separated, moveable long fingers, with thick opposable thumbs, and a long narrow deeply-furrowed palm. If we compare the print of this hand to a human foot, we see how right Burmeister was when he said in his excellent paper in the Geologische Bilder, that the foot was the real characteristic of man.1

Hæckel no doubt remarks, appealing to Huxley for confirmation, that all real apes are just as much twohanded animals as man, or to put it the other way, that man is just as much a four-handed animal as the ape; he says that many tribes of negroes can use their feet as a "hinder hand," and when they climb trees grasp boughs with it just like the "four-handed apes," etc.; of course, too, Hæckel gives us a picture in which a chimpanzee, a gorilla, an orang, and a negro are seen sitting on a tree together. But it has been proved that these statements about the prehensile foot in man are totally incorrect; Huxley's statement, to which Hæckel still refers, was contradicted years ago by several anatomists, and the saying that "only man

3

1 "Der Menschliche Fuss als Character der Menschheit," Geol. Bilder, i. pp. 63-142. Recent investigations have confirmed this. A. Ecker the anatomist says, "I have shown that the special characteristics of the hand are the opposable thumbs, the long prehensile fingers fitted for grasping, and the general mobility of the whole, while those of the foot are the arched shape, the short and unprehensile toes, and the impossibility of stretching the bone of the great toe far from the others; the reader will therefore see clearly that the foot in no way resembles the hinder extremity of the ape, but that the latter is much more like a hand, and therefore should be called a hind hand. It is only in man that the foot is exclusively a means of support, and the hand exclusively a prehensile organ. Man alone has hands and feet."-Correspondenz-blatt der deutschen Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, 1881, p. 91.

2 Anthropogenie, p. 480. Nat. Schöpfungsgeschichte, p. 569.

• Gerland, Anthropolog. Beiträge, Halle 1875, i. p. 185; cf. Huber, Zur Kritik, etc. p. 36.

has an upright gait, the four-handed animal is suited to an arboreal life, and moves on even ground very imperfectly on all fours," has received fresh confirmation. "All apes are more or less climbers; trees are their natural home; not one can walk in the proper sense of the word.”2

As regards the head,-Vogt goes on to say,-and the development of the two parts which compose it, the skull and the face, in man the upper part is predominant, the lower, or rather the hinder part, in the ape. The (anatomical) face, comprised between the eyebrows, the chin, and the ear, is only a small appendage to the human skull, which overlaps it on every side, projecting over the eyebrows in the forehead, over the side in the temples, over the neck at the back of the head, and by this means affording space for the unproportionably large brain; whereas in the apes the brain case is less apparent, the forehead is quite flat, or entirely disappears behind the overhanging eyebrows, and the occipital foramen is so far back that in the lowest apes it is situated almost entirely in the posterior face of the skull; in the others it is mostly at the back of the skull. (In apes the occipital foramen is situated in the posterior

1 Lucæ in the Archiv. für Anthr. vi. 15, 27.

2 Virchow, Menschen und Affenschädel, p. 27. Cf. Huber, Zur Kritik, etc. p. 35. Rauch, Einheit des Menschengeschlechts, p. 396. Baer, Studien, p. 312.

3 "The history of the development of the face is exactly the opposite of that of the cranium; the higher stages of development are characterized by a decrease, not by an increase in its size. . . . Man possesses the smallest face, if not absolutely, at least in comparison to the size of the cranium, and this peculiarity exists everywhere, in spite of the difference in the prognathism, and in the length of the hinder skull."-Aeby, Die Schädelformen, etc. pp. 77, 80.

third of the base of the skull, in man it is usually in the centre, or even a little more forward.) In spite of the fact that the gorilla and the Australian negro (the lowest race of men) are of about the same height, the skull of the latter is one and a half times larger, and this is even more remarkable when we remember that the legs of the gorilla are comparatively shorter, and the trunk therefore bigger and more powerful. The smallest cranium measured by Morton, belonging to a man who was not an idiot, measured 63 cubic inches, the largest gorilla skull yet measured is 34 inches. If we compare the size of the cranium with the facial bones, and if we take the whole length of the skull as 100, and ascertain the proportion of the length of the cranium, that is, of the brain itself to the skull, we have the following figures:-European, 891; Australian, 787; orang, 477; gorilla, 459: the proportions of the facial bones are consequently, European, 109; Australian, 213; orang, 52.3; gorilla, 54.1. Whatever we may say, and however we may look at the facts, we shall always find this important difference in the formation of the skulls of men and the apes which is shown by the comparison of the cranium and the facial bones. As we have seen in the case of the anthropoid apes, the length of the cranium never equals half the whole length of the skull, whereas among the lowest men the length of the facial bones is only an unimportant part of the whole, and even in the Australian it does not attain to even a quarter of the whole.

Thus far Vogt. Huxley's comparisons give us the same results. I will therefore quote only a few of the

more general statements.

"The differences between a

"The

gorilla's skull and a man's are truly immense." structural differences between man and even the highest apes are great and significant; every bone of a gorilla bears marks by which it might be distinguished from the corresponding bone of a man.

As regards the brain, that of man is, no doubt, not absolutely the largest, for the brains of the elephant, the whale, and the narwhal are far larger. But as Huxley says, it must not be overlooked that there is a very striking difference in absolute mass and weight between the lowest human brain and that of the highest ape, a difference which is all the more remarkable when we recollect that a full-grown gorilla is probably pretty nearly twice as heavy as a Bushman, or as many a European woman. It may be doubted whether a healthy human brain ever weighed less than 31 or 32 ounces; or whether the heaviest gorilla brain has exceeded 20 ounces. The rule that man's brain is the largest in proportion to the weight of his body is not, however, without exception, for some of the smaller birds probably possess a brain which is relatively larger. But still there is no doubt that the human brain differs very markedly from the animal brain, a conclusion which has been arrived at by many anatomists, however widely they may differ as to details.1

1 Evidences as to Man's Place in Nature, pp. 76, 104. 2 Evidences, p. 102.

3 Tiedemann, Das Hirn des Negers, p. 14 seq. * Cf. Moleschott, Der Kreislauf des Lebens, 4th ed., p. 413 seq. Th. Bischoff in the Wissenschaftlichen Vorträgen held at Munich, Brunswick 1851, p. 313. Peschel, Völkerkunde, p. 63. J. B. Meyer, Philos. Zeitfragen, p. 173. Huber, Zur Kritik, etc. p. 39.

In addition to this anatomical difference there is a still greater difference with respect to bodily development. "Apes," says Virchow, "have generally a short life and a rapid development; they are born in a condition of bodily and spiritual maturity which occurs in animals but never in man; their farther development takes place in a few years, and an early death brings their life to a close. Although we are

not fully informed as to the absolute duration of life among the anthropoid apes, it is questionable whether any one of them attains to the age at which the growth of man ceases; and it is at any rate certain that even the highest apes have reached their full development when man is still in early youth. They have arrived at sexual maturity at an age when man has not outgrown childhood. Still more characteristic is the difference as to the time when the various parts of the body develop. The brain of the ape grows less than any other part of his body; it is usually completed before the change of teeth takes place, whereas in man the real development only begins then. In the ape, directly after the change of teeth, there begins the quick growth of the jaws and facial bones, and the enormous increase in the outer parts of the skull, which are the distinguishing marks of the bestial character." 1

1 Virchow, Menschen und Affenschädel, p. 25. "Their hairiness and the position of the hair, their body of three feet in length, their far greater limitation as to climate and food, their life of only thirty years, are other important characteristics which show the difference between apes and men. The slow growth, long childhood, and late arrival at puberty, the absence of any special breeding time, and of all strongly developed instincts, menstruation, a great many special diseases, the power of speech, laughter and tears, these are other physiological characteristics of man which separate him from the ape and have the greatest influence on the whole development of his life."-Th. Waitz, Anthropologie, i. 104.