On the Hand and Foot in Man and Apes. 155 



r/uiiras serenus, Plotz (1587), = Entheus eumehis, Cvam., $. 



Loc. F 



Pyrrhopyge porus, I'liitz (1595) =MimonicuIes piti/usa,llew. 

 Colombia. 



„ jnirinut, I'lotz (1597), Belougs to Yanguna. Not repre- 



Surinam. sented in the G. k S. coll. 



„ leucoloma, Erscb. Very near P. seryins, Iloptf., but 



(1599), Peru. ' with the white patch on the 

 underside of the secondaries 



■■ extendin"' further inward. 



XXV. — Function and Form with Reference to the Hand and 

 Foot in Man and Apes. By DUNCAN C. L. FlTZWILLTAMS, 

 M.D., Ch.AJ., F.R.C.SS. Ed. & Eng., Demonstrator of 

 Anatomy, King's College, London; Casualty Officer, 

 Hospital for Sick Children, Great Orraond Street. 



[Plate v.] 



Through the kindness of Professor Cunningham I was 

 enabled to carry out a systematic anatomical study of a gibbon 

 {IJylohates agilis) in his possession. In this paper 1 wish to 

 deal only with the description of the hands and feet of the 

 animal, and incidentally to draw attention to tlie differences 

 existing in the hands and feet of man. 



The orang-utangs, chimpanzees, gorillas, and gibbons are 

 the four great tribes which form the anthropoid family. The 

 larger members of the family resemble man in stature and 

 outward form more nearly than the gibbon, but on closer 

 investigation the gibbon presents certain characteristics which 

 have led many eminent anatomists to place this ape next to 

 man in the scale of animal life. With the single exception 

 of man, the gibbon can assume the erect posture more 

 completely than any other animal. 



The Hand. 



The hand of the gibbon (PL V. fig. 1, A) is remarkable for 

 the great length it possesses in comparison with its width. 

 Measured from the crease in front of the wrist to the tip 

 of the longest linger the length amounts to 15^ cm., but the 

 breadth of the widest part, just above the root of the little 

 finger, does not exceed '6^ cm. The length is due to the 

 development both of the metacarpals and phalanges. 



The thenar and hypothenar eminences are small ; indeed, 

 so feeble is the development of the latter that it can scarcely 



