300 Pi^UF. G. ELLIOT SMITH OX THE 



Koy. Soc. 1897, pp. 48 & 49). And yet he would have us believe that so experienced 

 and careful an investigator as Dr. Forsyth Major had mistaken for the olfactory bulbs 

 structures Avhich are really the ojjtic nerves ; in other Avords, that he has been unable to 

 distinguish in the cranium between the olfactory fossa :md the o])tic foramen ! This 

 l)rcposterons charge was made at the Berlin Zoological Congress (Tageblatt, p. 4) 

 and repeated in the later memoir (Anat. Anzeiger, 1902, p. 234) in these words :— 

 " Die von Forsyth Major als Nervi optici gedeuteten Bildungen lialte ich fiir Bulhi 

 olfactorii " ; and concerning the true olfactory bulbs and their peduncles, he writes :— 

 " Diese Bildungen scheinen mir darauf zu deuten, dass hier nicht ein Tractus olfactorius 

 von enorraer Liitge vorliegt, sondern dass hier ein Tractionsdivertikel der Dura mater 

 gcbildet wurde, als deren Blutgefasse ich jeue Rauhigkeiten deuten mochte." 



Such statements as these miglit be intelligilde if they had come from one who had 

 studied only the plaster moidd, but Burgkhardt visited the British Museum where he 

 had every opportunity for examining not only the original cast, but also the skull from 

 w liich it was made. That he failed to make use of these opportunities must be evident 

 to anyone wlio has seen the cranium ; for the merest glance is sufficient to show that 

 Dr. Forsyth Major has correctly identified tire optic foramina (or canals) and the 

 olfactory fossae (or rather the common olfactory fossa). 



If further confirmation of his statements are wanted, there is in the British Museum 

 a recently acquired skull of a young Megaladapis wliich supplies the desired evidence. 

 This skull, moreover, amply confirms the pi-edictiou contained in tlie following quotation, 

 A\bich was made by Dr. Forsyth Major long before a skull of tl.e young 3Ie(jaladapis 

 was known : — 



"When describing the skull of Mcyaladapis, I endeavoured to show that its peculiar low condition is 

 not primitive, but pseudo-primitive (Fiirbringer), that is to say, that it has been brought about by a 

 ' retrogressive evolution/ or a i-etrograde metamorphosis, if the last term be preferred. If any further 

 proof were needed for this assertion, it would be furnished by the conformation of the brain, as described 

 at)ovc, i'or I trust that no anatomist will maintain that this was the primitive condition in Lemuroids. 

 It may fairly be predicted that, wlien we come to know the skulls of very young specimens of Mega- 

 ladapis, they will show a much closer approach to the ordinary Lemurid type in the conformation of the 

 l>iain-cavity and its walls, and the gap between the young and the adult in this respect will prove to be 

 wider than ])erhaps in any other known Mammal. However, in the Insectivora and most of all in 

 Centetes, we find also a very great difference between young and adult in the relative size and conforma- 

 tion of the brain (the brain being even absolutely smaller in the old), whilst tiie least divergence is to be 

 lound in Marsupials on the one side, in Man on the other, and this obviously for opposite reasons." — 

 Vroc. Roijal Soc. 181)7, p. 49. 



I might add that the pattern formed by the sidci in the l)rain of this young Mecja- 

 Idilupls is like that of the adult. 



The young Ileyaladapis possessed typical Sylvian and postsylvian sulci, and a faintly 

 marked lateral sulcus wiiich extended farther back than it does in the adult. 



The plump olfactory bulbs do not project to so great an extent as in the adult ; and 

 they are, moreover, separated by a bony septum. 



In these respects the young Meffaladapis more nearly resembles the average Prosimite 

 than the adult does. 



