6o SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 83 



specimens were all fragments, except in the case of smaller bones or 

 individual teeth. The second was that the fragments as a rule were 

 considerably water-worn of old, and that many of the specimens 

 appeared water polished. And there was a great mixture of forms. 

 All of which indicates, it seems, secondary deposition, in other words 

 deposition of bones that already have been dissociated, carried, and 

 washed more or less by the stream. Judging from this as well as 

 from the results of the Dubois and Selenka excavations, it would 

 seem that the fossiliferous deposits at Trinil would have to be 

 regarded as essentially secondary deposits ; though this would not 

 have made an occasional inclusion of whole parts or even whole 

 bodies impossible. 



THE LATEST CONTRIBUTION TO THE STUDY OF THE REMAINS 



While the writer was completing the above, a new publication on the 

 Pithecanthropus came to hand in the form of an extended memoir 

 on the remains by Dr. Hans Weinert, of Munich.^ The author, to 

 whom we owe the final restoration and description of the skull of the 

 Homo monstericnsis youth, has been given the opportunity by Dubois 

 of studying the original specimens, more particularly the skullcap 

 and the teeth, and of taking very detailed measurements, which he 

 now makes available. 



For the many details of Dr. Weinert's work, it will be necessary 

 to consult the original. The main conclusions may, however, be sum- 

 marized as follows : 



Much of the problem relating to the Pithecanthropus the author 

 regards for the present, and before any new finds are forthcoming, 

 as unsolvable. He is inclined to separate the lower jaw from the 

 consideration of the rest of the specimens. It is quite possible that it 

 may have belonged to the form Pithecanthropus but a decisive con- 

 clusion on this point is not possible. 



As to the six Trinil specimens, the conclusion as to whether 

 they all belonged to the same individual or form, also remains 

 still open. As to the skullcap, this assumes morphologically a stem 

 between the chimpanzee and the Neanderthal Man, and in such a way 

 that it inclines nearer to the human side. As to the question whether 

 the morphological sequence may also be extended to a phylogenetic 

 one it may only be said (pp. 541-542) that the Trinil skullcap shows 



* Weinert, Hans, Pithecanthropus crcctus. Z. Anat. u. Entwicklungsgesch., 

 Vol. 87, pp. 522-524, I fig., 1928. 



