Skip to content

Chapter III (2)

Text size

The instance we have mentioned of hairless Australians is the more remarkable since these aborigines are for the most part distinguished for their luxuriant growth of hair. The Australian blacks and the Ainos of Yedo are, as a rule, perhaps the most hairy races in the world. It is known, however, that in all countries and climates exceptional cases are found of individuals whose bodies are wholly or partially covered with hair, and these conditions sometimes affect whole families. Interesting historical and morphological researches respecting these hairy men have recently been made by von Siebold, Ecker, Virchow, Bartels, and Ornstein. In many of these cases we are presented with decidedly brute-like phenomena. The Mexican woman Julia Pastrana displays the strongest resemblance to apes. Other hairy men remind us at the first glance of some of the canine species. In all races the women are less hairy than the men. Darwin states that in the females of some species of apes the under side of the body is less hairy than in the males, and this is also the case with anthropoids, especially with the chimpanzee.

The beard is, as we know, common to man and apes. Among apes it is more strongly developed in the male than in the female, and this is also the case in the human species. Darwin points out that the growth of the beard both of men and apes occurs at the period of their sexual maturity, and also that there is a remarkable parallel between men and apes in its colour. For when the human beard varies in colour from the hair of the head, which is frequently the case, it is, without exception, of a lighter, and generally of a reddish hue. Darwin observed this in England, and Hooker found no exception to the rule in Russia. J. Scott carefully observed the numerous races which are to be found in Calcutta, as in other parts of India, namely, the two Sikh races, the Bhoteas, Hindus, Burmese, and Chinese. Although most of these races have very little hair on the face, Scott found that in all cases without exception, in which there was any difference in colour between the hair of the head and the beard, the latter was of a lighter shade. In apes the colour of the beard often differs widely from that of the hair of the head, and in such cases it is always of a lighter shade, often white, sometimes yellow or reddish.

“It is well known,” says Darwin, “that the hair on our arms tends to converge from above and below to a point at the elbow. This curious arrangement, so unlike that in most of the lower mammals, is common to the gorilla, chimpanzee, orang, some species of Hylobates, and even to some few American monkeys. But in _Hylobates agilis_ the hair on the forearm is directed downwards or towards the wrist in the ordinary manner; and in _Hylobates lar_ it is nearly erect, with only a very slight forward inclination; so that in this latter species it is in a transitional state. It can hardly be doubted that with most mammals the thickness of the hair and its direction on the back is adapted to throw off the rain; even the transverse hairs on the forelegs of a dog may serve for this end when he is coiled up asleep. Mr. Wallace remarks that the convergence of the hair towards the elbow on the arms of the orang (whose habits he has so carefully studied) serves to throw off the rain, when, as is the custom of this animal, the arms are bent, with the hands clasped round a branch or over its own head. We should, however, bear in mind that the attitude of an animal may perhaps be in part determined by the direction of the hair; and not the direction of the hair by the attitude. If the above explanation is correct in the case of the orang, the hair on our forearms offers a curious record of our former state; for no one supposes that it is now of any use in throwing off the rain, nor in our present erect condition is it properly directed for this purpose.”[25]

Darwin also remarks that it is erroneous to deny that apes have eyebrows. In fact, long bristly eyebrows are present in all anthropoids--not growing thickly together like those of men, but scattered among the shorter and thicker growth of hair which clothes the parts above the orbits; nor do they maintain any definite direction. In the white-handed gibbon, these eyebrows are remarkable for their length and stiffness. A growth of hair corresponding to eyebrows may, indeed, be observed above the upper eyelids of all mammals, including seals and pachydermata. On the upper lip of gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangs we may also observe a number of somewhat longer, stiff, and bristly hairs which stand apart from the otherwise short hairs on the lips, and give the impression of a cat’s “whiskers.” In _Hylobates albimanus_ I observed that these _vibrissæ_ attain to a considerable length (Fig. 10).

The external form of the trunk of anthropoids, taken as a whole, does not greatly differ from that of man. We have not, indeed, the well-formed human torso, with its graceful lines; and the formation of the posteriors, together with a want of expansion about the hips, displeases us in its departure from the human type (see Figs. 1 and 6). We shall not be disposed to compare the torso of the Apollo Belvedere, or of the Olympian Hermes with that of a gorilla or chimpanzee. Yet the torso of a powerful male gorilla, from which the hair has been removed, may be favourably compared with that of one of the large-bellied, lean-armed weaklings who are everywhere to be found as living caricatures of the human species.

The neck of anthropoids is generally short and thick. In the gorilla that part of the body has a great backward convexity, owing, as we have said, to the great development of the spinous processes of the cervical vertebræ, and of the muscles attached to them. A short, thick throat, and considerable development of the neck, a bull-neck, as it is called, is also not unfrequent in man. This peculiarity is sometimes supposed to be one of the national characteristics of the African blacks. Burmeister says that “the negro’s thick neck is the more striking, since it is generally allied with a short throat. In measuring negroes from the crown of the head to the shoulder I found the interval to be from nine and a quarter to nine and three-quarter inches. In Europeans of normal height, this interval is seldom less than ten inches, and it is more commonly eleven inches in women, and twelve in men. The shortness of the neck, as well as the relatively small size of the brain-pan, and the large size of the face may the more readily be taken as an approximation to the simian type, since all apes are short-necked, and the relative distance of these animals is somewhat further from the negro than that of the negro from the European. This shortness of the neck in the negro explains his greater carrying power, and his preference for carrying burdens on his head, which is much more fatiguing to the European on account of his longer and weaker neck.”[26]

Burmeister’s assumption on this subject is, however, much too general. It does not apply to many of the negro races--at any rate, not to those of the Upper Nile valley. A long, thin neck is the characteristic of the Funje, Shillooks, Denkas, Baris, and other large tribes of those regions. Among these people the interval between the top of the head and the shoulder is from ten to eleven, and even from eleven to twelve inches (240 to 260 mm., and 260 to 286 mm.). Burmeister has been thinking exclusively of the Brazilian blacks. Yet I am unable to trace the typical short neck, either in the well-known portraits of slaves by Maurice Rugendas,[27] or in the collection of photographs of Brazilian negroes which is in my possession. This characteristic is also absent, even in many portraits of West African and Mozambique blacks, tribes from which the slave population of Brazil has been chiefly drawn. Many Mongolians, Malays, Papuans, and Polynesians have short, thick necks, but this characteristic is more rare among the American aborigines and among Europeans. If we are to recognize an approximation to the simian type in this formation, it is one common to several nations, and it is not confined only, nor even chiefly, to the negro races.

The remarkable elongation of the upper limbs of anthropoid apes cannot be compared with the length of the corresponding limbs in men. For although among negroes and the members of other primitive peoples we may occasionally observe unusually long arms, yet these are individual peculiarities which are also found among Europeans, and cannot be counted among racial characteristics.

The hand of the orang and the gibbon is too long and narrow to be directly compared with the human hand. The chimpanzee and the gorilla, especially the latter, have hands more like those of man. In the case of an adult male gorilla the first glance at this member reminds us of the knotty fist of a black dock labourer or lighterman, like those who, at Rio de Janeiro, Bahia, or La Guayra, lift the heavy bags of coffee and place them on their heads or on their herculean shoulders. Much has been said of the enlargement of the connective skin between the bases of the fingers of a negro hand, and of the pointed extremities of the fingers. Van der Hoeven, in his well-known treatise, _De Natuurlijke Geschiedenis van den Negerstam_, has described and drawn the hand of an Ashanti boy, formed in this manner. Hence there is a disposition to recognize in this peculiarity an important characteristic of the negro race. As in the hand of the gorilla, the connective web between the bases of the fingers is also extensive, and the ungual phalanges taper at their extremities, there is also an inclination to ascribe an expressly anthropoid character to the negro hand. Yet this structure of the fingers is by no means universal among the negroes. An enlargement of the connective web is not indeed uncommon, but its extent varies considerably. Nor is it wanting in the fingers of other races. An attentive observer will be able to trace it in the labouring population of country districts in Europe. I have myself frequently observed this characteristic in Canton Wallis, and in the Lombard and Genoese provinces, through which I travelled on foot in 1869 and 1871, when I devoted special attention to this point. In Fig. 32 I give a negro hand of a type which seems to be common among the blacks in the inland districts of North-eastern Africa. It can hardly be denied that the form of this hand, which is certainly not flattered, possesses the characteristics of a thoroughly human organization.

With respect to other primitive peoples besides negroes, we have not at present sufficient information, and we ought therefore to beware of premature generalization. The thin shanks, with imperfectly developed calves, found among many primitive races, and especially among the African and Australian blacks, are often and not unjustly adduced as an instance of their ape-like formation. In fact, the general uncomeliness of these parts in the races in question is one of their significant characteristics.

The anthropoid foot resembles in structure those of other apes, including those of the New World, and as a rule it differs from the human foot in the flexibility of the great toes. It has, however, been justly observed that many individuals of different races have been able to use the great toe almost as if it were a thumb. Such persons may be found everywhere. Men who have been born without arms, or who have been deprived of them during life, have been able to use their feet like hands, as some compensation for this privation. The most surprising instance of our time has occurred in the violinist without arms, whose performances are heard in various continental capitals. Another, mentioned by Bär, was able to write with his feet. But even people who have the full use of their upper limbs can often grasp with the great toe as if it were a thumb, so as to pick up small objects from the ground, or draw them towards them. Constant practice in such feats produces a certain dexterity. Negroes, Malays, Polynesians, and Indians make use of their outstretched great toes in climbing with as skilful a gripe as our schoolboys and sailors are also able to do in gymnastics, or in climbing up the masts. Among such people the distinction between the foot of man and apes is less marked, since, even when at rest, the great toe is apt to be somewhat detached from the others. This may be seen in A. Buchta’s excellent photographs of individuals of the Central African tribe, the Makraka. Haeckel justly observes that there is no marked physiological distinction between the hand and foot which can be established on a scientific basis. In order to make such a distinction it is necessary to consider their morphological characteristics.[28]

Fig. 34.--Human skull. _a_, Nasal bone. _b_, Upper jaw. _c_,
Lower jaw. _d_, Occipital bone. _e_, Temporal bone. _f_,
Parietal bone. _g_, Frontal bone. _h_, Malar bone.
]

_Structure of the skeleton._--In comparing the skulls of anthropoids with those of men, we should, in the case of the gorilla, chimpanzee, and orang-utan, content ourselves with young specimens rather than with the skulls of adults. In aged apes of these species, the colossal development of the bony crests of the skull, as well as that of the jaws, the prominence of the orbital rim, and the flattening of the occipital bone, present distinctions of such a searching character that we are greatly hindered in the pursuit of the comparative method. But during the process of development the anthropoid skeleton admits of a direct comparison with that of man. In a young animal the rounded skull suggests a parallel between it and the human head. It must be admitted that we find, especially in primitive peoples, many human skulls which in their whole plastic form differ little from the skulls of young gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangs. Even in the way the occipital bone is rounded off, young anthropoids and men are often found in a similar stage of development. The squamous occipital portion in a young negro, Papuan and Malay, is indeed often flatter and more bevelled than it is in a young gorilla or chimpanzee.

We must not, however, assume that the two individuals brought into comparison are of precisely the same age, since such a point cannot easily be ascertained, even when subjects for examination are afforded by one of our larger museums. Savages are seldom able to give their precise age, and the attempt to do so often relies on insufficient data. The direct examination of the skull will afford some information on this point; but the conditions of growth in anthropoids are not so well known as to admit of an accurate estimate. We have to rely on the state of the teeth, on the stage at which the development of the bony crests has arrived, etc., in order to form an approximate estimate of the age of the skull.

On the squamous occipital portion the arrangement of the curved lines which are the boundaries to the attachments of the cervical muscles, is common to men, to anthropoids, and to other apes. Only indications of these lines are to be found in the lower order of mammals. In the human skull there is sometimes a formation belonging to the squamous occipital portion which has a distinctly pithecoid or ape-like character. This is the occipital swelling we have already described (_Torus occipitalis transversus_), which may be either enclosed by the two upper curved lines, or lie between these and the central curved lines, or may be altogether in the region of the latter. This swelling extends in a gradual manner above and below its bony support. Its edge may be more or less sharp, more or less like a crest in its development, wider or narrower, with or without a central eminence, but its appearance is always striking. In young male and female gorillas, orangs, and chimpanzees this formation represents the completely formed transverse occipital crests, which are found for the most part in aged male animals of these species. These swellings may also be observed on the skulls of adult men of all times and all nations. They are by no means rare in the skulls which are in ordinary use at the Berlin School of Anatomy, and they are remarkably common in many groups of skulls. They are frequent among the skulls, for the most part without their lower jaws, which the late Dr. Sachs disinterred in a Mohammedan burial-ground of the thirteenth century, near Cairo. These are the remains of Mohammedans of different ranks, but, for the most part, of the peasantry or fellaheen. Ecker was able to trace the sagittal crest in the skulls of Australian males, while it is absent in the females. Similar indications of the bony crest have been observed by me in the roof-shaped or scaphocephalic skulls of many negroes, but in these cases I am not aware whether there is a corresponding distinction of sex. It can hardly be denied that this bony prominence is a human characteristic.

Broca has given the term pterion to the H-shaped connection formed by the sutures between the parietal bone, the greater wing of the sphenoid bone, the squamous portion of the temporal bone, and the frontal bone. One of the most common disturbances in the symmetry of the connecting suture, as we have already briefly mentioned, arises from the insertion of a frontal process of the squamous portion of the temporal bone between the lower angle of the parietal bone, the fore-part of the frontal bone, and the greater wing of the sphenoid bone. This process of the temporal bone varies in size, and may occur on one or both sides. A similar formation is common among gorillas, chimpanzees, macacas, magots (_Inuus_), and baboons.[29] It is less frequent among orangs,[30] gibbons, marmosets, and American species (howlers, hooded apes, etc.).

Virchow and W. Gruber have agreed in representing this frontal process as theromorphological--that is, as a characteristic of the lower animals, and more especially of apes. Virchow has found this abnormal formation of the skull to be more common in some races than others. None of those in whom it occurs appear to belong to the Aryan races, and the existence of this process and stenocrotaphy, or temporal stenosis, seem to be due to a defective development of the greater wing of the sphenoid bone, and to the compression of the bones in its vicinity, by which the whole temporal region is contracted. This is a characteristic of the lower, but by no means of the lowest, races of men.

Stieda, Hyrtl, Gruber, and Calori have sought to controvert the fact that this temporal process is a characteristic of the lower races. Stieda asserts that it may occur exceptionally in all races of men.[31] He himself, aided by Anutschin, has ascertained the existence of this anomalous pterion on more than 10,000 human skulls, and he has also received information from others. He considers the frequency of this frontal process in man to be theromorphological, or indeed pithecoid. According to Anutschin, this anomalous condition is not equally common in all races. In the dark-skinned and woolly-haired races (Australians, Papuans, and negroes) the frontal process is most widely diffused; it is less frequent among Mongolians and Malays; and among Americans and white men its occurrence is from five to six times more uncommon than in the black races. Sometimes the frontal process occurs on the intercalary bone (_Ossa epipterica_), which is fused into the squamous portion of the temporal bone; and sometimes the process grows out of the squamous portion of the temporal bone. These imperfect processes or intercalary bones are not regarded by Anutschin as pithecoid, since they are more rare in apes than in men. Schlocker has sought to show that the frontal process of the squamous portion of the temporal bone, the less common temporal process of the frontal bone, and the temporal intercalary bone (_Ossa epipterica_) are of equal value from the genetic point of view.[32] This author regards the frontal process and the immediate connection of the frontal and squamous portion of the temporal bones, as theromorphological characteristics, but he does not believe the occurrence of this process to be restricted to the lower races.[33] This is also the opinion of Ten Kate. However this may be, the establishment of this theromorphological formation is important. Its immediate value as a contribution to the theory of the origin of species remains, as we shall presently see, even if we cannot trace it through intermediate and lower types.

In the great prominence of the supra-orbital ridges which has been observed in some pre-historic human skulls, a likeness to the corresponding feature in anthropoids has been traced. And indeed there is such a likeness, especially to the female chimpanzee, in the well-known Neanderthal skull, which is very dolichocephalic, with prominent supra-orbital arches, only divided from each other by a shallow depression. In the same skull the development of the supra-orbital ridges is related to that of the frontal sinuses. In this pre-historic specimen--which, by the kindness of Professor Schaafhauser, I was able to examine closely at the congress of anthropologists at Berlin in 1880--the forehead retreats in a marked manner towards the flattened region of the crown. De Quatrefages and Hamy say that the skull is both flattened and long (dolichoplatycephalic). The temporal ridges are not only very marked, but they approach each other in the region of the coronal arch (Fig. 35). This also occurs in the adult female chimpanzee, as well as in the young male gorilla, in the aged female orang, and in the gibbon.

It may here be observed that our men of science differ widely in opinion respecting the origin and ethnological significance of the Neanderthal skull, of which I will cite only a few instances. Pruner regards it as the skull of an idiot.[34] Virchow considers the specimen, and the similar one from Kailykke in the Copenhagen Museum, as an altogether individual formation,[35] a typical form modified by disease,[36] in other words, a pathological skull.[37] King regards the skull as one belonging to one of the primitive races.[38] Schaaffhauser has, indeed, endeavoured to make an artistic portrait of such a primitive man. Spengel holds that skulls which are “Neanderthaloid” in form are to be found chiefly in Europe.[39] If Huxley says decidedly that the Neanderthal skull can by no means be regarded as the remains of a human being which was a link between man and apes. At most this discovery only proves the existence of a man whose skull reverted in some respects to the simian type, just as a carrier or tumbler pigeon may sometimes display the plumage of their original ancestor, the rock-pigeon (_Columbia livia_). And although the Neanderthal skull is more like that of the ape than any other human skull with which we are acquainted, yet it is by no means so isolated as it at first appears, but is rather the ultimate expression of a series which may be gradually traced back from the highest and most fully developed type of human skulls. On the one side it approximates to the flattened Australian skulls, from which other Australian forms gradually lead to skulls which rather resemble the type afforded by the Engis skull. On the other side, it is still more closely allied with the skulls of certain ancient races which were either contemporaries or successors of those which dwelt in Denmark during the Stone Age, people whose kitchen middens have been discovered in that country.[40]

Huxley justly observes that some of the skulls drawn by Busk, and taken from the tumuli of Borrely, resemble the Neanderthal skull, especially in the abruptly retreating forehead. Some other European skulls may, within certain limits, be compared with the Neanderthal skull, as, for instance, those found at Brüx, Staengenaes, Olmo, Louth, Clichy, Bougon, Cro-Magnon, Grenelle, Furfooz, Engisheim, Cannstadt, and Toul. These all present interesting peculiarities of structure--strongly developed supra-orbital arches, a retreating forehead, a flattened crown, etc., although none of them are so remarkable in these particulars as the Neanderthal skull. It has not, however, yet been proved that this skull represents a definite racial type, and it seems more probable that it was simply an individual form.

The skulls of the Australian aborigines are, as Spengel justly observes, distinguished from the Neanderthal skull, and from others of like character, by their pronounced scaphocephalism. On the other hand, they have the prominent supra-orbital arches, the retreating forehead, the skull compressed in the temporal region, the prognathous countenance, relatively shorter than that of Europeans, and in all these respects the skulls of the Australians greatly resemble those of anthropoids. If, for instance, we turn to the illustration given by de Quatrefages and Hamy of a skull procured from Camp-in-Heaven, Arnhem’s Land, North Australia, and also Dr. Schadenburg’s negro skull, the most determined sceptic must be struck by their resemblance to the anthropoid skull.[41]

Similar characteristics to those which we have already mentioned as distinguishing the structure of the Australian skull, enable us to determine the anthropoid character of the skulls of many individuals belonging to the dark-skinned African races. These consist chiefly in the retreating forehead, the flatness and compression of the coronal arch, the pronounced prognathism, and the obtuse angles of the lower maxillary bones, which may be noted in so many negro skulls. On the other hand, the prominence of the supra-orbital arches is, as a rule, less marked in African races than in anthropoid species. There are specimens, however, as, for instance, the Congo skull given by de Quatrefages and Hamy,[42] which give an overwhelming impression of anthropoid characteristics. And we find the same to a surprising degree in the skulls of intelligent, warlike, and light-skinned races of Central and Western Africa, and as the Monbuttre, Haussaua, Bakale, Fan, etc. This character may be discovered in all races of men, and especially among the Papuans and some African negroes.

A mutual approximation of the temporal ridges in the coronal region may be observed in the skulls of various nations. This formation is most frequent in the long-headed negro and Papuan skulls. In these cases it is generally allied with the shortness of the interval between the sides of the skull, taken in its transverse diameter (stenocephalism).

In an adult female chimpanzee, the parietal bones often rise abruptly towards the sagittal suture, and in its vicinity there arises a longitudinal bony prominence, of which the sides pass gradually into the external surface of the parietal bones. The sagittal suture sometimes remains intact, and is sometimes included by this process. This produces a modified development of the so-called keel-shaped skull (_scaphocephalus_). Such a formation may be often observed in negroes and Papuans, and more rarely in the skulls of other races. The occurrence of a divided malar bone in human skulls, especially in those of the Ainos and Japanese, has been considered to be theromorphic, since it is occasionally observed in the skulls of apes.[43] I have myself, in a very few instances, found obscure traces of such a formation among anthropoids.

In 1863 Boucher de Perthes found at Abbeville half of a human lower jaw deposited in a black layer of clay and sand mixed with iron, and lying on the chalk. As far as we can judge from illustrations which are for the most part imperfect, there was nothing remarkable about it except its abruptly retreating ramus (Fig. 36), but the specimen aroused great attention at the time, and it was assigned by many intelligent observers to the primitive men of the diluvial period. Unfortunately it was afterwards proved to be a gigantic imposture.[44]

This is not the case with the lower jaws of Naulette, Aurignac, and Arcy, which are undoubtedly genuine and of great antiquity. The Naulette jaw is, indeed, very imperfect, yet we can trace the construction of the symphysis of the chin, which provokes comparison with the lower jaws of many anthropoids, especially those of the gorilla and chimpanzee (Fig. 37). The resemblance consists chiefly in the uprightness of the anterior surface, and especially of the body of the maxillary bone. In anthropoids this surface of the bone retreats from the row of teeth backwards and downwards to the lower edge of the body of the maxillary bone (Fig. 38); and in the Naulette specimen, as well as in the lower jaws of some modern Papuan skulls (of New Hebrides and elsewhere), there is a certain approximation to the simian type. A fossil ape (_Dryopithecus Fontanii_) has been found in the Middle Miocene of Saint-Gaudens, assumed to be one of the higher anthropoids, and in this case the jaw is only slightly retreating. Gaudry considers that the _Dryopithecus_ was about the size of a man. The incisor teeth were small. The cusps of the back molar teeth were less rounded than in Europeans, and more like those of Australians. It has been surmised, although the fact cannot be established, that the last molar teeth were only cut after the canine teeth, as is the case with the human wisdom teeth. Gaudry gives the illustration of the lower jaw of a Tasmanian, from eleven to twelve years old, together with that of _Dryopithecus Fontanii_. In the human jaw the first molar tooth is larger than in the _Dryopithecus_, while the canine tooth and the pre-molars are much weaker. This distinction is important, since the smaller size of the front teeth is connected with the slight projection of the face, which is always a sign of human superiority. Although the canine tooth of the _Dryopithecus_ is broken, we can see that it must have been considerably higher than the other teeth, and indeed the canine teeth of the male animal must have been very powerful. There is also a slight prominence in the teeth of this ape, which is absent in those of men. _Mesopithecus_, from the Miocene of Pikermi, Attica, was an ape less closely resembling the anthropoids. In the structure of the head it resembles the slender ape (_Semnopithecus_), and in the structure of the limbs it is like a macaca (_Macacus_). Gaudry believes that Sansan’s _Pliopithecus_ was related to the gibbon. An ape of the size of the orang-utan, which belongs to the slender apes (_Semnopithecus sub-himalayanus_),[45] was found by Baker and Durand in the Miocene of the Sewalik mountains.

In the comparative study of the human organization, and that of anthropoid apes, it is important to examine sections, and especially longitudinal sections, of characteristic skulls.[46] Virchow has caused drawings to be made, from specimens in the Berlin Museum, of a gorilla, a chimpanzee, an orang-utan, and an Australian woman. The gorilla’s skull, when compared with the Australian’s, is so narrow that it looks as if compression had been applied to it; and yet the Australian skull is extremely small in comparison with that of men in general, since its cubic space is only 1150 ccm. In the gorilla[47]--at least in the old male, from which the drawing is taken--the immense size of the frontal sinuses, and the swellings which cover them, together with the strongly developed jaw, increase the impression of size. But, as Virchow observes, “all which adds to the size of the skull is bestial, and not human.” It is much the same in the orang-utan. Only in the chimpanzee the cubic space of the skull may be somewhat more favourably compared with that of the human skull. It approaches in size to that of a microcephalic native of the Rhein-Pfalz (of which an illustration is also given), which ranks a good deal below the Australian skull, and approximates more closely to the simian type. The internal space of the skulls of an adult female gorilla or orang may also be more favourably compared with those of men.

We have already mentioned the presence of extensive sinuses and cells in the skulls of anthropoids, exceeding those of human skulls, and this is apparent in the accompanying illustration of a longitudinal section of the skull of a chimpanzee carried through its centre (Fig. 39). The length of this skull between the nasal partition and the most prominent part of the occipital bone is 128 mm.; that of the internal space is 108 mm. 10 mm. of this difference is due to the depth of the frontal sinuses, and the rest is owing to the thickness of the bony part of the skull. In an aged male gorilla, the first measurement is 153 mm., the second 115 mm. In another aged gorilla the measurements were respectively 183 mm. and 117 mm. In a still more aged male orang they were respectively 140 mm. and 114 mm. The comparative thinness of the centre of the squamous occipital portion is to be noted in the aged gorilla male. In the adult chimpanzee the large cells of the squamous portion of the temporal bone extend into this bone, and indeed without interruption into the parietal bone adjoining it. For such investigations the thin and light bones of individuals which have lived a wild life are more suitable than the heavy and fat specimens which have died after prolonged confinement.

Zuckerkandl has observed that among Europeans the orbital part of the nose, or that part which is between the orbits, is longer than the infra-orbital or lower part. In anthropoids the infra-orbital portion is considerably the longest, although only in adult animals. There are stages in the period of development in which these animals display the characteristics of an adult European, or indeed of a child. The proportions of the skulls of Malays take a middle place between those of Europeans and of apes. The growth of the infra-orbital part of the nose in the Malay does not equal that of apes, but in many cases it differs essentially from that of Europeans. Zuckerkandl makes a skilful attempt to establish this statement by statistics.

The same inquirer makes some interesting remarks on the comparative height and width of the orbits. He observes that the skulls of adult apes and men differ more in these respects than the young specimens of these organisms. The orbits both of a child and an adult, especially in the case of a European, are much more like those of a young ape than of an aged animal of the same species. In the chimpanzee and the orang-utan the proportions are the same as in men; that is, the width of the orbit exceeds its height. In man, this seems to arise from the exceptionally strong development of the supra-orbital ridge. It is most probable that in very young anthropoids the width of the orbit exceeds its height.[48] Zuckerkandl goes on to say that in anthropoids the height of the orbits is greater than their width, and that this difference increases with age. But this is not absolutely correct, for even in aged animals the proportions vary, and the height and width of the orbits sometimes, although rarely, remains the same.

In comparing the vertebral column in men and anthropoids, Rosenberg has sought to show in the embryo, that the first sacral vertebra assumes the form of a lumbar vertebra, and that in a later stage of development it is enclosed by the ilia, and anchylosed with the sacrum. The same author has proposed a theory of the homologous or genetic equivalents of the vertebræ, which we must now consider. According to this theory, as Welcker has observed,[49] the twentieth vertebra of an animal A is homologous to the twentieth vertebra of an animal B, the thirtieth vertebra of one animal to the thirtieth of another, although in one case it may be a lumbar vertebra, in another a pelvic vertebra, and in a third a coccygeal vertebra. The dorso-lumbar vertebræ of the lower apes have, in the case of men, their descendants, undergone a threefold metamorphosis, and, after their modification into sacral vertebræ, have assumed their fourth form as coccygeal vertebræ.

Froriep, a follower of Rosenberg, remarks that the lumbo-sacral vertebræ, _i.e._ those constituents of the vertebral column which form the transition from the lumbar to the sacral vertebræ, are invested with fresh interest by Rosenberg’s hypothesis. According to their position in the vertebral column, they are to be regarded as lumbar vertebræ, introduced too early or too late into the structure of the sacrum. If the twenty-fourth vertebra is assimilated with the sacrum, so as to form an upper promontory or outwork, this variety offers a point of transition to a future formation (?) in which this vertebra normally becomes the first sacral vertebra, and the column will now display twenty-three free vertebræ. If, again, this transition occurs in the twenty-fifth vertebra of the series, which thus becomes the chief sacral vertebra, this is, in Rosenberg’s opinion, a characteristic survival of the racial development, an atavism.[50]

According to Welcker’s theory, the chief sacral vertebra in one animal corresponds to the same sacral vertebra in another animal, whatever their number may be. The cervical vertebræ of one animal, which may be five, seven, or even eleven in number, correspond to the cervical vertebræ of another animal. The vertebral column of one animal corresponds to the vertebral column of another, taken as a whole, but not to two-thirds or three-fourths of that column. In accordance with the requirements of a given animal, that part of the bone which belongs to the sections of the breast and loins is more or less abundant, and the vertebræ are homologous in accordance with their region, and not with their number.

Holl has asserted that one vertebra is in close connection with the ilium, joined with it throughout its extent, and that this vertebra at the same time always appears to support the pelvis. This vertebra is, in normal cases, the first sacral vertebra, and the twenty-fifth of the series. It may be termed, as Welcker suggests, _vertebra fulcralis_. Such a main support is found, according to Holl, in every vertebral column, however anomalous its other conditions may be, and the only irregularity consists in its number in the series. This bone serves as a natural starting-point in our division of the vertebral column. The _vertebra fulcralis_ must always be regarded as the first sacral vertebra. It begins the series of sacral vertebra, and, on account of its subsequently important position, it must be regarded as primary. Holl finds that it is followed by four lower vertebræ, which are afterwards included with it in the sacrum. When in its primary condition the _vertebra fulcralis_ is twenty-fifth in the series, the twenty-fifth to the twenty-ninth vertebræ are included in the sacrum. When the _fulcralis_ is the twenty-sixth vertebra, the sacrum includes the thirtieth. Hence it follows that the sacrum is, from the first stages of its development, a formation which begins with the twenty-fifth or twenty-sixth vertebra, and includes four other vertebræ. Holl considers that the lumbo-sacral form of the last lumbar vertebra, which stands between the lumbar and sacral vertebræ, does not indicate a gradual transition into a sacral vertebra, but rather an arrest in its development.[51]

When we examine a human sacrum we see that its first vertebra, the twenty-fifth of the series, is formed like the lumbar vertebræ in its upper part, setting aside those portions of it which form part of the lateral masses of the sacrum. These lateral masses, which serve as a support to the ilia, owe most of their substance to the first sacral vertebra. Thus, since it has to support the whole weight of the pre-sacral vertebræ, it is in fact a true _vertebra fulcralis_.

Holl justly says that there are few instances in which the human _os sacrum_ consists of less than five vertebræ, and in no case are there less than four. In such a case the first sacral vertebra defines the pre- and post-sacral segment of the vertebral column.

In anthropoids the lower segment of the lumbar vertebral column is deeply sunk between the high, wide, and flattened ilia, which converge closely towards the vertebral column. In man these bones are not so much higher than the base of the sacrum, and their crests diverge more widely from the vertebral column. In the large apes the lateral masses of the sacrum are comparatively deeply set below their anchylosis with the pelvic bones. In an aged male gorilla, for instance, the transverse processes of the two lower lumbar vertebræ often extend to the hinder borders of the ilia, although the second of the lower lumbar vertebræ is somewhat higher than the top of the crest of the ilium. This is still more remarkably the case in an old male chimpanzee, in which the lowest lumbar vertebra seems to be wedged in between the two ilia. In a young male chimpanzee, and in the adult female, both the lower lumbar vertebræ are almost compressed between the upper segments of the ilia. In the orang the lowest lumbar vertebra is placed between the ilia. Out of the five sacral vertebræ the first and second are articulated with these bones.

In the gorilla the highest sacral vertebra, the twenty-fifth of the series, is the _fulcralis_. In this animal the first to the third sacral vertebræ form part of the connection with the crests of the ilia. In the chimpanzee the twenty-fifth is also the _vertebra fulcralis_, and from the first to the third are likewise connected with the ilia, but the third only to a limited extent; and in young males and in old females the connection is generally confined to the first and second sacral vertebræ. In the orang-utan the twenty-fourth vertebra is generally the _fulcralis_.

In the gibbon the twenty-fifth vertebra is usually the _fulcralis_. In the siamang I found that the fifth of the five lumbar vertebræ was between the ilia. Out of the five sacral vertebræ the first and second were articulated with the said pelvic bones. In _Hylobates agilis_ the fifth and sixth of the six lumbar vertebræ were between the ilia, and the first and second of the five sacral bones were articulated with these.

In the vertebral columns of the gorilla, the chimpanzee, and the orang we may observe an inconsiderable forward projection between the penultimate cervical and the second and third dorsal vertebræ. In the region below the second lumbar vertebra a similar forward projection may sometimes be observed. The so-called promontory at the entrance of the pelvis, that is, in the region developed between the lumbar and sacral vertebræ, which is remarkable in man, is only faintly apparent in anthropoids. The vertebral column is arched behind, since there is a dorsal curvature (see Figs. 17 and 23).

Aeby observes that the bodies of the vertebræ are tapering in the gorilla, and this is, in fact, the case. In climbing, or when he goes on all fours, the dorsal curvature of an anthropoid maintains its position. This curvature is still more apparent when the animal, in climbing, withdraws his body from the tree, mast, or whatever it may be, and bends forward his head. A similar dorsal curvature of the vertebral column may be observed in men who stiffen their hands and feet to climb up a tree or mast. If an anthropoid holds himself so erect as to be able to place his hands behind his head, the dorsal curvature of his spine is necessarily straightened, and indeed it becomes rather a ventral curvature.

The bony pelvis of anthropoids, with its high, narrow, and projecting ilia, and the lowest lumbar vertebræ deeply embedded between them, together with the sacral and coccygeal vertebræ, which directly remind us of the vertebræ of a rudimentary tail, present the points of unlikeness with the human skeleton in this part of the skeleton of these animals in the strongest light (comp. Figs. 40 and 41).

The bony thorax of anthropoids is distinguished from the human thorax in normal cases by the abrupt way in which it widens outwards. The thorax of the gorilla, and the widely diverging pelvic bones, which enclose the belly and give it a tun-shaped form, contrast with the graceful moulding of the corresponding parts of the human form.

Certain peculiarities in the structure of the bones of the shoulder-girdle and of the extremities of anthropoids, in which they differ from corresponding parts in the human structure, have been already mentioned.

With reference to the humerus of the gorilla, Aeby asserts that the head of the bone forms a cycloid, placed transversely, while in man its shape is that of the segment of a sphere. But I have pointed out in my treatise on the gorilla that there is a not inconsiderable variation in the form of the head of the humerus in these animals, and it is sometimes cycloidal or vertically-cycloidal, sometimes a segment of a true sphere. In the chimpanzee, orang, and gibbon this part of the humerus is always a segment of a sphere, while in man its form is not equally invariable. Aeby further observes that the transverse-cycloidal form of the head of the humerus in the gorilla justifies the inference that this animal, in the use of its fore-limbs, is accustomed to turn them transversely on their axis. But the direct observation of a living anthropoid, as well as the examination of its dead body, make it clear that the action of the ball and socket is remarkably free, and this theoretical surmise is contradicted by the perfection of the natural mechanism.

Fig. 40.--Human skeleton.--_a_, Parietal bone. _b_, Frontal bone.
_c_, Cervical vertebræ. _d_, Sternum. _e_, Lumbar vertebra.
_f_, Ulna. _g_, Radius. _h_, Carpus. _i_, Metacarpus.
_k_, Phalanges. _l_, Tibia. _m_, Fibula. _n_, Tarsus.
_o_, Metatarsal bones. _p_, Phalanges. _q_, Patella. _r_, Femur.
_s_, Os innominatum. _t_, Humerus. _u_, Clavicle.
]

The excessive curvature of the forearm which we notice in the gorilla and the chimpanzee in their natural condition is rare in man, and when it does occur it must be regarded as an abnormal and pathological phenomenon.

The orang-utan always displays a ninth carpal bone, corresponding to de Blainville’s _os intermedium_ and Gegenbaur’s _os centrale carpi_. In a very young animal I found that this small bone was furnished with a peculiar point of ossification. The bony structure of the wrist is developed in the following succession:--First, the _os magnum_ and unciform bones; second, the scaphoid bone; third, the trapezium; fourth, the semi-lunar bone; fifth, the cuneiform bone; sixth, _os centrale carpi_; seventh, the trapezoid bone. The pisiform bone and the sesamoid bone, between the trapezium and the scaphoid bone, of which we shall speak presently in their relation to the muscular system, are at first simply cartilaginous.

Up to this time my search for this ninth carpal bone in the gorilla and the chimpanzee has been fruitless, since its occurrence is only exceptional. In the gibbon it is plainly inserted between the scaphoid, semi-lunar, trapezoid, and _os magnum_. Gegenbaur considers the _os centrale_ to be a true constituent of the wrist, dating from an earlier condition, but he has nothing to suggest as to its subsequent survival. Rosenberg has lately given an incontestable proof of the presence of this bone in the human embryo. It is generally absorbed again, but sometimes it persists, and may be found in an adult as a well-formed ninth carpal bone. Cases of the persistence of the _os centrale_ in man have been chiefly collected and published by the diligence of the Russian anatomist, Gruber. It is now suggested that there may also be indications of _os centrale_ in the carpus of embryos of the gorilla and chimpanzee, but up to this time materials for such researches have been wanting.

I cannot accept the theory that _os centrale carpi_ is merely a detached portion of the scaphoid bone. In a very young chimpanzee this bone is undoubtedly superficially indented with two transverse furrows, but the three segments display only one uniform development of bone. The distinct formation of _os centrale_, and its occasional appearance in man, testify that it has an independent existence. Rosenberg holds that this bone is not merely the _os centrale_ of mammals, but that it is homologous with the two _ossa centralia_ of the fossil _Enaliosauria_. It has become abortive in proportion to the reduction in size which has taken place.[52] There would be no great difficulty in tracing back this bone to remote types of vertebrate animals, even as far as the _Urodela_ (Wiedersheim) of Eastern Asia.[53] The persistence of this bone in man must be regarded as a reversion, not as an arrest, of development.

Fig. 42.--Skeleton of human hand, back view. _a_, Scaphoid bone.
_b_, Semi-lunar bone. _c_, Cuneiform bone. _d_, Pisiform bone.
_e_, Trapezium. _f_, Trapezoid bone. _g_, Os magnum. _h_,
Unciform bone. _l-l′_, Metacarpal bones. _m-m′_ and _nn_,
Phalanges.
]

On the femur of several mammals, especially in the horse, ass, rhinoceros, and tapir, and more slightly indicated in the carnivora and other families, there is, in addition to the two great and small trochanters, a third, termed by Waldeyer _trochanter tertius_.[54] Such a formation, low, blunt, and generally placed at the top of the outer ridge of the superior bifurcation of the _linea aspera_, may be observed in human skeletons of all races, but is either absent in anthropoids or only faintly indicated. Virchow justly regards its presence as theromorphic, but not as a characteristic of savage or lower races.[55]

The human tibia displays in some instances a compression or lateral flattening of its shaft or centre-piece, so that its transverse diameter is quite out of proportion to its depth. Such a tibia is termed sword-bladed, or platycnemic. Bones of this form have been chiefly discovered in ancient deposits, as, for instance, at Gibraltar, at Perthi-Chwareu, in Wiltshire, in Lozère, at Clichy, at Saint-Suzanne (Sarthe), and especially at Cro-Magnon (Fig. 43), Janischwek, etc.

A similar formation has also been observed among men belonging to cultured races, both of ancient and modern times. Virchow, for example, discovered such bones in Transcaucasia (of the third and fourth century of the Christian era) and at Hanai-Tepe in Troas. All the large schools of anatomy in Europe contain specimens of tibiæ, which are to some extent platycnemic. These are also observed in the skeletons of primitive peoples of our time, as for example in the Negritos, Kanakas, and other African races. While some scientific men regard these bones as the result of an unhealthy condition, and the effect of rachitis, others more justly ascribe them to a vigorous exercise of the muscles in a one-sided direction. The idea expressed by Busk and others, that the platycnemic tibiæ discovered in ancient sites of Europe have belonged to a degraded race diffused over the whole continent, is contradicted by the wide diffusion of this characteristic, even in modern times. And it is doubtful whether platycnemy is absolutely restricted to the lower races. At Janischewek, Virchow found an extremely platycnemic tibia, exhumed from a kujawish grave of the Stone Age, which belonged to a skull remarkable for its unusual beauty and size, so that, taken by itself, the impression which it gave to an anatomist was that of a highly organized race.[56]

Fig. 43. Section through a platycnemic tibia from Cro-Magnon.

Fig. 44. Section through the tibia of a male gorilla.

Fig. 45. Section through the tibia of a male chimpanzee.
]

Comments

Log in to leave a comment.

Anthropoid apesChapter III (2)

0%36 min left in chapter