66 THE PROBLEM OF EVOLUTION 



There are other rudimentary organs of less import- 

 ance, to which I need only refer ; such are the wasted 

 muscles of the ear and face. Our earliest ancestors 

 may have lived under conditions which forced them 

 to use the ear muscles much more than we do. I 

 acknowledge that in many ways it is difficult to 

 account for the rudimentary organs, but I maintain 

 that there is no conclusive evidence of their phylo- 

 genetic significance. But possibly some one will 

 reproach me with having failed to mention the chief 

 proof of man's descent from beasts, viz. their blood- 

 relationship. I am now about to discuss this point. 



We have to distinguish two zoological theories, both 

 put forward by those who regard man as descended 

 from beasts. According to one, man is directly 

 related to the higher apes ; according to the other, 

 he is not directly related to them, but only remotely 

 connected through some ancestor, from whom both 

 men and apes are descended. 



The theory of the direct relationship between man 

 and the anthropoid apes was upheld by Karl Vogt 

 in his day, and more recently by Haeckel, and by 

 numerous modern zoologists. Selenka regarded it 

 as definitely proved, when he had established the 

 resemblance in the formation of the Placenta 

 bidiscoidalis, as it exists in man and in the higher 

 apes. 



But other evidence is commonly adduced, which 

 is based upoi? the resemblance that exists between 

 human blood and that of the higher apes. In- 



