330 
inion line, is greater than in most modern men, viz. 31,6°/, of the 
total height of the basion to the cranial apex. This is considerably 
less than in the La Chapelle skull (39,3 °/,), and not much more 
than is usually found in Australian skulls, e.g. in the Australian 
skull of Fig. 5 it is 27,7 °/,, in the Australoid Wadjak I 28 °/,. 
The mastoid process is, indeed, smaller than in most Australians, in 
my opinion in consequence of the preponderating significance as nuchal 
muscle which the sterno-cleido-mastoideus obtains in the mechanism of 
the flattened skull, but considerably larger than in the neandertalians. 
The bones of the skeleton found with the skull present the sapiens 
type — the tibia because of its slenderness, the articular extremities 
of the femur in that they lack the bulky character of those of the 
Neandertal Man. 
All things considered I cannot doubt that Homo rhodesiensis be- 
longs to the type of Homo sapiens. He exhibits this type decidedly 
in the most primitive, in the Australian form; he is still somewhat 
more platycephalic and the torus is even more pronounced than is 
found in Australians, who already distinguish themselves in these 
points from the other living races of Man. With greater justice even 
than the Australoid Wadjak Man and the Talgai-Australian can the 
Rhodesian lay claim to the name of proto-Australian. The characte- 
ristics mentioned are certainly in relation with the exceeding largeness 
of the masticatory apparatus and the heaviness of the facial part of 
the head resulting from it. They may be accounted for by similar 
mechanical causes as in the Siamang in contradistinetion with the 
small gibbon species, the Chimpanzee in contradistinction with the 
Orang utan, partially also similar as in the Neandertal Man, and 
thus corroborate the above considerations. 
The primitive character of this Australoid human skull appears 
from the heaviness of the facial part, the splanchnocranium in com- 
parison with the cerebral part, the neurocranium. Calculated to 
equal area of the brain (the two-third power of the capacity), the 
Rhodesian has a sixteenth larger palatal area than Kegitn’s very 
large-jawed Tasmanian '), with 3680 mm.’ palatal area and 1350 em.’ 
cranial capacity, about a sixth larger than the Australian compared 
in Fig. 5 (calculated from 3100 mm.’ palatal area, derived from the 
relative length and breadth of the dental arcades), and between a fifth 
and a fourth larger than Wadjak I. It is very important that here, 
as in the Wadjak Man and the Neandertal Man (incl. the Heidelberg 
Man) retrogression of the masticatory apparatus more than increase of 
the brain indicates the direction in which the genus Homo has developed. 
1) Few Australians reach 3600 mm”, certainly also few Tasmanians. 
