VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY IN 1913 627 



In regard to the question whether the lower jaw pertains to 

 the same individual as the cranium, or skull proper, the lecturer 

 expressed his views in the following words : 



" We can only state that its molar teeth are typically human, 

 its muscle-markings are such as might be expected, and it was 

 found in the gravel near to the skull. The probabilities are 

 therefore in favour of its natural association. If so, it is reason- 

 able to suppose that the skull will prove to be that of a very 

 lowly kind, not that of a highly civilised man. I have accord- 

 ingly made a new study of the specimen . . . and find that the 

 only alteration necessary in our original model is a very slight 

 displacement of the occipital and right parietal bones." 



Finally, he sums up by remarking that "in Eoanthropus we 

 have a human being with a distinct remnant of ape-like ancestors 

 in his jaws ; and in the human mandible, probably of the same 

 period, found near Heidelberg, we have a slightly more advanced 

 stage with teeth which are distinctly human. When the Plio- 

 cene forerunners of these species are found, they will probably 

 fall rather into the category of apes than of man. 



" Next, in connection with the remarks I have made about 

 the evolution of the brain in mammals, it is interesting to notice 

 that the brain of Eoanthropus makes a much nearer approach to 

 that of modern man than his face. It therefore appears that the 

 excessive development of the brain preceded the loss by the 

 mouth of its functions as a weapon. Increase of intelligence 

 removed the necessity for so much brute force, and the face then 

 became reduced in size, while the familiar weakness of the jaws 

 of man was the result." 



It should be added that in the Geological Magazine for 

 October 191 3 (decade 5, vol. x. pp. 433-4) Dr. Smith Woodward 

 published a short supplementary note on Eoanthropus, with a 

 figure of the amended restoration of the whole skull, together 

 with one of the lower jaw containing the newly found canine in 

 position. 



Many years ago Dr. Ameghino described a small monke}^ 

 from the Patagonian Miocene under the name of Homun- 

 culus, and considered that it showed affinity to the human 

 phylum. Mr. H. Bluntschli {Verh. Anat. Ges. 191 3, pp. 33-43) 

 has now shown that Homunculus, together probably with 

 Anthropops and Pitheculus, is nearly allied to the existing 

 South American douroucolis (Nyctipithecus). On the other hand, 



