CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION. 
205 
(13.) Palceolithic Man. 
I am indebted to the memoir of M. Rahon"^ for the details of all the individuals 
that are classed under this heading. I presume that in measuring the tibia he has 
not included the spine, as his formulae are, hke mine, based on its exclusion. I have 
further allowed for the fact that he used the oblique length of femur, while I require 
the maximum length. Unfortunately we have only five cases to base our estimate 
upon. 
Neanderthal Man. 
F = 44-52, H = 31-2, R = 24-0. 
We find for stature from : 
(a.) {h.) (d.) (li.) (i) Mean 
165-01 160-94 163-46 162-83 161-59 162-96 
Rahon gives 161-3 centims. (but I think he ought to have given 165*2 centims., 
as his femur estimate is incorrect) and SciiAAFFHAUSENt 160-1 centims., so that our 
estimate diverges by 2 centims. to 3 centims. 
3Ian from Spy. 
F = 43-32, 
We find for stature from : 
{a.) 
162-75 
(c.) 
157-07 
T = 33-0. 
{f.) Mean 
160-26 160-33 
Rahon gives 159-0 centims. 
Man from Clay at Lahr. 
The length of the femur here is doubtful, but it is said to liave been between 45-0 
centims. and 46-0 centims. If we take the mean value, the probable stature was 
166 85 centims., and the maximum value would only be 167-79 centims. Rahon 
gives 170 centims., using ulna as well as femur. I have not worked out the stature- 
ulna correlation, but, if this bone is at all akin to the radius, it will give very exag¬ 
gerated results for primitive man. 
Man of Chancelade. 
F =: 40-8, 
H = 30-0, R = 23-6. 
{a.) (6.) (d) 
158-095 157-46 163-125 
Here again the radius gives clearly an 
{h.) {i.) 
157-46 157-13. 
exaggerated result. The mean is 
* ‘ Memoires de la Societe d’Anthropologie de Paris,’ 1893, p. 414 et seq. 
t “ Dcr Neanderthaler Fund,” ‘ Deutsche Anthropologisclie Gesellscliaft,’ 1888. 
