70 



with a straight, as if incised margin, not showing the coloured 

 lining membrane when the mouth is shut. The chin is short 

 and receding, the muzzle very prominent. The eyelids with eye- 

 lashes, the eyes wider apart than in the orang or chimpanzee; 

 no denned eyebrows; but the hairy scalp continued to the super- 

 orbital ridge. The ears are smaller in proportion than in man, 

 much smaller than in the chimpanzee ; but the structure of the 

 auricle is more like that of man. On a direct front view of the 

 face, the ears are on the same parallel with the eyes 1 . The huge 

 canines in the male give a most formidable aspect to the beast : 

 they were not fully developed in the younger and entire specimen, 

 now mounted. The profile of the trunk describes a slight con- 

 vexity from the nape to the sacrum, there being no inbending at 

 the loins, which seem wanting, the thirteenth pair of ribs being 

 close to the 'labrum ilii.' The chest is of great capacity; the 

 shoulders very wide across; the pectoral regions are slightly 

 marked, and shew a pair of nipples placed as in the chimpanzee 

 and human species. The abdomen is somewhat prominent, both 

 before and at the sides. The pelvis relatively broader than in 

 other apes. 



The chief deviations from the human structure are seen in the 

 limbs, which are of great power, the upper ones prodigiously strong. 

 The arm from below the short deltoid prominence preserves its 

 thickness to the condyles ; a uniform circumference prevails in the 

 fore-arm ; the leg increases in thickness from below the knee to the 

 ankle. There is no 'calf of the leg. These characters of the limbs 

 are due to the general absence of those partial muscular enlarge- 

 ments which impart the graceful varying curves to the outlines of 

 the limbs in man. Yet they depend rather on excess, than defect, 

 of development of the carneous as compared with the tendinous 

 parts of the limb-muscles, which thus continue of almost the same 

 size from their origin to their insertion, with a proportionate gain 

 of strength to the beast. 



The difference in the length of the upper limbs between the 

 gorilla and man is but little in comparison with the trunk; it 

 appears greater through the arrest of development of the lower 

 limbs. Yery significant of the closer anthropoid affinities of the 

 gorilla is the superior length of the arm (humerus) to the fore- 

 arm, as compared with the proportions of those parts in the chim 



1 On the Anthropoid Apes : Proceedings, R. I. Yol. n. (1855) p. 26, and in 

 the Transactions of the Zoological Society, 1848. 



