256 THE AMERICAN MUSEUM JOURNAL 



with much uncertainty as to which if any of the lower mammals were 

 ancestral to them. It is now reasonably clear that they must have been 

 derived from early Eocene or Cretaceous ancestors related to the Tupaiid 

 family of insectivora. The next step will be to confirm or modif}' this 

 theoretical conclusion by the evidence of fossils showing the various stages 

 of transition from the higher Primates of the later Tertiary through the 

 early lemuroid Primates into insectivorous ancestors related to the tree 

 shrew. The materials for this purpose lie at hand, we believe, in the 

 American Museum collections. 



As the result of ten years' expeditions in charge of Associate Curator 

 Granger to the Eocene formations of the western states, a great collection 

 of fossil mammals has been brought together, peculiarly rich in the remains 

 of smaller species, and containing numerous specimens of lemuroid Primates 

 and of Insectivora. Some of the latter appear to be related to the tree 

 shrews and preliminary studies indicate various transitional characters 

 between the two groups. So far they confirm notably the conclusions of 

 Elliot Smith. The more thorough study of these collections should serve 

 to clear up to a great extent the early history and derivation of the order 

 of Mammalia to which man belongs. 



To confirm thus the deductions of comparati^'e anatomy by the facts of 

 palaeontology is a peculiarly pleasant and inspiring task. Less congenial, 

 but no less necessary is the critical examination and disproof if erroneous of 

 other and conflicting theories, by careful sifting of the evidence upon which 

 they are based. To such a task has Dr. Ales Hrdlicka of the United States 

 National Museum addressed himself, in his review of the evidence which 

 has been brought forward by the late Dr. Florentino Ameghino for the 

 South American ancestry and evolution of man. The writer of this notice 

 has elsewhere expressed his high appreciation of Dr. Ameghino's ability 

 and services to science, while intimating disagreement with many of his 

 theoretical conclusions. Dr. Hrdlicka, after careful study upon the spot 

 of all the evidence brought forward by Ameghino in support of his favorite 

 theory, comes to the conclusion that none of it can be regarded as indicating 

 a very high antiquity of the human race in South America nor as affording 

 any conclusive proof of earlier stages in its evolution. 



The Origin and Antiquity of Man by Professor George F. Wright is a very 

 able and well-written discussion of the evidence on this subject, considered 

 from a viewpoint almost forgotten in modern scientific progress, that of the 

 "reconcilers" (of Genesis and geology). Dr. Wright is a high authority 

 on glacial geology, and his criticisms of the excessive estimates made by 

 some authors of the length of the glacial period and of the anti(iuity of the 

 earliest evidences of man, deserve especial consideration. It is not in- 

 tended to review Dr. Wright's volume here, merely to mention it as a book 

 worth reading whether or not one agrees with its conclusions. 



