1333 
even at a very youthful age. Even in the rachitical hydrocephalus, 
in whom the skull under the influence of the increased intracranial 
pressure, may strongly increase in size, this premature ossification 
may manifest itself. So here again we state that with affection of 
one of the endocrine organs, by the removal of a retardation-process, 
a specifically human character is lost, the bones of the skull growing 
together, as is normal for other Primates. 
So now we have met with four specifically human characters 
which are to be considered as persisting foetal characteristics, and 
which, when any of the endocrine organs is affected, can undergo 
alterations in a pithecoid direction: his hairlessness, his orthognathy, 
his white skin, his persisting sutures of the skull. Each of these characters 
is the result of a retardation in the development and this retardative 
influence is removed with degeneration of any of the endocrine 
organs. I could bring under this group another phenomenon, viz. 
the slight development and slender build of the hands and feet in 
man, in contradistinction to those of the anthropomorphous apes. 
If sufficient time were at my disposal I would prove by a somewhat 
detailed anatomical demonstration, that in outward appearance as 
well as in structure, especially the foot of man has retained a foetal 
character. So here again we are confronted with a retardation in 
development. And this retardative influence is bound at the function 
of the Hypophysis. For with affection of this organ this retardative 
influence can again be removed, hand and foot become inelegant 
in shape, grow, and may considerably increase in size. 
We now come to a second group of phenomena, in which that 
retardative influence of the endocrine organs manifests itself in a 
somewhat different manner. 
The genital organs, especially in woman, differ from those 
of the female individuals of the other Primates in a very 
particular way by the presence of the so-called mons veneris and 
Labia majora. These form therefore a specifically human character- 
istie and a typical difference with the apes. The absence of these 
characters in apes is still of some historical importance as far as, 
at the time, Biscnorr the Munich anatomist, adduced this difference, 
as well as the absence of a hymen in apes as a great argument 
against the Darwinian theory about the relation between man 
and the other Primates. Yet Biscnorr was wrong, for though it 
may be true, that the organs mentioned are absent in born indi- 
viduals, if we examine the foetal stages of development of these 
animals, we obtain a different view. The organs mentioned originate 
from a wall-shaped eminence, which is formed round the genital 
