----------------------------+-----------------+-----------------
| Males | Females
+---------+-------+---------+-------
|Number of| Index |Number of| Index
|specimens| |specimens|
----------------------------+---------+-------+---------+-------
Long Island | (7) | 70.7 | (5) | 74.3
Manhattan Island | (2) | 71.7 | (1) | 71.8
Staten Island | (4) | 71.7 | (3) | 75.4
Connecticut | (4) | 72.4 | (4) | 74.6
Maine | (6) | 72.7 | (6) | 74.7
Massachusetts | (14) | 72.8 | (25) | 74.7
Southeastern Canada | (14) | 73.4 | (5) | 76.9
New York State | (19) | 73.5 | (15) | 74.8
Maryland | (4) | 73.6 | (4) | 74.0
Rhode Island | (6) | 73.7 | (5) | 75.6
New Jersey (Heye collection)| (4) | 73.9 | (5) | 75.8
New Jersey (earlier) | (6) | 74.6 | (19) | 75.1
Virginia | (27) | 75.5 | (28) | 76.3
----------------------------+---------+-------+---------+-------
There is remarkable similarity in the average index of the crania of
all the more northerly states as far as New Jersey. The Indians of
both sexes from Maine and Massachusetts are particularly close in
this respect, and, as will be seen later, these two groups, while not
entirely homogeneous, show many other close similarities.
The most important result is that shown by the crania from southeastern
Canada, which are almost entirely Huron or Iroquois; and by the
specimens from New York State, which also are largely of Iroquois
derivation. The Iroquois, as is well known, are regarded as a
linguistic stock distinct from the Algonquian, though there are some
lexical resemblances in the two languages. But the measurements of the
skulls of representatives of the two stocks show no such distinction.
In fact, the Iroquois occupy, with reference to nearly all important
cranial features, more or less of a median position among the
Algonquian groups, and there is no basis on which they can legitimately
be segregated as belonging to any different physical group of Indians.
It is quite possible that some of the Iroquois tribes may have been
derived, in smaller or larger part, from other peoples of the westward
or the southwestward, or that in course of time they became mixed with
such; but the greater proportion of the Iroquois can henceforth be no
more separated in physical anthropology from the Algonquians than can
any of the subgroups of the latter.
Another important result of these studies relates to the Lenape. The
Munsee and other Delaware Indian skulls, while nearing (and in the case
of females slightly surpassing) the upper limits of dolichocephaly,
are nevertheless sufficiently closely related to the crania from the
neighboring states to show that the Munsee, and the Lenape as a whole,
were in all probability only subdivisions of the eastern Algonquians.
Resemblances in other important features of the skull, as well as of
the skeleton, make this conclusion quite definite, thus eliminating the
theory of the migration of the Lenape from beyond the Mississippi, for
if such were the case, they could scarcely fit so precisely into the
anthropological position they occupy between the neighboring tribes.
Yet, as previously mentioned, there is some evidence, especially that
afforded by the Munsee, that the Lenape had some connection, probably
earlier as well as recent, with tribes living southwestward from the
Appalachian mountains.
From the limited Pennsylvania material it appears that the eastern
lowlands were occupied by Indians of the Algonquian or Lenape type,
while in the more westerly parts brachycephaly was frequent if not
common.
As to the Virginia Algonquians, they show the highest cranial indexes
of all the groups here considered, and had doubtless considerable
foreign blood, derived from the west or the south. It would be
interesting to compare the Virginia Indians with the Siouan tribes, to
which they seem to bear close affinity.