A Transitional Form between Man and the Apes. 17 
therefore, justifies the conclusion drawn from the third molar that the teeth 
of the relative individual were still of the Ape type. 
As to the dimension of the crown, the two teeth are neither too small nor too 
large, in proportion to the size of the skull, to admit of these remains belonging 
to a large Anthropoid Ape. In female Hylobates I find the proportion between 
the breadth of the skull and the transverse diameter of the second upper molar 
x Cercopithecide THylobates Sinia Homo Anthropopithecus eek [oe ES o 2 
| / r= 8 
28 
So 
im 
2s 
AE 
Pithecanthropus 
oO 
a 
° 
=) 
= 
Ay 
Pliohylobates 
(Eppelsheim) 
Pliopithecus 
= 
Prot- Dryopithecus & 
hylohates a) 
= 
Pro- 
cercopjthecus 
oS 
=I 
° 
S) 
i) 
Ss 
Archipithecus 
Fic. 3.—Genealogical tree of Man and the Apes. 
(which is always less variable than the third) exactly equal to that in Pithec- 
anthropus; in male Hylobates, and even in the females of the Chimpanzee, the 
second upper molar is relatively somewhat larger. For human proportions, how- 
ever, the dimensions are rather large. I only found in one of the maxillar bones 
of Spy a second molar having exactly corresponding dimensions of the crown. 
But such large and strongly divergent fangs of the roots, I believe, are never to 
be found in human molars. 
TRANS, ROY, DUB. SOC., N.S. VOL. VI., PART I. D 
