THE ORIGIN AND ANTIQUITY OF MAN 43 



the same in all ruiidamental regards. In all essential 

 • features tlie sets of bono parts are closely similar.^ 

 Now if we turn to struetiires other than the skeleton, we 

 find there are some remarkable similarities in certain 

 minor details. For example, we think of hairiness of 

 the apes as distinguishing them rather sharply from man, 

 but in reality the whole of the human body is covered 

 with hair, except tlie palms of the hands, the soles of the 

 feet, and the backs of certain terminal joints; these 

 same portions are hairless in apes. Moreover, the slant 

 of the hair in the several regions of the body, notably 

 on the arms, is the same that we observe in apes." In 

 apes and man there is reminiscence of the ancestral 

 functional tail — the coccyx, in fact, a reduced tail.'^ Our 

 ears are slightly, if at all movable, yet we retain in a 

 vestigial condition the muscles which in some ancestor 

 must have served to move the ears.^ The vermiform ap- 

 l^endix is less developed in man than in the apes, and is 

 relatively larger in the human foetus than in adult man. 

 Moreover, at the inner angle of the human eye is a fold 

 of tissue which has little or no meaning unless it be ex- 

 plained as a remnant of that third eyelid which in many 

 lower vertebrates, for example, hhds, is greatly devel- 

 oped and can be drawn over the whole eyeball inside the 

 outer eyelids. Unless we regard these vestigial struc- 

 tures in man as the traces of an earlier condition through 

 which our ancestors have passed, they have no intelli- 

 gent meaning. 



The study of embryology reveals many points of re- 

 semblance between the liuiii;ni embryo, in the earlier 



5 Romanes, op. cif., pp. 74-93; Metcalf, op. cit.. pp. 1G7-172. 



^ See figure 8. 



7 See Hguic 9. s See figuiu 10. 



