Editing Craniometry (section)

{{Short description|Measurement of the human cranium}}
{{multiple|
{{More footnotes needed|date=June 2022}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2018}}
{{More citations needed|date=March 2011}}
}}
[[Image:Craniometry skull 1902.jpg|right|200px|thumb|A human skull and measurement device from 1902]]

'''Craniometry''' is measurement of the cranium (the main part of the [[skull]]), usually the [[human skull|human cranium]]. It is a subset of [[cephalometry]], measurement of the head, which in humans is a subset of [[anthropometry]], measurement of the [[human body]]. It is distinct from [[phrenology]], the pseudoscience that tried to link personality and character to head shape, and [[physiognomy]], which tried the same for facial features. 

Today, physical and forensic anthropologists use craniometry to study the evolution of human populations, determining the origin of ancient remains such as the [[Kennewick Man]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mann |first1=Robert |editor-first1=Gregory E. |editor-first2=Sabrina C. |editor-last1=Berg |editor-last2=Ta'Ala |title=The Sagittal Suture as an Indicator of Race and Sex |date=2015 |location=Biological Affinity in Forensic Identification of Human Skeletal Remains: Beyond Black and White |page=106 |doi=10.1201/b17832 |isbn=978-0-429-24504-6 |url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.1201/b17832/biological-affinity-forensic-identification-human-skeletal-remains-sabrina-ta-ala-gregory-berg |access-date=18 July 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gill |first1=George |title=Craniofacial Criteria in the Skeletal Attribution of Race |journal=Journal of Anatomy |date=1998 |volume=194 |issue=1 |location=Forensic Osteology: Advances in the Identification of Human Remains |pages=293–295 |edition=2nd |doi=10.1046/j.1469-7580.1999.194101532.x |pmc=1467905 }}</ref><ref>{{cite court |litigants=Bonnichsen v. United States |litigants-force-plain= |vol=367 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=864 |pinpoint=870-872 |court=9th Circuit |date=2004 |url= |quote= |postscript= }}</ref>

There is a rift between forensic and biological anthropologists in the use of race in craniometry, with biological anthropologists attempting to disprove any theory of biological race, compared to how many forensic anthropologists make inquiries based on societally-created racial categories.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ousley |first1=Stephen |title=Understanding Race and Human Variation: Why Forensic Anthropologists are Good at Identifying Race |journal=American Journal of Physical Anthropology |date=2009 |volume=139 |issue=1 |pages=68–76 |doi=10.1002/ajpa.21006 |pmid=19226647 }}</ref> It was once intensively practised in [[biological anthropology|physical anthropology]] in the 19th and the first part of the 20th century. Theories attempting to [[scientific racism|scientifically justify the segregation of society based on race]] became popular at this time, one of their prominent figures being [[Georges Vacher de Lapouge]] (1854–1936), who divided [[Human|humanity]] into various, hierarchized, different "[[Race (classification of human beings)|races]]", spanning from the "[[Aryan]] white race, [[dolichocephalic]]" (from the [[Ancient Greek]] ''kephalê'', head, and ''dolikhos'', long and thin), to the "[[brachycephalic]]" (short and broad-headed) race. On the other hand, craniometry was also used as evidence against the existence of a "[[Nordic race]]" and also by [[Franz Boas]] who used the [[cephalic index]] to show the influence of environmental factors. [[Charles Darwin]] used craniometry and the study of [[skeleton]]s to demonstrate his [[theory of evolution]] first expressed in ''[[On the Origin of Species]]'' (1859). A few studies claim that forensic anthropologists can correctly identify the perceived social race of an individual with rates from 81-99% accuracy depending on the craniometric data, the number of variables used, the populations, and the type of analysis.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mann |first1=Robert |title=The Sagittal Suture as an Indicator of Race and Sex |date=2015 |location=Biological Affinity in Forensic Identification of Human Skeletal Remains: Beyond Black and White |page=111}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Gill |first1=George |title=Craniofacial Criteria in the Skeletal Attribution of Race |date=1998 |location=Forensic Osteology: Advances in the Identification of Human Remains |page=305 |edition=2nd}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ousley |first1=Stephen |title=Understanding Race and Human Variation: Why Forensic Anthropologists are Good at Identifying Race |journal=American Journal of Physical Anthropology |date=2009 |volume=139 |issue=1 |page=71|doi=10.1002/ajpa.21006 |pmid=19226647 }}</ref>

Quite separately, certain artists from the 15th century onward made measurements of heads and skulls with a view to attaining greater accuracy in their representation of those parts of the human frame. [[Bernard Palissy]] and [[Albrecht Dürer]] were pioneers in such researches.{{sfn|Duckworth|1911|p=372}}