ANATOMY OF THE ANTHROPOID APES. 201 



§ 11. Conclusions. 



In the preceding pages I have incidentally attempted to criticize the various species 

 of Chimpanzee that have at one time or another been proposed ; but the main object has 

 been to endeavour to show that the Chimpanzee which lived in the Society's Gardens 

 from 1883-91 is Du Chaillu's Troglodytes calvus, is not Duvernoy's T. tschego or any 

 other variety, and is a perfectly distinct species of Chimpanzee, which has, however, 

 hardly a claim to represent a distinct generic type. Troglodytes calvus differs from 

 T. niger in well-marked external characters, in less well-marked skull characters, and 

 apparently in its muscular anatomy and brain. I am not, however, desirous of empha- 

 sizing too much the myological differences, since we obviously do not know the range 

 of variation in T. calvus, or, for the matter of that, in T. niger. The skull of T. calvus 

 may be said to show an exaggeration of the characters proper to the genus Troglodytes, 

 from which I exclude the Gorilla. 



111. On the Oeang reputed to be Simia morio. 



Although perhaps most persons now consider that there is only one species of Orang 

 Outang, more than one name has been given to supposed different forms. The Sumatrau 

 Orang, for example, has been regarded as distinct from the Bornean ape, and the 

 smaller Bornean Orang has been distinguished from the larger animal {Simla satyrus) 

 under the name of Simia morio. The small Orang presented to the Society on 15th 

 April, 1891, which died on September 22nd, was believed to be a representative of the 

 latter species. 



The best figures known to me of the large Orang illustrate a paper by Dr. Hermes 

 published some fifteen years ago ^ In those plates the young and adult Orangs are 

 shown in several ways. Other figures which I have consulted are Gervais's ^, Chenu's ^, 

 Wallace's *, and Chapman's °, and that of Flower and Lydekker ^. I do not trouble to 

 indicate older illustrations, such as those given by Temminck, for most of them show 

 signs of inaccurate drawing or reproduction, and it would be unprofitable to build any 

 conclusion upon them. Of the coloured figures referred to, it seems to me that 

 Dr. Hermes's are far away the best, and they are the only ones besides that of 

 Dr. Chapman which give a good lateral view of the head. If the coloured drawing of 

 the head of " George," which I now exhibit (Plate XXIV.), be compared with Hermes's 



1 Zeitschr. f. Ethnologie, Bd. viii. 1876, jjk. xv. & xvi. 

 ^ Mammiferes, vol. i. pi. i. 



' Encycl. d'Hist. Nat., Quadrumanes, p. 39, fig. 42. 

 * ' The Malay Archipelago,' vol. i. p. 64. 



= "The Structure of the Orang,"' Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philad. 1879, pi. xi. 

 '■ ' Mammals Living and Extinct,' p. 733. The cut is from a drawing by Wolf. 

 VOL. xru. — PART V. No. 4. — Felruary, 1893. 2 G 



