Pithecanthropus erectus : a form from the ancestral stock of mankind / by Eugène Dubois.
- Eugène Dubois
- Date:
- 1900
Licence: In copyright
Credit: Pithecanthropus erectus : a form from the ancestral stock of mankind / by Eugène Dubois. Source: Wellcome Collection.
16/24 page 454
![these appear less bestial ” the smaller they get, while, on the contrary, the very ‘^bestial” iTeauderthal aud Spy skulls are very large. The smaller the absolute size of a cranium is, within the same species of mammals, the more significant is its relative size as compared with the rest of the body, and the more reduced are those features of the cranium that have directly to do with the size of the body and are especially related to the skeleton of the face. It is exactly these features that constitute the bestial marks of any skull. A skull that in comparison with that of normal man is so small and so ape-like in its form that it is declared by not a few experienced anatomists to be the skull of an ape, can not be human! The fossil skullcap has been, Avith more or less strong conviction, interpreted as follows: As that of an ape by— A s that of a man by— As an intermediate form by— B. Virchow. i W. Krause. 2 W. Waldeyer. * 0. Hamanu. ■* H. Ten Kate. ^ W. Turner. ® D. J. Cunningham. 2 A. Keith. ** B. Lydekker. ® Bud. Martin, m P. Matschie. “ P. To])inard. 12 E. Dubois. 12 L. Manouvrier. 1^ O.C. Marsh. 16 E. Haeckel, le A. Nehring. 12 B. V erneau. i® A. Pettit, m 1 Verliandl. Berl. Anthrop. Ges. 1895, pp. 81, 330,435, and Die Nation, 1895, No. 4, p. 53, 2Ibid.,p.78. 3 Ibid,, p. 88, and Antbrop. Congress, Kassel, 1895. * Gegenwart, Januar, 1895, p. 5. ®Nederlandsch Koloniaal Centraalblad, 1895, p. 128. ® Journal of Anatomy and Physiology, 1895, vol. 29, pp. 424-445. 2 Nature, vol. 51,1895, pp. 428-429. * Science Progress, 1895, vol. 3, pp. 348-369, and Proceed. Anat. Soc. February, 1895. ® Nature, vol. 51,1895, p. 291. 10 Globus, Bd. 67,1895, pp. 213-217. 11 Naturwissenschaftl. Wochenscbr., Bd. 10, pp. 81,82. 12 L’Anthropologie, 1895, tome 6, No. 5, pp. 605-607. 1* Jaarbock v. h. Mynwezen in Nederlandsch Indie, 1892. Pithecanthropus erectus, etc., Batavia, 1894. Leidener Zool. Congress, September 21,1895. Boy. Dublin Societj', November 20,1895. Anthrop. Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, November 25,1895. Berliner Gesellschaft f. Anthropol., Decem- ber 14,1895, etc. I'l Bulletin Soc. d’Anthrop. de Paris, 1895 (6),6, j). 12; 47 Bevue Scientifique, s6rie 4, tome 5, Mars 7, 1896, pp. 289-299. 10 American Journal of Science, 1895, vol. 69, pp. 144-147. 10 E. Haeckel, Systematische Phylogenie der Wirbeltiere, Berlin, 1895, p. 633. 1^ Naturwissenschaftl. Wochenschr., 1895. i®L’Anthropologie, 1895, tome 6, pp. 725, 726. 10Ibid., p. 726. Earlier (ibid., pp. 65-69) he considered it as human. In opposition to the view of the human character of the fossil skull, the two other views taken together constitute a majority, which cer- tainly would be considerably greater, namely, by an increase of the ifithecanthropists, if all the learned iieople who have expressed an opin- ion upon this fundamental specimen had openly published their views about it. It may also appear questionable whether this majority might not be increased through later expressions of the authors above cited.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b24880814_0018.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
