A Racial Study of the Fijians Norman E. Gabel 512 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of A Racial Study of the Fijians
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this eBook.

Title: A Racial Study of the Fijians

Author: Norman E. Gabel

Release date: March 14, 2012 [eBook #39140]

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/39140

Credits: Produced by Charlene Taylor, Jude Eylander, Joseph Cooper
and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A RACIAL
STUDY OF THE FIJIANS ***

Illustration: Simplified map of Fiji showing four regional divisions of
population made by the author.

A RACIAL STUDY OF THE
FIJIANS

BY

NORMAN E. GABEL
ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS

Vol. 20, No. I

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS

Editors: C. W. Meighan, Harry Hoijer. Eshref Shevky
Volume 20, No. 1. pp. 1-44, plates 1-15

Submitted by editors April 11, 1957
Issued March 27, 1958
Price. $1.00

University of California Press
Berkeley and Los Angeles
California

Cambridge University Press
London, England

Manufactured in the United States of America

CONTENTS
CONTENTS
MEASUREMENTS AND INDICES
MORPHOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS
CONCLUSIONS
LITERATURE CITED
PLATES

Page
Introduction 1
The problem and procedure 1
The habitat 2
History 3
Population 3
Racial background 4
Acknowledgments 4
Measurements and indices 5
General 5
Weight 5
Stature 5
Span 5
Span-stature index 5
The trunk 5
Sitting height 5
Relative sitting height 5
Biacromial 6
Relative shoulder breadth 6
Bi-iliac 6
Shoulder-hip 6
Chest breadth 6
Chest depth 6

Thoracic 6
Arms and legs 6
Arm length 6
Humeral length 6
Radial length 7
Radial-humeral 7
Leg length 7
Tibial length 7
Calf circumference 7
The head 7
Head circumference 7
Head length 7
Head breadth 7
Cephalic index 7
Head height 8
Length-height 8
Breadth-height 8
Cranial module 8
Minimum frontal 8
Fronto-parietal 8
The face 8
Bizygomatic 8
Cephalo-facial 9
Zygo-frontal 9
Total face height 9
Total facial index 9
Upper face height 9
Upper facial index 9
Bigonial 9
Fronto-gonial 9
Zygo-gonial 10
Nasal height 10
Nasal breadth 10
Nasal index 10

Nasal depth 10
Nasal-depth index 10
Mouth breadth 10
Lip thickness 10
Ear length 10
Ear breadth 11
Ear index 11
Bicanine breadth 11
Morphological observations 12
Pigmentation 12
Skin color: exposed 12
Skin color: unexposed 12
Hair color 13
Eye color 13
Hair 13
Hair form 13
Hair texture 14
Head hair quantity 14
Hair length 14
Baldness 14
Beard quantity 14
Body hair 15
Grayness: head 15
Grayness: beard 16
The face 16
Prognathism: total 16
Prognathism: mid-facial 16
Prognathism: alveolar 16
Malar projection: lateral 16
Malar projection: frontal 16
Gonial angles 16
Palate shape 16
Chin prominence 17
Chin type 17

The head 17
Temporal fullness 17
Occipital protrusion 17
Lambdoidal flattening 17
Occipital flattening 17
Median sagittal crest 17
Parietal bosses 17
Cranial asymmetry 17
Facial asymmetry 18
Eyes 18
Eye folds: external 18
Eye fold: median 18
Eye folds: internal 18
Eye obliquity 18
Eye opening 18
Forehead 18
Brow ridges 18
Forehead height 19
Forehead slope 19
Nose 19
Nasion depression 19
Root height 19
Root breadth 19
Nasal septum 19
Bridge height 19
Bridge breadth 19
Nasal profile 19
Nasal-tip thickness 20
Nasal-tip inclination 20
Nasal wings 20
Mouth 20
Lip thickness: membranous 20
Lip thickness: integumental 20
Lip eversion 20

Lip seam 20
Teeth 21
Bite 21
Caries 21
Crowding 21
Tooth eruption 21
Wear 21
Ears 21
Ear helix 21
Darwin's point 21
Ear-lobe type 22
Ear-lobe size 22
Ear protrusion 22
Ear slant 22
Body build 22
Body build: endomorph 22
Body build: mesomorph 22
Body build: ectomorph 22
Summary 23
Conclusions 25
Literature cited 26
Plates 27

MAP

Simplified map of Fiji showing four regional divisions of population made
by the author ... frontispiece

A RACIAL STUDY OF THE FIJIANS

BY

NORMAN E. GABEL
INTRODUCTION

This paper concerns itself with a physical survey of the native male
population of Fiji. The main objective is a description of these people by
means of anthropometric procedure.[1] The treatment includes, first, a
description of the Fijians as a whole, second, a comparison with
neighboring people, and third, regional differences among the Fijians
themselves.

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.

THE HABITAT

The islands of Fiji are centrally located in the southwest Pacific. Over three
hundred islands and islets make up the archipelago, which spreads between
latitudes 15' and 22' south of the equator for 300 miles. The international
date line runs through Fiji at the Koro Sea and the Moala Island group.
The total land area of the islands is about the equivalent of the state of
Delaware, somewhat over 7,000 square miles. Two great islands account for
nearly 95 per cent of the total area: Viti Levu, the largest, is over 4,000
square miles, and Vanua Levu, about half as large. Over 90 per cent of the
native population lives on these two islands although nearly a hundred other
islands are inhabited.
Most of the islands are made up of volcanic and sedimentary rocks. The
largest islands rest on a submerged portion of an ancient land mass,

sometimes called the Melanesian continent, which goes back in time to the
Paleozoic and, in its prime, intermittently connected Fiji with southeastern
Asia and Australia. Subsequent submergence, followed by cycles of
volcanic upbuilding, erosion, and more submergence over eons of time,
gave the big islands their upper foundations. The last extensive volcanic
activity and land uplift occurred in the Pleistocene and accounts for many
of the present mountain masses. The final touches to the Fiji profile have
been wrought by more recent weathering and erosion. Sedimentation is still
going on at river mouths and along the coasts, where deltas are being built
and mangrove thickets flourish.
Many of the smaller islands are old limestone masses that were pushed up
from the sea. Unlike the high craggy volcanic islands, these are lower and
flat-topped. Typically, they contain a basin-shaped depressed area that is
surrounded by a rim. These depressions are usually fertile and heavily
forested.
Coral islands make up the third variety of land forms. These are always
small and low. Their small size, thinner soil, and lack of fresh water make
them much less suitable for human habitation. But even a thin layer of soil
produces a luxurious vegetation.
Fringing and barrier reefs are abundant throughout the archipelago,
surrounding nearly every island. The most striking of these formations is
the Great Sea Reef, which forms an arc of nearly 300 miles along the
western fringe of Fiji and encloses large areas of coral-infested sea.
Moderately high mountains give to the larger islands a generally rugged
terrain. The more extensive ranges lie across the path of the prevailing
south and easterly winds producing windward and leeward climatic areas.
On the windward side rainfall is heavy and rather evenly distributed over
the year. Here the valleys and mountain slopes support a typical dense
tropical growth. The leeward side, however, receives much less moisture
and has wet and dry seasons. Scattered patches of trees and grasses cover
the ground, whereas heavy stands of forest are confined to valley bottoms
and higher mountain slopes. The mountainous interior of Viti Levu contains
a number of peaks over 3,000 feet, the highest of which is Mt. Victoria,
4,341 feet.

Surface water is abundant on the bigger islands. Several large and navigable
rivers drain Viti Levu and Vanua Levu. The Rewa River, on the east side of
Viti Levu is the largest and is navigable for small craft for 70 miles. Smaller
rivers and hundreds of streams are important sources of food and drink for
the people of the interior.
Great flood plains are formed at the mouths of the larger rivers. These and
the fertile flats that run back along the valleys contain the greatest
population densities.
The climate is generally pleasant and healthful. Tropical extremes of heat
and humidity are moderated by the prevailing trades, which usually supply
cool and pleasant breezes from the east. Still, days of uncomfortable heat
and oppressive humidity are not unknown; however, such periods are
protracted only in the interior. The climate is far from uniform throughout
the islands. The windward sides, where rainfall often exceeds a hundred
inches, have a more even temperature and sunshine is more moderate. On
the leeward sides there is less general cloudiness and more sunshine,
especially during the dry season. The smaller islands generally resemble the
leeward areas in climate.
Native plant and animal life, like much of the southwest Pacific, is
southeastern Asiatic in type and in origin. In the more profuse and varied
windward sides there are several general vegetation zones. Along the coasts
and in the larger river basins occur alluvial vegetation largely dominated by
several kinds of mangrove, which is densest in mud flats washed by the
tide. In this zone trees are scattered, and many of them bear useful nuts and
fruits. On the slopes and ridges behind the coastal belts are the great
tropical rain forests. They make up a dense cover of evergreen trees
interwoven with wild creepers and vines. Thick stands of shrubs and
smaller trees add to the tropical profusion. Above 2,000 feet the forests thin
out and become more heavily coated with moss and lichens, and ferns and
orchids attach themselves to the branches. Beyond 3,000 feet is the cloud
belt, and above this trees become stunted and are finally replaced by hardy
shrubs that cling to the rocks and crags.
On the leeward sides, patches of rain forest are found only in the moister
areas. More typical of this zone are thin-leaved trees interspersed in large

expanses of meadow and grassland.
A number of native plants are very vital to the Fijian livelihood and some
have modern economic importance. Several timber trees are essential to
house building, canoe construction, and wood carving. The ubiquitous
palms, here as elsewhere in the Pacific, are vital sources of food, drink,
building, and weaving materials and cordage. The mangrove provides
firewood, house poles, fishing fences, and traps, laths for bows and black
dye for their hair and tapa. Valuable starch is secured from the sago palm,
which is cut just before flowering, and the leaves are a common thatching
material. Various reeds, canes, and bamboos and lianas are useful to Fiji
economy. In the drier areas reeds and grasses provide material for house
walls, thatch, fish fences, and arrow shafts. Several kinds of trees yield
edible nuts and fruits.
Like other central-Pacific island groups, Fiji is poorly provided with
indigenous mammals. A small gray rat is a considerable pest in garden and
homes, and a large nocturnal bat, which is called a flying fox, lives in tree
colonies and is often seen at dusk in banana groves or other feeding places.
All the economically important animals of Fiji have been introduced, such
as pigs, fowl, dogs, cattle, horses, sheep, and goats.
Bird life is diverse and interesting, although in a number of places
introduced forms, like mynahs and turtle doves, have forced the native
varieties back into the jungle. Several game birds such as doves, pigeons,
and ducks are occasionally hunted.
Snakes and lizards are fairly common on the islands; none is poisonous.
Some are eaten, but the practice is not usual. Snakes had a more important
place in the former religious and totemic practices.
Much more vital to the native economy is the abundant and varied marine
life. This, with gardening, provides the foundation of Fijian subsistence.
Turtles, crabs, prawns, eels, to say nothing of scores of fishes, are hunted,
trapped, poisoned, speared, and netted. The cycle of the balolo worm has
here the same importance as in other Pacific islands.

HISTORY

The first western contact with Fiji was made in 1643 when Captain Abel
Tasman entered Fijian waters and sighted several islands and reefs without
realizing the nature of his discovery. Over a hundred years later, Captain
Cook made a second contact by stopping at one of the southern Lau Islands.
Real knowledge of the area began in 1792 when Captain Bligh sailed
through the archipelago from the southeast to the northwest, following the
famous mutiny of the Bounty. Bligh made an attempt to land, was attacked
by natives, and continued through the islands with no more landings. He
did, however, make a record of most of the islands he passed.
In the nineteenth century, commercial contacts began in the form of
sandalwood trade. This profitable commodity brought Europeans and
Americans first to the Sandalwood Coast on the west side of Vanua Levu.
During this period the first systematic survey of Fijian waters was made by
the U.S. Exploring Expedition in 1840. After little more than a decade the
sandalwood supply was depleted to the point where trade virtually ceased.
As a result of this initial commercial contact, which was mainly around
western Vanua Levu and eastern Viti Levu, some marked changes were
effected in Fijian culture. After the sandalwood traders abandoned Fiji for
more profitable fields, a number of deserters and ship-wrecked men
remained. These beachcombers, along with firearms that had been
introduced by trade or salvaged from wrecks, brought about the first
striking alterations. Rival chiefs competed for the acquisition of muskets,
gunpowder, and beachcombers. The latter in some instances became
attached to royal households as dubious advisors and instructors in the use
of guns, powder, and shot. Some of these coaches enjoyed a status
resembling that of household pets.
The introduction of firearms changed the native political scene and
increased the scope and destructiveness of warfare. For a time the rulers of
Mbau in eastern Viti nearly monopolized the supply of muskets and white
men. This established their political supremacy over rival leaders. Larger
and stronger political and military alliances, some resembling small
kingdoms, developed for purposes of defense or aggression. As warfare
grew more frequent, new diseases entered the islands and trade in liquor
advanced.

After the third decade of the nineteenth century better elements began to
enter Fiji and ensuing culture contact was not so consistently deplorable.
Bêche-de-mer traders and whalers began to visit the islands for trade goods
and supplies. Some began to settle at the east end of Viti Levu. Missionaries
came in the 1830's and the Christianization of Fiji began.
Internal conflict between rival chiefs, attacks on French, British, and
American ships, with subsequent reprisals, continued and intensified. By
mid-century, rivalry between the local kingdoms of Mbau and Rewa
reached a peak. At this time the powerful ruler of Mbau, Thakombau, who
dominated a large segment of eastern Viti Levu, had become hard pressed
by his Rewa enemies. Thakombau submitted to the missionaries who had
been pressing his conversion. With his support of the missionaries, the
native struggles became a religious war between Christianity and paganism
as well as between nativism and westernism. Thakombau's cause was
rescued in 1855 when King George of Tonga brought an army of 2,000
warriors to Fiji and combined his strength with that of the kingdom of
Mbau. Thenceforth Thakombau remained the paramount chief in eastern
Fiji and for some twenty ensuing years ruled under the dominance of
Tongan princes. Another Tongan chief, Ma'afu, arrived in 1848 and set up a
political domain that rivaled the kingdom of Thakombau.
Throughout these struggles and particularly with the conversion of
Thakombau and the leadership of the already Christianized Tongan chiefs,
native religion, including cannibalism, rapidly declined. Meanwhile,
English, Australian, and New Zealand settlers were augmenting earlier trade
contacts. Plantations and trade centers developed, and in 1857 a British
consul was appointed and set up at Levuka on the east coast of Viti Levu. A
few years later Thakombau sought relief from the payment of indemnities
to foreign powers and from internal harassments by an offer to cede his
dominions to Great Britain. The initial offer was declined and the British
consul was recalled in 1860.
The next ten years saw a continuation of political and military turmoil
stemming from rival interests of native rulers, Tongan interlopers, and
European immigrants. A second appeal to the British government resulted
in an unconditional deed of cession on October 10, 1874, which marks the
beginning of Fiji's status as a British Crown Colony.

POPULATION

Over 300,000 people live in the Fiji Islands. Of these about 140,000 are
native Fijians. The others are arranged in the following divisions: [4]

Indians 154,803
Europeans 6,500
Part European 7,496
Polynesians
Melanesians
Micronesians
} 4,133
Rotumans 3,990
Chinese 3,857
Others 649

When Fiji became a British Crown Colony in 1874 the population was
entirely native except for a handful of outsiders. At that time the population
has been variously estimated at approximately 200,000. Shortly thereafter a
measles epidemic reduced their number severely. This, with other
epidemics and maladies for which they had little or no immunity or
resistence, continued the decimation until by 1905 there were only 87,000.
During the next decade they held their own, until in 1919 the influenza
scourge brought them to their lowest level of 83,000. This was the last
serious setback to their number; since that time the population has been on
the upgrade.
A present threat to Fijian population, in the opinion of many, stems not from
disease but from the Indian presence. This began in the latter part of the
nineteenth century when Indian immigration of indentured laborers began.
The influx went on until 1916 by which time some 40,000 to 50,000 Indians
had come to Fiji and very few had returned to India. Since then, the Indians
have increased more rapidly than the Fijians until they now outnumber
them. This situation has, of course, created numerous problems beyond the
scope of this paper.
It is significant to point out that intermarriage or interbreeding between
Fijians and Indians is relatively slight. The amount of mingling of Fijians

with Europeans or Orientals cannot be demonstrated statistically, but it has
not been extensive. The Fijians, on the whole, retain pretty much of their
prehistoric racial make-up.

RACIAL BACKGROUND

It is well established that the Fijians are a mixed people, derived mainly
from Melanesian and Polynesian sources. Both of these parental strains in
turn are commonly believed to be racial blends. Hooton describes the
Melanesians as Oceanic Negroes whose composition includes Negrito,
Australoid, "plus convex-nosed Mediterranean plus minor fractions of
Malay and Polynesian."[5] Birdsell sees the same three strains in Melanesia
which he believes contribute to the Australians, namely Negrito, Murrayan,
and Carpentarian, plus a small amount of Mongoloid. He believes they
differ from Australians in being "basically negritic in their genetic
composition as a result of the rain forest environment."[6] Polynesians,
however, are usually thought to be derived from Caucasoid, Mongoloid,
and Negroid strains in which the Caucasoid component is more often the
strongest.
The composite character of the Fijians has been variously explained as far
as order and time of the contributing elements are concerned. One theory
regards a Negroid stock as aboriginal to which a Polynesian strain was later
added. An early explanation of this sort is that of Fornander who held that
the ancestors of the modern Polynesians coming from southeastern Asia via
Indonesia in the early centuries A.D. made a prolonged stopover in Fiji as
they moved eastward. This left a Polynesian imprint on the native Fijian
physical appearance as well as on their language and culture.[7] Later on,
Churchill added a second movement of Polynesians from the west about a
thousand years later. This was used to explain a certain amount of
Mongoloid elements that needed accounting for in western Polynesia.[8]
A differing interpretation brings the Polynesian influence into Fiji from the
east in relatively recent times. Thomson, for example, regards it as mainly
Tongan. There are many references in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries to Tongan presence in Fiji; they came to trade, to fight, and
merely to visit.

Hocart believes the Polynesians at one time occupied most of Fiji until they
were driven eastward to Tonga and Samoa by native Melanesians.[9]
Howells tentatively suggests another possibility: originally all of Fiji was
occupied by Polynesians except perhaps for some Melanesian tribes in the
mountainous interior of Viti Levu. Around the eleventh century a wave of
immigrants from the west reached Fiji. "The newcomers, taking possession
of the archipelago, partly amalgamated with and partly pushed out the
Polynesian tenants, just as did the hill tribes of Hocart's theory, the refugees
fleeing to Somoa and Tonga."[10] Howells associates this immigration with
the Fijian tradition of an arrival of ancestral families from across the
western sea.
This Fijian tradition of their own origin includes a landing on the west coast
of Viti Levu at Nandi by an ancestral chief and his sons who came across
the sea from the west. Several of his sons moved eastward and eventually
founded families with native wives in various parts of the archipelago.
These families ultimately became consolidated into present-day tribes or
federations. Most Fijian social units derive their origin from this or similar
legendary immigrations. These eposodes occurred eight or ten and, in one
case, fifteen generations ago.[11] Where these ancestors came from or what
their racial affiliations were is not described in the stories. On the basis of
supposed similarities of place-names, claims have been made for Africa as
the place of origin, but the validity of them is dubious. It is likely that these
traditions refer only to the more recent immigrations from the west. As to
the racial make-up of the ancestors, it is commonly believed that they were
Polynesians who, after settling in various parts of Fiji, took native wives,
presumably Melanesian, and originated many of the existing family lines.
This assumption does not rest on any actual physical reference to their
appearance but on such cultural data as their patrilineal succession and their
tradition of strong hereditary chieftainship.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am indebted to a number of people of Fiji whose assistance and
coöperation were helpful. Thanks are due to Sir Ronald Garvey, governor of
Fiji, whose approval of my project gave administrative sanction. Mr. G.
Kingsley Roth, the Secretary for Fijian Affairs, secured for me the

coöperation of the Fijian Affairs Department, which in turn gave me access
to the proper native officers and leaders, furnished me with necessary
transportation; he also gave me some sound advice. Also of the Fijian
Affairs Office, Ratu Dr. Dobi helped me make the necessary contacts as my
work took me from one area to another. Mr. Robbin H. Yarrow, safety
officer of the Emperor Gold Mining Company, was most helpful during my
stay at Vatukoula, where I secured an excellent sample of the northern
provinces.
The young Fijian who acted as my interpreter, guide, and recorder was Joji
Qalelawe; my especial thanks to him for his intelligent and cheerful
coöperation.

MEASUREMENTS AND INDICES
GENERAL

Weight[12]

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 814105-300 163.0 20.3 12.5
Interior 0 0 0 0 0
East 73 130-245 168.1 19.3 11.5
Coast 210 118-300 160.7 22.8 14.2
N.W. 79 120-212 161.9 16.9 10.4

The average weight of 163 pounds, coupled with their rather tall stature,
describes the Fijian as a large person, on the whole. Their generous weight
does not reflect excessive obesity; the body build, as will be pointed out
later, is prevailingly muscular and athletic. Variation among the regional
samples is not significant; all the groups average more than 160 pounds.

Stature

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815150.1-195.0 172.5 6.1 3.5
Interior 154150.1-183.7 169.6 6.0 3.5
East 120160.2-190.5 173.3 6.0 3.5
Coast 210156.1-195.0 173.4 5.8 3.4
N.W. 79159.8-186.0 172.7 5.8 3.3
Fiji (Howells) 133 158-190 170.8 6.1 3.6
Solomons (Howells) 85 146-181 160.2 6.8 4.2
Tonga (Sullivan) 92 160-188 173.0 5.2 3.0

The stature of the Fijians is moderately tall. Howells' series of Fijians, as
well as mine, indicate this category. In this measurement, the Fijians are
similar to the Tongans. They are 12 cm. taller than the Melanesians.
Among the Fijian themselves, the interior people of the highlands are
definitely shorter than the rest of the population.
Rumors still persist of remnants of pygmoid people in the interior
mountains of Viti Levu. I found no evidence of them either in my travels in
the interior or by extensive inquiries among natives and Europeans who had
thorough knowledge of the whole island.

Span

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815155.0-208.0 180.0 15.1 8.8
Interior 154155.0-201.0 179.5 7.5 4.2
East 120166.4-200.5 178.1 24.3 13.6
Coast 210160.1-208.0 181.2 14.6 8.1
N.W. 79165.1-202.0 180.0 21.6 11.9

Span of the arms also reflects the generous proportions of the Fijians.
Regional difference is not marked. Relative to stature, the hill people have
the longer arms and the eastern natives the shortest. The greater relative arm
length of the hill tribes seems to be owing more to deficiency of stature than
to excessive arm length or shoulder breadth.

Span-Stature Index

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 96.1-116.3 104.3 8.5 8.15
Interior 154 99.4-115.1 105.2 2.3 2.2
East 120 99.1-108.5 102.7 13.5 13.14
Coast 210 97.9-116.3 104.4 7.7 7.4
N.W. 79100.2-109.7 104.1 12.0 11.5

THE TRUNK

Sitting Height

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 75.1-100 87.0 3.5 3.9
Interior 154 75.1-94 84.4 9.4 11.0
East 120 81-100 88.5 3.5 3.9
Coast 210 80-99 87.7 3.2 3.6
N.W. 79 80-94 86.0 2.9 3.3
Fiji (Howells) 132 78-101 88.3 3.06 3.46
Solomons (Howells) 85 69-95 83.6 3.8 4.5

A total sitting height average of 87 cm. attests the generous general body
length. A regional trend follows the same curve as that for stature. The
eastern body length is greatest; it exceeds the over-all average by 1-1/2 cm.
and is more than 4 cm. larger than the interior people who fall at the bottom
of the scale of sitting height. Howells' Fijian series is close to my eastern
average. Compared with the Solomon Islands natives, the Fijians are much
more elongated.

Relative Sitting Height

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 45-58 50.4 1.5 3.0
Interior 154 46-56 49.8 1.4 2.8
East 120 48-54 51.0 1.3 2.5
Coast 210 46-56 50.5 1.4 2.8
N.W. 79 47-54 50.2 1.4 2.8
Fiji (Howells) 132 46-57 51.7 1.36 2.63
Solomons (Howells) 85 46-57 52.1 1.64 2.92

The relative sitting height ratio for all Fijians is 50.4 per cent. The eastern
average of 51 per cent indicates a little more legginess, whereas the interior
groups tend somewhat to longer trunks.

Biacromial

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 28-47 39.7 8.2 6.2
Interior 154 29-43 39.0 6.2 4.7
East 120 35-45 39.9 6.1 4.0
Coast 210 28-45 39.7 7.6 4.9
N.W. 79 35-47 40.5 6.6 3.9

The Fijians are generally a broad-shouldered people. The inhabitants of Ra
and Ba have the highest average and the interior people are least broad-
shouldered.

Relative Shoulder Breadth

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 18-27 22.3 1.3 5.8
Interior 154 19-25 22.9 1.0 3.9
East 120 20-26 23.0 1.0 3.9
Coast 210 18-26 22.9 1.0 4.4
N.W. 79 20-27 23.4 3.1 13.2

Relative to total stature, shoulder breadth averages 22.3 per cent. No
significant regional differences are indicated.

Bi-Iliac

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 23-40 29.2 5.6 5.3
Interior 154 25-38 29.0 5.1 5.2
East 120 27-34 29.5 4.1 4.8
Coast 210 23-37 29.2 5.9 5.5
N.W. 79 26-32 29.3 4.6 5.0

The Fijians, as a whole, are fairly broad-hipped; this condition holds with
little variation in all the provinces.

Shoulder-Hip

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 81558-101 73.7 4.3 5.8
Interior 15465-100 74.6 4.2 5.6
East 120 67-82 73.8 3.2 4.3
Coast 210 58-99 73.5 4.3 5.9
N.W. 79 62-86 72.8 5.9 8.1

The total shoulder-hip ratio describes the shoulders as 73.7 per cent as wide
as the hips. These ratios do not vary greatly in different parts of Fiji. The
somewhat higher index of the hill groups is owing largely to their narrower
shoulders, whereas the superior shoulder breadth of the northwest provinces
contributes mostly to the lower hip-shoulder index.

Chest Breadth

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 24-39 28.6 6.4 5.7
Interior 154 25-33 28.6 3.3 4.7
East 120 26-39 29.4 7.2 5.8
Coast 210 25-37 28.7 7.8 6.2
N.W. 79 25-32 28.9 4.3 4.9

Broad chests are also characteristic in Fiji. The eastern men surpass the Viti
Levu males, and the interior groups have the narrowest chests, but the
regional variations are small.

Chest Depth

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815184-308 22.9 5.5 7.0

Interior 154195-263 22.4 3.2 5.8
East 120189-295 22.5 4.9 6.6
Coast 210184-300 21.7 5.7 7.2
N.W. 79 192-250 21.8 3.3 6.0

The chests of the Fijians are also fairly deep. The close similarity in chest
depth of the interior group and the eastern sample is rather striking
inasmuch as the former are nearly 4 cm. shorter in stature. This would
indicate that the interior group, for their size, are relatively deep-chested.

Thoracic

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 59-96 76.4 4.6 6.0
Interior 154 69-88 78.5 3.9 5.0
East 120 65-85 76.3 4.3 5.6
Coast 210 56-89 75.5 4.7 6.2
N.W. 79 65-85 75.7 4.4 5.8

The thoracic index shows that the Fijians are deep-chested relative to
thoracic breadth as well as in absolute values. Again the interior people
stand out for their deeper chests.

ARMS AND LEGS

Arm Length

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 45-87 75.2 5.0 6.6
Interior 154 45-83 73.6 4.8 6.1
East 120 52-84 75.1 3.9 5.2
Coast 210 57-87 76.0 4.9 6.4
N.W. 79 55-86 75.3 6.6 8.8

The over-all arm length is 75.2 cm. Shorter arms seem to be characteristic
of the interior population where the average is nearly 2 cm. less than the
over-all average. The eastern group has the longest arms; the other samples
are intermediate.

Humeral Length

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 26-39 32.8 8.6 5.7
Interior 154 28-38 32.8 7.1 5.2
East 120 28-39 32.9 8.3 5.6
Coast 210 26-38 32.9 9.1 5.8
N.W. 79 28-38 33.0 7.9 5.4

Length of the upper arm averages 33 cm. for all Fijians; the several
provinces are closely similar in this trait.

Radial Length

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 23-35 27.6 4.1 5.1
Interior 154 24-33 27.3 2.4 4.5
East 120 23-34 27.5 6.9 6.1
Coast 210 24-35 27.9 3.5 4.8
N.W. 79 25-32 27.9 3.4 4.8

Lower arm length is 27.6 cm. and also varies but little among the regional
samples.

Radial-Humeral

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 81565-113 84.0 4.2 5.0
Interior 15477-104 83.0 3.8 4.6
East 12065-95 83.5 4.7 5.6

Coast 21075-113 84.7 4.2 4.9
N.W. 7977-94 82.2 3.6 4.3

The radial-humeral ratio indicates that the lower arm of Fijians is 84 per
cent as long as the upper arm. None of the subgroups deviates markedly
from this average.

Leg Length[13]

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 61-98 84.3 10.5 12.5
Interior 154 74-96 81.1 8.6 12.9
East 120 73-96 84.1 8.6 10.3
Coast 210 68-97 85.3 7.2 8.5
N.W. 79 75-95 85.7 4.4 5.2

Average leg length is 84.3 cm., and some regional differences are manifest.
The legs of the hill people are shorter by 3 cm. than are the other groups.
Their neighbors to the northwest and east have the longest legs, and the
eastern are intermediate.

Tibial Length

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 34-49 40.9 8.3 6.9
Interior 154 35-45 40.3 13.4 10.8
East 120 35-47 40.7 6.2 5.2
Coast 210 35-47 41.2 6.8 5.1
N.W. 79 36-47 40.9 6.1 5.9

Lower leg length is around 40 cm. for all Fijians. The regional pattern is
similar to that of total leg length: shortest in the highlands, intermediate in
the east, and longest in the coastal and northwestern districts.

Calf Circumference

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 29-57 37.6 6.7 7.1
Interior 154 31-51 37.0 6.4 7.1
East 120 33-50 38.1 4.7 6.5
Coast 210 29-48 37.2 9.4 7.9
N.W. 79 30-43 37.7 7.6 6.3

The generous girth of the calf of the Fijians reflects their sturdily muscled
legs. The eastern groups excel the other Fijians in this respect, whereas the
interior groups have the lowest average for calf circumference.

THE HEAD

Head Circumference

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815410-630 562.4 7.8 6.7
Interior 154537-613 565.3 4.1 2.5
East 120528-630 566.3 4.9 2.9
Coast 210410-630 563.5 4.6 3.5
N.W. 79 537-597 557.7 14.3 11.5

The head circumference average of 562.4 mm. Probably is a little on the
large size because of the thick wiry hair of most Fijians; the eastern groups
appear to have the largest heads and the northwestern groups show a rather
abrupt drop.

Head Length[14]

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815162-215 187.9 9.4 5.0
Interior 154170-210 190.1 7.6 4.0
East 120172-209 188.6 6.6 3.5
Coast 210162-215 187.4 13.5 7.2
N.W. 79165-214 187.2 7.9 4.2

Fiji (Howells) 133164-208 188.8 7.29 3.86
Solomons (Howells) 85170-208 188.5 6.5 3.5
Tonga (Sullivan) 117 173-213 191.0 6.6 3.5

Total head length for all Fijians is 187.9 mm; longest heads occur in the
interior. Both Howells' Fijian average and the Solomon Islands series are
close to the above value. Gifford's Tongan head length of 191 mm.
Somewhat exceeds the Fijian.

Head Breadth

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815122-186 155.9 6.8 7.7
Interior 154135-170 152.1 6.6 4.3
East 120144-172 157.2 5.2 3.3
Coast 210141-186 158.3 9.3 8.5
N.W. 79122-185 152.9 8.6 8.2
Fiji (Howells) 133135-170 153.7 6.1 3.9
Solomons (Howells) 85126-158 144.7 5.2 3.6
Tonga (Sullivan) 117 145-167 154.8 4.3 2.8

General head breadth is 155.9 mm., and considerable regional variation is
shown. Fijians of the interior have the narrowest heads, whereas the coastal
and eastern people have appreciably wider heads. Howells' series of Fijians
are closest to my highland groups.
The Solomon Islanders are markedly narrower headed than the Fijians,
whereas Sullivan's Tongan series is nearer the Fijian average.

Cephalic Index

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 68-99 83.0 6.4 7.7
Interior 154 68-96 80.0 6.0 7.3
East 120 72-92 83.9 3.8 4.5
Coast 210 72-99 84.2 7.2 8.6

N.W. 79 71-95 81.6 10.3 12.6
Fiji (Howells) 133 68-94 81.54 4.7 5.7
Solomons (Howells) 85 65-88 76.8 3.9 5.1
Tonga (Sullivan) 117 73-89 81.1 3.1 3.9

Most Fijians tend to brachycephaly. The eastern natives and those of the
coastal series have the broadest heads. The interior people show definitely
lesser values in this ratio than do the other groups. Howells' Fijian series is
close to the northwestern Fijians in their mesocephaly, and so is the Tongan
mean. The Solomon series borders on dolicocephaly.

Head Height

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815110-154 129.5 6.8 7.9
Interior 154114-140 127.7 4.8 3.8
East 120114-148 129.6 5.0 3.9
Coast 210112-154 120.0 7.0 5.4
N.W. 79117-142 127.6 9.2 8.9

Head height averages do not differ greatly among the provinces. The
interior and northwestern people have somewhat lower heads; the coastal
and eastern people show slight superiority.

Length-Height

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 55-84 69.0 3.4 3.6
Interior 154 59-77 67.2 3.9 5.8
East 120 61-78 68.7 3.2 4.7
Coast 210 55-84 69.4 3.7 4.3
N.W. 79 58-84 68.1 4.5 3.5

Relative to head length, the cranial vault of Fijians is high. The mountain
people show the lowest relative head height, whereas the other provinces
are nearer to the over-all average.

Breadth-Height

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 81566-102 83.0 3.0 3.3
Interior 154 75- 96 84.0 3.9 4.6
East 120 75- 91 82.4 3.4 4.1
Coast 210 66- 97 82.8 5.3 8.4
N.W. 79 73- 92 81.2 8.6 9.7

Head height relative to total breadth is 83 per cent. In this ratio the interior
groups have the highest index, a condition owing more to deficiency in
cranial breadth than to superior head height.

Cranial Module

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815141-176 157.7 10.5 6.7
Interior 154147-166 156.6 11.5 7.3
East 120148-172 158.4 4.4 2.7
Coast 210143-176 158.5 15.5 9.7
N.W. 79 141-171 155.9 10.7 6.7

Head size as expressed by the cranial module averages 157.7 mm. for all
Fijians. Regional fluctuation is unimportant.

Minimum Frontal

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 99-125 109.9 4.0 2.7
Interior 154100-121 109.8 3.6 3.3
East 120 99-122 110.8 3.8 3.4
Coast 210100-125 109.7 4.7 4.3
N.W. 79 101-120 109.4 3.7 3.4

A minimum frontal diameter of 109.9 mm. indicates a fairly ample forehead
breadth for the total sample. None of the subgroups depart much from this
value.

Fronto-Parietal

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 58-89 70.6 4.3 6.1
Interior 154 63-82 72.2 3.3 4.6
East 120 64-79 70.5 3.0 4.3
Coast 210 58-77 69.9 4.1 5.9
N.W. 79 61-89 69.7 8.7 12.5

Forehead breadth relative to total cranial width is 70.6 per cent. The greatest
deviation from this average occurs in the interior where the fronto-parietal
ratio is 72.2 per cent and lesser head breadth more than greater forehead
width causes the higher index.

THE FACE

Bizygomatic

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 110-164 145.7 5.0 3.4
Interior 154 110-163 145.8 6.3 4.3
East 120137-161 146.7 4.3 2.9
Coast 210128-164 145.2 4.9 3.4
N.W. 79136-156 145.1 4.3 3.0
Fiji (Howells) 132130-159 144.05 5.05 3.5
Solomons (Howells) 84 115-149 138.0 5.5 4.0
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 131-159 143.5 5.9 4.1

Broad faces are the rule among most of these people, as the total average of
145.7 mm. shows. Regional values for this criterion are closely alike in all

parts of Fiji, the eastern showing a slight superiority in bizygomatic
breadth.
Howells' Fiji series is slightly lower in this diameter as is the Tongan
average. The Solomon Islands natives have definitely narrower faces.

Cephalo-Facial

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 81582-108 93.5 5.7 6.1
Interior 15484-108 96.0 4.8 5.0
East 12082-102 93.3 3.2 3.4
Coast 21085-103 92.5 5.7 6.2
N.W. 7980-104 92.6 6.4 7.3
Fiji (Howells) 132 85-111 93.7 3.5 3.7
Solomons (Howells) 84 85-111 95.4 3.8 4.0
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 85-103 92.8 3.5 3.7

Face breadth relative to head width averages 93.5 per cent for all Fijians;
Howell's series is much the same. The narrower heads of the interior people
largely account for their higher index; otherwise there is general similarity
in the several provinces.

Zygo-Frontal

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 64-100 75.5 3.0 3.9
Interior 154 64-98 75.4 3.2 4.2
East 120 68-99 75.5 2.5 3.3
Coast 210 66-100 75.5 3.1 4.1
N.W. 79 66-93 75.4 2.9 3.8
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 63-84 73.1 4.2 5.8

The ratio of forehead width to face breadth is 75.5. All of the regional
averages for the zygo-frontal index are strikingly alike among the Fijians in

every instance; the forehead is about three-quarters the breadth of the face.
The Tongan ratio is a little lower.

Total Face Height

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815100-147 122.5 6.0 4.9
Interior 154103-137 121.3 5.6 4.6
East 120 110-147 124.7 5.8 4.7
Coast 210107-142 122.6 6.1 5.0
N.W. 79100-143 121.7 6.8 5.6
Fiji (Howells) 133105-159 121.8 6.9 5.7
Solomons (Howells) 85100-129 116.4 6.6 5.7
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 112-147 128.2 6.8 5.3

Fijian faces have the moderate average height of 122.5 mm. Slightly shorter
faces occur in the interior people, whereas the greatest total face height
average occurs in the east. The Fijian of Howells' series is close to mine.
The Tongan value for face height describes them as definitely longer faced.
The Solomon Islanders depart in the other direction with decidedly shorter
faces.

Total Facial Index

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 81568-104 84.1 4.6 5.5
Interior 154 73-96 83.2 4.4 5.3
East 12075-101 85.0 4.4 5.2
Coast 210 73-97 84.5 4.6 5.4
N.W. 7968-104 83.9 5.6 6.7
Fiji (Howells) 13274-105 84.7 5.0 6.0
Solomons (Howells) 84 74-97 84.5 4.4 5.2
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 78-102 89.3 4.4 5.0

Relative to maximum breadth, the Fijian face tends to shortness, although
this is due largely to their generous facial breadth rather than absolute
deficiency of height. The interior groups have the lowest values and the
eastern groups show relatively broad faces.
The Tongan average is much higher than any of the Fijian values, whereas
the Solomon Islanders show similarity to the Fijians in this feature.

Upper Face Height

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 56-84 70.2 5.1 7.3
Interior 154 59-79 69.1 3.9 5.6
East 120 64-83 71.7 4.0 5.6
Coast 210 59-84 70.4 6.6 9.4
N.W. 79 58-80 69.4 4.8 6.9

The ratio of the upper face height to maximum facial breadth shows the
Fijians of the interior to be relatively shorter faced and the eastern people
longest. The coastal and northwestern series are intermediate.

Upper Facial Index

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 37-65 48.2 3.7 7.7
Interior 154 41-65 47.4 3.3 7.0
East 120 42-59 48.9 2.9 5.9
Coast 210 40-59 48.5 4.8 9.9
N.W. 79 39-56 47.8 3.5 7.3

The ratio of the upper face height to maximum facial breadth shows the
Fijians of the interior to be relatively shorter faced and the eastern people
longest. The coastal and northwestern series are intermediate.

Bigonial

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 95-146 109.7 5.1 4.6
Interior 154 95-146 109.8 6.0 3.6
East 120 97-125 110.6 5.1 4.6
Coast 210 95-129 109.9 5.3 4.8
N.W. 79 99-119 109.1 4.5 4.1
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 92-119 104.8 5.8 5.5

Lower jaw breadth as expressed by the bigonial diameter indicates a
tendency to broadness shared with little variation among all the subgroups.
The Tongan value is considerably smaller.

Fronto-Gonial

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 81580-122 99.9 5.5 5.5
Interior 15484-122 100.0 6.0 6.0
East 120 86-115 99.9 5.3 5.3
Coast 210 80-114 100.3 6.0 6.0
N.W. 79 85-113 99.8 4.8 4.8

Similarly the bigonial diameter in relation to forehead breadth is much the
same in all groups, the general average nearly 100 per cent.

Zygo-Gonial

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 65-86 75.3 4.1 5.4
Interior 154 67-86 75.4 6.0 8.0
East 120 65-82 75.4 3.5 4.6
Coast 210 66-83 75.7 3.4 4.5
N.W. 79 68-83 75.2 3.4 4.5
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 63-87 73.2 4.6 6.2

Relative to face breadth, jaw width is 75.3 per cent with very little
geographic variation.

Nasal Height

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 42-65 53.9 3.4 6.3
Interior 154 45-65 53.2 3.5 6.6
East 120 48-62 54.7 3.1 5.7
Coast 210 46-63 54.1 3.4 6.3
N.W. 79 45-61 52.9 3.5 6.6
Fiji (Howells) 133 44-63 52.4 3.9 7.4
Solomons (Howells) 85 40-59 49.9 3.8 7.7
Tonga (Sullivan) 117 47-65 57.4 3.9 6.8

The Fijian nose may be called medium long. Greatest nasal heights occur in
the eastern and in the coastal series. The interior and northwestern groups
have shorter noses. The Fijians of Howells' series fall near the short end of
my averages. Natives of the Solomons are definitely lower in nasal height,
whereas the Tongan's average is so much higher that one suspects a
difference in the location of the nasion.

Nasal Breadth

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 31-62 46.7 3.4 7.3
Interior 154 40-61 47.6 3.4 7.1
East 120 38-53 45.5 3.0 6.6
Coast 210 38-62 46.4 3.3 7.1
N.W. 79 31-57 47.4 3.6 7.6
Fiji (Howells) 133 37-54 46.19 3.0 6.0
Solomons (Howells) 85 34-51 44.6 2.8 6.3
Tonga (Sullivan) 117 38-55 44.4 3.0 6.8

Broad noses are common to most Fijians. The greatest contrast is between
the narrower-nosed eastern people and the interior people, among whom the
widest noses occur. The nose of the Solomon Islanders is somewhat
narrower, according to Howells' data, and the Tongan average is also lower.

Nasal Index

No. Range Mean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 61-112 87.1 8.2 9.4
Interior 15469-109 89.7 8.1 9.0
East 12061-100 83.2 7.6 9.1
Coast 210 63-111 86.0 7.1 8.7
N.W. 79 63-110 89.9 8.6 9.6
Fiji (Howells) 13368-123 88.8 8.3 9.3
Solomons (Howells) 85 68-119 87.1 8.9 10.2
Tonga (Sullivan) 117 61-98 77.6 7.6 9.8

Platyrrhini is the rule in Fiji, but individual and regional variations are
great. There are some leptorrine subjects in every province, and there are
some whose noses are broader than long. The interior people and the
northwestern groups have the relatively broadest noses, whereas the eastern
index is more moderate. The noses of Sullivan's Tongans are relatively
longer than the Lauans. The Solomon Island average is identical with the
Fijian.

Nasal Depth

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 16-32 22.0 2.9 3.2
Interior 154 17-32 22.5 2.1 9.3
East 120 17-28 21.9 1.8 8.2
Coast 210 17-32 21.8 3.6 6.5
N.W. 79 16-29 22.3 1.9 8.5

Nasal depth averages 22 mm.; the regional variation is very small.

Nasal-Depth Index

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 32-60 47.2 6.8 6.8
Interior 154 34-59 47.4 5.1 6.6
East 120 35-60 48.4 4.6 9.5
Coast 210 32-58 47.0 8.1 7.2
N.W. 79 34-58 47.2 5.5 6.7

Mouth Breadth

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 29-72 57.6 4.7 8.2
Interior 154 34-72 59.6 4.4 7.4
East 120 33-66 56.5 3.9 6.9
Coast 210 29-67 57.3 4.0 7.0
N.W. 79 36-65 57.3 4.4 7.8

Mouth breadth averages show the interior groups to have widest mouths,
the eastern people least wide, and the coastal and northwestern people
intermediate.

Lip Thickness

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 9-45 22.4 3.8 6.9
Interior 154 12-31 23.4 3.6 5.4
East 120 12-29 21.7 3.4 5.7
Coast 210 16-45 20.8 3.6 5.3
N.W. 79 10-29 22.0 3.9 5.7

Thick lips are characteristic of most Fijians. The interior average is highest
for this diameter, whereas the northwestern Fijians have least-thick lips.

Ear Length

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 55-83 66.6 4.5 6.8
Interior 154 53-83 66.0 4.8 7.3
East 120 55-80 67.2 5.0 7.4
Coast 210 55-77 66.7 4.9 7.3
N.W. 79 57-75 66.5 3.7 5.6
Tonga (Sullivan) 117 56-81 66.0 4.6 6.9

Fijian ears on the whole tend to be long, as the average 66.6 mm. indicates.
Regional differences are slight. Tongans closely resemble Fijians.

Ear Breadth

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 24-55 34.3 3.2 9.3
Interior 154 27-41 33.7 2.5 7.4
East 120 29-40 34.1 4.0 11.7
Coast 210 29-55 34.7 3.9 11.2
N.W. 79 25-42 33.8 2.9 8.6
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 25-42 34.5 2.6 7.6

Ear breadth is also generous, and regional differences hardly exceed 1.5
mm., including the Tongans.

Ear Index

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 38-62 51.6 5.0 9.7
Interior 154 40-61 51.1 3.6 7.0
East 120 41-59 50.6 5.8 11.5
Coast 210 42-62 52.1 6.7 12.9
N.W. 79 38-59 50.9 4.0 7.9
Tonga (Sullivan) 116 41-62 52.4 3.9 7.5

Length-breadth ear ratios indicate that coastal groups have somewhat
broader, and the northwestern people the relative longest, ears.

Bicanine Breadth

No. RangeMean S.D. C.V.
Total sample 815 24-72 39.8 11.7 19.4
Interior 154 37-49 39.9 10.7 16.8
East 120 36-68 41.8 7.4 7.7
Coast 210 24-72 39.0 13.4 14.3
N.W. 79 38-49 38.6 14.0 16.3

Bicanine breadth is characteristically great among Fijians, reflecting the
ample jaws and teeth. Widest diameters are seen in the east, followed by the
hill people of the interior. The northwestern groups have the least bicanine
diameter.

MORPHOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS
PIGMENTATION

Skin Color: Exposed

Brunet Swarthy Lt. Brn Med. Brn Dk. Brn Black Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 1 .01 5 .6 30 4 400 48 377 46 0 0 813
Interior 00 00 11 55 36 97 63 0 0 153
East 00 3 2 12 10 99 83 6 6 0 0 120
Coast 00 10 73 85 41 116 56 0 0 209
N.W. 00 00 11 42 53 36 46 0 0 79
Fiji II 00 00 0 0 128 96 5 4 0 0 133
Solomons 00 00 00 4 5 79 93 2 3 85
Tonga (Range: Lt. Brown to Dk. Brown.)

Color of skin includes exposed and unexposed areas. The former was
observed on the face, since the Fijians do not use any kind of face or head
covering. This condition in the total series divides itself quite evenly
between medium brown and dark brown. A few have light-brown skin; only
six individuals are classified as swarthy and brunet. None was judged to be
completely black. The Fijians of Howells' series are described as 96 per
cent medium brown[15] and 5 per cent dark brown, a discrepancy I would
attribute to personal judgment difference. The Solomon Islanders are
markedly darker than the Fijians, the majority have dark-brown skin and 3
per cent are black, whereas 5 per cent have medium-brown complexions.
Tongan data on skin color cannot be directly adjusted to my statistics.
Sullivan's comment on their skin color states that it is "a medium yellowish-
brown where it is unexposed to the sun. Exposed parts of the skin of a few
of the persons were a very dark chocolate" (Sullivan, 1922, p. 248).

Among the Fijians themselves, the greatest contrasts occur between the
eastern and the interior groups of Viti Levu. Where 63 per cent of the latter
have dark-brown skin, only 5 per cent of eastern fall into this category. The
bulk of eastern (83 per cent) have medium-brown skin as against 36 per
cent of hill people. The coastal and northwestern provinces are, like the
total series, more evenly divided between medium and dark brown.

Skin Color: Unexposed

Brunet Swarthy Lt. Brn Med. Brn Dk. Brn Black Total
No. % No. % No.% No.% No. % No. %
Total sample 61 9 1 242 30 545 66 11 1 0 0 813
Interior 00 0 0 20 13 133 87 0 0 0 0 153
East 33 4 3 77 64 36 30 0 0 0 0 120
Coast 11 2 1 56 27 148 71 2 1 0 0 209
N.W. 00 1 1 20 25 57 72 1 1 0 0 79
Fiji II 00 00 0 0 127 96 5 4 0 0 132
Solomons 00 00 00 9 11 74 87 2 2 85

Unexposed skin color was observed on the under surface of the upper arm
near the armpit. The anticipated shift in color range results in a reduction of
dark-skin incidence to a mere 1 per cent, and an increase in medium brown
to 60 per cent and of light brown to 30 per cent.
Howells' describes 96 per cent of his Fijians as medium brown, 4 per cent
dark brown, and none light brown. The Solomon Islanders seem definitely
darker than the Fijians whether they are compared with Howells' or my
series.
The eastern groups continues to contrast with the interior people. The
former show a majority of 64 per cent in the light-brown category as
compared with 13 per cent among the interior groups; the latter have a
medium-brown incidence of 87 per cent against 30 per cent among Lauans.

Hair Color

Black Dk. Brn Med. Brn Lt. Brn Red-Brn Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 757 93 31 5 10 00 18 2 807
Interior 145 95 85 00 00 0 0 153
East 114 95 65 00 00 0 0 120
Coast 193 92 11 5 00 00 5 2 204
N.W. 70 89 56 00 00 4 5 75
Fiji II 118 91 97 00 00 3 2 130
Solomons 55 65 26 31 00 34 0 0 84
Tonga 0 94 04 00 00 00 0

Black hair is the usual color, although 5 per cent are described as dark
brown and a few red-brown. This latter variation is a rufous color (reddish-
brown) and it may be a little more frequent than the data indicate because
the Fijians frequently dye their hair with a substance extracted from
mangrove bark. This intensifies the usual blackness of the hair and adds a
satisfying gloss. More sophisticated natives have access to modern hair dye
and lacking this, some have been known to resort to black shoe polish.
Hair bleaching is no longer practiced in Fiji.
The hair of the Solomons Islands is not so uniformly black, nearly a third
have dark-brown hair and a few are light brown.

Eye Color

Black Dk. Brn Med. Brn Lt. Brn Total
No. % No.% No. % No. %
Fiji I 2 0 550 68 257 31 4 1 813
Interior 0 0 131 86 22 14 0 0 153
East 0 0 71 59 48 40 1 1 120
Coast 0 0 127 61 81 39 1 0 209
N.W 1 1 53 67 25 32 0 0 79
Fiji II 0 0 130 98 00 2 2 132
Solomons 0 0 85 100 00 0 0 85
Tonga 03 0 94 00 03 0

A little more than two-thirds of Fijians' eyes are described as dark brown.
The remaining third have medium-brown eyes. There were four individuals
who were light brown. Howells, with his Fijian series, is more generous
with the darker designation; he designated 98 per cent as dark brown and 2
per cent light brown. His Solomons sample is described as dark brown
without exception. The Tongan data also is recorded as more uniformly
dark brown than my Fijians.
The Fijians of the interior of Viti Levu have more deeply pigmented eyes
than the others; 86 per cent are classed as dark brown and only 14 per cent
medium brown.

HAIR

Hair Form

Straight Low WaveDeep Wave Curl Frizz Wool Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 00 7 0.1 13 0.291 11.0 702 862 0 0 813
Interior 00 00 00 4 3 149 97 0 0 153
East 00 11 10 8 37 31 72 60 0 0 120
Coast 00 01 3 0 18 9 188 90 0 0 209
N.W. 00 23 00 7 9 70 89 0 0 79
Fiji II 00 00 0 0 19 16 38 33 59 51 116
Solomons 2 3.3 1 1.6 0 0 16 26 17 28 25 41 61

Frizzly hair is the condition of over 85 per cent of Fijians; 11 per cent are
curly-haired, whereas over twenty individuals have wavy hair. Straight hair
is absent. The Fiji II series of Howell distinguishes between frizzly and
wooly hair, which I do not. Their combined incidence is 83 per cent, quite
close to my frequency of frizzly. Whether one does or does not distinguish
between frizzly and wooly hair, there is no doubt that most Fijians have
Negroid hair form. The Solomon Islanders are surprising with somewhat
less Negroid hair form than the Fijians. Their combined percentage of
frizzly and wooly is 69, which is nearly 20 per cent less than that of the

Fijians. Twenty per cent have curly hair against 11 per cent among Fijians.
Also, the only instances of straight hair occur in the Solomons.
In the Fijian breakdown, the interior groups have the most Negroid hair; 97
per cent have frizzly hair and 3 per cent have curly hair. The eastern people
are the least Negroid in this respect; frizzly hair drops to 60 per cent,
whereas curly hair advances to 30 per cent and wavy hair to 9 per cent. The
coastal and northwestern series are closer to the interior groups with about
90 per cent frizzly hair.

Hair Texture

Course Medium Fine Total
No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 804 99 9 1 0 0 813
Interior 153 100 0 0 0 0 153
East 116 97 4 3 0 0 120
Coast 208 100 1 0 0 0 209
N.W. 78 99 1 1 0 0 79

Hair texture is prevailingly coarse; only 1 per cent of the total series shows
medium coarseness and none have fine hair. This preponderance of coarse
hair is much the same in all the provinces, although the eastern people do
depart slightly with a 3 per cent incidence of medium-coarse hair.
It might be added that Fijian hair is quite stiff or wiry. For example, when
the hair is unshorn, it stands out like a mop. A Fijian can insert a long
stemmed flower in his hair and it will stay in place with no additional
fastening.

Head Hair Quantity

Absent Subm. [16] ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 0 0 61 7219 27533 65 0 0 813
Interior 0 0 26 17 27 18100 65 0 0 153

East 0 0 5 4 24 20 91 76 0 0 120
Coast 0 0 11 5 63 30135 65 0 0 209
N.W. 0 0 7 9 21 27 51 65 0 0 79
Fiji II 00 00 00 1 1132 92 133
Solomons 00 00 00 5 6 80 94 85

Head hair quantity is pronounced in the majority of Fijians (65 per cent); it
is moderate in 27 per cent and submedium in 7 per cent. Howells describes
nearly all the Fijians as having very pronounced head hair—99 per cent,
which would appear to be a personal difference in appraisal. In any case,
the two series agree that Fijians have hair of more than moderate quantity.
The Melanesians of the Solomons are also characterized by much head hair.
Regionally, the only significant variation in this trait is shown in the east,
where more individuals have a submedium designation. In the absence of
age data, this contrast cannot be fairly interpreted.

Hair Length

It might be observed here that although hair length was not included in this
survey, on the basis of personal but unrecorded observation, the Fijians
conform to the Melanesian pattern. Most Fijian men now cut their hair short
in the Western style, but some still do not. Women generally trim their hair
but not short. The natural length of head hair is intermediate between the
short-haired African Negroes and the long-haired Caucasians and
Mongolians.

Baldness

Absent Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 731 90 40 3 30 4 12 1 0 0 813
Interior 122 80 12 8 12 8 7 5 0 0 153
East 112 93 3 3 4 3 1 1 0 0 120
Coast 194 93 10 5 4 2 1 0 0 0 209
N.W. 72 91 1 1 3 4 3 4 0 0 79

The lack of age correlations also limits the value of data on baldness, but
some meaning can nevertheless be extracted. Regardless of age, with an
incidence of pronounced baldness of 1 per cent among all adult males and
of 4 per cent for a moderate condition, it is a clear indication that Fijians are
not prone to loss of head hair.

Beard Quantity

Absent Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 0 0 234 29370 44208 26 1 .01 813
Interior 0 0 22 14 67 44 64 42 0 0 153
East 0 0 45 38 59 49 16 13 0 0 120
Coast 0 0 60 29 94 45 54 26 1 0 209
N.W. 0 0 22 28 30 38 27 34 0 0 79
Fiji II
cheeks 27 21 2 2 44 34 46 35 12 9 131
skin 97 0 0 52 40 56 43 14 10 131
Solomons
cheeks 21 25 0 0 42 49 22 26 0 0 85
chin 78 0 0 53 62 25 29 0 0 85
Tonga
chin 0 0 0 19 0 31 50 0 0 0 0
lower chk. 0 4 0 37 0 18 40 0 0 0 0

Moderate beard quantity is shown by 44 per cent of Fijians; the remainder
are fairly evenly divided between the submedium and pronounced
categories. Howells' series, which records beard quantity for the cheeks and
chin separately, shows a higher frequency of pronounced and very
pronounced designations. However, his data includes many individuals who
have no beards at all. Both series are doubtless influenced by the fact that
they contain a preponderance of young adult; a greater proportion of older
men would have greatly raised the incidence of the pronounced categories.
Nearly all modern Fijians have adopted the Western practice of shaving.
Examination of earlier pictures and written description of Fijians leaves no

doubt that the majority of mature men possess luxurious beards when nature
is unrestrained.
The natives of the Solomon Islands, according to Howells, are a little less
bearded than the Fijians.
The Tongans are a little more heavily bearded than the Fijians.
Some geographical variation is indicated by my data. The interior people of
Fiji have the highest incidence of face hair; 42 per cent are recorded as
pronounced. Least endowed are the eastern Fijians, where 13 per cent have
pronounced beards and 38 per cent are submedium. The coastal and
northwestern series conform more closely to the overall distribution.

Body Hair[17]

Absent Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 0 0 243 30328 40162 20 80 10 813
Interior 0 0 31 20 56 37 41 27 25 16 153
East 0 0 55 46 45 38 14 12 6 5 120
Coast 0 0 57 27 82 39 46 22 24 11 209
N.W. 0 0 16 20 36 46 19 24 8 8 79
Tonga 0 0 23 29 0 26 0 22 0 0 0

The body hair endowment is also not unimpressive. Forty per cent show a
moderate condition, 20 per cent are pronounced, and 10 per cent very
pronounced; none are totally devoid of body hair; 30 per cent are
submedium. Chest hair among the Tongans is somewhat less in evidence;
although the majority range from submedium to pronounced, 23 per cent
are described as hairless.
The provincial distribution in Fiji follows that of face hair: the interior
groups are hairiest and the eastern people least so.
The anatomical distribution of body hair deserves some comment, even
though specific observations were made on the chest. Not infrequently the

hair is heavier on the upper legs than on the chest. Occasionally, too, the
back of the shoulders is quite hairy as well as the belly.

Grayness: Head

Absent Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 621 76 82 10 82 10 28 3 3 3 813
Interior 80 52 37 24 19 12 17 11 0 0 153
East 91 76 13 11 16 13 0 0 0 0 120
Coast 176 84 14 7 17 8 2 1 0 0 209
N.W. 60 76 8 10 9 11 2 3 0 0 79

Grayness: Beard

Absent Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Total sample 610 75 61 8 90 11 52 6 0 0 813
Interior 72 47 30 20 20 13 31 20 0 0 153
East 89 74 9 8 18 15 4 3 0 0 120
Coast 178 85 8 4 21 10 2 1 0 0 209
N.W. 60 76 6 8 11 14 2 3 0 0 79

Grayness of the hair data without corresponding age incidence is not
particularly significant. It is clear, nevertheless, that premature grayness is
not common. I would hazard the judgment that on the whole the Fijians
show less tendency to grayness than do Caucasians.
The higher incidence of grayness of the interior sample of Fijians is likely
due to a larger number of older men in that series.

THE FACE

Prognathism: Total

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 206 25 306 38288 35 13 2 813
Interior 40 26 59 39 52 34 2 1 153
East 54 45 55 46 11 9 0 0 120
Coast 47 22 84 40 73 35 5 2 209
N.W. 18 23 29 37 32 41 0 0 79
Tonga 63 53 26 22 29 25 0 0 118

Prognathism: Mid-Facial

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 517 64 184 23109 13 3 1/2 813
Interior 133 87 15 10 5 3 0 0 153
East 100 83 17 14 3 3 0 0 120
Coast 122 58 49 23 37 18 1 1 209
N.W. 48 61 20 25 11 14 0 0 79

Prognathism: Alveolar

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 798 98 9 1 4 1/2 2 0 813
Interior 153 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 153
East 120 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 120
Coast 207 99 0 0 1 1/2 1 1/2 209
N.W. 76 {96} 2 3 0 0 1 1 79

Slight and moderate total prognathism characterizes most Fijians.but it is
pronounced in only 13 of the 813 subjects. A quarter of the series show no
prognathism. The eastern people are least prognathic with a zero incidence
of 45 per cent. The other regional sample are close to the general condition.

Mid-facial prognathism has a submedium incidence of 23 per cent and a
medium of 13 per cent; the remainder lack the condition, except three
individuals who are pronounced.
The coastal and northwestern groups have more frequent medium
designations. Alveolar prognathism is almost entirely lacking in all groups.

Malar Projection: Lateral

Absent Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 1 0 2 0264 32543 67 3 0 813
Interior 0 0 0 0 62 41 91 59 0 0 153
East 0 0 0 0 25 21 95 79 0 0 120
Coast 0 0 0 0 68 33141 67 0 0 209
N.W. 0 0 0 0 28 35 50 63 1 1 79

Malar Projection: Frontal

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 4 1/2 0 0709 87 100 12 809
Interior 0 0 0 0139 91 14 9 153
East 0 0 0 0103 86 17 14 120
Coast 1 0 0 0181 87 27 13 209
N.W. 0 0 0 0 67 85 12 15 79

The facial contours generally include lateral malar projection; two-thirds
show a pronounced condition and the balance are medium. The eastern
people have high cheek bones oftener than do the others.
Frontal malar projection is also common but more often moderately so; 87
per cent show medium projection and 12 per cent are pronounced.

Gonial Angles

Sbm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 24 3459 56 325 40 5 1 813
Interior 0 0 97 63 55 36 1 1 153
East 1 1 65 54 54 45 0 0 120
Coast 7 3 110 53 90 43 2 1 209
N.W. 3 4 49 62 27 34 0 0 79

Palate Shape

Parabolic Sm. U Lg. U Square Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 493 61 2 0303 37 15 2 813
Interior 94 61 0 0 59 39 0 0 153
East 81 68 0 0 38 32 1 1 120
Coast 131 63 0 0 71 34 7 3 209
N.W. 50 63 1 1 27 34 1 1 79

A fairly strong tendency to well-developed gonial angles is indicated; 40
per cent show pronounced angles and nearly all the rest are medium. These
proportions hold pretty much for all groups.
Palate shape also attests to the well-developed jaws of Fijians; it is a large U
in 37 per cent of the subjects; 2 per cent are square and the remainder
parabolic.

Chin Prominence

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 2 0 164 20593 73 54 7 813
Interior 0 0 36 24 110 72 7 5 153
East 0 0 25 21 89 74 6 5 120
Coast 0 0 41 20153 73 13 6 207
N.W. 1 1 11 14 55 70 9 11 76

Chin Type

MedianBilateral Total
No. % No. %
Fiji I 673 83 140 17 813
Interior 130 85 23 15 153
East 112 93 8 7 120
Coast 162 78 45 22 207
N.W. 62 82 14 18 76

A well-developed chin further typifies most Fijian faces; nearly three-
quarters have a moderate chin prominence, 7 per cent are pronounced, and
the remainder are submedium. This range is much the same in the
subgroups.
The chin is commonly median although 17 per cent have the bilateral type.
The bilateral chin is least frequent in Lau (7 per cent).

THE HEAD

Temporal Fullness

Absent Subm. + Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 1 0 563 69249 31 813
Interior 0 0 113 74 40 26 153
East 0 0 70 58 50 42 120
Coast 1 0 148 71 60 29 208
N.W. 0 0 59 75 20 25 79

Occipital Protrusion

Absent Subm. + Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 13 2775 95 25 3 813

Interior 4 3149 97 0 0 153
East 0 0 116 97 4 3 120
Coast 3 1193 92 13 6 209
N.W. 0 079 100 0 0 79

A narrowness in the temporal part of the head is indicated. Sixty-nine per
cent of the subject show submedium temporal fullness, whereas the
remainder are moderate. This condition is not marked and may best be
described as a discernable tendency.
The back of the head is generally rather flat as the 95 per cent incidence of
occipital protrusion indicates. This is a natural condition; no intentional
flattening is practiced by Fijians.

Lambdoidal Flattening

Absent Subm. + Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 754 93 32 4 27 3 813
Interior 153 100 0 0 0 0 153
East 113 94 5 4 2 2 120
Coast 188 90 13 6 8 4 209
N.W. 72 91 3 4 4 5 79

Occipital Flattening

Absent Subm. + Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 809 100 2 0 2 0 813
Interior 153 100 0 0 0 0 153
East 120 100 0 0 0 0 120
Coast 209 100 0 0 0 0 209
N.W. 79 99 0 0 1 1 79

Median Sagittal Crest

Absent Subm. + Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 600 74 177 22 36 4 813
Interior 96 63 46 30 11 7 153
East 109 91 10 8 1 1 120
Coast 160 77 43 21 6 3 209
N.W. 53 57 24 30 2 3 79

Parietal Bosses

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 17 2 413 51381 47 2 0 813
Interior 1 1 130 85 22 14 0 0 153
East 4 3 66 55 50 42 0 0 120
Coast 6 3 82 39120 57 1 0 209
N.W. 1 1 40 51 38 48 0 0 79

A median sagittal crest though not striking is recorded in a number of cases.
It has a submedium incidence of 22 per cent and pronounced 4 per cent.
Among the interior people, the crest is more common. Because of the
heavy, bushy, and wiry hair of Fijians it is probable that some instances of
this feature were not detected by simple palpation, and the incidence may
be higher than the data indicate.
Submedium development of the parietal bosses is rather common occurring
in 51 per cent of the series. It is very common in the interior (85 per cent).

Cranial Asymmetry

Absent Left RightTotal
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji 813 100 0 0 0 0 813
Interior 153 100 0 0 0 0 153
East 119 100 0 0 0 0 119

Coast 208 100 00 0 0 208
N.W. 79 100 00 0 0 79

Facial Asymmetry

Absent Left RightTotal
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji 806 100 1 0 0 0 807
Interior 153 100 0 0 0 0 153
East 117 98 0 0 2 2 119
Coast 206 99 0 0 2 1 208
N.W. 78 99 1 0 0 0 79

Cranial and facial assymetry are generally lacking, at least in any marked
degree. Normal asymmetries of the face and head were ignored in this
description.

EYES

Eye Folds: External

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji 804 98 5 1 4 1 0 0 813
Interior 152 99 0 0 1 1 0 0 153
East 119 99 0 0 1 1 0 0 120
Coast 209 99 1 1 1 1 0 0 208
N.W. 78 99 0 0 1 1 0 0 79

Eye Fold: Median

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 782 96 3 1/2 25 3 3 1/2 813

Interior 152 99 00 11 0 0 153
East 108 90 1 1 10 8 1 1 120
Coast 202 97 10 52 1 0 209
N.W. 78 99 00 00 1 1 79

Eye Folds: Internal

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 778 96 4 0 30 4 1 0 813
Interior 151 99 00 2 1 0 0 153
East 102 85 1 1 17 14 1 0 120
Coast 203 97 00 6 3 0 0 209
N.W. 78 99 00 1 1 0 0 79
Fiji II 116 89 7 5-1/2 7 5-1/2 0 0 130
Solomons 80 94 2 2-1/2 3 3-1/2 0 0 85
Tonga 63 57 33 30 9 8 6 5 111

Eye folds are not a feature of the Fijian facial make-up. The external fold is
present in only 2 per cent of the total series. The median fold shows a 96
per cent absence. The eastern groups exceed the other provinces with a 10
per cent occurrence. The internal eye fold has a total presence of 4 per cent
and is also commoner in the east (14 per cent).

Eye Obliquity

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 251 31 358 43201 25 3 1 813
Interior 92 60 46 30 14 9 1 1 153
East 33 28 52 35 45 38 0 0 120
Coast 47 22 102 49 58 28 2 1 209
N.W. 27 34 32 41 20 25 0 0 79

Eye Opening

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 0 075 9-1/2 737 91 1 1/2 813
Interior 0 0 24 16128 84 1 1 153
East 0 0 13 11 107 89 0 0 120
Coast 00 9 4200 96 0 0 209
N.W. 00 7 9 72 91 0 0 79

Some degree of eye obliquity is present in the majority of cases; 43 per cent
show a submedium condition; 25 per cent are medium and three individuals
have pronouncedly oblique eyes. The remainder, or 31 per cent, have no
obliquity. In the east, the natives depart from this total distribution in
opposite directions. The interior groups have much less eye obliquity; the
eastern people, a great deal more. The other provinces are quite close to the
total frequencies.
Eye opening height is preponderately moderate (91 per cent). The
remaining 10 per cent with one exception show submedium eye opening.
Regional variation is not great. The eastern and interior groups have a little
higher frequency in the submedium class.

FOREHEAD

Brow Ridges

Absent Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 0 0148 19 364 44295 36 6 1 813
Interior 0 0 16 10 69 45 64 42 4 3 153
East 0 0 28 23 42 35 50 42 0 0 120
Coast 0 0 42 20 99 47 67 32 1 0 209
N.W. 0 0 19 24 40 51 19 24 1 1 79

Brow ridges are a marked feature of Fijians in general. None of them lack
some supraorbital development. Forty-four per cent have medium brow
ridges, 36 per cent are pronounced, and 1 per cent are very pronounced. The
other 19 per cent are small. The interior and eastern groups share a little
higher incidence of pronounced brow ridges; the other regions are nearer
the total distribution of variations.

Forehead Height

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 0 0 444 55369 45 0 0 813
Interior 0 0 90 59 63 41 0 0 153
East 0 0 68 57 52 43 0 0 120
Coast 0 0 110 53 99 47 0 0 209
N.W. 0 0 46 58 33 42 0 0 79

Forehead Slope

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 8 1 280 34460 56 65 8 813
Interior 0 0 53 35 87 57 13 8 153
East 0 0 38 32 72 60 10 8 120
Coast 4 2 78 37 113 54 14 7 209
N.W. 2 3 27 34 47 59 4 4 79
Tonga 1 1 70 60 45 39 0 0 116

Forehead height is submedium in more than half the cases (55 per cent); the
others are all medium. There is no significant variation among the
subgroups.
A sloping forehead is quite characteristic of the Fijian head; 56 per cent are
moderately sloping, 8 per cent are pronounced, and 34 per cent are
submedium. Only 1 per cent have foreheads with no recession. Regional
differences are very slight.

NOSE

Nasion Depression

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 1 0 170 21579 71 63 8 813
Interior 0 0 41 27103 67 9 6 153
East 1 1 32 27 85 71 2 2 120
Coast 0 0 45 22144 69 10 10 209
N.W. 0 0 18 23 56 71 6 6 79

Root Height

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 1 0 63 8555 67 194 24 813
Interior 0 0 16 10 96 63 41 27 153
East 1 1 3 3 77 64 39 33 120
Coast 0 0 10 5157 75 42 20 209
N.W. 0 0 4 5 57 72 18 23 79

Root Breadth

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 0 0 1 0258 32 554 68 813
Interior 0 0 0 0 38 25 115 75 153
East 0 0 1 1 53 44 66 55 120
Coast 0 0 0 0 67 32 142 68 209
N.W. 0 0 0 0 24 30 55 70 79

Nasal Septum

Straight Concave Convex Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 777 99 0 0 36 4 813
Interior 153 100 00 0 0 153
East 118 98 00 2 2 120
Coast 196 94 0 0 13 6 199
N.W. 78 99 00 1 1 79

Bridge Height

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 0 0 54 7644 79115 14 813
Interior 0 0 13 8124 81 16 10 153
East 0 0 1 1 98 82 21 18 120
Coast 0 0 10 5173 83 26 12 209
N.W. 0 0 7 9 60 76 12 15 79
Tonga 0 0 21 22 81 70 9 8 111

Bridge Breadth

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 0 0 0 0265 33 546 67 813
Interior 0 0 0 0 29 19 124 81 153
East 0 0 0 0 72 60 48 40 120
Coast 0 0 0 0 62 30 147 70 209
N.W. 0 0 0 0 23 29 56 71 79

Nasal Profile

Concave Straight Convex Total
No. % No. % No. %

Fiji I 14 2 625 77 173 21 812
Interior 0 0 123 80 30 20 153
East 1 1 88 73 31 26 120
Coast 4 2 171 82 34 16 209
N.W. 1 1 59 75 19 24 79

Moderate nasion depression characterizes the majority of noses (71 per
cent). Pronounced depression is recorded for 8 per cent, and submedium
occurrence in 21 per cent. Only one individual lacks any depression. This
distribution does not vary much among the provinces.
A well-elevated nasal root is also characteristic; 67 per cent show moderate
elevation and 24 per cent pronounced, whereas 8 per cent are submedium;
one individual is without any elevation. The interior Fijians have a little
higher frequency of low nasal root (10 per cent), whereas the eastern
people, with a 30 per cent incidence, excel in the pronounced category.
More striking is the breadth of the Fijian nasal root. It is pronounced in 68
per cent and moderate in the remainder of the series. Pronounced breadth is
commoner among the interior people (75 per cent) and least preponderant in
the east (55 per cent).
The nasal septum is nearly always straight; the only departure from this
condition is a 4 per cent incidence of convexity. Regional differences are
not significant.
Nasal bridge height is commonly medium (79 per cent) in the totality of
noses. Fourteen percent are pronouncedly high and 7 per cent are
submedium. The several provinces do not depart very far from this
distribution.
The Fijian nose shows a strong tendency to broadness of the bridge. Two-
thirds show pronounced breadth of bridge and the remainder are medium.
Pronounced broadness increases in the interior groups (81 per cent) and
shows a marked decline in the east (40 per cent).
Nasal profiles are most often straight (77 per cent), but convex noses are
not uncommon (21 per cent). Convexity is slightly more frequent in the east

(26 percent), whereas in the coastal people its incidence drops to 16 per
cent.

Nasal-Tip Thickness

Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 1 0344 42461 58 1 0 812
Interior 0 0 55 36 98 64 0 0 153
East 1 1 80 67 39 33 0 0 120
Coast 0 0 94 45 114 55 1 1 209
N.W. 0 0 27 34 52 66 0 0 79

Nasal-Tip Inclination

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 731 90 57 7 24 3 0 0 812
Interior 147 96 6 4 0 0 0 0 153
East 109 91 6 5 5 4 0 0 120
Coast 186 89 16 8 7 3 0 0 209
N.W. 71 90 6 8 2 3 0 0 79

Nasal Wings

Compressed Medium Flaring Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 0 0 198 24 615 76 813
Interior 0 0 25 16 128 84 153
East 0 0 70 58 50 42 120
Coast 0 0 42 20 167 80 209
N.W. 0 0 16 20 63 80 79

The nasal tip is pronounced more often than not, 58 per cent showing this
condition. The remaining 42 per cent have tips of medium thickness.
Thicker tips occur more often in the interior (64 per cent) and in the
northwest (66 per cent), least often in the east (33 per cent).
Usually the nasal tip is not inclined downward. Slight and moderate
inclination has a combined incidence of only 10 per cent.
Flaring nasal wings are a common condition (76 per cent). This incidence
rises to 84 per cent in the interior and drops to 42 per cent in the east.

MOUTH

Lip Thickness: Membranous

Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 19 2428 53364 45 2 0 813
Interior 10 7 43 28100 65 0 0 153
East 1 1 83 69 36 30 0 0 120
Coast 1 1/2 88 42 119 57 1 1/2 209
N.W. 4 5 39 49 36 46 0 0 79
Tonga 12 10 97 84 7 6 0 0 116

Lip Thickness: Integumental

Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 4 1/2 608 75 201 25 0 0 813
Interior 1 1/2 114 75 38 25 0 0 153
East 1 1100 83 19 16 0 0 120
Coast 2 1164 78 43 21 0 0 209
N.W. 0 0 55 70 24 30 0 0 79
Fiji II 0 0 1 1/2 26 20106 80 133
Solomons 0 0 0 0 12 14 73 86 85

Lip Eversion

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 12 1 333 41444 55 24 3 813
Interior 0 0 63 41 88 58 2 1 153
East 8 7 77 64 35 29 0 0 120
Coast 0 0 63 30138 66 8 4 209
N.W. 1 1 26 33 51 65 1 1 79

Lip Seam

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 33 4 429 53343 42 8 1 813
Interior 1 1 79 52 73 48 0 0 153
East 14 12 77 64 29 24 0 0 120
Coast 6 3 105 50 94 45 4 2 209
N.W. 3 4 44 56 32 41 0 0 79

Fijian lips are Negroid in thickness in many instances. Membranous lips are
thick in 45 per cent of the series, medium in 53 per cent, and submedium in
25 per cent. Thickest lips occur in the interior and coastal areas where the
pronounced type registers 65 per cent and 57 per cent, respectively. In the

east, lips are more moderate in thickness, and the pronounced category
drops to 30 per cent.
Integumental lips also tend to be heavy but not so much as the mucous
parts. Twenty-five per cent of the total Fijians have thick integumental lips
and the remainder are moderate. Howells' Fiji II series classes 80 per cent
as very pronounced and the remainder as pronounced. The Solomon
Islanders, with an 86 per cent incidence of very pronounced, have the
heaviest lips of all.
Lip eversion varies largely between moderate and submedium, 55 percent
and 41 per cent, respectively. The interior and coastal Fijians show this trait
a little more often than the others, whereas the eastern people have least lip
eversion. The lip seam is present in nearly all cases, but not to a pronounced
degree. Fifty-three per cent are submedium and 42 per cent are moderate.
The eastern groups are definitely less endowed with this trait. The other
provinces vary but little from the total distribution.

TEETH

Bite

Under E-E Subm. over + over Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 2 0 518 64 274 34 13 2 807
Interior 0 0 94 61 59 39 0 0 153
East 0 0 73 61 45 38 2 2 120
Coast 1 0 130 62 76 36 0 0 207
N.W. 1 1 49 62 23 29 3 4 76
Fiji II 4 3 50 38 77 59 0 0 131
Solomons 1 1 37 45 45 54 0 0 83

Caries

Absent Subm.(1-4) + (5-8) ++ (9-16) +++ (17-x) Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Fiji I 645 78 80 10 58 7 22 3 8 1 813
Interior 130 84 16 10 32 11 3 2 153
East 100 83 10 12 43 21 4 3 120
Coast 153 73 29 14 16 8 84 3 1 209
N.W. 62 80 9 11 68 11 0 0 78

Crowding

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 685 84 115 14 13 2 0 0 813
Interior 134 88 19 12 0 0 0 0 153
East 100 83 17 14 3 3 0 0 120
Coast 180 86 25 12 4 2 0 0 209
N.W. 64 81 14 18 0 0 0 0 78

Tooth Eruption

Complete Incomplete Total
No. % No. %
Fiji I 796 98 15 2 811
Interior 153 100 0 0 153
East 119 99 1 1 120
Coast 199 95 8 4 207
N.W. 74 94 2 3 76

Wear

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 184 23 443 54 144 18 42 5 813
Interior 27 {18} 58 {38} 37 {24} 31 {20} 153
East 26 {22} 69 {57} 24 {20} 1 {1} 120

Coast 60 {29} 120 {57} 28 {13} 1 {1/2} 209
N.W. 12 {15} 47 {60} 17 {22} 2 {3} 78

The jaws of Fijians have a rather distinctive frequency of edge-to-edge bite.
I recorded this as 64 per cent, but Howells' series indicates a 38 per cent
incidence.
The quality of Fijian teeth as reflected by frequency of caries is excellent.
Nearly 80 per cent of the total show no tooth decay. The soundest teeth
from this standpoint occur in the interior, the east, and the northwest. The
coastal people show the highest incidence of caries, an interesting point
since many of this sample come from around Suva and have more access to
the Western processed foods.
Tooth crowding is quite uncommon to Fijians, a condition consistent with
their generous jaw conformation. Crowding is noted in only 16 per cent of
the series, and most of it is slight.
Tooth eruption is complete in nearly all the subjects. A 2 per cent incidence
of incomplete eruption is entirely due to the immaturity of some of the
young adults. No pathological suppression was noted.
Some wear of the teeth is recorded for more than three-quarters of the
series, but lacking age incidence, the data has limited meaning. The Fijian
diet is not abrasive the way, for instance, it is for the Indians of our
Southwest, where the staple food is ground in stone mills.

EARS

Ear Helix

Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 230 28 511 63 72 9 0 0 813
Interior 45 29 99 65 9 6 0 0 153
East 29 24 74 62 17 14 0 0 120
Coast 58 28128 61 23 11 0 0 209

N.W. 24 30 51 65 45 00 79

Darwin's Point

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 761 94 36 4 15 2 1 0 813
Interior 150 98 3 2 0 0 0 0 153
East 112 93 6 5 2 2 0 0 120
Coast 187 89 13 6 4 4 1 0 209
N.W. 77 97 2 3 0 0 0 0 79

Ear-Lobe Type

SolderedAttached Free Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 80 10 531 65202 25 813
Interior 47 31 74 48 32 21 153
East 3 3 85 71 32 27 120
Coast 9 4 141 67 59 28 209
N.W. 5 6 52 66 22 28 79

Ear-Lobe Size

Subm. + ++ +++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 176 22457 56178 22 2 0 813
Interior 49 32 66 43 38 25 0 0 153
East 16 13 76 63 27 23 1 1 120
Coast 31 15123 59 55 26 0 0 209
N.W. 20 25 47 59 12 15 0 0 79

Ear Protrusion

Absent Subm. + ++ Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 2 0 262 32463 57 86 11 813
Interior 1 1 47 31 90 59 15 10 153
East 0 0 31 26 77 64 12 10 120
Coast 1 0 75 36 114 55 19 9 209
N.W. 0 0 26 33 49 62 4 5 79

Ear Slant

Absent Subm. + Total
No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 416 51 332 41 65 8 813
Interior 78 51 67 44 8 5 153
East 55 46 52 43 13 11 120
Coast 118 56 74 35 17 8 209
N.W. 38 48 39 49 2 3 79

The Fijian ear is a moderately distinctive appendage from a racial
standpoint. The helix shows moderate development on the whole and is
submedium otherwise except for a 9 per cent incidence of pronounced
appearance. Regional variation is small.
The Darwin's point is noted in a number of cases: 4 per cent to a
submedium degree and 2 per cent medium.
The ear lobe is somewhat distinctive with a 65 per cent incidence of the
attached condition and 10 per cent soldered. The remaining 25 per cent is
free. This distinctiveness is more marked among the interior groups where
the soldered type of lobe increases to 31 percent.
Ear-lobe size is moderate in more than half the series, pronounced in 22 per
cent, and submedium in 22 per cent. Small lobes are commoner in the
interior province.
Moderate ear protrusion is the commonest form followed by submedium.
Marked projection is recorded as 11 per cent.

Ear slant either is lacking or slight in most instances; the series is rather
evenly divided between these two categories, the zero category having a
small majority. Moderate slant is noted for 8 per cent.

BODY BUILD

Body Build: Endomorph

1 2 3 4 5 6Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 260 32 334 42126 15 46 6 33 4 12 1 811
Interior 49 32 66 43 26 17 5 3 6 4 1 1 153
East 30 25 54 45 21 18 5 4 8 7 1 1 119
Coast 77 37 82 39 28 13 10 5 8 4 3 1 209
N.W. 26 33 34 43 9 11 6 8 2 3 2 3 79

Body Build: Mesomorph

1 2 3 4 5 6Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 1 {0.1} 2 {0.2} 33 4131 16 227 28 419 52 813
Interior 00 1 1 11 7 27 18 41 27 73 48 153
East 11 0 0 2 2 14 12 38 32 65 54 120
Coast 00 0 0 9 4 29 14 67 32 104 50 209
N.W. 00 1 1 2 3 15 19 14 18 47 59 79

Body Build: Ectomorph

1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Fiji I 351 43 195 24 110 14 88 11 68 8 1 {0.1} 813
Interior 54 35 56 37 13 8 15 10 15 10 0 0 153
East 49 41 33 28 15 13 12 10 11 9 0 0 120
Coast 84 40 51 24 36 17 18 9 19 9 1 1 209

N.W. 39 49 19 24 11 14 68 45 00 79

Variations in body build have been expressed with the Sheldon method of
somatotyping.[18] Accordingly, the Fijians are primarily and definitely
mesomorphic, with endomorphy the second strongest component, and
ectomorphy, third. About 80 per cent of the total series had a mesomorphic
rating of 5 and 6 which leaves no doubt as to the prevailingly athletic
physique. Endomorphy is seldom pronounced so that obesity may be
described as no more than occasional. A pronounced linear build is likewise
relatively infrequent.
The Fijian subgroups do not vary markedly from the over-all pattern.

SUMMARY

The preceding data may be summarized from three points of view. The first
will emphasize the physical features that are common to most Fijians. At
the outset it should be pointed out that a "typical" Fijian does not exist,
except as a statistical abstraction. The racial composition of the Fijian is
complex and far from being homogeneous. There is no doubt, from the
physical and cultural evidence, as well as the geographical location, that
Fijians are related to both Melanesians and Polynesians. The second point is
to give a precise indication of these affinities with Melanesia and Polynesia.
A third concern of this analysis is the geographical variability within Fiji.
This consists of a regional breakdown of the Fijian data into interior,
eastern, coastal, and northwestern divisions, in order to demonstrate some
of the local variation of the Melanesian-Polynesian ingredients and their
possible meaning.

Body (pl. 1).

—In general size and appearance, the Fijian is tall and well proportioned.
His body is fairly tall and well muscled, that is, predominately athletic in
build. Obesity is relatively uncommon except in moderate degrees. This
rather tall stature allies the Fijians more closely with the Polynesians.
Shoulder, chest, and hip diameters also indicate that Fijians are generously
endowed.

The Fijians who occupy the mountainous interior of the main island are less
tall than the coastal and eastern people; they also have narrower shoulders,
relatively deeper and narrower chests, whereas their arms and legs are
somewhat shorter. The eastern Fijians are tallest of all subgroups.

Skin Color.

—Most Fijians have either medium- or dark-brown skin on the exposed
facial surfaces. The more protected body areas show higher frequencies of
medium brown and light brown. The Fijians are definitely less dark than the
Melanesians but are darker, on the whole, than the Polynesians.
The interior hill tribes are darker than the eastern and coastal groups. The
lightest average skin shade occurs in the east.

Hair (pls. 6 and 7).

—In several respects the hair is the most consistent endowment of the
Fijians. In nearly all instances it is black, frizzly, and coarse. The only
departure from this condition is an occasional instance of dark brown and a
few instances of rufous shade. Curly hair is a more common exception in
the east. The coastal and northwestern people are nearer to the interior
condition of frizzly hair. All in all, the hair form is definitely Melanesian.
Hair length conforms to the general Melanesian condition, that is,
intermediate between short Negroid and long Caucasiod or Mongoloid.
Considerable beard and body hair is common to Fijians (pls. 8 and 9).
Moderate to pronounced beard is shown by nearly three-quarters of the total
series, and body hair is even more prevelant. General hairiness is also
exhibited by the Solomon Islanders and the Tongans in the comparative
data. The interior tribes of Fiji are more hairy than the other groups. This
prevelence of body and face hair seems to conform to parts of Melanesia
where it may be regarded as an Australoid element. Its presence in the
Tongan data does not seem to be representative of other Polynesians, who
are generally described as more glabrous.

Head (pl. 2).

—Moderate brachycephaly is the commonest head form of Fijians,
although the total range is great. In this respect the Fijians resemble the
broad-headed Tongans, and are quite distinct from the longer-headed
Melanesians. The Fijian head, despite its general brachycephaly, is rather
compressed in the temporal area and submedium in parietal elevation. The
back of the cranium is characteristically flattened, a natural conformation as
no deformation is practiced.
The interior mountain tribes of Fiji have narrower heads and lower cranial
indices than do the coastal and eastern groups. The interior people also have
lesser head heights and a higher breadth-height index.

Forehead (pl. 10).

—Moderate to strongly developed supraorbital ridges are a common Fijian
endowment. Similarly are low and sloping foreheads. These features have
been observed in western Melanesia, where, like hairiness, they suggest
Australoid of archaic Caucasoid elements.

Face.

—Broadness characterizes the Fijian face. Bizygomatic breadth locates
them nearer to the Polynesians than to the narrower-faced Melanesians.
Strongly developed malars are common, and they tend to project laterally
more than frontally. Widest faces appear among the eastern people.
Bigonial and bicanine widths show that generous breadth includes the lower
parts of the face, a condition born out by strong gonial angles.
Face length falls between the long-faced Tongans and the definitely shorter-
faced Melanesians (pls. 3 and 4).
Some prognathism is common among Fijians, both total and mid-facial, but
the condition is not universal nor pronounced. The eastern Fijians are the
least prognathic (pl. 10).

Eyes.

—Dark brown is the prevailing eye color, although many subjects have
medium-brown eyes. Eye folds are only occasional and eye-opening height
is usually moderate. Slight eye obliquity is common, more so in the eastern
sample.

Nose (pl. 4).

—Great variability marks the nasal area. The commonest condition is a
broad and moderately long nose. Medium nasion depression is frequent; the
root is wide and moderately elevated. Bridge breadth is often pronounced
and the nasal profile is straight to convex. The nasal tip is characteristically
thickened and nasal wings are usually flaring. On the whole, there is a great
deal of Melanesian in the Fijian nose; it is Negroid, but not pronouncedly.
Those aspects of the nose which may be termed Negroid are commoner in
the interior hill people and the northwest and least evident in the east.

Lips (pl. 5).

—Thick and moderately everted lips occur in nearly half the series. This
Negroid combination is more manifest in the interior and least in the east.
Integumental lips tend to be heavy.

Teeth.

—The condition of the teeth is generally excellent. Most Fijians have broad,
roomy jaws that permit complete and uncrowded tooth development. Dental
caries are very infrequent. A rather high incidence of edge-to-edge bite is
interesting.

Ears (pl. 5).

—The ears are usually moderate in length and tend to protrude. Ear lobes
are commonly large and are more often attached or soldered than free.

CONCLUSIONS
On the whole the Fijians are predominately Melanesian but with numerous
Polynesian affinities that vary with locality. The Melanesian qualities are in
part Negroid or Negritoid and in part Australoid. The Negroid resemblances
are best illustrated by frizzly black hair, broad noses with depressed nasion
and flaring nostrils, thick lips, and dark pigmentation (pls. 11 and 12).
Australoid elements are general hairiness, strong brow ridges, low, sloping
foreheads, compressed parietal and temporal areas, and some prognathism
(pl. 13). The presence of Australoid suggestions need not mean that they
come from Australia, but that they form a part of the Melanesian make-up.
This interpretation of the Melanesians as a hybrid people conforms with
similar designations by such students as Birdsell[19] and Hooton.[20]
Polynesian influence in Fiji is most clearly demonstrated by lighter
pigmentation, tall and muscular body build, moderate brachycephaly, broad
faces and jaws, high and fairly long noses and strong chins. I found much
the same resemblances between Fijians and Polynesians as did Howells;[21]
however, in my comparisons the Polynesian similarities are outweighed and
outnumbered by a greater array of Melanesian characters. The essential
Melanesian character of the Fijian population is further demonstrated by
recent blood-analysis comparisons; the conclusions of Simmons et al.,
identify the Fijians as Melanesian.[22]
The Fijians who live in the interior of Viti Levu show the most frequent
Melanesian traits (pls. 11 and 14). These people are shorter, have narrower
shoulders and chests; their heads are narrower and lower vaulted; they have
broader noses, thicker lips, are hairier, and have darker skins. This
condition, occurring as it does in the mountainous interior, which may be
regarded as a refuge area, supports the theory that the Melanesian is the
earlier component in Fiji.
The eastern Fijians stand in considerable contrast to the interior tribes and
are the most Polynesian in appearance (pl. 15). They have lighter skins,
greater stature, and heavier musculature. Their heads are broader, as are

their faces and jaws; their noses are larger, narrower, and higher bridged,
and their chins are more pronounced.
The coastal sample might be called intermediate or a more even blend of
Melanesian and Polynesian.
The northwestern people resemble the coastal tribes. This means they show
fewer departures in either a Melanesian or Polynesian direction. This also
means they do not tell us whether the legendary ancestors, who are
supposed to have first landed in Fiji on the northwest coast of Viti Levu,[23]
were Melanesian or Polynesian. These data may mean one of three things:
(1) the Fijian tradition of a landing at this place eight or ten generations ago
is groundless, (2) the immigration did take place but whatever racial traits
predominated, whether Melanesian or Polynesian, have been homogenized
and obscured by subsequent intermixture and by movements back and forth
on Viti Levu, (3) the landing did occur but the ancestors were already a
Melanesian-Polynesian blend when they arrived.

LITERATURE CITED
Birdsell. J. B.
1948. Racial Origin of the Extinct Tasmanians. Records of the Queen
Victoria Museum, Tasmania, Vol. II, No. 3.
Churchill, W.
1911. The Polynesian Wanderings. Carnegie Institute of Washington,
Publ. No. 134, Washington.
Derrick, R. A.
1951. History of Fiji. Printing and Stationery Dept., Suva, Fiji.
Fornander, A.
1878. The Polynesian Race. London.
Hocart, A. M.
1929. Lau Islands, Fiji. Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Bull. 62,
Honolulu.
Hooton, E. A.
1946. Up From the Ape. Macmillan Co., New York
Howells. W. W.
1933. Anthropometry and Blood Types in Fiji and the Solomon Islands.
American Museum of Natural History. Anthropological Papers, Vol. 33,
Pt. 4.
Roth, G. K.
1953. The Fijian Way of Life. Oxford University Press, London.
Simmon, R. T., J. J. Graydon, and G. Barnes
1945. The Medical Journal of Australia, May 26.
Sullivan, L. R.
1922. A Contribution to Tongan Somotology. Bernice P. Bishop Museum,
Vol. VIII, No. 4.

Thomson, B.
1908. The Fijians: A Study of the Decay of Custom. Wm. Heinemann,
London.

PLATES

PLATE 1. NEAR-AVERAGE BODY FEATURES

Stature: 173.3 cm.
Weight: 172.1 lbs.
Arm length: 75.1 cm.
Leg length: 82.2 cm.
Shoulder breadth: 41 cm.
Hip breadth: 29.1 cm.
Shoulder-hip index: 71.0
Chest breadth: 28.8 cm.
Chest depth: 22.8 cm.
Thoracic index: 75.7

Sitting height: 86.3 cm.
Sitting height-stature index: 50.0
Body build: Strongly mesomorphic

PLATE 2. NEAR-AVERAGE CRANIAL FEATURES

Head length: 187.2 mm.
Head breadth: 156.9 mm.
Cephalic index: 83.9
Head height: 128.6 mm.
Length-height index: 68.7
Length-breadth index: 81.1
Minimum frontal diameter: 109.8 mm.
Fronto-parietal index: 70.0

PLATE 3. NEAR-AVERAGE FACIAL FEATURES

Bizygomatic breadth: 146.7 mm.
Cephalo-facial index: 93.2
Zygo-frontal index: 75.3
Bigonial breadth: 109.6 mm.
Fronto-gonial index: 100.1
Zygo-gonial index: 74.7
Bicanine breadth: 39.8
Total facial height: 122.3 mm.
Total facial index: 84.1

Upper facial height: 71.3
Upper facial index: 48.9
Nasal height: 53.1
Nasal breadth: 45.5
Nasal index: 85.6

PLATE 4. NEAR-AVERAGE FACE AND NOSE FEATURES

FACE
Pronounced malars
Moderately long face
Wide gonia
Moderate chin
Moderate prognathism
NOSE
Broad bridge
Wide root

Moderate length
Thick tip
Flaring nostrils
Straight profile

PLATE 5. NEAR-AVERAGE LIP AND EAR FEATURES

LIPS
Moderately thick
Pronounced lip seam
Moderate eversion
EARS
Moderate size
Small lobe
Attached lobe
Moderate protrusion

PLATE 6. NEAR-AVERAGE HAIR FEATURES

Black color
Frizzly form
Pronounced quantity
Coarse texture
Intermediate length

PLATE 7. HAIR FORM VARIANTS

CURLY HAIR WAVY HAIR

PLATE 8. PRONOUNCED BODY HAIR

20 per cent occurrence

PLATE 9. PRONOUNCED BEARD

26 per cent occurrence

PLATE 10. FACIAL VARIATIONS

No prognathism
High forehead
Moderate browridges
Moderate prognathism
Low, receding forehead
Pronounced browridges
Pronounced prognathism
Low, receding forehead
Very pronounced browridges

PLATE 11. INTERIOR SUBJECT (MORE NEGROID)

Shorter stature
Narrower shoulders
Deeper chest
Darker skin
Narrower head
Broader nose
Thicker lips

PLATE 12. "NEGROID" FIJIAN

PLATE 13. INTERIOR SUBJECT (MORE AUSTRALOID)

Heavier beard and body hair
Lower, more sloping forehead
More compressed parietals
More pronounced brow ridges
More prognathic

PLATE 14. "AUSTRALOID" FIJIANS

PLATE 15. EASTERN SUBJECT (MORE POLYNESIAN)

Lighter skin
Less beard and body hair
Wavy hair
Wider head
Higher, steeper forehead
Less prognathic
Higher, narrower nose
Moderately thick lips

Illustration: PLATE 16. "POLYNESIAN" FIJIANS
[1] Hooton, 1946, pp. 735-763.
[2] Derrick, 1946, pp. 5-6.
[3] Ibid., pp. 7-8.
[4] Population statistics from "Fiji Information," of 1954, issued by Public
Relations Office, Suva, Fiji.
[5] Hooton, 1946, p. 621.
[6] Birdsell, 1949, p. 120.
[7] Fornander, 1878.
[8] Churchill, 1911.
[9] Hocart, 1929, p. 236.
[10] Howells, 1933, p. 335.

[11] Roth, 1953, pp. 54, 55.
[12] One pound deducted for dress (usually shorts only).
[13] By subtracting sitting height from total stature.
[14] Cranial measurements are not distorted by cradling practice or other causes
of deformation.
[15] Howells records skin color with the von Luschan scale. I have adjusted this
scale to my own.
[16] + means medium or moderate; ++ means pronounced; +++ means very
pronounced.
[17] Observation taken on the chest.
[18] W. H. Sheldon, The Variation of Human Physique, Harper and Bros., 1940.
[19] Birdsell, 1949, p. 120.
[20] Hooton, 1946, p. 621.
[21] Howells, 1933, p. 332.
[22] Simmons et al., 1945, pp. 3-4
[23] See pp. 1 and 4 of Introduction.

[Transcriber's Note: Figures incorrectly entered as zero have been
calculated and inserted in {}.]

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A RACIAL STUDY
OF THE FIJIANS ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be
renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law
means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States
without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying
and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a
registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook,
except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying
royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge
anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg
eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do
practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by
U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any
other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you
agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License
available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work,
you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement,
you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy
of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to
be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on
or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying
with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a
lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you
follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation”
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are

located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are
removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing
Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can
easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you
share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a
constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the
laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work.
The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied
or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with
this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in
the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from
texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice
indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the
work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without
paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a
work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on
the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs
1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the
permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the
copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License
terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently
displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or
immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the
official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no
additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of
exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work
in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format
must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph
1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply
with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in
this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project

Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works
not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and
the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription
errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that
damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except
for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to
you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you
can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund.
If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to

you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work
electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you
may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable
to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum
disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity
or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause
to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg
work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the

efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of
life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring
that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for
generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)
(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s
laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516,
Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment

including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort,
much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods
and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg
eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a

copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how
to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
newsletter to hear about new eBooks.