76 



APES AND MONKEYS. 



ture of its extremities, the orang as regards 

 that of the brain, the chimpanzee that of the 

 head and teeth. The assertion of a single 

 hne of development leading up to man finds 

 accordingly no support whatever in facts 

 from an analysis of the .Simla; of the present 

 day. 



And just as little support does it find in 

 the consideration of the fossil forms. With 

 the exception of the above-mentioned sharper 

 fixation of characters, which, however, have 

 nothing to do with the question of resem- 

 blance to man, and accordingly with a higher 

 development especially of the brain, we can 

 adduce not a single fact in favour of the idea 

 that during the different periods in the history 

 of the earth's crust the t\pe of the Simise 

 has made steady advances to a higher state 

 of development. The large anthropoid ape 

 found at Sansans, the Dryopithccjis Fontauir, 

 of which, it must be mentioned, we possess 

 only an incomplete lower jaw, stands as near 

 to man as any of the still living Anthropo- 

 morphai, if not nearer. In South America 

 there were even found remains of a large ape 

 (Laopithecus) which stands nearer to man 

 than all the American monkeys of the present 

 time. The Miocene period has accordingly 

 brought the .Simian type as far, has developed 

 it to as great a height, as our present world. 

 In respect of organic perfection this type has 

 stood still since the later Miocene period. 



It must be admitted, however, that if in 

 accordance with the principles of the now 

 received evolution theory, we take into 

 account the development of the individual, 

 we have to meet the significant fact, that 

 the infant ape is in every respect nearer 

 the child of the human species than the adult 

 ape is to an adult man. The original dis- 

 tinctions of the young of both t\ pes are 



much more insignificant than those of adult 

 individuals. This assertion long ago made 

 by me in my " Lectures upon Man" has re- 

 ceived striking confirmation from the more 

 recent investigations on the young Anthro- 

 pomorphee which have died in European 

 zoological gardens. The older the indivi- 

 dual becomes the more pronounced become 

 the characteristic distinctions in the form of 

 the jaws, the occipital crests, &c. Man and 

 ape, as they develop from the embryonic 

 condition and the young form, diverge indeed 

 almost in opposite directions towards the 

 final type of their genus ; but even adult apes 

 always retain in their organization traits which 

 correspond to those of the human infant. 



From these facts we may draw the con- 

 clusion that man cannot stand in genetic 

 relation either to any of the present apes or 

 to any of the fossil forms yet discovered, 

 but that both types have originated from a 

 common form which is more clearly expressed 

 at the stage of infancv. because the period of 

 childhood is more closely approximated to it. 



The question whether the true apes and 

 monkeys, or in one word the Simise, can be 

 brought into genetic connection with the 

 Prosimii will be discussed in treating of the 

 latter. 



By way of resume we may say that the 

 Simla-, so far as they are known to us, have 

 been from their first appearance on the stage 

 of life arboreal forms adapted to a tropical 

 climate, forms nioreover which have always 

 been strictly limited to the hemispheres now 

 assigned to them, but which in earlier geo- 

 logical epochs spread farther to the north 

 within these hemispheres, and that in neither 

 hemisphere do they exhibit any essential 

 advance in organization since the Miocene 

 period. 



