K. Pearson to W.M.F. Petrie, 11th Aug. 1895.- External URL
- Correspondence Details
-
Sent From (Definite): Karl PearsonSent To (Definite): Sir William Matthew Flinders PetrieDate: 11 Aug 1895
- Current Holder(s)
-
Holder (Definite): Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology, UCL.
- No links match your filters. Clear Filters
-
Sent fromKarl Pearson
11 Aug 1895
Description:
‘Dear Professor Petrie,
Professor Thane tells me that there would be no objection to the skulls etc. of the Libyans(?) being placed temporarily in the gallery of the anatomical museum, there being plenty of room there. This would enable us to keep the material at the College say till Xmas. Mr Thompson has completed a certain number of measurements & would be willing to undertake more next term. I am extremely desirous of taking two special series of measurements myself, but I feel it almost impossible with pressure of other work, accumulated by my long illness, to undertake them before October. I hope you may see your way to allowing the material to remain for the present.
I expect to deal with Mr Thompson’s results next week & will send you at once any points that occur to me. One seems to suggest itself from the one constant I have already determined – namely that your new race is very probably identical with the so-called Mook[?] collection of “Egyptian mummies”. I shall see this better when I have got other constants out, but if my idea is verified, Mook would have anticipated you, had he been less eager to send 400 skulls to Germany and more desirous of knowing what he was digging up. The collection is asserted to be mummies because particles of hair & skin are attached to the bones and they came from Egypt!
But if this should turn out to be the case, where alas! shall I still find any collection of mummy skulls of sufficient extent to determine what the Egyptians themselves were? Or to compare with the New Race?
Yours very truly,
Karl Pearson.’
-
Sent toSir William Matthew Flinders Petrie
11 Aug 1895
Description:
‘Dear Professor Petrie,
Professor Thane tells me that there would be no objection to the skulls etc. of the Libyans(?) being placed temporarily in the gallery of the anatomical museum, there being plenty of room there. This would enable us to keep the material at the College say till Xmas. Mr Thompson has completed a certain number of measurements & would be willing to undertake more next term. I am extremely desirous of taking two special series of measurements myself, but I feel it almost impossible with pressure of other work, accumulated by my long illness, to undertake them before October. I hope you may see your way to allowing the material to remain for the present.
I expect to deal with Mr Thompson’s results next week & will send you at once any points that occur to me. One seems to suggest itself from the one constant I have already determined – namely that your new race is very probably identical with the so-called Mook[?] collection of “Egyptian mummies”. I shall see this better when I have got other constants out, but if my idea is verified, Mook would have anticipated you, had he been less eager to send 400 skulls to Germany and more desirous of knowing what he was digging up. The collection is asserted to be mummies because particles of hair & skin are attached to the bones and they came from Egypt!
But if this should turn out to be the case, where alas! shall I still find any collection of mummy skulls of sufficient extent to determine what the Egyptians themselves were? Or to compare with the New Race?
Yours very truly,
Karl Pearson.’
-
