454 



PITHECANTHROPUS ERECTUS. 



these appear less "bestial" the smaller they get, while, on the contrary, 

 the very " bestial " Neanderthal and Spy skulls are very large. The 

 smaller the absolute size of a cranium is, within the same species of 

 mammals, the more significant is its relative size as compared with the 

 rest of the body, and the more reduced are those features of the cranium 

 that have directly to do with the size of the body and are especially 

 related to the skeleton of the face. It is exactly these features that 

 constitute the bestial marks of any skull. 



A skull that in comparison with that of normal man is so small and 

 so ape-like in its form that it is declared by not a few experienced 

 anatomists to be the skull of an ape, can not be human ! 



Ihe fossil skullcap has been, with more or less strong conviction, 

 interpreted as follows: 



As that of an ape by — 



A a that of a nian by — 



As an intermediate form by — 



R. Virchow. ' 



W. Turner. 6 



E. Dubois. 13 



W. Krause. 2 



D. J. Cunningham. 7 



L. Manouvrier. I4 



W. Waldeyer. 3 



A. Keith. s 



O.C. Marsh, is 



0. Ham aim. 4 



R. Lydekker. 9 



E.Haeckel. ' 6 



H. Ten Kate. s 



Rud. Martin. 10 



A. Nekring. I7 





P. Matschie. u 



R. "V erneau. 18 





P. Topinard. ' 2 



A. Pettit. 's 



1 Verhandl. Berl. Anthrop. Ges. 1895, pp. 81, 330, 435, and Die Nation, 1895, is o. 4, p. 53. 



2 Ibid.,p.78. 



3 Ibid., p. 88, and Anthrop. Congress, Kassel, 1895. 



4 Gegenwart, Januar, 1895, p. 5. 



6 Nederlandsch Koloniaal Centraalblad, 1895, p. 128. 



6 Journal of Anatomy and Physiology, 1895, vol. 29, pp. 424-445. 



7 Nature, vol. 51, 1895, pp. 428-429. 



8 Science Progress, 1895, vol. 3, pp. 348-369, and Proceed. Anat. Soc. February, 1895. 

 s Nature, vol. 51, 1895, p. 291. 



>° Globus, Bd. 67, 1895, pp. 213-217. 



1 ' Naturwissenschaftl. Wochenschr., Bd. 10, pp. 81, 82. 



12 L'Anthropologie, 1895, tome 6, No. 5, pp. 605-607, 



13 Jaarbock v. h. Mynwezen in Nederlandsch Indie, 1892. Pithecanthropus erectus, etc., Batavia, 

 1894. Leidener Zool. Congress, September 21, 1895. Roy. Dublin Society, November 20, 1895. Anthrop. 

 Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, November 25, 1895. Berliner Gesellschaft f. Anthropol., Decem- 

 ber 14, 1895, etc. 



14 Bulletin Soc. d' Anthrop. de Paris, 1895 (6), 6, p. 12; 47 Revue Scientiflque, serie 4, tome 5, Mars 7, 

 1896, pp. 289-299. 



15 American Journal of Science, 1895, vol. 69, pp. 144-147. 



lfi E. Haeckel, Systematische Phylogenie der Wirbeltiere, Berlin, 1895, p. 633. 



17 Naturwissenschaftl. Wochenschr., 1895. 



18 L'Anthropnlogie, 1895, tome C, pp. 725, 726. 



19 Ibid., p. 726. Earlier (ibid., pp. 65-69) he considered it as human. 



In opposition to the view of the human character of the fossil skull, 

 the two other views taken together constitute a majority, which cer- 

 tainly would be considerably greater, namely, by an increase of the 

 pithecanthropists, if all the learned people who have expressed an opin- 

 ion upon this fundamental specimen had openly published their views 

 about it. It may also appear questionable whether this majority might 

 not be increased through later expressions of the authors above cited. 



