LOWER JAW

I. THE GONIAL ANGLE 11. THE BIGONIAL BREADTH

ALES H R D L I ~ X A U. 8. Nationul Xuseum, Smitlisonian Institution, Washington, D . C.

I. THE GONIAL ANGLE

lorok, in 1898, called the lower jaw tlie neglected stepchild of anthropometry, and while numerous contributions to the study of the bone have been made since, a large majority of these were so small that to some extent the reproach is still applicable today. The reasons for this remissness were and still are the concentration of attention in craniology on the vault and on the upper face; inadequate and often damaged or otherwise unsatisfactory materials ; difficulties presented to the student by the extensive variations of the bone, with imperfect landmarks ; and its seemingly secondary interest in the anthropology of recent human groups. As a matter of fact the human lower jaw-I do not like the term mandible for the human bone-is both phylogenetically and ontogenetically one of the most interesting parts of the human skeleton. A separate loose bone, an appendage to the rest of the face, it yet possesses a rich evolutionary and in modern times also involutionary history, shows astonishing correlation with the maxilla, the rest of the face and the base of the skull, presents unique age changes, and differs characteristically in the two sexes. It carries or reproduces now and then long past ancestral features, and is capable of remarkable functional adaptations. The more attention it receives the more evident it becomes that its whole status deserves well to be restudied and established.
281

282

ALEB HRDLIEKA

A good example of this need is shown by the item which is

the subject of this paper, the body-ramus, o r simply the gonial, angle. This feature has been taken here because it constitutes a definite morphological unit, offers valuable group, age, sex and other variations, and is one of the easiest to measure fairly accurately by different observers. The gonial angle is the postero-inferior angle of the bone, formed by the ramus with the body. This separation of the two portions of the jaw under different names is however anatomically incorrect. It gives the impression of two distinct parts, which is wrong. The old terms of horizontal and ascending portions were much better. The bone develops in two halves, the right and left, and there is but one center of ossification for each half with its ramus. The latter is not a branch at all, but merely the ascending part of each half of the jaw. The membrane in which the bone develops overlies in the embryo the MeckeIs cartilage, an almost straight band which constitutes the first mandibular arch. I n this there is as yet no bend upward of the posterior part, no ramus; it approaches the condition of the jaw in the reptilian forms. The bend or angle appears first in the bony jaw, but even here for a time it is generally but mild, approaching such form as seen in the pinnipedians. Even at birth the gonial angle is still very obtuse, mostly above 140 or even 150 degrees. As teeth develop and separate the jaws, the angle grows less, until in extreme cases it may reach 100 degrees or even slightly lower; but in these cases the angular part of the posterior border of the ascending branch is overdeveloped. I n looking over the mandibles of the vertebrates below man, there is found much of interest as to the angle. Thus in fishes, turtles and saurians there is no ascending branch and no angle, and similarly in birds. I n the long-tailed Pangolin, and in the anteaters, the jaw is near horizontal, and there is no ramus or angle, o r only bare indications of the same. I n the fur-seal the lower jaw is still near horizontal or moderately curved, without distinct ascending branch or angle, and in the sea-lion is not much farther in these respects; but

LOWER JAW

283

in the Indian seal there is already a fairly distinct ramus and a marked angle. I n general and though the ramus may in some species be decidedly underdeveloped, a marked gonial angle is present in all terrestrial mammals. I n most of the ungulates the ascending part is largely developed and high, and the angle region is broad, its margin approaching semicircular. I n all the carnivora, rodents and primates, and in related genera, both the ascending part and the angle, though varying, are well developed ; and in the two largest anthropoid apes, the gorilla and the orang, the ramus is huge, though in its conformation and in the near-semicircular outline of its angle region it still resembles that of some of the large lower vertebrates more than it does human. But in the Old as well as the New World monkeys, in the gibbons, and in the chimpanzees, both the ascending part and the angle resemble the human. It may however be stated here that the gorilloid angle region, i.e., a broad angle portion with semicircular margin, occurs occassionally also in the human jaw, particularly it seems in the Eskimo and some American Indians. From the anthropometric point of view, the gonial angle should by rights be written the gonial angles, for these belong to the originally separate halves of the jaw, and hence are doubled formations that, while closely related, yet in many individuals differ more or less on the two sides. It may be stated at once, however, that the inequalities in all the bilateral features of the lower jaw, in any larger series, tend to balance, or almost so, so that the means of their nieasurements will be similar. This for routine work justifies the taking of measurements on one side only, and that preferably the left, which is easier. To dentist and surgeon, 011 the other hand the individual inequalities must be of direct interest and these professions should be aware of the occasionally marked extent of the inequalities under seemingly nonpathological conditions. The gonial angle is measured on the classic Broca s mandibular goniometer, which with care allows of but little error, so that the records of various observers must be fairly com-

284

ALE^

HBDLI~KA

parable. The only source of error would be to measure the two angles simultaneously, which would result in more or less vitiation of the result by the obliquity of the condyles and protrusion backward of their mesial portions. The recorded data on the gonial angle suffer, however, from the prevalent inadequacy and great unevenness of the series. It was to compensate for this, as far as possible, that the writer has measured the large materials to be reported upon in this paper. But these should be headed by the older records. The older data on adults will be given in a table ; they may usefully be preceded, however, by Debierres' (1886) records 011 the angle in the anthropoid apes and in fetuses at term.
Gonial angle in apes (Debierre)
ANQLE

ANGLE

AXOLE

6 gorillas:

95" 99 100 101 102 102

4 chimpanzees:

103" 106 108 108

? orangs: !

104" 105

Gonial angle in human young (Debierre) 128, 130, 140, 146, 180" (5) Fetuses a t term (30) Children 5 months t o 9 years 121, 150'

In the large anthropoid apes the angle, it is seen, is as a rule low, approaching the right angle, nevertheless reaching the lowest adult human. In the human "fetus at term," the angle, though mostly wide, raries extensively and may in some cases reach the higher values of the adult. Tlie older data on human adults, excepting my own, are as folloms: The data that I have published will be included with the new records.
There are doubtless some records that, hidden in general reports, have escaped being iaclutled; but they, it would seein, can be of no great importance. And there are some records, particularly those of Rasche ( '13), i n which no separation is made of the two sexes. As the angle differs substantially in the male and female, and the sex proportions in the series in question are doubtless uncren, tlie rccolds are almost useless.

LOWER J A W

285

Goitial (bodg-ramlts) angle. Older data

MALE
FBNALE

JYliites (and related) : Mediterranean French Neolithic Old French French, recent Great-Russinn Slav Slav Tirolean and Bavarim German Alsatian and 8. W. Germm (17-70 years) Old Egyptian ( X V I I I Dyn.) Berber (Biscra) Guanche Pariahs Mndras Hindu Polynesian Maori Hawaiian Gilbert Island American Inr7ian : Old Peruvian Old Peruvian American Indian American Indian Pecos Pueblo Central American Other Pellowbrown: Eskimo Eskimo Eskimo Eskimo Chukchi Giiliak Aino Aino

(20) (6) (31) (12) (160) (5) (3) (11) (30)

121 115.5 122 126 119 121 128 126 126.2

....
... .
(15) (27) (4) (2) (12) (30) (43) (15) (3)

(6)

. . .. 123 .. . .
122 121 131 129 127.6 124 124 131

123

Renard Broca Renard Broca Tarenetzki Renard Frizzi Tarenetzki Welcker Kieff er Renard Renard Broca Renard Renard Renard Welcker Welcker Welcker Frizzi Renard Renard Welcker Hooton Broca Frizzi Broca Oetteking Welcker Oetteking Tarenetzki Tarenetzki Koganei

(94) 121 (15) 122 (5) 124 (5) 113.4 (7) 119 (5) 124 (5) 114 Sex not given Sex not given Sex not given

. . ..

., ..

(5) (2) (3) (15) (15) (10)

(4)

122 125 125 116 117.6 111.6 124 119 122.9

(6) (26) (10) ?,ex 8 (97)

(6)

115 118 117 (15) 117.7 122.8

115 115.5 129 (10) 134 121 130 123

. . ..
(5) 121.1 (62)

.. . . ....

. . ..

(1) (2) (2) Sex ? (1) (4) (3) (64)

....
(4)

....
132.2 126 122 122 127 127

(8) 123.3 (1) (4) (1) (37)

IGiven by Topinard, 1885, p. 962, same for all other Brocns data. Used a modified method, which may account f o r his lower values. Writers data on the Eskimo (30) are incorporated into his new data, q.v.

286

ALES

HRDLI~KA

Gonial (body-ramus) angle. Older data-(Continued)

YALE FEMALE

Japanese Japanese Chinese Chinese (and related) Chinese Chinese Mongol Kalmuck Malay Malay Siamese
Peltowbrown-Wbite (wig.) : Lapps Lapps Blacks : New Caledonian New Hebrides Melanesian Papuan Australian Australian Australian Hottentot Nubian African Negro African Negro African Negro African Negro

(3) (8)
(5)

(10) Sex ? (27)

(4)

Sex B

() 4
Sex P Sex?
(84)

132 124.3 132 124 (10) 119.9 116 (10) 121 (24) (5j

.. . . . .. .
(2) () 3 120.8
(7) (4)

118.1 (3) 118.7 121.1

Tarenetzki 130 Toldt, Jr. 123.3 Toldt, Jr. Renard . Welcker 126.9 Haberer 122 Broca Welcker 120 Renard Welcker Welcker

. . ..
. ..

(155) (7 1) (13) (3) Sex B Sex ? (13) () 6 Sex I Sex I Sex ?

(10)

122.3 (48) 122.6 (136) 111 117 119 (10) (15) 109 124.7 (10) (10) (15) 120.4 121 125 (5) () 2 (2) 112 121.2 () 3

128 Herberz 125.2 Schreiner 112 119 119

Renard Renard Frizzi Welcker Weloker Brackebush Frizzi Welcker Welcker Welcker Broca Renard Frizzi

. .. .

116

.. . .

(23) (7)

122 115.8 117 () 4 (11) (3)

122 120 123

The above records on European Whites show much relation and may with advantage be taken collectively, which gives the following figures :
MALE FEMALE FEMALE : =ALE

European Whites (collectively)

(212)

122.4

(112)

153 2.

184 0.3

I f jaws with extensive loss of teeth are excluded, these data within adult life, it has been shown by Debierre and also Kieffer, would not be materially affected by age and may

LOWER J.4W

287

therefore for the time being serve as standards. Just what the conditions are in the other racial groups can mostly only be suspected-the records are too insufficient and uneven. There are, however, strong indications that the gonial angle, in general, is highest in the Whites (and in the Aino), and prevalently nearly as high in the Negro; that it is materially lower in the Melanesians and especially, seemingly, in the Polynesians; and that also it is markedly lower in the American Indians. To the preceding records, thanks to our collections, I am now able to add considerable new data and that, moreover, data secured by the same observer, same instrument and same method, and taken very largely sequentially, without prolonged interruptions. My method is that of Broca, Topinard, and essentially also Welcker. It is the simplest and on the whole most satisfactory. Its attempted alterations by Torok, Keilson, Kieffer, were based more or less on theoretical grounds, have lead to no advantage and found no followers. The instrument I use is the classic Brocas mandibular goniometer ; here again there were attempted in the course of time several innovations (Torok, Hambruch, Black), without improving the instrument for the study of the angle. The instrument, as is well known, consists of a horizontal plane to which is hinged a plane that can be moved up and down, and through a slit in which passes a metal arc, the graduation of which shows the angle of inclination of the movable part. F o r measuring the gonial angle the lower jaw is laid on the basal part with its alae toward the movable plank, and the side to be measured, to do away with any possible interference of the mesial end of the condyle, is moved so that the antero-posterior plane of the ramus is at right angles to the movable portion. The jaw is held down so that its gonial part on the side measured touches the base, the hinged part as well as the bone are moved until the former touches the most posterior parts of the branch that is being measured, and the angle of inclination is read off. It would be impractical to t r y to reach some

288

-4LEg HBDLI6PA

ideal or more satisfactory angle, as has been attempted. The region of the angle varies much, but in the long run these variations compensate each other and the results obtained are quite satisfactory. That this is so the observer may readily convince himself by subdividing his materials into series of twenty-five or fifty and seeing the closeness of the results. Measuring the angle in this manner is simple and expeditious. I any extraordinary conditions are met with f in a specimen-which will be rare-the observer must use his trained common sense a s to what to do, I n the occasional instances of rocking jaws, where the inferior border of the bone is convex and there is no well defined gonial angle, the best appears to be to take the angle in the position of the bone when lying on its base and naturally at rest. The angle, as already mentioned, in most cases differs more or less on the two sides ; but the differences have failed in any of our series to show any defi1iit.e significant trend. Jaws with extensive loss of back teeth should always be excluded from this measurement. The data which I am able to present now are as follows :
The gon,ial (body-ramzis) angle. Authors data
~

JIhrrB

FPMALF.

FE3CALE: MALE

Anierican Whites (Mise., N. T.)

Specs Mean Range

(152) 123.6 (105-141) (42) 119.8 (1O8-132) (30) 117.8 (109-133) (131) 114.2 (101-126) (100) 113.6 (104-129) (38) 113.8 (101-128)

( 1461

128 (111-147) (50) 124.2 (111-136) (43) 123.4 (112-135) (200) 118.0 (102-133) (100) 120.4 (108-129) (25) 117.5 (106-131)

103.4

Old Egyptians (XI1 Dyn.)

Polynesians (Hawaii)
hortli Americati ~ 7 i d i r f ? t . ~ California

103.7

104.7

10.7.1

Pueblos (New Mexico and Arizona) Sioux

1042

m.3

LOWER J A W

289

The gonial (body-mmus) angle. Authors d a l e ( Continued)

MALE FEXALB FEMALE : X A L E

Florida

(200)

t 200 )
117.3 (101-133)
(65)

112.7 (98-127)
Arkansas and Louisiana Mounds

104.2

(67) 118.5 (108-131) (60) 118.4 (108-130 (8) 118 (116-121) (37) 118.0 (104-136) (120) 116.8 (103-134) (391) 121 (100-141) (30) 0 . 1 (109-133) (66) 122.1 (108-137) (24) 120.7 (110-137)
(4)

122 (109-134) (60) 123.7 (111-133)

(6)

103.

Potoniac River (Md.)

104.5

Lenape

127.8 (133-131) (31) 125.0 (115-135) (113) 122.6 (110-138) (411) 125.2 (106-143) (23) 125 (112-137) (6) 127.2 (120-135) (35) 126.3 (115-143)

Alaska Indians (collectively)

(heterogeneous) 104.9

Peninsula, Kodiak Island, Aleutian Island * Eskimo

103.5

Mongols

104.4

Chinese (Canton district workers) African and American Negro (f ullblood)

Kaffir

104.6

115.3 (112-119)
Includes five non-Eskimo groups, the means of which range, niale 115.7-119; female 131.7-123.5.

Reducing the above to nearest whole figures and halves, and arranging the data consecutively, there result the following interesting relations :

290

ALE^ HRDLIEKA
Gonial angle
MALE

FEMALE

Whites and related: Miscellaneous Ameriean 'White Old Egyptian Polynesian Pellowbrowns: Chinese Eskimo Outer Mongol Potomac River Algonquiii drkansas and Louisiana Mounds (related to Algonquin) Lenape (related t o Algonquin) Alaska Indians (collectively) Southwestern Alaska (Aleut, etc.) Pueblo Californian Siouan Floridian Blacks: African and American (fullblood) Negro

123.5 120 118 122 121 120 118.5 118.5 118 118 117 115.5 114 114 112.5 120.5

128 124 123.5 127 125 125 123.5 122 125 122.5 120.5 118 117.5 117.5 126

It is seen that the angle is by no means closely alike in all

human groups, or even in all the groups of one human stock. Between the group highest in the scale and the lowest there is in both sexes more than 10 degrees of difference, which is certainly material. But what the meaning is, is not clear. The first consideration would naturally be given to the mass of the jaws and the teeth, and the first three items on the list would seem to support a conclusion that the angle stands in inverse correlation with this factor. The jaw in the mean is perceptibly stronger in the XI1 Dynasty Egyptians than it is in the American Whites, and is still somewhat stronger in the Polynesians. But this lead breaks down when we consider the Yellowbrowns. The largest and heaviest jaws not only in America but in recent man of the whole world, are those of the Eskimo and the Florida Indians-yet in the angle the two stand at the opposite ends of the yellowbrown range. The Mongol jaw is less massive than that of the Eskimo, but the angle in the two is practically equal; while the Aleuts and other southwestern Alaskans have lower jaws

LOWER J A W

291

much like those of the Eskimo, but their angle is lower. The Negro has a stouter jaw than the White, yet the angles are closely similar. The Potomac River Algonquins had a decidedly weaker jaw than the related type of people of the Arkansas and Louisiana Mounds, but the angle is almost the same. The Californians and the Sioux did not have equally massive jaws, nor did the two belong to the same cephalic or stature type of the Indian, but the angle in their jaw is identical. The Californians and the Sioux were dolichoand mesocranic, the Floridians and Aleuts highly brachycranic, and the Sioux and Aleuts were among Americas most low-vaulted, the Floridians among the most high-vaulted strains-yet all these show a low angle. Nor does the angle in individual strong or weak jaws always conform to the strength of the bone. It is plain that everything about the lower jaw must be much better known before the causes of the differences in the angle can be established. There is doubtless no definite and universal single cause. Yet in the long run, strength or weakness of the bone do probably affect the angle, as do the time of eruption and the size of the teeth, the presence or absence of lower third molars, and the activity and mass of the internal pterygoid muscle; heredity, too, in all probability, already plays a role. A thorough large scale study of individual jaws and of groups with widely differing angles will eventually throw light on these problems. The most obvious and definite fact shown by the new data and suggested already in the old records, is the general presence of low to moderate angle in the American Indians. In this respect they differ from the Eskimo a s well as the Mongol and Chinese, they differ especially from the Whites, and they show once more their basic unity. As the several groups shown here differed considerably in habits of life the peculiarity would seem to be already in the Indian a generalized racial character. A suggestive fact is that the southwestern Alaskan groups, who physically approach the Indian rather than the Eskimo, show gonial angles like those of the Indians. It is highly desirable that the Russian workers

292

ALEB

HRDLI~KA

give us comparable data on the lower jaws of the native Siberians. A g e . Since Debierre's (1886) and Kieffer's ( '07) studies on the gonial angle in relation to age, it is known that, at least in one group of Whites, the average gonial angle does not change from the time the adult life is reached to at least 70, except where there is extensive loss of teeth. This rule is probably universal, for no convincing exception to it could be found in the various series that I have examined. What was observed was that, after elimination of the plainly senile jaws or those having suffered much loss of teeth, the highest angles found, between 140 and 148, occurred in jaws with all or most of the teeth present and in no instance indicating old age. Moreover such high angles occur in both sexes. They are generally associated with a rather subdeveloped ascending branch but high symphyseal region, but in no instance with anything senile or pathological. The other extremes, the jaws in which the gonial angle reaches close to or even below loo", occurred without exception in neither the young nor the old adults but during the fully developed and presenile period. I n these cases the lower portion of the ascending branch of the bone was in every instance overdeveloped, the gonial region presenting a broad convex margin which protruded backward ; and the whole bone was generally strong; but the height of the symphyseal portion was in none of these cases exceptionally high. Such jaws resemble much some of those of the smaller lower primates, and may possibly mean a form of reversion. Within the well-established adult life, therefore, and before senility with its extensive loss of teeth sets in, age alone has apparently no material influence on the gonial angle. Size. The size of the jaw, alone, seems also to bear but little definite relation to the gonial angle. Certainly the largest jaws do not have the lowest nor the smallest bones the highest angles; but it is not possible to say that there is any direct connection. The point can only be settled by special studies.

LOWER J A W

293

Sez. Throughout the records, the old (where more ample), as well as the new, the gonial angle in the female lower jaw is seen to be 3 to 5 degrees higher. The percental female :male relation, the male being taken as 100, is especially interesting. The data will here be recapitulated.
Goitial angle in female
2'8.

male jnivs

(8 = ZOO)
103.4 103.7 104.7 103.103.1 103.3 103.5 104.2 104.2 104.4 104.5 104.9 103.3 104.4 104.6

American Whites (N.Y., misc.) XI1 Dynasty Egyptians Polynesians (Hawaii) American Indians and Eskimo Arkansas and Louisiana Calif oruia Sioux Eskimo Florida Pueblos Pueblos-Peeos (Hooton) Potomae River S. W. Alaskans Other groups: Aino (Koganei) Mongols African and American Negroes

The correspondences are remarkably alike, ranging less than two points, and if all the series were equally ample even these differencs would probably diminish. P e t evidently there are some differences, and these must have their cause or causes, though these are not obvious. The female jaw as compared with male is on the average smaller, lighter, and provided mostly with a smaller dental arch and teeth-factors all of which may have some influence on the angle. Here again is a need of further special studies. With these sex differences, however, there is a great deal of overlapping or interdigitation, which, in individual cases, makes the gonial angle of but limited value for sex identification. All that may be said on this point is that an angle below 118" points towards a male, above 128" towards a female; but there are numerous exceptions.

294

ALE^

HRDLI~KA

Side. A measurement of the gonial angle on the two sides reveals some interesting conditions. Taking three of our main groups the means of the angle on the right and left were :
Gonial angle according to side
XALE FEMALE

Right

Left

Right

Left

American Whites (N. P.misc.) Eskimo (in general) Outer Mongol

133.8 120.9 119.4

123.6 121.1 121.-

128.125.3 124.9

128.125.123.-

I n the averages, it is plain, there is practically no difference in the angle on the two sides, in any of the groups, and this, there are indications, is the general rule. I n view of this fact it is wholly legitimate to measure the angle on one side onlyfor greater convenience the left-unless in a given case there are reasons to the contrary. Individually, however, the conditions are very different. Taking in many respects our two most opposed series, we find the following conditions :
Gonial angle, diferences as to aide
MALE

FEMALE

Spec's

76 22
'33

Spec's

lo

76 48
45

76 34 29

U. 8.Whites (N. Y. misc.)

Western Eskimo

(100) (100)

40 39

38
38

(77) (100)

18
!?G

There is practically an identity of showing in the males of the two series-another one of those basic points which go far toward the demonstration of the unity of the human species. The females differ somewhat from the males and between themselves, but the differences are very moderate. In scarcely one-fourth of the cases in all the categories are the angles on the two sides equal; in four-tenths of the males and not f a r from a half of the females the angle is slightly to

LOWER J A W

295

moderately larger-more oblique-on the right ; in nearly the same proportion (four-tenths) of cases in the males but in a decidedly smaller percentage in the females, the angle is larger on the left. These conditions, too, must have their significance. They possibly are connected with habits of mastication, but this is a mere thought. Here, once more, there is need of further studies. The individual differences in the angle on the two sides are mostly small, but may read as high as 7 or 8 degrees. I n one case, in fact, a white male, without any perceptible pathological cause, the difference reached 10 degrees. Taking well-preserved jaws of the American (N. Y. misc.) Whites, there appeared the following conditions :
Goniul angle on the two sides i n Amaricnn Wiiites Anele larger on one side than on the other, bv 4 5 Degrees 1 2 3 Male (75) 28 34.7 18.7 8 5.3

.-

Female (63)

28.6

31.7

25.4

63 .

31 .

Above 5 53 . (Go, 698, 10) 48 . (Go, 6,7)

There is no great or characteristic difference in the showing. I n roughly 60% of the cases where a difference appeared this was of but 1 or 2 degrees, or rather immaterial. But in 18.6% of the male and in 14.2% of the female jaws the difference ranged from 4 to 10 degrees, and these cases call f o r attention. They must have definite causation. They ought to connect with some corresponding asymmetries in the maxillae, or in the base of the skull. Here is still another point that demands further study. Individual variation in the gonial angle, while ample, is not excessive. F o r our entire new series the minimum and maximum, in the males, ranged from 98 to 141, or 43 units; in the females from 101 to 147 degrees, or 46 units, which would be approximately 36 and 37% of the general average. But this is excessive. The actual ranges of the better represented series, in percentage of their individual averages, run

296

ALEB

HRDLI~KA

in round numbers from 18 to 34 in the males and from 17 to 30 in the females, with the general means of 23 f o r the males and 21 for the females.2 The most variable is the angle in the Eskimo, though this is doubtless connected with the large number of specimens from that stock; the next being that of the Whites. I n the female jaw the variability of the angle tends mostly to be less than in the male, but there are exceptions. The next table gives the ranges in the different major groups.
Gonial angle : individual variaton (range average)
MALE BEMALE

Indian, Arkansas and Louisiana Old Egyptian Indian, Potomac Hawaiian Indians : Pueblo Indians: California Indians : Sioux Chinese Indians : Florida American Whites (N. Y.) Eskimo

(67) (42) (60) (30) (100) (131) (38)

19.4 20.20.3 20.4 20.8 21.9 23.7

20.5 20.1 17.8 18.6 17.4 26.3 21.3 27.2 28.1 29.6

(66) (200) (152) (391)

23.8 25.7 29.1 33.9

Additional influences. It is quite possible that some influence on the gonial angle may be exerted by such factors as stature, cranial and facial type, habits and occupations. Possibly the sex differences may be found thus explainable. But such influences cannot, it would seem in view of the data, be either very potent or clear-cut. All this however remains to be tested and determined. Here is a fine chance for some young worker.
a The expression of the variation by this means, i.e., by giving the range in percentage of the average, is a simple and very useful procedure, if the series dealt with are both ample and near equal. This of course is impossible of realization for any wider studies in anthropology which depend on skeletal collections; but even thus such data carry a certain amount of desirable and valuable information.

LOWER J A W

297

SUMMARY

This section renews attention to one of the major features of the lower jaw that has hitherto been inadequately covered and understood. New data are given on the gonial angle in 3006 adult presenile lower jaws, 1492 male, 1514 female, principally White, Indian, Eskimo, and Mongol. The angle is shown to offer definite group and sex differences. It is, in the main, highest (most oblique) in the Whites, lowest (nearest to right angle) in some of the American Indians. The mean angle is as a rule higher in the females than in the males. This holds true evidently for all human groups; and the relation of the values of the angle in the two sexes is remarkably uniform. In many individual jaws, the angle differs more or less on the two sides. Mostly such differences are small and practically insignificant; but in a minor proportion of cases they reach from 4 to 10 degrees and are worthy of attention. In any large series of specimens, however, these differences as to side balance each other, so that no special tendency is observable. The causation of the showings, all through, demands further investigation.
1 . THE BIGONIAL BREADTH 1

Following the consideration of the gonial angle of the lower jaw, it appears logical t o devote attention next to the bigonial breadth, though there is no great interdependence of the two features. And in this connection it will be found that the lower jaw of the Eskimo deserves especial attention. I t is the jaw of a people among whom, due to environmental needs, the process of mastication of food reached its recent mans maximum, to which were added the further calls for chewing by the women of frozen garments and skins. As a result the bone among these people reached a high grade of

298

ALE$ H R D L I ~ K A

development in bulk, equalled only by that of their neighbors who lived under much the same conditions, and by a few groups of the American Indians, such as the robust hunters of the Plains, and particularly the Floridians ; but among the latter the massiveness of the jaw was due in part to other reason^.^ The Eskimo lower jaw could well be defined as the greatest functional achievement in recent human jaws, and as such it deserves all possible attention. Fortunately there are now available in the U. S. National Museum extensive and geographically comprehensive collections of the bone, larger than those of any other primitive people except the Indian; they proceed with considerable probability all from fullbloods ; barring occasional scurvy they are free from pathological conditions; and in a large majority of cases they are accompanied by skulls or even whole skeletons, which make sexual determination quite definite. I n fact sex identification of the adult Eskimo jaw, with due experience and care, is in general not difficult. For the measuring of the bigonial breadth we have the Geneva Agreement, with much subsequent experience. The directions of the Agreement are as follows :

Bigonial breadth
Landmarks. The gonions, or points of the angles formed by the ascending branches with the body of the lower jaw. The separation of the angles is measured by applying the compass to their external surface. ' Excess of phosphates and carbonates in food consisting largely of mollusks,
which increased the massiveness of the whole skeleton.

LOWER J A W

299

Iizstrumeizt. The sliding compass. The bigonial diameter is the maximum external breadth of the lower jaw at the angles. The above definition would leave little to be desired, did it not mention the gonions. The use of the term gonions in the Geneva (and especially in subsequent short Martins definitions 4, is confusing, these points often being wholly indefinite and even where better determinable not coinciding always with the maximum flare of the angles. Method, Div. Phys. Anthrop., U. S. N. M.: Use stub branches of the compass. Apply instrument so that the rod rests on each side against the posterior border of the ascending branch at o r just above the angles, while the branches of the compass are brought to the most prominent external points at o r closely about the angles. Note. The measurement is generally simple, but in some cases offers difficulties. The greatest prominence may be on the posterior border of the ramus above the angles; or the angle parts may be more or less introverted. Such cases will call for the trained common sense of the observer, the guiding query being always : just what do I want to measure? Discussioiz. The bigonid diameter. The values of the data on the bigonial diameter secured by different observers, notwithstanding some differences in technique, should be fairly comparable, for there is but little room f o r gross error. A greater difficulty is offered by the very uneven and mostly wholly inadequate series of specimens, and this even in the case of the white peoples. The principal records on the measurement that could be located are as follows: Straightline distance between the t w o gonia, i.e., the mandibular angles. Martin (Lehrbuch, 2nd ed., 11, SWS). Froni my Practical Anthropometry, Wistar Inst., Phila., 1939.

The bigonial diameter. Previous data

QROUP
MALE

Whites: Berber (Biscra) Old Egyptians

Old Egyptians X V I I I Dyn. Slav Great Russian Old French Spanish Mediterranean, misc. Tirolean and Bavarian
Mixed : Pariah of Madras Hindu Lapp Lapp Polynesian

() 7 (5 1)
(5)

96 . 96 .

BEMALE

OBSERVER

() 3 (15)

85 . 85 . 97 . 9.0 9.1 92 . 9.1 93 . 9.6 86 . 9.2 9.5 9.7 9.0

Renard Renard Oetteking Renard Tarenetzkp Tarenetzkp Hoyos Sainz Tarenetzky Frizzi Renard Renard Srhreiner Herberz Herberz

both sexes

9.7 9.7 9.7 9.85 99 . 10.1 9.1 9.4 10.4 10.4 10.0

Yellow browis: Anlericun Indian Old Peruvian (Ancon) Old Peruvian ( 9 ) St. Rosa Is., Calif. Peeos Pueblo, Calif. ' ' Anier. Indian ' ' Calif oruia " Anier. Indian'' Kentucky Lenape Ark. and La. Mounds Sioux Florida

9.3 9.8 10.0 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.6 10.75 9.7 9.8 1. 02 10.2 10.5 10.5 10.8 1. 15 11.5 11.6
both sexes (156)
I

Renard Frizzi Matiegka Hooton Renard '6 HrdliEka ( 0 ) - Frizzi 9.5 HrdliEka ( ' 0 3) 9 6 HrdliEka ( ' 6 . 1) 9 6 HrdliEka ( ' 9 .5 0) 9.9 HrdliEka ( ' 7 3' and new) - HrdliEka ( '22)

9.2 9.2 9.45 93 . 91 .

0t 11er Fellow browns Chinese Chinese (or related) Malay Aino Japanese Chinese Giliak Greenland Southnn~ptonIs. Sniith Sound
Green land 19 groups, Greenland t o Alaskan Pen.

9.4 94 . 9.6

96 . 9.7 1. 10 10.7 10.4

Haberer Renard Renard Koganei Renard Frizzi Tarenetzky Oetteking 1) Hrdlirka ( ' 0 HrdliEka ( T O )

10.97 Furst L Hanseu % 10.57 HrdliGkn ( ' 0 3) 9.0 8.8 9.4 8.8
9.0

[201) (13') (lij

(3)

11.42 (199) 9.4 9.5 9.8 1. 02 106 9.5

9.6

Melasesinn : New Hebrides New Caledonian Bisninrck Archip. Australian Australian Africnu Negro African Negro

(2) (5)
(2)

(11)
'ccii

(3)

(7j
(23)

(3)

(11)

89 .

Renard Renard Frizzi Braekebush Frizzi Frizzi Renard

Measured 3000 skulls of Spain, b u t gives no indication a s t o the nuniber of lower jaws.

300

LOWER J A W

301

The above data show that the Eskimo lower jaw in its bigonial breadth exceeds materially all other jaws on record. Arranging these roughly from the narrowest to broadest in the males, and taking the mean of the records where multiple, there is obtained the following sequence :
MALE

Groups: 2
2 3

1 2
6

India Old Peru (coast) Melanesia Old Egypt African Negro European White

specs.

(1)
(32) (33)

(15) (30) (approx 1200)

(42)

9.2 9.2 9.5 9.G 9.G

3 1 2
2 10 22

Chinese Aino Australian Lapp North American Iiidian Eskimo

(64) (17) (237)

(30) (212)

9.7 9x . 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.4 11.45

The figures show several items of interest. The lowest values-the most subdued bigonial breadth-is seen in India and on the coast in Old Peru, warm regions of short sedentary and not robust groups ;while the decided maximum is given by the Eskimo, next t o whom come the Lapp and the North American Indian. The Australian, too, has a broad jaw, but the Melanesians unexpectedly are weak in this respect. The African Negro has, curiously-so f a r as represented-even a trace narrower jaw than the European White, and both stand somewhat below the mean of the range, with the Chinese close by. There are then some fairly marked differences in the dimension in various parts of the earth, but most of the recorded series are too small or restricted for definite conclusions as to the extent o r meaning of the differences. The preceding records I am now able to supplement with those on considerable new materials, particularly from Alaska and on the American Indian. The data on the Eskimo include those of 1930,8 but there are substantial additions.
Anthrop. Survey i n Alaska.

Bigonial Breadth. Author's present data

YALE FEMALE RANQE O r INDN. VAL

0:6 d = 100)
IN
AVERAOE

% OF

11.28 (9.4-13.9) (10.6-12.3) 10.50

90.5

10.54 (9.8-11.2)
93.4

(.-34 921.)

93.4

11.24 11.47 11.31 (10.1-13.5) (10.0-12.8) 10.38 10.47 (9.0-12.1) (9.5-11.0)

98.6
923

11.05 10.81 (9.6-12.3) (9.3-12.8) 10.20 9.95

(8.6-11.2) (8.G-11.2)

98.0 92.0 99.9 90.3

10.82 10.82 10.77 9.99 10.28 10.16 (9.0-12.4) (9.2-18.3) (9.3-12.0) (8.7-11.2) (9.6-11.1) (8.8-11.2) (8.8-11.4) 9.26 9.95 10.05 9.71 9.52 9.54 9.43 9.89

(8.2-10.7) (8.7-11.3) (9.1-10.6) ( . - 9.9) 87 (8.6-10.5) (7 8 1 . ) .-03 (8.1-10.5)

92.8 92.8

Eskimo (in general Greenland t o Peninsula) Peiunsula (mixture of Eskimo and Aleuts) Kodiak Islanders Pre-Koniag Koniag Aleutian Islanders Pre-Aleut Aleut Alaskan Indian (mainly Yukon) E'lorida Indian * Mongol (Urga) Chinese (Canton reg.) Polynesian (Hawaii) U.8. Whites (N. Y. misc.) Negro (mainly American, fullblood)

(33)

9. 86

Physically not Eskimo.

* Additional t o those reported before.

LOWER J A W

303

MALE

FRYALE

Pre-Koniag (Kodiak) Koniag (Kodiak) Eskimo (in general) Alaska Peninsula (Eskimo-Aleut) Pre-Aleut Alaska Indian Florida Indian Aleut Mongol Polynesian (Hawaii) U. S. White (mise., N. Y.) Chinese (Canton) Negro (fullblood, mainly American)

(64) (33) (369) (18) (39) (35) (100) (67) (33) (25) (107) (60) (33)

11.47 (92) 11.31 (20) 11.28 (391) 11.24 11.05 10.82 10.82 10.81 10.77 10.28 10.10 9.99 9.89 (19) (23) (30) (100) (69) (23) (40) (100) (9) (41)

10.38 10.47 10.54 10.50 10.20 9.95 10.05 9.95 9.71 9.54 9.43 9.52 926

The broadest male jaws, it is seen, are those of the Alaskans, the Eskimo in general, and the Old Floridians, followed by the Mongols; the least broad are those of the American white laborers and especially those of the Chinese and the Negro. The females follow much the same order, except the Eskimo, which stand at the head of the list, and the Florida Indian, in whom they stand also higher than the males. As to the causes of the showing, the thought naturally turns first to stature, and to the shape of the skull. The mean stature of the American Whites, the American Negro and the Polynesians was above the general human medium of, in male, ca. 165 cm., that of the remaining groups ranged from medium to submedium. Narrow heads prevailed in the PreKoniag, Pre-Aleut, Eskimo, Polynesian, White, Chinese and Negro, decidedly broad head were characteristic of the Koniag, Aleut, Alaska and Florida Indian, and of the majority of the Mongols. There is plainly no clear conformity here, either with stature or head form. The bigonial breadth of the lower jaw must evidently be potently influenced also by other factors. These factors are not f a r to seek. A survey of the broadest jaws in any group shows that they differ from the rest particularly by the development, both internally and ex-

304

ALE^ HRDLIEKA

ternally, of the parts that serve for the insertions of the pterygoid muscles, aside of the masseters the main muscles of mastication. They affect the gonial regions both by their mass and by their activity. They cause a grooving and thickening of the bone, in instances increase its spread at the angles, and, especially, lead to the development of irregular external elevations about each angle, and more or less of a flare outward of the border of the bone about, not seldom even above, the angle. It is essentially these conditions, the above-medium mass and activity of the pterygoid muscles, that enlarge the bigonial breadth of the jaw, and that means above-medium mastication. The bigonial breadth, as all 0sseous dimensions, correlates doubtless basically with stature ; it is affected also, though much less than the bicondylar breadth of the jaw, by the breadth of the skull; but the main ontogenetic factor which influences it is the function of mastication. It is unquestioiiably for this reason that the native peoples of the arctic and subarctic, who consume large quantities of raw or but poorly prepared food, have such broad jaws. The Eskimo woman in particular is known for the amount of chewing she had to do, and she logically heads all the rest of the females. There are two groups in which the conditions need further explanation. They are the old Florida Indians, and the Negro. The lower jaw of the Floridians was huge all over, as was that of the Eskimo and other Alaskans. They doubtless did also a lot of tough chewing. But in Florida, as has already been mentioned, due to the excess of carbonates and phosphates in the food-principally mollusks-the whole skeleton grew thicker and heavier. As to the Negro, both African and American, large jaws are rare, while those of submedium development-except in length-are fairly common. The majority of the Negro groups in Africa had no need of heavy mastication, and in America they lived always like the poorer southern white people. Their jaws now and then exceed those of the Whites in certain dimensions, to be dealt with later, but not in bigonial diameter. Contributing cause to this was

LOWER J A W

305

probably the occasional narrowness of the Negro base of the skull. An interesting side problem is the condition of the Eskimo jaw, as to the bigonial breadth, in different groups of these people. The next figures will show the facts. They represent practically the whole Eskimo habitat, outside of Labrador, from which collections are still insufficient.
Biyoa ial breadth among the E ~ k i m o
FEYALE

Barrow Region St. Lawrence Island Point Hope Western Rivers Greenland Seward Peninsula Western Coast and Islands (Bering Sea)

(122) (13) (63) (22)

11.3 11.4 11.4 11.5 11.8

(23) (59) (124)

(66)

(21) (71) (23)

10.3 10.6 1. 06 10.3 10.4 10.6 10.8

These differences show no distinct correlation with either geographical or any other known factors. They may to some extent be due to insufficiency and unevenness of the numbers of specimens in the different series. What is plain is that all the groups had broad jaws. The female : male relation in the bigonial breadth ranges from 90.2 in the Mongols and 90.5 in the Pre-Koniag people to 93.4 on the Peninsula and in the Eskimo, and 93.6 in the Negro, where the female jaw relatively to that of the male is the broadest. There is really a remarkable general similarity in this respect. The differences, which would probably be further reduced if we had throughout adequate numbers of specimens, are doubtless of functional character.
SUMMARY

The older records on the bigonial breadth of the lower jaw are here supplemented by those on substantial series of specimens from the Eskimo, various other groups from Alaska, the American Indian, the Mongol, Chinese, Polynesian, Negro, and miscellaneous American Whites.

306

ALES H R D L I ~ K A

The breadth shows material differences in the different groups aside of such as might be attributed to the influence of stature or the breadth of the head. The broadest jaws are found in the arctic and subarctic peoples, the least broad in southern groups including the Melanesians and the Negro. There are definite indications that the dimension under consideration is largely influenced by the development of the pterygoid muscles, which in turn are proportionate to the amount and nature of mastication. The differences in the bigonial breadth of the jaw in different human groups may therefore be safely accepted as mainly of ontogenetic, functional, causation.
LITERATURE CITED ANNANDALE, N., AND H. C. ROBINSON 1903 Anthropological and Zoological Results of a n Expedition to Perak and the Siamese Malay states. Fasc. Malay., sm. 4to (measurements of lower jaws p. 155). . BOSSE,U. 1901 Beitrage zur Anatomie des mensclilichen Unterkiefers 1 Uber einige Mass- und Zahlenverhaltnisse d. Unterkiefers. 2. Uber den Processus lemurinious (Sandifortii) . Inaug. Diss. med. Konigsberg,

37 PPBRACKEBUSCH, 1905 Die Australierschadel der Sammlung des Anatomischen K. Instituts zu Wittingen Inaug. Diss., Gtt. BROCA,P. 1875 Instructions cranialogiques e t craniometriques M6m. SOC. Anthrop. Paris, 2 me sbr., I1 and 8, Paris. Measurements of the Mandible pp. 93-96. DEBIERRE, C. 1886 Sur le dbveloppement, 16volution, e t sur Iangle de la mlchoire inf6rieure. Bull. SOC. Anthrop. Lyon, V, 185. FRIZZI, . 1910 Untersuehungen am menschliehen Unterkiefer mit spezieller E Beriick sichtignng der Regio mentalis. Arch. Anthrop., IX, 252-286. FITRsT, M., AND Fa. C. C. HANSEN 1915 Crania Groenlandica. Copenhagen, C. 167 e t seq. K. GORJANOVIB-KUMBERQER, 1909 Der Unterkiefer der Eskimos (Gronlander) als Trager primitiver Merkmale. Sitz.-Ber. Preuss. Akad. Wise., LII, 1282-1294. HABEREB, A. 1902 Schadel und Skeletteile aus Peking, Jena. K. HOOTON, A. 1930 The Indians of Pecos Pueblo, New Haven; lower jaw pp. E. 68-69. HOYOS SAINZ, L., AND T. ARAMADI 1913 Notes preliminaires sur les Crania Rispanica. Bull. and M6m. SOC.Anthr. Paris, IV, 81-94.

LOWER JAW

307

HRDLI~KA, 1930 Anthropological Survey in Alaska. 46th Ann. Rep. Bur. A. Am. Ethnol., Wash. 1922 The -4nthropology of Florida, Publ. Fla. St. Hist. SOL, Delano, Fla., sm. 4to. 1909 Report on an additional collection of skeletal remains from Arkansas and Louisiana. J. Ac. Nat. Scis. Phila., XIV, 196. 1906 Contribution to the Physical Anthropology of California. Univ. Calif. PubIs, IV, no. 2, pp. 49-64. 1937 The Minnesota Man. Am. J. Phys. Anthrop., XX, 195. 1916 Physical Anthropology of the Lenape, etc., Bull. 62, Bur. Am. Ethnol., Wash., 130 pp. (Lower jaw p. 31.) KEILSON, 1904 Anatomische und topographische Untersuchungen iiber den 9. Condylus mandibulae und den Meatus auditorius externus. Iiiaug. Diss. Berl. KIEFFEB, J. 1907 Beitrage zur Kenntniss der Veranderungen am Unterkiefer und Kiefergelenk des Menschen durch Alter und Zahnverlust. Z. Morphol. & Anthropol., XI, i-82. IILAATSCH, . 1899 Die fossilen Knochenreste des Menschen und ihre BeH dentung f u r das Abstammungs Problem. Erg. Anat. & Entwickelungsgesch, I X : Unterkiefer pp. 462-471: (Nothing as t o measuring; discussion of characteristics of lower jaws of Early Man known to that date). KOGANEI, 1893 Beitrlge zur pliysischen Anthropologie cler Aino. Tokyo. Y. KURZ, E. 1918 Der Unterkiefer des Gxinesen. Arch. Anat. Phys. Anat., Abt. S. 173-209. 1922 Die Form des Saugetierunterkiefers. Inaug. Diss. Frankfurt a. M. MARTIN, R. 1905 Die Inlandstamme der malayischen Halbinsel. Jena. MARSELLI, 1875 Sul peso del cranio e della niandibola in rapport0 col sesso. E. Arch. Anthrop. & Etnol., V, 149-199. OETTEICIBO, 1909 Kraniologische Studien an Altagpptern. sin. 4t0, BraunB. schweig (The mandible p. 36 et seq.). PUCCIONI, 1914 Morphologie du maxillaire infkrieur. Anthropologie, Par., N. XXV, 291-321. RASCHE, W. 1913 Beitrage zur Anthropologie des Unterkiefers. Inaug. Diss. Zurich. RENARD, 1880 Des variations ethniques du maxillaire inf6rieur. These, Paris, L. 66 PPSCHREINER,E. 1935 Zur Osteologie der Lappen. L. Jaw, vol. I, 122-125. I<. TARENECIZI, 1884 Beitrage zur Craniologie der Aiiios auf Saehalin, V6m. A. Acad. Sc. St. Petersbg. - 1884 Beitrage zur Craniologie der gross russischeii BevSlkerung M6m.-Acad. St. Petersbg, XXXII, no. 13.

ALES H R D L I ~ K A
TARENECKI, 1893 Weitere Beitrage zur Craniologie der Bewohner von Saehalin, A.
TOLDT, C., MBm. Acad. Scs St. Petersb., XLI, no. 6. JR. 1903 Die Japanerschadel des Miin-scliener anthropologischen Institutes. Arch. Anthrop., XXVIII, 143 et seq. (Lower jaw p. 180). TOPINARD, 1885 Elembnts dhnthropologie gBnBrale, Paris 8, Mandible pp. P. 960-962. TOR~K, v. 1898 Ueber Variationen und Correlationen der NeigungsverhaltA. nisse am Unterkiefer. Z. Ethiiol., XXX, 125 et seq. WALLISCH,W. 1909 Das kiefergelenk. Arch. Anat. & Physiol., Anat. Part, 11 1. H. 1902 Die Zugeltorigkeit eines Unterkiefers zu einem bestimmten WELCKER, Schadel, etc. Arch. Anthrop., XXVII, 37-106.