PITHECANTHROPUS ERECTUS. 



455 



For example, Cunningham is now of the opinion that the fossil skull 

 belonged to an individual with strongly marked simian characters. 1 He 

 might on this account be properly placed under the first category. 



In a praiseworthy manner Manouvrier, 2 in a recently published figure, 

 has undertaken to restore the skull of Pithecanthropus according to 

 the cast. Before this I had tried the same thing, especially for my own 

 satisfaction, in order that I might be clear as to the result of such an 

 unprejudiced restoration. After the emptying of the skullcap I have 

 now tried it again. The fact that I have arrived at different results 



Fig. 3 Attempt at a restoration of the skull of the Pithecanthropus erectus half the natural size 



C, coronal suture; O, foramen magnum. 



The following corrections should be made in this figure : The point O (posterior border of the fora- 

 men magnum) is about 3 mm. (in the half-sized figure; in nature, therefore, 6 mm.) too high. Also the 

 posterior part of the Linea temporalis is about 3 mm. (in natural size about 6 mm.) too low. 



than those of the worthy Parisian anthropologist in some not unimpor- 

 tant points arises chiefly from this, that I had resort to the emptied 

 fossil skullcap itself for the restoration, which caused me to consider 

 the temporal and occipital regions somewhat differently from what Man- 

 nouvrier did. It is this that induces me to now publish my restoration 

 also. 



Especially of the temporal region I will again say that it has the very 

 greatest similarity to that of the adult gibbon, and iudeed the entire 

 skullcap, with the exception of the strongly inclined planum uuchale of 



Mature, vol. 53, 1895, pp. 116 and 296. 



8 Revue Scientifiqne, srrie 4, tome 5, Mars 7, 1896, p. 294. 



