Prehistoric Man

these materials, other evidence is available in the form of certain products of human industry. These include such objects as implements of various

venience and partly in view of the cogency possessed by actual remains of the

arked relief. The specimens thus distinguished are known as the remains of Pithecanthropus erectus, on the one hand, and on th

stance is greater than that claimed for any

the course of human evolution. When the bones are examined, the contrast they provide with all human remains

thropus

e years 1891 and 1892 by Professor Dubois[1], who was engaged at the time on an investigation of the remains of various animals found embedded in a river-bank in Java. As is

to the Bibliography at

f his conclusions. Here we find described a creature of Pliocene age, presenting a form so extraordinary as hardly to be consi

brows and narrow forehead of a flattened skull, containing little more than half the weight of

stimating approximately the body-weight, while the capacity gives an indication of the brain-weight. The body-weight is asserted to have been about 70 kgm. (eleven stone) and the brain-wei

-utan

hropus er

n

on of the Javanese foss

y Professor Dubois but also by Professor Schwalbe, are confirmatory of the 'intermediate' position claimed for Pithecanthropus erectus. The molar teeth are of inadequate size if the skull-

been made to reduce the age of the strata further. As the matter stands, the difference is not very material, but Professor Dubois refuses to accept the revised estimate and still adheres to his own determination. Incidentally the more recent work (Blanckenhorn[2], 1910) has resulted in the discovery of a tooth claimed as

he line Gl-Op, representing a base-line of the brain-case. Pe, Pithecanthropus.

us. For if two skeletons are represented, one may be human, while the other is that of an ape. It is admitted that the larger bones were separated by a distance of forty-six feet. By way of meeting this criticism, it is submitted that the distance is by

lies in the fact that the human thigh-bone bears indications of an erect attitude, while the form of the skull gives guidance as to the size of the brain, and consequently to some extent provides a clue to the mental endowment of the individual. Whether the erect attitude or the characteristic brain-development was first obtained by man has been debated for many years. In this case, the evidence was taken to shew that the assumption of the erect attitude came as a means of surmounting the crux of t

on (in 1896), take into account all the characters of the ancient human remains even then available. For the evidence of those remains points to an order exactly the reverse of that just stated, and it indicates the early acquisition of a large and presumably active brain. And now that additi

be explained that the very contrast between the thigh-bone and the skull-cap in respect of these inf

s result comes the discovery that the characters of straightness and slenderness in the shaft of the bone from which the inference as to the erect attitude was largely drawn, do not give trustworthy evidence upon this point. In fact, a human thigh-bone may be much less straight and less slender than that of arboreal animals such as the Gibbon, the Cebus monkey, or the Le

oint remains, provided only that their original association be acknowledged. Should this assumption be granted, the claims put forward on behalf of his discovery by Professor Dubois seem to be justified. On the other hand, should the association of skull-cap and thigh-bone be rejected, the former has not lost all claim to the same position. For the most recent researche

berg or Ma

ctory paragraph of this chapter. This period was by no means barren in respect of other additions to the list of human fossils. But the other results (including even the finds at Taubach) are regarded as of sub

of any prominence at the chin, would have caused great hesitation in regard to the pronouncement of a decision as to the probable nature of the fossil. The one paradoxical feature is the relatively small size of the teeth. All of these have been preserved, though on the left side the crowns of four have been removed by accident in the process of clearing away some adherent e

. B a similar tracing from an unusually large jaw of an

replacing the very definite 'sigmoid' notch found in almost all human jaws (though the relative shallowness of this notch has been long recognised as distinctive of the lowest human types). The difference in vertical height between the uppermost points of the condyle (c) and the coronoid process (d) is therefore unusually small. On the other hand, the lower margin of the bone is undulating, so that it presents a hollow on each side, as well as o

his must not be ascribed to any lack of ardour on the part of archaeologists. More probable is it that with the lapse of time, the acceptance of an evolutionary interpretation of the origin of man has gained a wider circle of adherents

n the Mauer jaw and those of the highest apes on the one ha

the mandible of an Orang-utan comes nearest to the Mauer jaw. But other mandibles of the same kind of ape (Orang-utan) are very different. The chief difficulty in assigning the possessor of the Mauer jaw to a pithecoid stock has been mentioned already. It consists in the inadequate size of the teeth. In addition to thi

fe. It is to be remembered that special stress was laid by Professor Dubois (cf. p. 4) on the fact that the teeth of Pithecanthropus when compared with the skull-cap are inadequately small, if judged by the ape-standard of proportion. The characters of the teeth, in so far as upper and lower molars can be compared, present no obstacle to such an association, and in fact provide some additional evidence in its favour. The crucial point seems therefore to be the massiveness of the jaw. With regard to this, the following remarks may be made. First, that the skull-cap of Pithecanthropus is on all sides admitted to shew provision for powerful jaw-muscles. And further, in respect of actual measurements, the comparison of the transverse width of

sults of the comparisons that can be made will shew that the gap separating the jaw of Mauer

f time, still the intervening period does provide intermediate forms to bridge the gulf. Not the least interesting of many reflections conjured up by the Mauer jaw, is that this extraordinary form should be met with in a latitude so fa