THE ORIGIN OF THE HUMAN BODY 325 



only in the degree that Polynesians, Mongolians, and Hot- 

 tentots differ from them, that is, within the limits of the one 

 and only human species. Other opinions might be cited (cf. 

 Hrdlicka, Smithson. Inst. Rpt. for 1913, p. 518, and H. 

 Muckermann's "Darwinism and Evolution," 1906, pp. 63, 64) , 

 but the number and variety of the foregoing bear ample 

 testimony to the uncertain and ambiguous character of the 

 remains. 



The skull is that of a low, perhaps, degenerate, type of hu- 

 manity. The facial and basal parts of the skull are missing. 

 Hence we are not sure of the prognathism shown in McGregor's 

 reconstruction. The skull has, however, a retreating forehead, 

 prominent brow ridges and a sloping occiput. Yet, in spite of 

 the fact that it is of a very low type, it is indubitably human. 

 "In no sense," says Huxley, "can the Neanderthal bones be 

 regarded as the remains of a human being intermediate be- 

 tween men and apes." ("Evidence of Man's Place in Nature," 

 Humb. ed., p. 253.) D. Schaaffhausen makes the same con- 

 fession — "In making this discovery," he owns, "we have not 

 found the missing link." ("Der Neanderthaler Fund," p. 49.) 

 The cranial capacity of the Neanderthal skull, as we have 

 seen, is 1,236 c.cm., which is practically the same as that of 

 the average European woman of to-day. In size it exceeds, 

 but in shape it resembles, the dolichocephalic skull of the 

 modern Australian, being itself a dolichoeephalic cranium. 

 Huxley called attention to this resemblance, and Macnamara, 

 after comparing it with a large number of such skulls, reaches 

 this conclusion: "The average cranial capacity of these se- 

 lected 36 skulls (namely, of Australian and Tasmanian blacks) 

 is even less than that of the Neanderthal group, but in shape 

 some of these two groups are closely ^elated." {Archiv. 

 fiir Anthrofpologie, XXVIII, 1903, p. 358.) Schwalbe's opin- 

 ion that the Neanderthal Man constitutes a distinct species, 

 though its author has since abandoned it (cf. Wasmann's 

 "Modern Biology," Eng. ed., 1910, p. 506), will be considered 

 later, viz. after we have discussed the Men of Spy, Krapina 



