Skull Size. Does It Matter? No… For centuries, archaeologists have been unearthing and analyzing primitive human skulls of various sizes and shapes. Since the dimensions of these ancient skulls vary immensely, scientists have presented critically opposing theories regarding the connection between skull dimensions and brain function. This paper proposes that skull dimensions have no merit in the determination of reasoning capability or intelligence quotients of ancient or modern humans. Furthermore, this paper will illustrate that the theory of skull dimension as being a true indicator of intelligence or reasoning ability encourages the unethical use of eugenics, promotes discrimination, and encourages further segregation of the human race.
Our first example of skull measurements used to determine intelligence and reasoning ability begins in 1913. Two farmers from Boskop, South Africa discovered abnormally large ancient humanoid skulls scattered throughout their field. (Lynch, Granger) The farmers delivered these skull fragments to the local museum and by 1915, an official report was made to the Royal Society of South Africa.
The discovery was so amazing that England became involved and excavated more skulls from the area, later naming theses ancient ancestors Boskop man. (Lynch, Granger)
Boskop skulls measure 1750 cc. on average, as compared to the average human skull today, which measures approximately 1350 cc. The size and shape of the Boskop brain is about 23-30% larger than the average human skull. (Lynch, Granger) To add perspective, we can note that the size of a human brain today is about 25% larger than the size of homo-erectus. (Lynch, Granger)
Scientists theorize that judging by the shape and size of the skull, the Boskop man had a 53% larger prefrontal cortex, the area that registers cognitive, forward thinking ability. (Lynch, Granger) According to Lynch and Granger, the Boskop brain would have had an “inconceivably large prefrontal cortex”. (Lynch, Granger) Due to this new assessment of these large and strangely shaped ancient skulls, neuroscientists Richard Granger and Gary Lynch concluded that the unusually larger dimensions of these skulls proved their theory; some of our ancient relatives had higher IQ’s, as well as superior reasoning abilities than today’s modern humans. (Lynch, Granger)
In fact, Lynch and Granger went so far as to state that due to the skull measurements, these ancient Boskop men had “an average intelligence (IQ) of around 150, making them geniuses among Homo sapiens.
However, although this theory may seem intriguing, many researchers and scientists disagree with Granger and Lynch’s theory, “scientists agree that there is absolutely no evidence showing that either brain size or brains to weight ratios are reliable indicators of intelligence or rational.” (Lavender)
The skulls found by the two farmers in Boskop, South Africa are indeed a remarkable discovery for anthropologists; however, it is common knowledge that over the last two centuries, archaeologists have unearthed abnormally shaped skulls from various ancient civilization dig sites. While some of these skulls are large, similar to the Boskop skulls, many of these skulls are comparatively small.
To date, none of the smaller skulls compare with the astonishing tiny size of the humanoid “hobbit” skulls, found in 2003, by Australian and Indonesian explorers in an Indonesian cave, 20 feet into the cave floor (Leigh). Hobbit was the name given to this race of peculiarly diminutive ancient beings, due to their tiny skulls and undersized skeletal remains.
The oldest hobbit bones have been estimated to be anywhere from 12,000 to around 95,000 years old. What’s more, tools found on the island suggest that hominids have been on Flores for 800,000 years. (Zimmer) Keep in mind that these people were only three feet tall (Strickland), “weighed only around 55 pounds and had startlingly small brains.” (Roach)
“Brown calculated its (the hobbit brain’s) volume at less than a third of a modern human’s. Hobbit had by far the smallest brain of any member of the genus Homo.”
Amazingly, the Hobbits were quite sophisticated, regardless of the fact that their brains were “small, even for a chimpanzee”. As mentioned by Carl Zimmer in an issue of Discover Magazine, by examination of the hobbit skull it is clear that similar to the larger Boskop skull, the frontal lobe area of the hobbit skull is also enlarged. This frontal area is “known to be important in planning and other complex kinds of thought”. (Zimmer)
Noting that archaeologists found “sophisticated tools and evidence of a fire near the remains,” one must realize that these small skulled humanoids have much to offer in the debate surrounding skull size and its relationship to reasoning and intelligence.
Since the discovery of the hobbit skeletal fossils, scientists have scrutinized these skulls, as well as the fossilized artifacts and complicated tools that surround the prehistoric hobbit colonies, yet there is still additional research required to evaluate the true nature and intelligence of these ancient people.
In a March 2010 interview, Richard Potts, paleoanthropologist and curator of anthropology at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, re-iterated the relevance of ongoing research and exploration by stating, “One of our Smithsonian researchers is also returning to Flores, Indonesia to continue digging for evidence of Homo floresiensis, the so-called hobbit”. (Richard)
Another aspect in determining intelligence by examination of the skull, is the question of whether skull measurement is an accurate gauge of the size of the brain that it houses. In 2007, Reuters published a scientific article detailing an incredible phenomenon discovered by Dr. Lionel Feuillet and his colleagues at University de la Mediterranee in Marseille.
Dr. Feuillet reported that a 44-year-old man had come to them complaining of weakness in his leg, when Dr. Feuillet’s staff requested the man’s medical history; they discovered that he had received a shunt in his skull as an infant, to drain water from the brain. (“Tiny Brain, No Obstacle to French Civil Servant.”)
The man’s brain had shrunk to nearly a sliver of a normal sized brain and yet he maintained an IQ of 75. The man’s IQ was below average, bearing in mind that the average IQ is 100, yet he was able to function in society with only a tiny fraction of the average sized brain. The man was married, held a full-time job as a civil servant and helped raise his family with two children. According to doctors, he was not mentally disabled.
“What I find amazing to this day is how the brain can deal with something which you think should not be compatible with life,” commented Dr. Max Muenke, a pediatric brain defect specialist at the National Human Genome Research Institute.” (“Tiny Brain, No Obstacle to French Civil Servant.”)
Scientific research involving the relationship between skull dimension and brain function is not a new concept. The early 1800’s was a thriving time for Entrepreneurial Phrenologists. As defined by the Encarta World English Dictionary, “Phrenology” is “the study of the bumps on the outside of the skull, based on the now discredited theory that these bumps reflect somebody’s character.” (Encarta® World English Dictionary [North American Edition])
The pseudoscience of phrenology began in the early 1800’s based on the ideas of a Viennese physician, Franz Joseph Gall. Gall theorized that the size, shape, and placement of bumps on the skull could determine the intelligence and the disposition of an individual.
For nearly one hundred years, phrenology blossomed into an entrepreneurial pseudoscience, causing a great deal of discrimination and unjust practices. For example, employers hired phrenologists to examine the skulls of job applicants in order to determine the candidate’s character, integrity, and intelligence. Due to unreasonable phrenologist reports, countless hopeful interviewees were victims of discrimination and denied employment, due to the size and shape of their skulls. (Wyhe)
Another discriminatory use of skull measurement developed in America around 1850 and lasted for well over fifty years. The pop-culture phenomenon “Cult of Domesticity” (Lavender) claimed that women were inferior to men, perpetuating discrimination against women.
“During the mid to late 1800’s women were considered intellectually inferior to men as well as physically inferior.
On the average, women’s stature is smaller than the average male, therefore women naturally have smaller skulls, but during the mid to late 19th century, scientists aided the discrimination against women by concluding that women were inferior to men, explaining that smaller brain size was associated with inferior intelligence.
It is interesting to note that before scientists relied on phrenology to deduce women’s inferior mental capabilities, they used ratios of brain size compared to body weight. Unexpectedly, scientists discovered that women had a larger brain to weight ratio, as opposed to men having a smaller brain to weight ratio, causing these pseudo-scientists to change their method and rely solely on brain size when determining rationality and intelligence. (Lavender) After scientists measured the skulls of average sized women, they eloquently determined that women were inferior to men, stating:
“Woman is a constantly growing child, and in the brain, as in so many other parts of her body, she conforms to her childish type.
The above mentioned statement, linking inferiority with a specific race or gender, based on skull size and measurement, clearly confirms that this form of theorization should in no way stand for truth, carrying with it such broad discrimination based on physical characteristics. Bigotry and social injustice begins with the separation of humans by skin and hair color, physical size and stature, and various other outward appearance based prejudices.
As Keyes stated in 2006, these types of discriminatory scientific theories began with Darwinism and climaxed with the Holocaust.
“There was a clear and distinct starting point at which the radical race science movement was born. This starting point occurred at the end of the nineteenth century when scientists and intellectual theorists conjectured the racial theory of Social Darwinism.” (Keyes)
Although other scientists similar to Lynch and Granger have authored books and published articles stating their findings and observations, theorizing the relationship between skull measurements and intelligence, we must remember that science is constantly evolving and expanding, lest we fall into the trap which many descended into during the late eighteen and early nineteen hundreds.
Works Cited
“Hobbits a breed apart – Brain proves island people are separate species.” Daily Telegraph, The (Sydney) (n.d.): Newspaper Source. EBSCO. Web. 24 Apr. 2010.
Keyes, David. “Race Science and Nazi Germany: Its Influence on.” Math.Colorado.Edu (2006): 01. Web. 24 Apr 2010.
Lavender, Catherine. “The Cult of Domesticity and True Womanhood.” Department of History (1998): n. pag. Web. 17 Apr 2010.
LEIGH DAYTON, SCIENCE WRITER. “Fossil finds give clues to ancestors – HUMANITY’S ORIGINS.” Australian, The (2010): 11. Newspaper Source. EBSCO. Web. 24 Apr. 2010.
Lynch, Gary, and Richard Granger. “What Happened to the Hominids Who May Have Been Smarter Than Us? .” Discover 28 Dec. 2009: 01. Web. 11 March 2010.
“Phrenology .” Encarta® World English Dictionary [North American Edition] . Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc., 2009. Web.
“Tiny Brain No Obstacle to French Civil Servant.” Thomson Reuters 19 July 2007: n. pag. Web. 17 Apr 2010.
Richard, Potts. “Smithsonian Hall of Human Origins chronicles human evolution.” Washington Post, The, Retrieved from Newspaper Source database.
Roach, John. “”Hobbits” Were Separate Species, Skull Suggests.” National Geographic News 23 Jan. 2009: Web. 3 Apr 2010.
Strickland, Eliza. “The Debate Continues: Another Skull Study Supports the “Hobbit”.” Discover 26 Jan. 2009: 01. Web. 16 April 2010.
“The People Time Forgot: Flores Find.” National Geographic April. 2005: 01. Web. 16 Apr 2010.
Wyhe, John van. “The History of Phrenology.” Victorian Web 20 Nov. 2003: n. pag. Web. 17 Apr 2010.
Zimmer, Carl. “The Hobbit’s Brain.” Discover 3 March 2005: 01. Web. 16 Apr 2010.
Skull Size, Does It Matter? No… related articles from the blogosphere…
SKULL SIZE — CRANIAL CAPACITY
SKULL SIZE —– CRANIAL CAPACITY by Sanford Pinna, MD Copyright 2010 For the first time in the history of Europeans, men have decided to shave the hair off their heads and reveal the shape and size of their skulls. …
Publish Date: 10/22/2010 6:41
http://drpinna.com/skull-size-cranial-capacity-10591
Rowley's Whiskey Forge: Crystal Head Vodka Cut Down to Size
Crystal Head Vodka Cut Down to Size . “Oh, well, would you look at that?” Dan Aykroyd is holding my skull in his hands. A genuine smile of surprise seems to play across the actor’s face. I admit that he’s not the first to cradle that …
Publish Date: 10/26/2010 19:58
http://matthew-rowley.blogspot.com/2010/10/crystal-head-vodka-cut-down-to-size.html
Rare sloth, 'iconic' bison skull found in Snowmass – NewsPlurk
Enormous Ice Age bison skull found at Snowmass dig. By AP KDVR Denver SNOWMASS VILLAGE, Colo. (AP) — The skull of an Ice Age bison twice the size of modern bison is the latest fossil discovery coming out of more …
Publish Date: 11/07/2010 20:32
http://technology.newsplurk.com/2010/11/rare-sloth-bison-skull-found-in.html
Bratz Dolls May Give Girls Unrealistic Expectations Of Head Size
In Beyond The Facts, we examine how Bratz are convincing a generation of girls that to be hip and beautiful they have to have gigantic heads.
Possibly related posts: 