at all. In some cases the low nasal index is the result of the great height of the nose and in spite of the great width. This is true of the Tongans, Samoans, and Chippewa Indians. In the others it is due to the fact that the noses are of moderate width and height. So it seems that the use of the nasal index should at least be supplemented by absolute measurements. [19] 250 Memoirs Bern ice P. Bishop Museum TABLK IV. COMPARISON OF NASAL WIDTH, NASAL HEIGHT, AND NASAL INDICES ARRANGED IN ORDER OF MAGNITUDF. OF NASAL WIDTH. NASAL CROUP WIDTH Kajji, Nigeria 43.0 Mawambi pygmy 45.0 Tonga 44.4 Toricelli, New Guinea 44.3 Fan 44.0 Kagoro, Nigeria 44.0 Sentani, New Guinea 44.0 Humboldt Bay, New Guinea 44.0 Samoa 43.8 Shoshoni Amerindian 43.4 Chippewa Amerindian 42.8 Negrito, Zambales 42.8 Maricopa Amerindian 41.4 Tagalog Bulakan 41.0 Tagalog, Rizal 41.0 Risaya Iloilo 41.0 Nahuqua Amerindian 40.5 Iloko, Iloko.s Norte 40.0 Senoi 40.0 Dolan, Turkestan 39.9 Suhanun 39.9 Sioux Amerindian 39.9 Sundanese 39.0 Banjerese 38.8 Kirghiz 38.2 Dombs, India 38.0 Aino 38.0 Nabaloi, Benguet 38.0 South Andamanese 37.7 Egyptian i7.2> Polish Jew 37.0 Little Russian Jew 37.0 Khotan, Turkestan 36.9 The forehead of the Tongan is well developed and presents a rather gradual slope. The glabella is developed only to a moderate degree. Though the lips are designated as of medium thickness (PI. xxxvi, B), it is obvious that if our stand- ards were more sensitive we should find that they were somewhat above the aver- age in thickness. As a group the Tongans are not prognathous. However it is safe to say that the face is more projecting than that of the European. The chin is positive but not so prominent a feature as that of Europeans. (See PI. xxxvii, A and xxxvii, B.) The ears are large but offer no points of special interest. The rim on the lingual surface of the upper incisor teeth is typically not well developed. It was noticed, however, in what may be termed a moderate degree of frequency. NASAL NASAL [lEIGUT INDEX AUTHOR 49.0 91.0 Tremearne Martin 57.5 77.6 Sullivan Martin 48.0 91.1 Martin 47.0 92.9 Tremearne 49.0 87.9 Van der Sande 53.0 83.7 Van der Sande 59.8 73.6 Sullivan 52.2 83.1 Boas 56.5 75.5 Hrdlicka 40.5 106.0 Reed 49.0 85.2 Ten Kate 50.0 82.0 Folkmar 51.0 80.5 Folkmar 49.0 84.1 Folkmar Martin 55.0 73.T Folkmar 47.0 85.0 Martin 51.2 78.9 Joyce 52.6 74.8 Christie 58.3 68.8 Sullivan 45.1 86.9 Garrett 44.3 88.0 Garrett 49.3 78.1 Joyce 44.0 86.5 Fawcett 55.9 68.0 Koganei 40.0 95.0 Bean 42.7 88.2 Martin 48.7 76.6 Martin 51.0 72.6 Fishberg 53.0 69.8 Fishberg 49.9 74.7 Joyce [20j Sullhan — Tongan Somatology COMPARISON OF THE TONGANS WITH THE SAMOANS 251 Researches during the past year provide the necessary data for a comparison of the Tongans and the Sanioans, and it is practicable to make the comparison somewhat more detailed than is usual, because both groups were studied by the same men, and differences in method and technique can therefore be largely ignored. In Table V the standard deviations and coefficients of variation are com- pared. The Samoan series is somewhat noteworthy for its relative homogeneity when compared with existing groups of man. As a group the Tongans show noticeably more variation than the Samoans. In thirteen of the nineteen characters under discussion the Tongans are more variable than the Samoans — a statement which applies to both sexes. In the six characters in which the Samoans exceed the Tongans in range, the excess is very slight. In most of the characters in which the Tongans are the more variable the excess is appreciably larger. In both groups the variability as expressed by the coefficient of variation is consider- ably greater in the males than in the females. In comparing the averages of the two groups for each anthropometric char- acter shown in Table VI and the frequencies of the attribute characters shown in Table VII, the very close correspondence of the Tongans to the Samoans is striking in every character that lends itself to accurate measurement. Most of the differ- ences occurring might well be regarded as chance differences. It must be remem- bered again that small differences in distribution in the attribute or descriptive characters are not to be taken too seriously. TABLE V. COMPARISON' OF STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND COEFFICIENTS OF VARIATION IN SAMOAN AND TONGAN SERIES CHARACTER MALF. FEMALE S. D. ± V. in per cent S. D. ^; V. in per cent Samoan Tongan Samoan Tongan Samoan Tongan Samoan Tongan 1. Stature 5.25 5.21 3.05 3.01 4.92 5.83 3.05 3.58 2. Head length 5.69 6.89 2.98 3.60 5.22 6.47 2.85 3.51 3. Head width 4.46 4.26 2.88 2.75 3.87 5.06 2.61 3.37 4. Mininumi frontal 5.98 4.87 5.78 4.64 3.96 4.65 3.90 4.51 5. Face width 5.23 5.94 3.59 4.13 3.79 6.03 2.77 4.43 6. Bigonial 5.13 5.81 4.90 5.54 3.93 4.80 3.96 4.83 7. Face height 6.56 6.81 5.00 5.31 6.41 5.79 5.30 4.66 8. Nose height 3.64 3.91 6.09 6.80 4.53 3.75 8.34 6.61 9. Nose width 2.59 3.02 5.91 6.80 2.56 2.86 6.21 6.82 10. Ear height 4.23 4.57 6.39 6.92 3.33 3.97 5.44 6.15 11. Ear width 2.76 2.62 7.84 7.59 2.30 2.35 6.84 7.03 12. Cephalic index 3.53 3.14 4.34 3.87 2.98 4.09 3.68 5.01 13. Fronto-parietal index 3.30 3.51 4.94 5.19 3.12 3.22 4.54 4.68 14. Cephalo-facial index 2.84 4.68 3.01 5.04 2.63 3.23 2.84 3.54 15. Zygomatico-f rental index 3.55 4.23 5.01 5.78 3.34 3.33 4.49 4.41 16. Zygomatico-mandibiilar index 3.84 4.56 5.42 6.22 3.50 3.57 4.83 4.92 17. Facial index 4.87 4.43 5.42 4.96 5.03 4.32 5.60 4.75 18. Nasal index 5.86 7.58 7.96 9.76 7.99 6.15 10.47 8.28 19. Ear index 3.79 3.93 7.11 7.50 4.53 3.93 8.25 7.58 [21] 252 Memoirs Bernice P. Bishop Museum TABLE VI. COMPARISON OF AVEIt.\GES OF ANTHROPOMETRIC CHARACTERS OF TONGANS AND SAMOANS CHARACTER MALE FEMALE 12 3 4 5 6 A, A2 Ai-A= Vei= + e2= A, A, Sanioan Tongan Sanioan Tongati 67-70 92-117 20-23 88-97 Persons Persons Persons Persons 1. Stature 171.7 173.0 + 1.3 .83 161.2 162.5 2. Head length 190.6 191.0 +0.4 .93 183.0 184.1 3. Head width 154.8 154.8 0.0 .67 148.1 150.0 4. Minimum frontal 103.4 104.8 + 1.4 .85 101.5 103.0 5. Face width 145.9 143.5 —2.4- .84 136.5 136.1 6. Bigonial 104.6 104.8 +0.2 .82 99.0 99.2 7. Face height 131.1 128.2 —2.9- 1.01 121.1 124.1 8. Nose height 59.8 57.5 —2.3' .56 54.3 56.7 9. Nose width 43.8 44.4 +0.6 .41 41.2 41.9 10. Ear height 66.1 66.0 —0.1 .65 61.2 64.5 11. Ear width 35.2 34.5 —0.7 .41 33.6 33.4 12. Cephalic index 81.3 81.1 —0.2 .51 80.8 81.6 13. Fronto-parietal index 66.8 67.6 + 0.8 .51 68.8 68.7 14. Cephalo- facial index 94.2 92.8 -1.4= .55 92.4 91.2 15. Zygomatico-frontal index 70.9 73.1 +2.2' .58 74.5 75.4 16. Zygomatico-mandibular index 71.7 73.2 + 1.5 .62 72.5 72.5 17. Facial index 89.9 89.2 —0.7 .72 89.8 90.8 18. Nasal index 73.6 77.6 + 4.0i .99 76.3 74.2 19. Ear index 53.3 32.4 —0.9 .58 54.9 51.8 7 A,-.\, + 1.3 + 1.1 + 1.9 + 1.5 — 0.4 + 0.2 + 3.0 + 2.4 4-0.7 + 3.3 — 0.2 + 0.8 — 0.1 — 1.2 + 0.9 0.0 + 1.0 — 2.1 — 3.1 In Table VI the Samoan male averages are given in column i and the Tongan male averages in column 2. The differences of the two averages with the Samoans as a standard are given in column 3, superior figure i indicating possible significant difference and superior figure 2 an approach to significant difference. These differences are compared with the magnitude of the errors of the averages in column 4. Unless a difference in column 3 is three times as great as the magnitude of the errors in column 4, it is not regarded as significant. Columns 5, 6, and 7 give the same data for the females as are given in columns i, 2, and 3 for males The differences in the females are less significant on account of the size of the Samoan sample. TABLE VII. COMPARISON OF ATTRIBUTE CHARACTERS IN TONGANS AND SAMOANS CHARACTER ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS Samoan 67-70 Persons Skin color Medium (unexposed part) brown Von Luschan's numbers 14, 15, 16 [22] MALE FEMALE Tongan Samoan Tongan 92-118 20-23 88-97 Persons Persons Persons Medium Medium Medium brown brown brown 14, 15, 16, 17 13,14,15 13,14,15,16 Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 253 CHARACTER MALE Hair form Straight Low waves Deep waves Curly Frizzly Woolly [air colo Black . Dark b iinount c None . Scant . Mediiin Heavy None . Scant . Median Heavy None . Scant . Mediun Heavy ye color Black . Dark b Light 1 Blue ... onjuncti Clear . Not cl< ^picanthi Absent Trace . Mediur Markec Nasal bridge Low Medium .. High Samoan 55.1 27.5 10.1 5.8 1.4 Tongan 41.5 41.5 14.4 2.5 FEMALE Samoan Tongan 47.8 34.4 39.1 46.9 8.8 12.5 5.2 4.3 1.0 Hair color Black 91.4 94.1 56.9 87.6 Dark brown 4.3 4.2 8.8 4.1 Amount of hair — males only UPPER CHEEK CHIN None 10.1 2.1 Scant 46.3 15.8 23.2 19.4 Medium 31.9 33.7 27.5 30.6 Heavy 11.5 48.4 49.2 50.0 LOWER CHEEK CHEST None 14.5 4.2 59.7 23.4 Scant 43.3 37.2 22.3 28.7 Medium 23.2 18.1 14.9 25.5 Heavy 18.8 40.4 3.0 22.3 FOREARM LEG None ;. 3.0 Scant 19.1 10.5 7.2 7.3 Medium 35.3 43.2 42.0 66.7 Heavy 42.6 46.3 50.7 26.0 MALE FEMALE Eye color Black 2.9 3.4 13.0 15.5 Dark brown 97.1 94.1 2.5 82.6 4.3 814 Light brown 2.1 Blue 1.0 Conjunctiva Clear 23.5 18.8 45.4 42.7 Not clear 76.5 81.2 54.6 57.3 Epicanthic eye fold Absent 68.1 56.8 47.8 53.6 Trace 27.5 29.7 43.4 26.8 Medium 2.8 8.1 1.4 5.4 8.8 14 4 Marked 5.2 21.4 64.3 14.3 21.7 70.4 7.8 56.9 39.1 4.3 30.5 67.4 2.1 [23] 254 Memoirs Bernice P. Bishop Museum CHARACTER MALE FEMALE Samoan Tongan Samoan Tongan Axes of nostrils Anterior posterior 2.9 1.7 5.3 Oblique 57.3 78.3 39.1 69.5 Transverse 39.7 20.0 60.9 25.3 Slope of forehead Vertical 40.0 60.3 85.7 84.4 Moderate 58.5 38.8 14.3 15.6 Low 1.5 .9 Glabella Smooth 29.4 49.1 100.0 83.5 Medium , 55.8 42.8 15.5 Prominent 14.7 8.0 1.0 Lips Thin 10.3 4.3 10.3 Medium 92.8 83.6 91.4 87.6 Thick 7.1 6.0 4.3 2.1 Prognathism None 56.7 53.3 69.6 46.4 Slight 23.8 22.0 13.0 37.1 Medium 17.8 24.6 17.4 15.5 Marked 1.4 1.0 Keilodonty Lateral incisor teeth: No rim 51.5 42.1 57.1 36.3 Trace of rim 34.3 42.9 23.8 40.6 M^rSrlm} ''■' ^^^ l^-O 23.1 Mesial incisor teeth: No rim 68.2 57.9 76.0 62.6 Trace of rim 25.7 29.8 14.3 26.4 Medium rim) ^/^ ,^, „. ,„„ Marked rim} ^"^ ^^.3 9.5 10.9 Although the differences are small it may be profitable to further analyze those that do occur. Head length and breadth and, consequently, the cephalic index are almost identical in the two groups, but the Tongans have slightly lower, nar- rower faces, lower noses, a higher average nasal index and lower average cephalo- facial indices. There is also noticeable a slightly greater tendency to have wavy or curly hair. Beards are slightly heavier and body hair more plentiful. There is more conjunctival pigment in the Tongans and a higher frequency of the epicanthic eye fold. There are fewer highly arched nasal bridges. [24.1 Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 255 EVIDENCES OF MELANESIAN INTERMIXTURE Although the differences between Tongans and Samoans are v^ery slight, yet almost without exception they point in the direction of Melanesia. Of the Samoans' I said that considering the grouj) as a unit there seems to be very little Melancsian blood in evidence. On the basis of cultural or linguistic affinities it is common to assume a large amount of Melanesian blood in all Polynesian groups. If such blood exists it should be easily demonstrable. Melanesian intermixture should result in a lower stature, longer heads, broader, shorter noses, shorter ears, more curly, frizzly, or woolly hair, more beard and body hair, a smaller transverse fronto- parietal index, a lower, narrower face, greater prognathism, and a heavier develop- ment of the glabella and supra-orbital region. A large percentage of the difference between Tongans and Samoans is of a nature that from purely theoretical reasons I suggested might be expected to result from Melanesian mixture. As a matter of fact there are few or no careful and detailed descriptions of those Melanesian groups that arc geographically nearest to the Tongans and very meager data from the area as a whole. In order to state with any finality what might be expected from the mixture of Polynesians and Melanesians, in lieu of any absolute data on the question, detailed and accurate descriptions of several living Melanesian groups would at least be necessary. Assuming, however, that I have stated with approximate accuracy what might be expected in such a mixture, the analysis can be carried a step further. As a test woolly, frizzly, curly, deeply waved, and, to a less extent, low-waved hair, may be taken to indicate Melanesian physical mixture. . If it does indicate Melane- sian mixture and this mixture has taken place on a large scale within fairly recent times, it is to be expected that persons with wavy and curly hair will show other Melanesian characteristics. By this I do not mean that there is necessarily any high correlation between the combinations in which physical characters are inher- ited when two races mix but that, purely on the basis of chance, if curly, wavy hair indicates the presence of Melanesian blood, it is reasonable to expect that the curly, wavy-haired group, as a unit, will show a closer approach to the Melanesian average than will the straight-haired group. Accordingly I have divided my material on the basis of hair form into three groups. The first group includes the straight-haired persons, the second group those with low waved hair, and the third group includes all with deeply-waved, curly, or frizzly hair. I have compared these three groups with the total series. The averages of the three groups do not necessarily equal the averages of the total series since the data for a number of persons who were doubtfully marked "straight to low waves" or "low waves to deep waves" were excluded in making up the " Op. cit., p. g6. [2S] 256 Memoirs Bernice P. Bishop Museum smaller groups. In seriating these doubtful types of hair form in the summary, I alternately placed one of these in the lower class and one in the upper class. In obtaining averages of groups based on hair form, it seemed best to exclude the data marked "doubtful." The averages for the anthropometric characters in these four groups will be found in Table VIII. TABLE VIII. — .\VER.\GES OF ANTHROPOMETRIC CHARACTERS FOR TONGANS WITH DIFFERENT TYPES OF HAIR FORM MEN Character Total group 1. Stature 173.0 2. Head length 191.0 3. Head width 154.8 4. Minimum frontal 104.8 5. Face width 143.5 7. Face height 128.2 8. Nose height 57.5 9. Nose width 44.4 12. Cephalic index 81.1 13. Fronto-parietal index 67.6 14. Cephalo-facial index 92.8 17. Facial index 89.2 18. Nasal index 77.6 WOMEN Character Total group 1. Stature 162.5 5. Face width 136.1 7. Face height 124.1 8. Nose height 56.7 9. Nose width 41.9 12. Cephalic index 81.6 13. Fronto-parietal index 68.7 14. Cephalo-facial index 91.2 18. Nasal index 74.2 Deep-waved Straight hair I,o\v-waved hair to woolly hair 171.0 173.9 173.2 189.3 193.2 192.2 154.3 155.2 156.9 102.4 106.1 103.3 144.7 145.2 143.9 129.7 129.0 128.3 58.9 57.8 57.0 44.3 44.8 45.6 81.3 80.3 81.8 66.3 68.3 66.0 93.7 93.7 91.9 89.8 88.9 89.3 7S.S N 77.7 80.4 Deep-waved Straight hair Low-waved hair to woolly hair 161.3 163.1 162.3 137.0 137.2 136.4 124.0 124.5 123.3 57.3 56.8 56.1 42.1 41.9 41.8 81.0 82.2 81.2 69.1 67.9 69.3 91.5 91.0 90.9 73.6 74.2 74.7 There are no consistent differences between the straight-haired and the low-waved groups. But in the groups containing the persons with deeply waved, curly, frizzly, and woolly hair we notice that the averages again point in the direc- tion of Melanesia. The faces are lower and narrower, the noses are lower and wider, the average cephalo-facial index is lower and the nasal index is higher. Emphasizing, then, more the nature than the magnitude of the difference, I am inclined to believe that in those traits in which the Tongans differ from the Samoans the differences may probably be attributed to Melanesian intermixture. [26] Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 257 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Comparison of the Tongans with the Sanioans has thus shown remarkably close resemblance between these two groups in almost every detail. The few small differences might well be considered as accidental or as reflecting slight local differences, were it not for the fact that they point in the main in one direction. From the general direction of these differences it seems most reasonable to assume that they are the result of IMelanesian intermixture. In another publication' I stated that I saw no reason for assuming any appreciable amount of Melanesian blood in Samoa. Perhaps this statement should be qualified to make its meaning clearer. The census returns show that there are in Samoa and Tonga a considerable number of natives of Fiji and other Melanesian islands. In both of these island groups there are persons of known and admittedly mixed Melanesian-Polynesian parentage. These facts are known and require no anthropological research to establish them. In view of these facts it is desirable to determine to what extent the population styling itself as of pure Samoan or of pure Tongan origin has been in the past affected by Melanesian intermixture. This problem can be solved only by determining the degrees of differences and likenesses in the groups concerned. The results, however, can be expressed only in general terms, for there are no known factors in the equation. From the marked general differences in physical type between Samoans and Melanesians I conclude that the amount of Melanesian blood in Samoa is very small. This may be due to the fact that intermixture never took place on a very large scale in Samoa, or that if it did take place on a large scale it was so long ago that the Melanesian element is almost completely absorbed by the general Samoan population. In Tonga conditions are somewhat different. Enough Melanesian blood is in evidence to alter noticeably the average physical type. But such correlation exists between the various Melanesian traits in individuals and groups that when individ- uals are classed on the basis of one Melanesian trait the averages in many other traits also reflect the Melanesian intermixture more clearly than do the Tongans as a whole. From this it may be assumed that the Melanesian element in Tonga is either comparatively recent or considerable in amount. The chances are in favor of recent rather than great intermixture, but since skeletal material of known chronological sequence is lacking, no definite conclusion is possible. It may be said, however, that without much doubt there is considerably more Melanesian blood in the general Tongan population than there is in the general Samoan population. In their broader racial affinities the Samoans and Tongans are very similar, and therefore what I have said of the Samoans holds for the Tongans. Never- ' Op. cit. [27] 258 Memoirs Bernicc P. Bishop Museum theless it seems desirable to repeat the discussion in my paper on Samoan Soma- tology'* and to extend it somewhat. I have stated my belief that there was little or no reason for assuming the Samoans to be of European or Caucasian origin. From the evidence available I have concluded that the Samoans are of Mongoloid or Yellow-Brown affinities. Scientific opinion has wavered back and forth on the question as to whether there was or was not justification for calling the yellow and the brown elements of this stock separate races. Everyone must admit that there is some justification for so doing. Superficially there are some striking dififerences in the two stocks. When all the groups composing this stock are considered, anthropologists have found that the two elements have a considerable number of very important characteristics in common. One group may depart radically from the other groups in one or two characters but in all other characters will approach the form prevailing in the majority of the groups. At present the line of cleavage between the yellow and brown elements of this stock seems to be rather well marked. This is probablv due not to the fact that such a gap exists but that our data is lacking on many interesting and connecting types. The Chinese, the Japanese, the Koreans, the numerous Siberian peoples, and many other similar Asiatic groups constitute the yellow element of this group. The American Indians, the Malays, the Indonesians and in my opinion the Polynesians constitute the brown element of the Yellow- Brown race. Each one of these groups named represents a departure from the other groups in a greater or less number of important characteristics. Yet analysis reveals a large number of remaining characteristics pointing clearly to its major affinities. It is for this reason that I insist that no classification based on hair form, cephalic index, or any one single character should be taken too seriously. It may very well be that the one character which was hit upon as a basis for classifica- tion may be the very one in which the group under discussion has become dififer- entiated from its closest relatives. Relationship must be based on a totality of characters — the larger the number of physical characters used in indicating rela- tionships the greater the probability that the relationship indicated is a real one. The evidence for a Caucasian origin of the Samoans and Tongans is decidedly sparse and unconvincing. They do depart somewhat from the bulk of the Yellow-Brown peoples in hair form. Coarse, stiff, or lank black hair occurs only rarely in these two groups. The prevailing form is moderately coarse in texture and either straight or, quite as often, slightly wavy in form. This more than any other one thing is responsible for the theory of a European origin of these peoples. Now while the hair is not so stiff, straight, and coarse as the prevailing form of hair in the Yellow-Brown peoples, neither is it so fine as the " Op. cit. [28] Sullivan — Tongan Somatology 259 prevailing hair form of the Caucasians. I do not wish, however, to make too much of this point and am wilhng to grant that in this one character the Samoans and Tongans approach nearer to the Caucasian than to the Yellow-Brown types. The same can be said of the lack of prognathism and of the development of the chin. But it should be remembered that the Polynesians arc not alone among the Yellow-Browns in thus ap])roaching a Caucasian norm. Certain American Indians approach the Caucasian norms even more closely in the lack of prognathism, ele- vation of the nose, and in the develoimient of the chin. A few other characters upon which we have data are intermediate between the prevailing Caucasian and Yellow-Brown norms. In detail these are hair tex- ture, amount of beard, amount of body hair, size, shape and direction of the palpebral fissure (eye opening), low frequency of the epicanthic eye fold, low frequency of the enamel rim on the upper incisor teeth, the size of the teeth, the hair color (occasionally a slight brownish tint in sunlight) and the cephalo-facial index. But in skin color, eye color, the amovint of conjunctival pigment, the eleva- tion of the nasal bridge, the form and direction of the nostrils, nasal height, nasal breadth, nasal index, the thickness of the lips, the large massive faces reflected in the face height, face width, and bigonial width, the Samoans and the Tongans differ from the Caucasians and approach more nearly the norms of the brown division of the Yellow-Brown race. These characters may be summarized in tabular form as follows: TAliLE IX. RACI.VL AFFINITIES OF THE TONGANS AND SAMOANS A. .Approach Caucasian norms in : Hair form Lack of prognathism Chin development B. Intermediate between Cau- casian and Yellow-Brown in : Hair texture .\mount of beard .■\mount of body hair Form of palpebral fissure Absence of eye fold Absence of incisor rim Hair color Cephalo-facial index C. Approach Yellow-Brown norm in : Skin color Eye color Conjunctival pigment Nasal bridge Xostrils Nasal height Nasal breadth Nasal index Lips Face width Face height Bigonial diameter It will be noted that many characters occurring in both races but distinctive of neither have been omitted. I may likewise have laid myself open to criticism by assigning any one character exclusively to one race. This has been done con- sciously for the sake of clearness in presentation. In saying, for example, that [29] 26o Memoirs Bernice P. Bishop Museum the Tongans and Samoans approach the norm of the Yellow-Brown race in skin color, I say it knowing that a few Caucasian groups have a skin color nearer to that of the Tongans and Samoans than to many Yellow-Brown groups. Yet on the whole hrown skin is more distinctive of the Yellow-Brown peoples than it is of the Caucasians. I have also perhaps heen somewhat too generous in admitting that certain characters approach the Caucasian norm when they also approach the norms of other race groups. While I have said that in the amount of beard and body hair the Samoans and Tongans approach the Caucasian norms it should be remembered that in these respects they approach just as closely the Melanesian norm. Beyond saying that the bulk of the data at hand seems to point to the conclusion that the Polynesians under discussion belong to the brown division of the Yellow-Brown race in the same sense that it is customary to regard the American Indians as members of this race, it seems unwise to go further at this time. From this it should not be assumed that the relationship of the Polynesians and the American Indians is immediate and close. At present I would not care to do more than to express a belief that the relationship existing between the Polynesians and the American Indians is considerably closer than that existing between either the Polynesians or the American Indians and the Chinese. It is probable, however, that closer relatives to the Polynesian will be found nearer at hand. [30] Bkrnice p. Bishop Musrum Memoirs, Voi.umk VIII, Plate XXXVI A. TONGAN TYPES SHOWING THE Rv\NGE OF VARIATION IN EYE FORM, THE CHARACTERISTIC HAEF- OPEN EYES SOMEWHAT OBLIQUELY PLACED, AND THE SLIGHTLY THICKENED AND nEVELLED LOWER LID WITH lUST A SUGGESTION OF AN EPICANTHIC FOLD. B. TONGAN TYPES SHOWING THE FORM OF THE LIPS, NOS. I TO 4 IN MEN AND NOS. 5 TO 8 IN WOMEN. NOS. 2, 3, 6, AND 7 ARE THE MOST COMMON TYPES. AS A GROUP THE TONGANS HAVE LIPS OF SOMEWHAT MORE THAN MEDIUM THICKNESS, DIFFERING QUITE MARKEDLY FROM THOSE OF CAUCASIAN PEOPLE. Photographs by GifFord and McKern Berxice p. Risnnr Mi^sei'm Memoirs, Volume VIM, Pf.ate XXXVII A. PROFILES OF TONGAN MEN ARRANGED IN ORDER OF CHIN DEVELOPMENT. THE TONGAN CHIN THOUGH POSITIVE IS BY NO MEANS SO PRONOUNCED AS THAT OF CAUCASIAN PEOPLES. NOS. 3, 4, 5, AND 6 PORTRAY THE MOST COMMON TYPES. B. PROFILES OF TONGAN WOMEN ARRANGED IN ORDER OF CHIN DEVELOPMENT. THE CHIN OF TONGAN WOMEN IS NOTICEABLY LESS DEVELOPED THAN THAT OF THE MEN. NOS. 3. 4. 5, AND 6 PORTRAY THE MOST COMMON TYPES. Photographs by GiflFord and McKern Bf.rnice p. Bishop Museum Memoirs, Volume VIII. Plate XXXVIII A. PROFILES OF TONGAN MEN SHOWING TIIK KLKVATION OF THE NASAL BRUKJE AND THE PROFILE OF THE NOSE. NOS. 7 AND 8 SHOW A HIGHLY ELEVATED NASAL BRIDGE. THE NASAL BRIDGE OF THE TONG.SNS AS A GROIT IS NOT ELEVATED SO MUCH AS THAT OF CAUCASIANS. B. PROFILES OP TONGAN WOMEN SHOWING THE RANGE IN ELEVATION OF THE NASAL BRIDGE AND THE CONTOUR OF THE NASAL PROFILE. THE NASAL BRIDGE IS SEEN TO BE MODER.VTELY ELEV.XTED. NO. 8 IS AN ABERRANT AND UNCOMMON TYPE. Photographs by GifFord and McKern Bernice p. Bishop Museum Memoirs, Volume VIII, Plate XXXIX TONGAN TYPES SHOWING THE RANGE IN NOSE FORM, NOS. I TO 4 IN MEN AND NOS. 5 TO 8 IN WOMEN. NOS. 2, 3, 6, AND 7 ARE THE MOST COMMON FORMS. NONE OF THE NOSES HERE POR- TRAYED APPROACHES IN SIZE THE CAUCASIAN TYPES. Photographs by Gifford and McKern Vn^ RETURN MARIAN KOSHLAND BIOSCIENCE AND TO — ► NATURAL RESOURCE LIBRARY 2101 Valley Life Sciences BIdg. 642-2531 LOAN PERIOD ONE MONTH LOAN ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AH 1 bR 7 DAYS. DUE AS STAMPED BELOW. DUE m " J34lUECTTORE( RPr«D Bin M 00 0/ -i?0 3 Pi',; FORM NO. DD 8 24M 4-00 UNIVERSITY OF C Berkele ALIFORNIA, BERKELEY y, California 94720-6500