452 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 192 8 



LuscHAN, F. VON. [Remarks on Pithecanthropus.] Vcrh. Berl. Gesellsch. 

 Anthrop., Zeitsclir. fiir Etbnologie, vol. 27, p. 81, 1895. 



The skullcap does not resemble that of the gibbon more than it does 



that of other forms. The femur resembles in general that of man, but, if 



correctly figured, would indicate a greater pelvic breadth than in modern 



man. No reason to doubt that femur and skullcap came from one 



individual. 



Lydekkeb, Richaed. Review of " Pithecanthropus Erectus, eine Menschenaehn- 



liche Uebergansform aus Java " by E. Dubois. Nature, vol. 51, p. 291, 



January 24, 1895. 



" With regard to the skull . . . there appears every reason to re- 

 gard it as that of a microcephalous idiot of an unusually elongated type ". 



Maib, R. Ueber die Bregmagegend und die Lage des Bregma mit besonderer 

 Beriicksichtigung des Pithecanthropus. Zeitschr. Morph. Anthrop., Stuttgart, 

 vol. 22, pp. 435-480, 1 pi., 20 text figs., 1922. 



Manouveier, L. Discussion du "Pithecanthropus erectus" comme precurseur 

 presume de I'homme. Bull. Soc. Anthrop. Paris, ser. 4, vol. G, pp. 12-47, 1895. 



The skullcap, tooth and femur can not be regarded with certainty as 

 having pertained to one individual or one species, but there is no theo- 

 retical impossibility in such a view. Impossible to demonstrate either a 

 human or simian origin of the fossils. The question must remain open 

 pending further discoveries. 



Manouv'Kier, L. Deuxieme etude sur le "Pithecanthropus erectus" comme 

 precurseur presume de I'homme. Bull. Soc. Anthrop. Paris, ser. 4, vol. 6, 

 pp. 553-651, 1895. 



Concludes, after direct examination of the specimens, that all pertained 

 to one individual, a representative of an authropomorph race approaching 

 the lowest living human races and the race of Spy on the one hand and 

 the anthropoid apes on the other, in such a manner that, until there is 

 proof to the contrary, we may regard the " missing link " as found. 



MANOtrviiiEK, L. Le Pithecanthropus erectus et la theorie transformiste. Revue 



" Scientiflque, ser. 4, vol. 5, pp. 289-299. Mar. 7, 1896. 



MANOiJ\TiiER, L. Reponse aux objections contre le Pithecanthropus. Bull. Soc. 



Anthrop. Paris, ser. 4, vol. 7, pp. 396-460, 1890. 

 Manouvrier, L. Quatorzleme conference annuelle transformiste. Le " Pithecan- 

 thropus erectus " et I'origine de FHomme. Bull. Soc. Anthrop. Paris, ser. 4, 



vol. 7, pp. 467-4;3, 1896. 

 Manouvrier. L. On Pithecanthropus erectus. Amer. Journ. Sei., ser. 4, vol. 4, 



pp. 213-234. September, 1S97. Translation, by MacCurdy, of parts of three 



articles. 

 Marsh, O. C. On the Pithecanthropus erectus, Dubois, from Java. Amer. 



Journ. Sci., ser. 3, vol. 49, pp. 144-147, 3 figs, (from Dubois), February, 1895. 

 Marsh, O. C. On the Pithecanthropus erectus, from the Tertiary of Java. 



Am. Journ. Sci., ser. 4, vol. 1, pp. 475-482, June, 1896. 



Describes discovery. He saw the specimens at Leiden In 1895. Convinced 

 that the deposits were Tertiary and that all parts came from one indi- 

 vidual. Agrees with the conclusions of Dubois. 



Martin, R. Kritische Bedenken gegen den Pithecanthropus erectus Dubois. 

 Globus, vol. 67, pp. 213-217, March, 1895. 



The remains are human ; skull of the Neanderthal type ; wisdom tooth 

 wholly human ; femur human. 



