RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Straightness of figure—Angular contours—Absence of fatty
tissue—Nature’s economy—Abnormal obesity—Straight spinal
column—Flat and long dorsal curve—_Ensellure_—Strong cervical
curve—Uniformity of sacro-lumbar curve—Flexibility of spine
due to thick cartilaginous discs—Racial comparisons between
length of vertebræ and that of intervertebral discs—Influence
of upright attitude—Smallness of bones composing the spinal
column and the explanation—Exceptions to rule—Narrow sacral
bone—Peculiarities of fifth lumbar vertebra—Long extremities
of equal length—Foot suggests tree-climbing—Evolution of
foot—So-called “hand-footed” men—Feet used for lifting and
carrying purposes—Function of peroneus muscle—Flatfoot
rare—Correct placement of foot when walking—Tree-climbing and
its effects—Peculiarity of Tasmanian’s foot—The shape and
skeleton of lower limbs—“Boomerang” legs—Shoulder and arm
bones—Bodily height of male and female.
Let us study these interesting-looking people more closely and endeavour
to find out their characteristic features, and in what respects they
differ from ourselves. At the same time, let us in passing ascertain to
what degree they resemble us and other peoples, past or present, and what
peculiarities they might share with the man-apes or lower forms of the
animal kingdom.
What immediately appeals to our critical eye is the strong contrast in
the general outline of the figure when we compare it with our own. The
round, full contours and shapely exterior of the European are replaced
by an angularity and straightness in the aboriginal. The surface-padding
or, more correctly, the subcutaneous deposition of fatty tissue, which
makes the lines and curves of our bodies so uniform—and the female figure
so beautiful—is, to a large extent, the result of long selective culture
and of the comforts which civilized life has brought with it. In the case
of the aboriginal, however, the forethought of Nature has not allowed
the development of such paddings of fat to any considerable amount; they
would only tend to impede the agility of the hardy desert roamer. He does
not need a thick layer of fat beneath his skin. From an artistic point
of view, the leanness of his body is quite becoming to himself. He lives
in a country whose climate is hot, and his healthy hunting-life makes
him immune from many of the ills to which the city dweller is heir. As a
reserve storage of heat and nourishment, therefore, which might be called
upon to aid his physiological constitution in times of need, the quantity
of superfluous fat can safely be reduced to a minimum. Nature has given
enough, but not a measure in excess. Thus, without any indication of
unhealthy emaciation, the integumentary accumulation of fat is so scant
that parts of the internal anatomy of an aboriginal can readily be
deciphered topographically. We can follow the shape of the superficial
muscles and of the skeleton, and can palpate the outline of the abdominal
organs with comparative ease. Although the muscles are small, they are,
nevertheless, strong, firm, and wiry; this is particularly noticeable in
the extremities.
It is a curious fact, however, that there is a natural predisposition
in the aboriginal to produce fatty tissue once he gives up his active
hunting career, like a sportsman out of training, and to develop a
perceptible obesity when he lives under conditions which supply him daily
with an abundance of nourishment. Under such circumstances, which are
of course abnormal and only brought about by European influence, his
skin is very apt to accumulate locally masses of fat known medically
as _lipomas_. The Arunndta natives call these tumours “_lurra_,” and
connect their appearance upon their bodies with heavy weight-carrying. It
is, indeed, a noteworthy fact that these fatty tumours frequently occur
upon the shoulders of aboriginal wood-carriers, who are in the habit of
collecting logs of timber for camp or station purposes.
Associated with the angularity and flatness of the bodily form, we
notice, when looking upon the figure of an aboriginal in profile,
and comparing it with that of an European in a similar position, a
straightness of the spine. If, for instance, we were to make an accurate
drawing of the spinal curvatures of the two subjects shown in Plate
II, we would find that the line representing the spinal column of the
aboriginal gin would be very straight in the centre of the back, that is,
in the dorsal segment; in fact it would be found that the dorsal curve
is very slight. Careful comparisons have been made with frozen corpses
of different races and the man-apes, bisected in the mesial plane, and
it has been determined that this portion of the spine is flatter in the
Australian aboriginal than in any other race of man; and indeed it is
flatter than in the chimpanzee. Moreover, a larger number of vertebræ
are involved in the dorsal curve of the Australian than there are in the
other cases.
In the European subject of our illustration—a young Australian lady—the
lumbo-sacral curve, known usually as the _ensellure_, is unusually
prominent.
If now we examine the curvature of that portion of the backbone which
constitutes the neck, we shall find it less pronounced in the European
but strongly developed in the Australian aboriginal.
But perhaps the greatest difference between the two types is the manner
in which the curvature breaks from the lumbar to the sacral portions
of the spine. In the European this break is sharp and angular; in the
Australian it is very gradual on account of a peculiar oblique position
of the last lumbar vertebra. Should we, again, extend our observation
to the chimpanzee, we would find that a number of the sacral vertebræ
are included in the lumbar curve. Consequently the aboriginal’s spine
seems to occupy an interesting position in which the last lumbar vertebra
stands almost as a connecting link between the lumbar curve above and the
sacral curve immediately below it.
The lumbar curve is greater in the European than in the Australian, but
it is decidedly greater in the chimpanzee. The difference in curvature
is brought about mainly by the discs of cartilage which exist between
the vertebræ, and that is why there is a considerable movement possible
in the lumbar portion of the spine of the lower races of man; and it
is quite possible that the lumbar curvature alters according to the
position adopted by the individual, that is, according to whether he be
in a standing or in his favourite squatting posture. In the European the
corresponding portion of the spine is much more rigid.
The proportional lengths of cervical, dorsal, and lumbar spinal sections
are much the same in both European and Australian, but there are
considerable differences in the two spines so far as the proportions
of the bony vertebræ and the intervertebral discs of cartilage are
concerned, especially in the lumbar region. The lumbar vertebræ of the
European are shorter than are those of the Australian, and the latter
again are shorter than those of the man-apes. In other words, the lengths
of the bones, which build up the lumbar portion of the spinal column,
increase (_i.e._ in proportion to the size of the column as a whole) as
one passes from the most highly cultured European through the primitive
human stages, like the aboriginal of Australia, to the anthropoid apes,
and finally to the lower types of monkeys. At the same time, as the
length of the vertebræ increases, a reduction in the thickness of the
cartilaginous discs takes place.
There is no doubt this phenomenon depends to some extent upon the
acquisition of the upright attitude by man, since the cartilage between
the bone acts as an effective shock-absorber—the percussion produced by
the impact of the heel against the ground when walking being reduced
before it reaches the brain. When the brain-box does not rest immediately
above the point of percussion, as for instance in the semi-erect posture
of the apes, the dangers of concussion are not so great.
While we are discussing the vertebral column of the Australian
aboriginal, we might draw attention to the comparative smallness of the
bones composing it. If we were, for instance, to compare the column of
an Australian with that of a European of similar height, we would find
that the vertebræ of the former are appreciably the smaller—their volumes
being almost in the ratio of one to one-and-a-half. This is the more
striking since we shall learn later that the Australian aboriginal often
is quite as tall in stature as the European. The skeleton of the African
negro, on the other hand, is decidedly more massive than that of the
European.
The smallness of the bones composing the vertebral column undoubtedly
favours the flexibility and agility which characterize the Australians
as a hunting people. There are, it is true, certain variations in
the structure of the spinal column of the Australian, which seem to
contradict this general rule, as, for instance, a slightly stronger
development of the vertebræ of the neck and a greater volume of the
lumbar vertebral bones in the female. The former of these features is
no doubt a primitive characteristic throwing back to the quadrupedal
ancestry of the human species, the latter having to do with the processes
of birth.
The sacral bone at the lower end of the vertebral column varies slightly
in size, but is, generally speaking, much narrower than that of the
European or of any other living race. It is principally on this account
that the hip-bones of the Australians seem remarkably close together in
both sexes.
The fifth lumbar vertebra of the Australian often exhibits certain
sacral characters, which remind one of the orang outang; in that
anthropoid the fifth lumbar bone is often fused to the _os sacrum_ and
in reality becomes the first sacral body. Occasionally this vertebra is
asymmetrical, being normal, _i.e._ lumbar, on the one side and sacral
on the other. Its posterior arch is at times wanting, the spines having
failed to join, as ordinarily they do, in a median line behind the main
body of the bone. The last named feature is, however, not infrequently
observed in the skeletons of other races as well.
Another very striking feature, connected with the anatomy of the
Australian, is the great length of his arms and legs. This length of
extremities is taken in a conjoint sense, and with regard to the height
of the individual. The aboriginal is often said to have very much longer
arms than legs. This is incorrect. In point of fact, no human type is
known, living or fossil, with such a disproportion in the limbs. All
types of mankind, individually considered, have arms and legs more
or less equal in length; from this original condition the elongated
arms, so typical of apes, have evolved, by secondary processes, in all
probability through the acquisition of arboreal habits. There is, of
course, no doubt that the length of the extremities, both upper and
lower, so characteristic of the Australian, together with the relative
slenderness of the vertebræ, points to an early evolutional stage, which
was common to the ancestral forms of both man and ape. The monkey has
brought tree-climbing to such a degree of perfection that it practically
lives in the branches. Primitive man, too, has not neglected the
art, and, although the normal proportions of his extremities do not
directly suggest tree-climbing, there is another development which does,
especially in the Australian; and that is his foot.
When we consider the likely transformations which the human foot has
undergone from an original hand-like form, resembling that of certain
monkeys and lower primates, to its present condition, we shall find
that two processes have been at work in the modelling of this important
part of man’s anatomy. Firstly, the big toe (originally a thumb) has
taken up a position adjacent to that of the next digit (originally an
index finger), and, by lying in the same plane with it, has forfeited
its power of opposition. Secondly, the big toe has grown appreciably
stronger, while the other digits have become smaller and weaker. That the
big toe, in its ancient evolution, once stood in the same relation to the
other toes as the thumb does to the fingers of the hand, is evident from
the arrangement of the blood-vessels and nerves in this part of the foot,
corresponding exactly to that of the hand, even though the gap originally
existing between the first and second digits has been filled by fleshy
tissue.
It is of considerable scientific interest to note that cases are
occasionally observed among the Australian tribes in which indications of
this ancestral condition are retained. In the Fig. 2 we see the feet of
an aboriginal of the Berringin tribe in the north of Australia, whose big
toes are remarkable for their shortness when compared with the second.
[Illustration: Fig. 2. Peculiar “hand-like” feet of the Berringin
tribesmen. Tracing from a photograph.]
It is, of course, a well-known fact that the newly-born European baby
possesses a wonderful mobility in its feet; and such might also be
acquired by people who have lost their arms; but the wearing of boots
usually deprives modern nations of this freedom of movement. The
aborigines of Australia make frequent use of their toes. A considerable
lateral flexibility of the end phalanges enables them to lift small
objects off the ground between the big and second toes. Spears are
carried by warriors, between the toes of either foot, to conceal the
weapons in the grass; and so the enemy is led to believe that the men are
unarmed.
When collecting firewood, the gins never stoop to pick up the pieces, but
lift them with their toes to the level of their hands. The hands then
pile the fuel upon the head and hold it there until sufficient has been
collected to carry back to camp.
The power of being able to use the toes in the manner described depends
upon the development of a muscle, which arising from the outer side of
the fibula and terminating in a long tendon, passes obliquely across
the sole of the foot, to insert itself into the metatarsal bone of the
great toe. This is the long _peroneus_ muscle, the function of which, in
the monkeys at any rate, is to keep the big toe in opposition. In man,
moreover, this muscle helps considerably to maintain the arch of the
foot. Flatfoot is eminently rare among the aborigines; only one or two
cases have come under observation.
When walking, the aboriginal carries his foot so that it points directly
ahead of him, and not, as has been written, “with his toes well turned
out.” If anything, the sole of the foot is slightly tilted so that the
outer border touches the ground a little in advance of the ball.
There is no doubt the outer surface and the ball of the foot play an
important role in the art of tree-climbing, as it is practised by the
Australians and other primitive peoples. Several methods are in vogue;
they will be described later. Suffice it, for the time being, to refer to
one: In pursuit of small marsupials, young birds, honey, nuts, fruits,
or any other things good to eat, the aboriginal often has occasion to
ascend the tall smooth trunks of trees, which harbour such articles in
abundance. This is done, often without the aid of any implement, in the
following way: The hunter faces the tree and applies the palms of his
hands to the opposite side of the butt. As he tightens his hold with
his fingers, he springs from the ground and clutches the butt between
the soles of his feet. The arches adjust themselves to the convexity of
the trunk, whilst the pressure of the outer edges and balls of the feet
prevent the limbs from slipping. In this posture, the hunter is virtually
hanging by his arms, which are hooked by the hands, and is sitting upon
his heels, which are fixed firmly against the tree, as described. Holding
his head well back between the shoulder-blades, he suddenly lifts his
body upwards with his thighs, while his hands, momentarily relaxing their
hold, are pushed upwards also. Now the fingers again tightly clasp the
trunk, and the feet are quickly lifted and tucked under the buttocks,
to again support the weight of the body as before. The same actions are
repeated, time after time, and it is not long before the climber reaches
the nearest branches, when progress is simplified. Vide Plate XIX, 2.
[Illustration: _PLATE II_
Comparison of European with Aboriginal figure.
“We notice, when looking upon the figure of an aboriginal in profile,
and comparing it with that of an European in a similar position, a
straightness of the spine.”]
This ancient custom of tree-climbing is not peculiar to the Australians,
but is adopted by most primitive races. It is very probable, too, that
the prehistoric races were to a large extent arboreal, and made use of
similar methods of tree-climbing. When considering the evolution of the
human foot, therefore, we will have to remember that it has been to some
extent influenced by the tree-climbing factor, which, indeed, must be
considered in the light of a forerunning stage in the acquisition of the
upright attitude by man.
In this primitive method of ascending trees, by which the head is thrown
so far behind, we see also a likely explanation of the greater cervical
curvature we have noticed in the aboriginal’s spine, when one compares it
with the European’s. We might even venture to say that these processes
originally brought about the lumbar curvature, and thereby laid the
foundation to the acquisition of the erect posture, by means of which
man learned to balance his head upon the vertical spinal column. Then
the foot, which had been to a great extent modelled through his arboreal
activities, stood man in good stead, and he began to walk erect between
the trees.
The foot skeleton of the Tasmanian shows a peculiarity, in which it
differs from that of the Australian on the mainland. Under normal
conditions, the heel-bone of the Australian, and of the European as well,
has a small elongation or process on the anterior side which separates
the two adjoining small bones, the _cuboid_ and the _talus_, from each
other. But in the case of the Tasmanian the two small bones named lie in
juxtaposition. This phenomenon is only occasionally noticed in Australian
skeletons, and is quite exceptional in European; it is abnormal even in
the anthropoids.
The Australian’s legs are often the subject of comment, if not ridicule;
they are so thin and lanky. Even when the proportions of the chest and
trunk as a whole are good, the legs usually remain unshapely. Even under
the best of conditions, there is a paucity of flesh both in thigh and
calf; the lower portions of the limbs are in the true sense of the word
spindle-shanks.
Even the gluteal musculature is only moderately developed. Sedentary life
and cosmetic culture seem to have been the principal factors at work
in shaping this region in the modern European. Monkeys, on the other
hand, show no considerable gluteal development at all. It would appear,
therefore, that tree-climbing has not played a great role in developing
these muscles, but seems rather to have influenced the growth of the
deltoid muscle, which extends from the upper arm to the shoulder-blade
and collar-bone, and of the big pectoral muscle.
The thigh-bone, although it is slender, like the rest of the long bones
of the Australian, is abruptly dilated at its epiphyses, and, in that
respect, differs considerably from the European femur, which widens
gradually towards the extremities, in trumpet fashion. The Australian’s
thigh-bone is more like the Neanderthal type, but the smallness of its
head at once distinguishes it from the fossil. The slenderness of the
shaft, together with the relative smallness of the condyles, brings the
Australian femur nearer to the _Pithecanthropus_. Generally speaking,
this bone is stronger in the Tasmanian than in the Australian.
One occasionally finds a strongly developed ridge or process in the
upper portion of the Australian femur, which has been styled the third
trochanter. At the lower extremity, the smooth depression on the anterior
surface of the bone, between its condyles, is deep in the Australian
and Tasmanian, and in that respect resembles the Neanderthal femur. The
superior margin of the hyaline cartilage covering this depression is
variable, and occasionally far exceeds the average European limit.
Among certain tribes of central and southern Australia, the tibia is
often peculiarly flattened laterally, like a sword, whilst the anterior
edge of the bone is remarkably prominent. This condition is known as
_platycnemia_ and has also been observed, quite frequently, in the
skeletons of the extinct men of Europe and Egypt, and in the Negroid and
Polynesian races.
Occasionally this platycnemic condition is associated with an exaggerated
curvature of the anterior edge of the bone, a phenomenon which Dr. E. C.
Stirling has described as _camptocnemia_. The popular name for it among
bushmen is “Boomerang-Leg”; in some cases the tibia certainly has quite
as large a curvature as some of the least bent of the familiar throwing
sticks have.
In attempting to offer an explanation for this remarkable phenomenon,
it is at the outset difficult to say to what extent it might be
pathological, that is, the direct result of some constitutional disorder,
like rickets, from which the individual, in whose shin-bone the curvature
appears, might be suffering.
A theory has, however, been advanced to the effect that, since the
anterior ridge of the bone represents part of the surface from which the
_tibialis posticus_ muscle arises, and since this muscle effects the
adduction of the foot, when a person is walking, it is feasible that the
altered shape and the increased bulk of the tibia may be due to that
factor. The Australians, like other primitive hunters, are possessed of
an astounding endurance when running down wounded game.
Dr. Ramsay Smith points out that there may be a connection between a
platycnemic condition and the peculiar method the Australians have of
lifting things from the ground with their toes, by which the tibialis
posticus muscle is specially involved.
The fibula of the Australian is straight, and, especially in the case of
the female Tasmanian, often has the end adjacent to the knee, which is
known as its head or capitulum, prolongated in an extraordinary manner.
This feature is of morphological interest because it harks back to a
primitive condition in the evolution of the knee, in which the long bone
of the lower extremity played a more important part in the action of the
joint than it nowadays does in the human species.
In male Tasmanians the shoulder-blade is of considerable length, and
its apparent narrowness is primarily due to the elongation of the
infra-spinous fossa.
The humerus of the Australian shows a very small torsion, the angle being
less than in any other human type. A foramen is not infrequently observed
between the condyles of this bone. The Tasmanian humerus possesses a
peculiar, laterally convex curve; and its internal condyle is often much
enlarged.
[Illustration: _PLATE III_
1. Colossal brow-ridge, Arunndta man.
2. Supra-orbital prominence, deep notch at root of nose, prognathism
(Tasmanoid features), and female beard, Denial Bay tribeswoman.]
As with ourselves, the bodily height of the Australian varies
considerably, even within one and the same tribe. No great racial
importance can on that account be placed upon statistical data in respect
of height. The tallest individual I know of was a man of Yarrabah, near
Cairns, in Queensland, who stood seven feet four inches high.[1] Some
of the smallest men I have ever seen lived in the Tomkinson Ranges
in Central Australia, who barely measured four feet six inches in
height; yet among the same tribe were many men who stood over six feet.
The smallest gin, the mother of two children, who has come under my
observation, measured four feet five-and-a-half inches. She lived in the
Katherine River district. We might claim from five feet four-and-a-half
inches to five feet six inches as a reasonable average height for the
male, and about five feet for the female.
[1] Measured by the Rev. E. R. Gribble.