1899.] SOME ANTHROPOID APES. 313 



only 1010 mm. in height (less than 3 ft. 4 in.). On renewed 

 cai'eful examination of the skeleton and of the skin, including 

 observations on hair-colour, ear-dimensions, characters of the 

 extremities and face, I could find no reason for regarding it as 

 other than an old female Chimpanzee, but one considerably smaller 

 than our Cambridge specimen " A " (also an aged female). 



2. The foregoing instance is one iu which a Chimpanzee is 

 incorrectly described as a Gorilla. The converse, whereby a Grorilla 

 is described as a Chimpanzee, may be noticed in the j)aper by 

 Professors Kiikenthai and Ziehen of Jena (in the ' Jenaische 

 Zeitschrift f iir JSTaturwissenschaft,' Band xxix. 1891), entitled : 

 " Untersuchungen iiber die Grrosshirnf urchen dnr Primaten." On 

 mentioning Gorilla eiigcna, the anthors state that they themselves 

 had no opportunity of maJdng observations on cei'ebral hemispheres 

 of this species. They draw up, however, from tlie works of others, 

 a list of twent)' characteristic features of the fissures of the cerebral 

 hemispheres in this species. They proceed to Troglodytes nir/er, 

 of which they describe six hemispheres, with which they combine 

 descriptions of tAvo hemispheres of Troylodytes savayii ! The 

 latter specimens are in the Museum of the Royal College of 

 Surgeons, and are the cerebral hemispheres of a Gorilla that 

 died in this Society's Gardens in 1887. More interesting than 

 the omission of the authors to recognize the identity of Gorilla 

 engena with Troglodytes savayii is the fact that out of the ten 

 particulars in which the hemispheres of T. savayii are stated to differ 

 from those of T. niyer, in three only does such divergence from 

 T. nigev imply agreement with features previously described by the 

 authors as characteristic of Gorilla enyena, while in three cases 

 there is divergence from these characteristic features of Gorilla 

 engena, and in the remaining four instances no comparisons can 

 be made. But further, from the examination of these hemispheres 

 of T. niger and savayii, the authors proceed to draw up a list of 

 characters specially typical of the hemisphere of the Chimpanzee, 

 and seventeen of these affect features that appeared in the list for 

 Gorilla enyena. Of these seventeen characters, thirteen actually 

 present similarities in conformation between the hemispheres of 

 Gorilla enyena and of the Chimpanzee (i. e. T. niger and T. savugii of 

 Profs. Kiikenthai and Ziehen), while only four indicate differences 

 of conformation. If we may accept the data, no better proof could 

 be adduced of the practical identity of Gorilla and Chimpanzee in 

 respect of cerebral convolutions. 



3. The study of cerebral hemispheres of Gorilla and Chimpanzee 

 respectively (in my possession) shows iu strong relief the diver- 

 sity of conformation that may be met with in the brains of the 

 former. Consequently the value to be attached to the arrange- 

 ment of the cerebral convolutions as a criterion of species is 

 insignificant, and herein the conclusion arrived at in the preceding 

 paragraph is corroborated. I should prefer, however, to postpone 

 the further consideration of this part of the subject until I have been 

 able to consult the communication so lately made to the Zoological 

 Society on the brain of the G orilla. 



