1889. | NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 135 
and lived at the time of Hlephas antiquus and Rhinoceros 
Merckii,—is unknown to us as regards his ethnic character ; as 
are also the manufacturers of the stone implements in the plio- 
cene of Monte-aperto, and in the upper miocene of Italy and 
the Tagus valley in Portugal, and of the lower miocene of The- 
nay and Puy-Conray in France. 
**Tf the most ancient ethnic type known to us could assume 
modifications during the Quaternary sufficient to give rise to races 
so different as those of Cro-Magnon and Furfooz,—losing so 
many inferior features and acquiring higher ones in their stead, 
. . . —there is no difficulty in conceiving that pliocene man was 
lower in type than the man of Spy. . . . The distance between 
this last type and the modern anthropoid apes is certainly enor- 
mous ; it is less between the same man (of Spy) and the Dryopith- 
ecus (middle miocene of Saint-Gaudens). . . . But the ethnic 
type of lower Quaternary man had to advance a long way in order 
to assume the character of the present races, if indeed he was 
their ancestor.” 
These views will not pass without challenge ; yet the results 
of the authors’ careful measurements are well deserving of at- 
tention. It is worth while to remember that the Neanderthal 
skull, when first discovered, was regarded as even more pithecoid 
than these Belgian crania are now described to be; and much 
caution is needed in generalizing from such evidence. In regard 
to the Engis skull, another celebrated relic of the same age, classed 
with that of Neanderthal, Prof. Huxley goes so far as to say 
that it might have belonged to a philosopher.’ 
In view of such facts and such wide differences of opinion, it 
is well to wait somewhat before adopting the views of the Belgian 
scholars about the man of Spy. Both in the Old World and the 
New, skulls are known which, if found under circumstances 
indicating high antiquity, would be classed with these early 
Quaternary types. Another point to be noted is the fact that 
photographic representations of crania appear lower than geo- 
metrical (orthogonal) projections, and thus tend to exaggerate 
the peculiarities that are so much dwelt upon. [A camera- 
lucida outline by Huxley and a geometrical projection by 
1 The first impressions regarding these early skulls have been strik- 
_ ingly modified by later researches. Darwin called the Neanderthal 
skull well developed and capacious, though at first it was claimed to be 
so very degraded in type. Without going so far as this, Virchow and 
others have shown that crania of similar character are not so rare 
either in ancient or even modern times, in that part of Europe, par- 
ticularly in Friesland; and other anthropologists have asserted that 
they had noticed heads of similar general type among people in various 
countries of Europe. 
