ME. ST. GEOEGE MIVAKT ON THE SKELETON OE THE PEIMATES. 
371 
DIMENSIONS AND PEOPOETIONS. 
The skeletons which have been measured for comparison are the following : — For 
Man, the skeleton No. 5569 in the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons; for the 
Gorilla, No. 5178; Chimpanzee, No. 5082; Orang, No. 5050; Hylobates, Nos. 5026 
and 5027 ; Colobus, No. 5008 a; and Semnopithecus, No. 5504, — all in the same collec- 
tion. For Cercopithecus, a skeleton in my own collection; for Macacus, No. 4991 in 
the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons; Cynocephalus, Nos. 4719 and 4720; 
Ateles, No. 4687 ; Lagothrix, No. a 4718 a; Cebus, No. 4671 ; Mycetes, No. 4718 b ; 
and Pithecia, No. a 4670, — all in the same collection. For Brachyurus, No. 806 b ; and 
for Callithrix, No. 969 a, — both in the Osteological Collection of the British Museum. 
For Chrysothrix, No. 4667, in the College of Surgeons Museum ; for Nyctipithecus, 
No. 4665 a; Hapale, No. 4664 a; Indris, No. 4631; Lemur, No. 4661 a; Loris, 
No. 4633; Nycticebus, No. 4634 a; and Arctocebus, No. a 4632 a, — all in the same 
collection. For Perodicticus I have used the skeleton No. 743 c in the British 
Museum; and for Galago, No. 68 d, and Tarsius, No. 318b, both in the same collection. 
Finally, for Cheiromys I have employed the skeleton in the Museum of the Royal 
College of Surgeons. 
In estimating proportions, I have in general only employed one specimen of each 
genus ; and therefore, as there is considerable individual variation, the proportions here 
given are offered merely as approximations to the true standard of each genus. 
An average *, drawn from the comparison of a considerable number of specimens in 
each case, would have been more satisfactory ; but, in the first place, materials for such 
an estimate are not as yet accessible, and in the second, even were they so, the expen- 
diture of time would have been out of proportion to the result. I venture to think, 
therefore, that it may be left to such succeeding observers as may confine themselves 
to special groups, to rectify the results here given. 
Following the happy idea started by Professor Huxley f, I have taken as my main 
standard of comparison (in estimating proportions) the vertebral column, estimating it 
by measuring it along its inferior (in Man anterior) curvature from the anterior (in Man 
upper) end of the atlas to the posterior (in Man lower) end of the sacrum. 
The other dimensions given in the following Tables have been estimated as fol- 
lows : — 
The entire pectoral is measured from the summit of the head of the humerus to the 
distal end of the longest digit, whichever that may be. 
' * Such, as is given hy Mr. George Busk in his admirable paper “ On the Cranial and Dental Characters of the 
existing Species of Hycenn ,” Journal of the Linnean Society, vol. ix. p. 59, 1866. 
f Man’s Place in Nature, p. 71. Dr. Lucae has not, unfortunately, pursued this plan, but in Man and the 
higher Apes he has estimated the spinal column by measuring from the atlas to the end of the coccyx, while in 
the lower forms he has measured to the end of the last caudal vertebra provided with a complete neural 
arch ( loc . cit. p. 285). This divergence of mode necessitates a certain discrepancy between my results and those 
of Dr. Lucae, nevertheless a considerable correspondence exists between them. 
MDCCCLXVII. 
3 E 
