ONE 



£ OF BRAINS, MEN, 



AND FOSSILS 

 K 



Probably no branch of biology is more charged with immoderate, 

 emotive, and misleading statements than that which deals with man himself. 

 It is likely, too, that few branches of human biology are more bedeviled with 

 half truths, selective omissions, and the forthright proclamation of unproved 

 propositions than that which deals with brain size and, especially, the rela- 

 tionship between brain size and function. 



It is not surprising, therefore, that when these two fields converge in 

 the physical anthropology of the brain some interesting departures from 

 scientific methodology and logic occur. Often, indeed, it seems that the 

 techniques of the scientist give way, in greater or lesser measure, to those of 

 the publicist and the propagandist. 



These difficulties characterize the study of brains among living peoples, 

 where material is abundant and where both brains and behavior can be 

 studied directly. When we deal with fossil man the problems are multiplied 

 a hundredfold, for in the main, evidence is scanty and embraces only the size 

 and shape of endocranial casts, or the capacity of the braincase, supplemented 

 by the fossilized signs of behavior, such as material culture. 



Small wonder, therefore, that the history of such studies shows some 

 dramatic swings of the pendulum: from an optimistic extreme at which it 

 has been claimed that functional areas can be identified on endocasts with 

 relative ease, to a gloomy opposite pole at which it has been averred that 

 endocasts can teach us practically nothing at all. 



In this volume I shall try to dissect out the facts about brain size, cranial 

 capacity, and the fossil evidence of behavior. Some of the facts will be culled 

 from the literature; others will be based upon original studies I have been 

 privileged to make upon most of the original fossil hominid crania from 

 Africa, Asia, and Europe. 



At the outset, lest I give the impression of sailing under false colors, let 

 me make clear that I am no neurologist, but rather a simple anatomist, with 

 some anthropological and genetical experience, who is trying to apply himself 

 to the study of ancient as well as modern anatomies. My thinking lacks the 



