MONKEYS-AFFINITIES AND DISTRIBUTION 183 



gifted with high intelligence, but with a form totally 

 unlike that of man, to have visited the earth before man 

 existed in order to study the various forms of animal life 

 that were found there, we can hardly think he would have 

 placed the monkey tribe so high as we do. He would 

 observe that their whole organisation was specially adapted 

 to an arboreal life, and this specialisation would be rather 

 against their claiming the first rank among terrestrial 

 creatures. Neither in size, nor strength, nor beauty, 

 would they compare with many other forms, while in 

 intelligence they would not surpass, even if they equalled, 

 the horse, the elephant, or the beaver. The carnivora, as 

 a whole, would certainly be held to surpass them in the 

 exquisite perfection of their physical structure, while the 

 flexible trunk of the elephant, combined with his vast 

 strength and admirable sagacity, would probably gain for 

 him the first rank in the animal creation. 



But if this would have been a true estimate, the mere 

 fact that the ape is our nearest relation does not neces- 

 sarily oblige us to come to any other conclusion. Man is 

 undoubtedly the most perfect of all animals, but he is so 

 solely in respect of characters in which he diffhs from all 

 the monkey tribe — the easily erect posture, the perfect 

 freedom of the hands from all part in locomotion, the 

 large size and complete opposability of the thumb, and 

 the well-developed brain, which enables him fully to utilise 

 these combined physical advantages. The monkeys have 

 none of these ; and without them the amount of resem- 

 blance they have to us is no advantage, and confers no 

 rank. We are biassed by the too exclusive consideration 

 of the man-like apes. If these did not exist the remain- 

 ing monkeys could not be thereby deteriorated as to then- 

 organisation or lowered in their zoological position, but it 

 is doubtful if we should then class them so high as we 

 now do. We might then dwell more on their resemblances 

 to lower types — to rodents, to insectivora, and to mar- 

 supials, and should hardly rank the hideous baboon above 

 the graceful leopard or stately stag. The true conclusion 

 appears to be, that the combination of external characters 

 and internal structure which exists in the monkeys, is that 



