ADDRESS BEFORE THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION. 275 



the gradual modification from a human type somewhat different from 

 that which now exists to that which is met with at present. I must 

 confess that my opinion remains exactly what it was some eighteen 

 years ago, when I published a little book which I was very sorry to 

 hear my friend, Professor Flower, allude to yesterday, because I had 

 hoped that it would have been forgotten amongst the greater scandals 

 of subsequent times. I did there put forward the opinion that what is 

 known as the Neanderthal skull is of human remains, that which 

 presents the most marked and definite characteristics of a lower type — 

 using the language in the same sense as we would use it in other 

 branches of zoology. I believe it to belong to the lowest form of 

 human being of which we have any knowledge, and we know from the 

 remains accompanying that human being, that as far as all fundamental 

 points of structure were concerned, he was as much a man — could wear 

 boots just as easily — as any of us, so that I think the question remains 

 pretty much where it was. I don't know that there is any reason for 

 doubting that the men who existed at that day were in all essential 

 respects similar to the men who exist now. But I must point out to 

 you that this conviction is by no means inconsistent with the doctrine 

 of evolution. The horse, which existed at that time, was in all essential 

 respects identical with the horse which exists now. But we happen 

 to know that going back further in time the horse presents us with 

 a series of modifications by which it can be traced back from an earlier 

 type. Therefore, it must be deemed possible that man is in the same 

 position, although the facts we have before us with respect to him tell 

 in neither one way nor the other. I have now nothing more to do 

 than to thank you for the great kindness and attention with which 

 you have listened to these informal remarks. 



