Man and Monkeys 135 



So much for this most modern method of classification, which 

 has probably found adherents because it would deliver us from the 

 relationship to apes which many people so much dislike. In contrast to 

 it we have the second class of special hypotheses of descent, which keeps 

 strictly to the nearest structural relationships. This is the only basis 

 that justifies the drawing up of a special hypothesis of descent. If 

 this fundamental proposition be recognised, it will be admitted that 

 the doctrine of special descent upheld by Haeckel, and set forth in 

 Darwin's Descent of Man, is still valid to-day. In the genealogical 

 tree, man's place is quite close to the anthropoid apes ; these again 

 have as their nearest relatives the lower Old World monkeys, and 

 their progenitors must be sought among the less differentiated 

 Platyrrhine monkeys, whose most important characters have been 

 handed on to the present day New World monkeys. How the 

 different genera are to be arranged within the general scheme in- 

 dicated depends in the main on the classificatory value attributed 

 to individual characters. This is particularly true in regard to 

 Pithecanthropus, which I consider as the root of a branch which 

 has sprung from the anthropoid ape root and has led up to man ; 

 the latter I have designated the family of the Hominidae. 



For the rest, there are, as we have said, various possible ways of 

 constructing the narrower genealogy within the limits of this branch 

 including men and apes, and these methods will probably continue 

 to change with the accumulation of new facts. Haeckel himself has 

 modified his genealogical tree of the Primates in certain details since 

 the publication of his GenereUe Morphologie in 1866, but its general 

 basis remains the same 1 . All the special genealogical trees drawn 

 up on the lines laid down by Haeckel and Darwin — and that of 

 Dubois may be specially mentioned — are based, in general, on the 

 close relationship of monkeys and men, although they may vary in 

 detail. Various hypotheses have been formulated on these lines, 

 with special reference to the evolution of man. Pithecanthropus 

 is regarded by some authorities as the direct ancestor of man, by 

 others as a side-track failure in the attempt at the evolution of man. 

 The problem of the monophyletic or polyphyletic origin of the human 

 race has also been much discussed. Sergi 2 inclines towards the 

 assumption of a polyphyletic origin of the three main races of man, 

 the African primitive form of which has given rise also to the gorilla 

 and chimpanzee, the Asiatic to the Orang, the Gibbon, and Pithecan- 

 thropus. Kollmann regards existing human races as derived from 

 small primitive races (pigmies), and considers that Homo primi- 

 genius must have arisen in a secondary and degenerative manner. 



1 HaeckeFs latest genealogical tree is to be found in his most recent work, Unsere 

 Ahnenreihe. Jena, 1908. 



2 Sergi, G. Europa, 1908. 



~\c%\ \ 



