August 28, 1913] 



NATURE 



66- 



is estimated at 1408 c.c, of La Ouina at 1367 c.c, 

 and of Gibraltar at 1296 c.c. 



It is long, almost mesocephalic, and Aery flat : 

 ■ the frontal torus is enormous, the forehead low 

 and retreating; there is a marked occipital torus, 

 and the foramen magnum is situated far back- 

 wards ; the squamosal is small, the mastoid pro- 

 cess reduced, the tympanic slightly compressed, 

 and there is a rudimentary post-glenoid apophysis. 

 The palate is very large. The face has a remark- 

 ably brutal appearance, due partly to the retreat- 

 ing forehead and the frontal torus, the great 

 round orbits, and very broad nose, but above all 

 to the massive maxilla, which is without a canine 

 fossa, and projects forwards, continuing the direc- 

 tion of the jugal, to form a sort of snout. The 

 lower jaw is distinguished by the great thick- 



inter se, but it becomes misleading when the com- 

 parison is extended to the skulls of existing races. 

 A better method is to superpose sagittal sections 

 on a line drawn from the basion to the centre of 

 form of its cranial area, as in the accompanying 

 illustrations (Figs. 2 and 3). 



It was found possible to obtain an internal cast 

 of the skull, and thus to throw some light on the 

 form of the brain, which, notwithstanding its mag- 

 nitude, presents several simian features. It 

 would be interesting to know what psychological 

 significance may attach to these; Prof. Bottle's 



F;c. 2.— Profile of the skull of th 

 line) compared with that of a 1< 

 jld be interchanged.) 



-Profile of the skull of the man of La Chapelle-aux-Saints (th 

 e) compared with that of an average European (thin line). 



ness of its body, the breadth of the ascending 

 ramus, the obliquity of the symphysis, and the 

 complete absence of a chin. The dentition is 

 megalodont. 



As the author justly remarks, it is not so much 

 the occurrence of one or other of these characters 

 which distinguishes the head of Neandertal man 

 (many of them may be found scattered up and 

 down among the members of some existing races) ; 

 it is rather the association of all of them in one 

 and the same skull, and, so far as we know, in all 

 the skulls of one and the same race. 



Very complete measurements are given, but 



exception might fairly be taken to the use of the 



glabella-inion line as a base ; this is not without 



value when the Neandertal skulls are compared 



NO. 2287, VOL. 91] 



of the 

 of La Chapelle-aux-Saints 

 restored (X15). 



-The skeleton of an Aus- 

 1 aborigine for compari- 

 rith Fig. 3 (XI5). 



comment is that a small watch may be a better 

 timekeeper than a big clock. 



A minute description of the other bones of the 

 skeleton brings to light a number of interesting 

 peculiarities, as in the form of the scapula and the 

 clavicle, the characters of the cervical vertebra;, 

 and others which are summarised in a useful table 



(pp. 222-6). 



In discussing the stature it is pointed out that 

 Manouvrier's rules are founded exclusively on 

 a study of existing white races, and that other 

 factors have to be taken into account when we 

 proceed to extinct races like the Neandertal. Prof. 

 Boule is thus led to assign a stature of from 



