662 



NATURE 



[August 28, 191, 



(3) It reaches even the highest centres, but simply 

 touches them and does not enter them. 



(4) It enters them, but fails to bring about that 

 physical change in them that is the invariable con- 

 comitant of every conscious state. 



The first of these explanations appears to me the 

 least tenable of all. The last explanation, on the 

 other hand, seems to be relatively the most probable. 

 Indeed, on purely psychological grounds I am inclined 

 to accept it as the final solution, but I must wait and 

 seek an explanation on strictly physiological lines. 



Abdul Majid. 



Ghasiari-Mandi, Lucknow, India. 



In replv to your inquiry for information upon the 

 question raised by Mr. Majid I beg to say that the view 

 of the matter which is, I think, pretty generally accepted 

 and which I have adopted and attempted to develop in 

 several publications (more especially in a series of 

 papers in Mind, vol. xv., "Physiological Factors of 

 the Attention Process "), is that the central nervous 

 system consists of series of sensor-motor arcs super- 

 imposed on one another to form strata of successively 

 higher function from below upwards ; that the 

 svnapses or cell-junctions of the higher level arcs offer 

 higher resistance in the resting state than those of 

 arcs of lower level; that the waking state is essentially 

 one in which the generally diffused excitement of the 

 whole system reduces these resistances of the higher 

 levels to such degree that excitations from lower levels 

 can penetrate them, such penetration being impossible 

 in the quiescent state owing to the high degrees of 

 resistance presented bv the synapses of these higher 

 levels. 



Ansesthetic drugs (as I first suggested in Mind in 

 1898) seem to abolish consciousness through increasing 

 the resistances of the synapses ; and fatigue-products 

 probably act on them in a similar manner, thus co- 

 operating wjth diminution of external stimuli to the 

 sense-organs in predisposing to or inducing normal 

 sleep. I know of no evidence that points towards 

 Mr. Abdul Majid's fourth type of explanation. His 

 letter raises an interesting question, which is by no 

 means settled, although the type of explanation I 

 suggest is, I think, more or less tentatively accepted 

 by a good many physiologists ; and it would be of 

 interest to elicit some expressions of opinion. 



W. MCDOUGALL. 



Oxford, August 7. 



FOSSIL MAN. 1 



T X the summer of 1908 the Abbe's A. and J. 



-L Bouysonnie and L. Bardon, already distin- 

 guished for their researches into the Palaeolithic 

 industries in France, made an important discovery. 

 At La Chapelle-aux-Saints, a little south of Brive, 

 in the Department of Correze, they found buried 

 in a grave of Mousterian age a human skeleton 

 of Neandertal type, with the head more completely 

 preserved than in any previously known example 

 of its kind. An inquest was held on the spot 

 by some of the best-known " prehistorians " in 

 France, who unanimously confirmed the observa- 

 tions of the discoverers. The skeleton, which 

 Messrs. Bouysonnie and Bardon have generously 

 presented to the National Museum of Palaeontology 

 in Paris, was entrusted by a fortunate choice to 

 the director, Prof. Bottle, and the result of his 



1 " L'Homnr.e Fossile de la Chapelle-aux-Sainte." By Prof. M. Boule. 

 Pp. 275-f-xvi plates. (Paris : Masson et Cie., 1913) Price 50 francs. 



NO. 2287, VOL. 91] 



investigations is the beautiful monograph before 

 us. 



The first chapter is devoted to a history of the 

 discovery. The skeleton was found lying in a 

 hollow of the rocky limestone floor of the cave, 

 and was covered by a magna of broken bones, 

 worked flints, and yellow cave-earth, over which 

 followed first a layer of clay and then of loose 

 soil containing pebbles. Among the animals re- 

 presented by the bones are the woolly rhinoceros, 

 reindeer, bison, hysena, marmot, and horse — a 

 characteristic Pleistocene fauna. The implements 

 I are for the most part Mousterian points and 

 racloirs ; there are a few bouchers of Acheulean 

 type, as well as some grattoirs which seem to 

 presage the Aurignacian ; but the assemblage as 

 a whole is typical Mousterian. 



The skeleton was orientated east and west, the 

 head to the west. Above the head were the bones 

 of a bison's foot (a metatarsal and some phal- 

 anges) still in connection — a proof that the 

 deposits had not been disturbed, and suggestive 

 of much else besides. 



The skull (Fig. i), of which a masterly analysis 

 is given, is unusually perfect, and especially in 



those parts which are absent from the Gibraltar 

 skull, so that it is possible to determine the posi- 

 tion of such important points of reference as the 

 basion, opisthion, and bregma. The base is un- 

 fortunately incomplete, and this is the more to be 

 regretted as the base of the Gibraltar skull, which 

 in some respects is better preserved, presents some 

 peculiar features not yet perhaps fully explained. In 

 general there is a strong resemblance between 

 these two skulls, the most marked difference, apart 

 from size, lying in the extreme prognathism of 

 the skull from La Chapelle-aux-Saints. Prof. 

 Boule suggests that the orthognathism of the 

 Gibraltar skull may be due to distortion conse- 

 quent on pressure, but in the absence of collateral 

 evidence we should be more inclined to regard it 

 as an individual variation. 



The most important characters of the skull are 

 as follows : it is very large, especially for a man 

 whose stature did not exceed i'6 metres, and its 

 capacity, measured directly by Flower's method, 

 is 1620 c.c. The capacity of the Neandertal skull 



