THE PROBLEM AND PROCEDURE

The data used in this survey were secured in 1954 during a stay of seven

months in Fiji. My plan was to obtain anthropometric samples from

several parts of the archipelago; this plan was only slightly altered as

time and transportation facilities directed. Each of the three main

administrative districts into which the islands are divided were visited

and within each district samples were secured from most of the

constituent provinces. The original sample consisted of 880 subjects.

Later, 65 subjects were excluded for various reasons: some were part

Samoan or Tongan, a few were Rotumans, and others were immature. The

number finally used stands at 815.

A limited amount of comparative material has been included in order to

help locate the Fijians in the overall Pacific picture. These data were

drawn from W. W. Howells, "Anthropometry and Blood Types in Fiji and the

Solomon Islands" in The American Museum of Natural History,

Anthropological Papers, volume 33, part 4, 1933, and from L. R.

Sullivan, "A Contribution to Tongan Somatology" based on the field

studies of E. W. Gifford and W. C. McKern, in Memoires of the Bernice P.

Bishop Museum, volume 8, number 4, 1922. The latter report provides

comparison with what may be termed western Polynesians who are also the

nearest Polynesians to the Fijians. The Fijian data in Howell's paper

make it possible for me to check some of my own Fijian material, and the

Solomon Island data in the same report provide a Melanesian measuring

stick.

Since an over-all description of the Fijians is the initial concern of

this paper, each physical trait measured or derived from measurement is

tabulated according to range, average, and deviation. Traits observed

but not measured are presented according to degree of development, e.g.,

absent, medium, and pronounced, and according to percentage of

occurrence. Further statistical manipulation is not deemed necessary for

the writer's purposes.

It is well established that the Fijians are a mixed people. They are

regarded, and with good reason, as a hybrid of, mainly, Melanesian and

Polynesian components. Their geographical location, their history, and

their physical appearance bear this out.

The proportions of Polynesian and Melanesian elements are, of course,

not evenly distributed throughout Fiji. Even superficial observation

indicates that the natives range from strongly Melanesian to markedly

Polynesian. To demonstrate how this variability follows certain regional

trends, the data have been broken down into four geographical areas.

This subdivision rests on several considerations and merits further

comment.

One of the subgroups represents the people of the mountainous interior

of Viti Levu, the main island of Fiji (see accompanying map). This

region may be regarded as something of a refuge area. Fijians from this

relatively isolated locality might reasonably be expected to exhibit

more of the earlier racial elements of the total composition. It should

be pointed out, however, that the degree of isolation associated with

this; interior; group is not extreme. Fiji tradition and history

indicate extensive interregional movement. Particularly in early

historic times, when the advent of firearms and other Western culture

greatly stimulated intergroup warfare and cannibalism, there was much

moving about from one region to another. With all this, the interior

people still remained, as indeed they are today, more apart from the

rest of the population and less subject to outside influence.

The second segment chosen for interregional comparison is in the central

Lau Islands and is designated in this paper as the "eastern" group.

Lying as they do, at the eastern end of Fiji, they are closest to Tonga,

the nearest Polynesian neighbors. Tongan contact with Fiji in

prehistoric as well as more recent times is well established.[2] It is

in the Lau Islands that Polynesian cultural affinities are most marked.

Hence, it seems a logical choice for a second and separate glance in the

racial history.

The third comparative sample might be termed an intermediate group. It

is taken from the coastal villages of eastern Viti Levu, largely from

the provinces of Rewa and Tailevu. This area is geographically between

the "interior" and "eastern" groups and is referred to in this paper as

the "coastal" group.

The final regional division represents the northwestern parts of Viti

Levu. This is the place where, according to Fiji tradition, their

ancestors first landed after migrating from the west.[3] Fijian legend,

which gives this hint of their ancestry, does not include a physical

description of these immigrants. Nor does it define the physical

appearance of the earlier people whom the newcomers encountered and with

whom they mingled. On the rather slim hope that anthropometry might shed

a little light on this questionable phase of Fijian history, this area,

along with the first three, has received separate treatment.

A Racial Study of the Fijians · 第 13 / 43 题