December 29, 1923] 



NA TURE 



933 



Letters to the Editor. 



77/1? Editor does not hold himself responsible for 

 opinions expressed by his correspondents. Neither 

 can he undertake to return., nor to correspond with 

 the writers of rejected manuscripts intended for 

 this or any other part of Nature. No notice is 

 take?t of anonymous communications.^ 



The Gorilla's Foot. 



With regard to Mr. Akeley's cast of a gorilla foot 

 iiscussed in Nature of November 24, p. 758, I note 

 Uiat Sir Ray Lankester did not wait until he had seen 

 the cast which we sent to the British Museum (Natural 

 History) but has again made the following charges : — 

 (i) The picture of the cast of the foot in Mr. Akeley's 

 book " In Brightest Africa," p. 242, gave a mis- 

 leading or distorted view of the cast and was in effect 

 an example of bad photography. (2) The gorilla foot 

 as represented by the cast differed in appearance from 

 all previous pictures of and statements about the 

 gorilla's foot and was misleading, chiefly because it 

 did not show the great toe in a divergent position ; 

 it also differed in appearance from the photograph of 

 another gorilla's foot figured by Akeley in the same 

 book (p. 231), in which the great toe was shown in the 

 flexed and abducted position. (3) Therefore Akeley 

 had himself supplied the refutation of his claim that 

 his gorilla's foot was different from any other yet 

 discovered. (4) That it is " highly improbable " that 

 Akeley's photograph of the cast " correctly represents 

 the foot of a normal species or variety of gorilla." 



As to (i), I have already stated (Nature, Novem- 

 ber 24) that the photograph published in Mr. Akeley's 

 ^ 3ok gave a " very fair " view of the cast in question, 

 id after a careful re-examination of the facts I will 

 Jd nothing to that statement except that Mr. 

 celey has a deservedly high reputation based upon 

 my years of experience both in photographing and 

 making anatomical casts, and needs no warning 

 jm any one as to the precautions to be observed 

 in such work. 



As to (2), neither Mr. Akeley nor I ever asserted that 

 the cast in question showed the hallux in the position 

 that it probably assumed %vhen the animal's weight 

 rested upon it. I quoted Mr. Akeley's statement 

 that the cast was taken in the relaxed condition of 

 the foot after rigor mortis had passed away, and I also 

 noted that the hallux could no doubt be more or less 

 abducted. The cast was made within twenty-four 

 hours after death, in a cool, moist climate. The foot 

 was cut off from the leg. the muscles and ligaments 

 being relaxed, and was placed in a hollow in the ground 

 with the sole facing upward. The foot and its digits 

 were not posed but were allowed to assume the relaxed 

 position. After being lightly soaped a thin coating 

 of plaster was then applied and allowed to set, in order 

 to prevent distortion by the weight of the plaster. 

 No other outside pressure was exerted in any direction 

 when the plaster was poured around. The whole 

 operation was conducted with exceptional care to 

 avoid distortion. 



The outstanding feature of Mr. Akeley's cast is that 

 shows that in the relaxed condition the hallux 

 assumed a position of lesser divergence, so that it was 

 more nearly in line with the other digits. In this 

 connexion it is pertinent to state that Dr. D. J. 

 Morton is now studying the anatomy of the foot of 

 another one of Mr. Akeley's adult gorillas, and finds 

 that the arrangements of the internal cuneiform and 

 first metatarsal bones are such that it is possible for 

 the hallux to be drawn into the position shown in Mr. 

 Akeley's cast. Dr. Morton has also found that in Mr. 

 keley's, as well as in other adult specimens, the distal 



NO. 2826, VOL. I 12] 



ends of the metatarsals of all the digits are twisted 

 upon the shafts at different degrees in such a way as 

 to make the volar surfaces face more directly down- 

 ward, whereas in infant gorillas the volar surface of 

 the hallux is tilted toward that of the other digits, 

 this arrangement being still more pronounced in the 

 chimpanzee. After extensive comparison, Morton 

 concludes that the infant gorilla foot retains more of 

 the primitive arboreal characteristics, while the adult 

 gorilla foot shows numerous man-like adaptations 

 not found in the chimpanzee. 



As to (3), Mr. Akeley never claimed that his 

 gorilla's feet were different from all others previously 

 described. Such may yet prove to be the case in 

 regard to the detailed proportions and minor charac- 

 ters of the foot, but it has not yet been asserted by 

 either Mr. Akeley or myself. 



As to (4), the original foot from which the cast was 

 made has not yet been compared minutely with the 

 other gorilla feet collected in the same general region, 

 but after a preliminary comparison there seems no 

 reason to brand the individual as representing an 

 " abnormal species or variety." 



In brief, Mr. Akeley's cast can be misleading only 

 to those who read into it more than was claimed for it, 

 or who do not realise that a gorilla's hallux may 

 assume a position other than that figured in the 

 previous literature of the subject. A carefully made 

 cast of this kind is of greater scientific value than any 

 photograph of the same object, because it represents 

 the object in the round and without photographic 

 distortion. A good cast, such as this unquestionably 

 is, gives indisputable evidence of fact. 



In conclusion. Sir Ray Lankester's statements in 

 his book, " Great and Small Things," about the signi- 

 ficance of the differences between human and anthro- 

 poid feet, suggest that he is one of several eminent 

 persons (including Mr. H. G. Wells) who do not see 

 that the human foot is an anatomical palimpsest, in 

 which the later record of a long terrestrial life is so 

 deeply impressed that it has largely obscured the 

 underlying older record of a previous arboreal stage 

 with a divergent hallux. This is not a " theory " but 

 a well-founded inference from the many facts that are 

 now being examined by Sir Arthur Keith, Dr. Morton, 

 and others. William K. Gregory. 



American Museum of Natural History, 

 New York, December 7. 



Psycho-Analysis and Anthropology. 



Referring to the letters in Nature from Dr. 

 Malinowski (November 3) and Prof. Elliot Smith 

 (November 24) on this subject, I should like to make 

 three remarks. 



(i) While agreeing with all that Prof. Elliot Smith 

 says as to " Totem and Taboo," and that Freud failed 

 to acquaint himself with the essential facts and 

 associations of which he writes, this is by no means 

 the case with all of his disciples, while even in " Totem 

 and Taboo " there is stress laid on the quality of 

 ambivalence in savage belief and custom, which, if I 

 judge rightly, had not previously been sufficiently 

 appreciated by anthropologists. It may be that Prof. 

 Elliot Smith has recognised this in his article in the 

 Monist, which I have not had the opportunity of 

 reading. 



(2) I rather doubt whether time will bear out Prof. 

 Elliot Smith's contempt for typical symbols. Type 

 dreams — that is, identical dreams having the same 

 meaning attributed to them — certainly occur among 

 peoples genetically and culturally remote. Thus, to 

 take an example, quite superficial reading, and the 

 kindness of friends in supplying references, indicates 



