824 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



centa, indicating a violent separation in this important character- 

 istic of the lemurs from the other primates. M. Vogt, while not 

 attaching so great importance to this feature as M. Broca, brought 

 other objections, based on diversities in the formation and con- 

 nections of the jaw-bones, the structure of the orbits, the position 

 of the OS lacrymalis, the bare cerebellum of the lemurs, the 

 shape of the uterus, the presence of inguinal mammse in addition 

 to the pectoral mammse, and other points. Hence he concluded 

 that there was no relation between the prosimians and the apes, 

 and consequently none with man ; and that, except the opposable 

 thumbs, which occur also with the marsupials, the prosimians 

 have no anatomical character in common with' the monkeys. 

 " Therefore it would be derogatory to all the principles of positive 

 science to rank the prosimians among the probable ancestors of 

 the human race." These objections are certainly important from 

 the morphological point of view, but they do not oblige us to re- 

 ject the lemurs from the order of primates. None of these di- 

 vergent characteristics are contradictory of the idea that they are 

 the first draught, the beginning, of the latter order. The charac- 

 teristics drawn from the nails and the opposable thumbs press the 

 others out of the view of the general idea which has directed the 

 choice of the word primates. 



The lemurs are the lowest family in the order of primates, and 

 are further removed from the other families than the latter are 

 from one another. The distance from the anthropoids to man is 

 quite as great, as I have demonstrated in previous lectures, on the 

 evidence of the volume of the brain and the cranial characters 

 which proceed from it ; and yet I class man among the primates. 

 In strictness we might detach the lemurs and make a special or- 

 der of them, the genealogical relation of which with the monkeys 

 would not be thus prejudiced ; but then we should be obliged to 

 do the same with man. M. Vogt is, nevertheless, not consistent, 

 and retains the word prosimians as the synonym of lemurs. 



I have already insisted, in previous lectures, upon the relations 

 of the lemurs with the marsupials, and more particularly with the 

 phalangers. The insectivora come next in order. All authors, 

 from Cuvier to M. Vogt, have mentioned the resemblance between 

 the teeth of lemurs and those of insect-eaters. Their teeth, says 

 Cuvier, arranging his orders downward, from man to the lower 

 mammals, " begin to exhibit sharp tubercles gearing into one an- 

 other as in the insectivora." " The Galegos," we find a little fur- 

 ther on, " have the insectivorous teeth and regimen of the other 

 lemurs. M. Vogt says that the dentition of the tarsiers is like 

 that of the insectivora ; and Prof. Huxley observes that the lobes 

 of the molars are habitually very far in front, as in the insec- 

 tivora. Gratiolet classed the lemurs with the insectivora. Deriva- 



