108 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLIII. No. 1099 



utter lack of blending, correlation or coordina- 

 tion of interrelated parts, one set of fragments 

 identical with one, the other set identical with 

 another animal of diverse type, not merely 

 similar each to each — such a combination is 

 without parallel and is not reasonably possible. 

 To cite a familiar instance, the teeth of the 

 chalicotheres have a general adaptive resem- 

 blance to the titanotheres, the skull and neck 

 to the horses, the claws to the edentates. This 

 is a combination quite unexpected, but never- 

 theless a quite possible one, and of course well 

 proven. But if one should find a jaw identical 

 in every particular with that of a titanothere 

 associated with a cranium identical in every 

 way with that of Equus and claw-phalanges 

 agreeing in all respects with Mylodon, it would 

 not be reasonably possible that they could be- 

 long to a single animal, no matter what argu- 

 ments of association and distribution were 

 adduced to support such a conclusion. 



Turning to mammals exclusive of man, we 

 may note first a paper by Dr. Guy E. Pilgrim,^* 

 of the Geological Survey of India, in which 

 are described a number of new or little-known 

 anthropoids from the Miocene and Pliocene of 

 India. The author discusses the afiinities of 

 the higher primates and the ancestry of man 

 in the light of the new evidence and regards 

 the extinct genus Sivapithecus as very near to 

 the direct ancestry of man. Pithecanthropus 

 he considers to be approximately intermediate, 

 while the PiltdovTn man (Eoanthropus) and 

 Neanderthal man (Homo neanderthalensis) 

 are relegated to a side branch derived from an 

 earlier stage in the ancestral series than Siva- 

 pithecus. Pilgrim's conclusions in regard to 

 other extinct and existing genera are no less 

 unexpected. Among the living anthropoids 

 the gibbon is considered nearest to the hominid 

 stem. One species of the Miocene Dryo- 

 pithecus is believed to be related to the 

 gorilla, and the new genus Palwosimia to the 

 orang. Pilgrim's views are criticized by 

 W. K. Gregory." 



The well-known anthropologist Professor 



"eBecords Geol. Surv. India, Vol. 45, pp. 1-74; 

 4 pis. and 2 figs. 

 27 Science, Vol. 43, pp. 341-342. 



Gustav Schwalbe'^* of Strassburg contributes 

 an extended description of Oreopithecus and a 

 conservative discussion of the affinities of this 

 ape of the European Miocene. 



Dr. W. K. Gregory^^ summarizes his studies 

 on the lemuroid Primates and discusses the 

 evolution and relationships of the lemuroids 

 of the Eocene of l^Torth America and Europe. 

 A significant feature in this author's classi- 

 fication is the association of all the living and 

 extinct lemurs of Madagascar, in spite of their 

 diversity of form and size, in a single group, 

 more primitive than the African and Oriental 

 lemuroids, and nearly related to the Eocene 

 Adapts and Notharctus of Europe and North 

 America. The African bush-baby (Galago) 

 and East Indian loris {Nycticehus) are more 

 progressive types, the tarsier {Tarsius), al- 

 though still grouped with the Lemuroidea, in 

 many respects approaches the higher primates. 

 The group of small Eocene primates known as 

 Anaptomorphidse are now included under the 

 Tarsiidse ; Necrolemur of the French Oligocene 

 is related to Tarsius and Galago, but, with 

 Microchmrus, is held in a distinct family. 



The conclusions just enumerated, based upon 

 anatomical grounds, have a most important 

 bearing upon the evolutionary history and 

 dispersal of the primates. That Madagascar 

 has served as a refuge for primitive survivals 

 of a group once widespread is not surprising. 

 That the diversity of the Malagasy primates 

 covers an underlying near affinity points to 

 their derivation from a single stock, not from 

 the remnants of a diverse lemuroid fauna of 

 the adjoining continents. 



Dr. W. D. Matthew and Mr. Walter 

 Granger^" describe a series of new or little 

 known primates and primate-like Inseotivora 

 from the North American Eocene and trace 

 the history of these groups through the suc- 

 cessive horizons of the Eocene. In the best 

 known group of these Eocene lemuroids, the 



2S Zeitsch. f. Morph. Anihr., Vol. 19, pp. 

 149-254. 



29 Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer., December, 1915. 



30 Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Eist., Vol. 33, Part I., 

 Carnivora, W. D. M.; Parts II. and III., Gondy- 

 larthra, W. D. M. and W. G.j Part IV., Primates, 

 etc., W. D. M. 



