supraciliary　ridge；　would　convert　the　Australian　brain　case　into　a　form
  identical　with　that　of　the　aberrant　fossil。
  And　now；　to　return　to　the　fossil　skulls；　and　to　the　rank　which　they
  occupy　among；　or　beyond；　these　existing　varieties　of　cranial
  conformation。　　In　the　first　place；　I　must　remark；　that；　as　Professor
  Schmerling　well　observed　（'supra'；　p。　300）　in　commenting　upon　the　Engis
  skull；　the　formation　of　a　safe　judgment　upon　the　question　is　greatly
  hindered　by　the　absence　of　the　jaws　from　both　the　crania；　so　that　there
  is　no　means　of　deciding　with　certainty；　whether　they　were　more　or　less
  prognathous　than　the　lower　existing　races　of　mankind。　　And　yet；　as　we
  have　seen；　it　is　more　in　this　respect　than　any　other；　that　human　skulls
  vary；　towards　and　from；　the　brutal　typethe　brain　case　of　an　average
  dolichocephalic　European　differing　far　less　from　that　of　a　Negro；　for
  example；　than　his　jaws　do。　　In　the　absence　of　the　jaws；　then；　any
  judgment　on　the　relations　of　the　fossil　skulls　to　recent　Races　must　be
  accepted　with　a　certain　reservation。
  But　taking　the　evidence　as　it　stands；　and　turning　first　to　the　Engis
  skull；　I　confess　I　can　find　no　character　in　the　remains　of　that　cranium
  which；　if　it　were　a　recent　skull；　would　give　any　trustworthy　clue　as　to
  the　Race　to　which　it　might　appertain。　　Its　contours　and　measurements
  agree　very　well　with　those　of　some　Australian　skulls　which　I　have
  examinedand　especially　has　it　a　tendency　towards　that　occipital
  flattening；　to　the　great　extent　of　which；　in　some　Australian　skulls；　I
  have　alluded。　　But　all　Australian　skulls　do　not　present　this　flattening；
  and　the　supraciliary　ridge　of　the　Engis　skull　is　quite　unlike　that　of
  the　typical　Australians。
  On　the　other　hand；　its　measurements　agree　equally　well　with　those　of
  some　European　skulls。　And　assuredly；　there　is　no　mark　of　degradation
  about　any　part　of　its　structure。　　It　is；　in　fact；　a　fair　average　human
  skull；　which　might　have　belonged　to　a　philosopher；　or　might　have
  contained　the　thoughtless　brains　of　a　savage。
  The　case　of　the　Neanderthal　skull　is　very　different。　　Under　whatever
  aspect　we　view　this　cranium；　whether　we　regard　its　vertical　depression；
  the　enormous　thickness　of　its　supraciliary　ridges；　its　sloped　occiput；
  or　its　long　and　straight　squamosal　suture；　we　meet　with　ape…like
  characters；　stamping　it　as　the　most　pithecoid　of　human　crania　yet
  discovered。　　But　Professor　Schaaffhausen　states　（'supra'；　p。　308）；　that
  the　cranium；　in　its　present　condition；　holds　1033。24　cubic　centimetres
  of　water；　or　about　63　cubic　inches；　and　as　the　entire　skull　could　hardly
  have　held　less　than　an　additional　12　cubic　inches；　its　capacity　may　be
  estimated　at　about　75　cubic　inches；　which　is　the　average　capacity　given
  by　Morton　for　Polynesian　and　Hottentot　skulls。
  So　large　a　mass　of　brain　as　this；　would　alone　suggest　that　the　pithecoid
  tendencies；　indicated　by　this　skull；　did　not　extend　deep　into　the
  organization；　and　this　conclusion　is　borne　out　by　the　dimensions　of　the
  other　bones　of　the　skeleton　given　by　Professor　Schaaffhausen；　which
  show　that　the　absolute　height　and　relative　proportions　of　the　limbs
  were　quite　those　of　an　European　of　middle　stature。　　The　bones　are
  indeed　stouter；　but　this　and　the　great　development　of　the　muscular
  ridges　noted　by　Dr。　Schaaffhausen；　are　characters　to　be　expected　in
  savages。　　The　Patagonians；　exposed　without　shelter　or　protection　to　a
  climate　possibly　not　very　dissimilar　from　that　of　Europe　at　the　time
  during　which　the　Neanderthal　man　lived；　are　remarkable　for　the
  stoutness　of　their　limb　bones。
  FIG。　31。Ancient　Danish　skull　from　a　tumulus　at　Borreby：　　one…third　of
  the　natural　size。　From　a　camera　lucida　drawing　by　Mr。　Busk。
  In　no　sense；　then；　can　the　Neanderthal　bones　be　regarded　as　the　remains
  of　a　human　being　intermediate　between　Men　and　Apes。　　At　most；　they
  demonstrate　the　existence　of　a　man　whose　skull　may　be　said　to　revert
  somewhat　towards　the　pithecoid　typejust　as　a　Carrier；　or　a　Pouter；　or
  a　Tumbler；　may　sometimes　put　on　the　plumage　of　its　primitive　stock；　the
  'Columba　livia'。　　And　indeed；　though　truly　the　most　pithecoid　of　known
  human　skulls；　the　Neanderthal　cranium　is　by　no　means　so　isolated　as　it
  appears　to　be　at　first；　but　forms；　in　reality；　the　extreme　term　of　a
  series　leading　gradually　from　it　to　the　highest　and　best　developed　of
  human　crania。　On　the　one　hand；　it　is　closely　approached　by　the
  flattened　Australian　skulls；　of　which　I　have　spoken；　from　which　other
  Australian　forms　lead　us　gradually　up　to　skulls　having　very　much　the
  type　of　the　Engis　cranium。　　And；　on　the　other　hand；　it　is　even　more
  closely　affined　to　the　skulls　of　certain　ancient　people　who　inhabited
  Denmark　during　the　'stone　period；'　and　were　probably　either
  contemporaneous　with；　or　later　than；　the　makers　of　the　'refuse　heaps；'
  or　'Kjokkenmoddings'　of　that　country。
  The　correspondence　between　the　longitudinal　contour　of　the　Neanderthal
  skull　and　that　of　some　of　those　skulls　from　the　tumuli　at　Borreby；　very
  accurate　drawings　of　which　have　been　made　by　Mr。　Busk；　is　very　close。
  The　occiput　is　quite　as　retreating；　the　supraciliary　ridges　are　nearly
  as　prominent；　and　the　skull　is　as　low。　　Furthermore；　the　Borreby　skull
  resembles　the　Neanderthal　form　more　closely　than　any　of　the　Australian
  skulls　do；　by　the　much　more　rapid　retrocession　of　the　forehead。　　On　the
  other　hand；　the　Borreby　skulls　are　all　somewhat　broader；　in　proportion
  to　their　length；　than　the　Neanderthal　skull；　while　some　attain　that
  proportion　of　breadth　to　length　（80：100）　which　constitutes
  brachycephaly。
  In　conclusion；　I　may　say；　that　the　fossil　remains　of　Man　hitherto
  discovered　do　not　seem　to　me　to　take　us　appreciably　nearer　to　that
  lower　pithecoid　form；　by　the　modification　of　which　he　has；　probably；
  become　what　he　is。　　And　considering　what　is　now　known　of　the　most
  ancient　races　of　men；　seeing　that　they　fashioned　flint　axes　and　flint
  knives　and　bone…skewers；　of　much　the　same　pattern　as　those　fabricated
  by　the　lowest　savages　at　the　present　day；　and　that　we　have　every　reason
  to　believe　the　habits　and　modes　of　living　of　such　people　to　have
  remained　the　same　from　the　time　of　the　Mammoth　and　the　tichorhine
  Rhinoceros　till　now；　I　do　not　know　that　this　result　is　other　than　might
  be　expected。
  Where；　then；　must　we　look　for　primaeval　Man？　　Was　the　oldest　'Homo
  sapiens'　pliocene　or　miocene；　or　yet　more　ancient？　　In　still　older
  strata　do　the　fossilized　bones　of　an　Ape　more　anthropoid；　or　a　Man　more
  pithecoid；　than　any　yet　known　await　the　researches　of　some　unborn
  paleontologist？
  Time　will　show。　　But；　in　the　meanwhile；　if　any　form　of　the　doctrine　of
  progressive　development　is　correct；　we　must　extend　by　long　epochs　the
  most　liberal　estimate　that　has　yet　been　made　of　the　antiquity　of　Man。
  End