The construction of statistics for summarizing posterior samples returned by a Bayesian phylogenetic study has so far been hindered by the poor geometric insights available into the space of phylogenetic trees, and ad hoc methods such as the derivation of a consensus tree makeup for the ill-definition of the usual concepts of posterior mean, while bootstrap methods mitigate the absence of a sound concept of variance. Yielding satisfactory results with sufficiently concentrated posterior distributions, such methods fall short of providing a faithful summary of posterior distributions if the data do not offer compelling evidence for a single topology.