894 BUE.EAU OF AMEETCAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 52 



exceeded in some of the modern skulls of whites in the Warsaw col- 

 lections and in general the bone is entirely like that of H. sapiens. 

 "The position of DiprotJiomo as a precursor of man is untenable;" 

 though, should the geologic position claimed for tlie fragment become 

 firmly established, the specimen would have much weight as evidence 

 of the existence of man in the Lower Pliocene. 



The atlas of Monte Hermoso (pp. 31-32) ''is entirely like a 

 human atlas." A comparison showed that in one of the recent 

 atlases of the collection the main features that characterize the 

 Monte Ilermoso specimen are even more accentuated. The dimen- 

 sions of the Monte Hermoso atlas are moderate, such as are found in 

 Homo sapiens. The formation, on the basis of this specimen, of a 

 new species of man, as attempted by Lehmann-Nitsche, is not justified. 



The femur of Monte Hermoso (p. 30) "does not appear to me 

 possibly to proceed from the same individual as the atlas. The 

 specimen is of small size and belonged to a much smaller animal 

 form." 



Stolyhwo mentions two other communications by Pohsh men of 

 science on the Argentine finds,^ neither of wliich, however, appears 

 to contain original observations or to be of special importance. 



The next publications received relating to early man in Argentina 

 were Schwalbe's postscript ^ and Sergi's paper ^ on the subject of the 

 Diprothomo. 



wSchwalbe's paper is a discussion of several of the more recent 

 publications dealing with or touching on the DiprotJiomo (Mochi, Ame- 

 ghino, Sergi, Branca, Wilser, Friedemann, and v. Luschan). He 

 finds that his views concerning the fragment as expressed in his 

 former publication thereon need no modification; and the obser- 

 vations of Friedemann and v. Luschan coincide so closely with his own, 

 that he ' ' regards the Diprothomo question as definitely settled and con- 

 siders it wholly superfluous and unnecessary to enter again into con- 

 sideration of this phantasy-image, which proved to be purely human." 



According to Schwalbe, Branca pronounces himself against the 

 notions of Ameghino in regard to the Diprothomo as well as the Tetra- 

 prothomo specimens. The Diprothomo fragment is considered by 

 Branca, as by v. Luschan, to be clearly of human origin. 



On the other hand, Sergi opposes the opinions of Schwalbe, Friede- 

 mann, and V. Luschan, on the Diprothomo. He accepts as correct 

 neither the orientation of the fragment as practiced by Ameghino nor 

 that of Schwalbe, and essays to pose the same on a modern meso- 



1 Poniatowski, St., O klasyflkacyach wskaznik6w antropologicznych; in Sprawozdania z posiedzefy 

 Towarzystwa Naukowego Warszawskiego, ui, No. 7, 1910; and Majewski, E., O czaszce prazczlowieka plio 

 censkiego, Diprothomo platensis, with discussion by K. Stolyhwo; ibid., ii. No. 12, 1909. 



2 Schwalbe, G., Nachtrag zu meLaer Arbeit: tJber Ameghino's Diprothomo platensis; in Zeitschr.fur 

 Morph. und Anthr., Band xni, Ileft 3, Stuttgart, 1911, pp. 533-540. 



3 Sergi, G., Sul Diprothomo platensis Ameghino; in Rivista di Antropologia, xvi, f. 1, pp. 1-12. 



