The Project Gutenberg eBook of Anthropoid apes
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Anthropoid apes
Author: Robert Hartmann
Release date: February 27, 2025 [eBook #75484]
Language: English
Original publication: London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co, 1885
Credits: deaurider and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANTHROPOID APES ***
Transcriber’s Note: Italics are enclosed in _underscores_; references
to specific area within illustrations, originally printed in smaller
point-size numbers, are enclosed in ~tildes~.
Additional notes will be found near the end of this ebook.
THE
INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC SERIES.
VOL. LIII.
ANTHROPOID APES
BY
ROBERT HARTMANN
PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BERLIN
WITH SIXTY-THREE ILLUSTRATIONS
LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH & CO., 1, PATERNOSTER SQUARE
1885
(_The rights of translation and of reproduction are reserved_)
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR ACQUAINTANCE WITH ANTHROPOID APES 1
II. THE EXTERNAL FORM OF ANTHROPOID APES 11
III. THE EXTERNAL AND ANATOMICAL STRUCTURE OF ANTHROPOID
APES, COMPARED WITH THE HUMAN STRUCTURE 55
IV. ON VARIETIES IN THE FORM OF ANTHROPOIDS 210
V. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION, HABITS IN A STATE OF NATURE,
AND NATIVE NAMES OF ANTHROPOIDS 225
VI. LIFE IN CAPTIVITY 257
VII. POSITION OF ANTHROPOIDS IN THE ZOOLOGICAL SYSTEM 285
VIII. A SUMMARY, TOGETHER WITH SOME FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS
OF THE ANTHROPOMORPHISM OF THE GORILLA, CHIMPANZEE,
ORANG, AND GIBBON 290
APPENDIX 309
INDEX 321
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
FIG. PAGE
1. Aged male gorilla 14
2. Ear of a male adult gorilla 17
3. The young male gorilla, from the specimen in the Berlin
Aquarium of 1876–77 22
4. The same animal at a still earlier age 23
5. Ear of chimpanzee 31
6. Young chimpanzee 33
7. Head and shoulders of an aged male orang-utan 38
8. Ear of the orang-utan 39
9. Adult male orang-utan 40
10. Head of the white-handed gibbon 47
11. Ear of the white-handed gibbon 48
12. Left hand of _Hylobates albimanus_ 49
13. Left foot of the same animal 50
14. A wauwau in the left foreground (_Hylobates agilis_); in
the background to the right, two slender apes
(_Semnopithecus entellus_) 51
15. Skull of an aged male gorilla in profile 56
16. Front view of the skull of an aged male gorilla 57
17. Skeleton of an aged male gorilla 65
18. Skull of an aged male chimpanzee 69
19. Skull of a very young female chimpanzee 73
20. Skeleton of the forearm and hand of the Central African
bam-chimpanzee 74
21. Skeleton of foot of the Central African bam-chimpanzee 76
22. Skull of middle-aged female orang 77
23. Skeleton of young orang-utan 79
24. The Zulu king, Ketchwayo, in fighting array, with two of
his men 85
25. Aidanill, hairless Australian 88
26. The same in profile 88
27. Dewan, Aidanill’s sister 90
28. Human ear 93
29. Magot (_Innuus ecaudatus_) 94
30. Capucin ape (_Cebus capucinus_) 98
31. Hand of a very aged male gorilla 103
32. Hand of a Hammegh from Roseres, on the Blue Nile 104
33. Satan’s ape (_Pithecia Satanas_). Shows the formation and
mode of using the feet in apes of the New World 106
34. Human skull 108
35. The Neanderthal skull 115
36. Lower jaw of Moulin-Quignon 119
37. Naulette lower jaw 120
38. Lower jaw of chimpanzee 120
39. Sagittal section through the skull of a bam-chimpanzee 123
40. Human skeleton 132
41. Skeleton of an aged male gorilla 133
42. Skeleton of human hand, back view 136
43. Section through a platycnemic tibia from Cro-Magnon 138
44. Section through the tibia of a male gorilla 138
45. Section through the tibia of a male chimpanzee 138
46. Skeleton of the human foot, seen from above 140
47. Coaita (_Ateles paniscus_) 142
48. Muscles of the head and face of a European 151
49. Head-muscles of a Monjalese negro 152
50. Head-muscles of gorilla presented in Fig. 3 153
51. Palmar muscles of man 168
52. Palmar muscles of gorilla 169
53. Muscular system of the back of a gibbon’s hand 170
54. Muscular system of the human foot 177
55. Muscles on the upper side of chimpanzee’s foot 178
56. The brain of an orang, seen from the side 191
57. Brain of the chimpanzee, seen from above 192
58. Brain of gorilla, side view 193
59. Brain of orang, seen from above 194
60. Longitudinal section of a gorilla’s brain 196
61. Mafuca 216
62. The home of the gorilla 230
63. Climbing orang-utan, seen from behind 244
ANTHROPOID APES.
CHAPTER I.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR ACQUAINTANCE WITH ANTHROPOID APES.[1]
Our first acquaintance with the great anthropoid apes dates from the
times of remote antiquity. The West Coast of Africa, which is the
abode of these animals, was known to the Carthaginians as early as
B.C. 500. In B.C. 470 Hanno set out with sixty fifty-oared galleys,
laden with colonists and merchandise, on a grand expedition across
Morocco to Upper Guinea. The object in view was partly mercantile,
partly undertaken with the purpose of establishing a colony. It seems
that at that time pioneering expeditions had previously taught them
how far the coast was adapted for colonization. The Carthaginians met
with “_gorillai_” on the lower range of the mountains of the Isle of
Sherboro, and in the mountainous district of Sierra Leone(1). These
are described as hairy sylvan creatures who replied to the attacks of
the seafarers by throwing stones at them. Three of these monsters, of
the female sex, were captured, but they bit and scratched so furiously
that it was necessary to kill them on the spot. Pliny relates that at
the time of the Roman invasion, B.C. 146, two of the skins obtained
on this occasion were still preserved at Carthage, in the temple of
Astarte(2). It was subsequently shown that chimpanzees, not true
gorillas, were described in these “gorillai.” The latter animals are
not now found so far north.
[1] A list of the numerous authorities for the substance
of this chapter is placed at the end of the volume.
An old representation of the chimpanzee, in mosaic, was found on the
pavement of the temple of Fortuna at Præneste (now Palestrina). This
mosaic is now in a museum at Rome, and has been described by several
authors. It represents a scene in tropical Africa, probably on the
Upper Nile. I find it difficult to recognize the chimpanzee on the
mosaic amid the giraffes, hippopotami, crocodiles, and the other
representatives of the animal world of tropical Africa(3). But it is
well known that these large apes are found on some of the streams of
the Upper Nile, as in Niam-Niam and Uganda. Pliny writes of these
animals: “On the Indian mountains to the south, in the land of the
Catharcludi, there are satyrs. These are the swiftest of creatures,
sometimes going on all fours, sometimes upright like men, and they are
so active that they can only be captured when old or sick”(4). These
satyrs have been identified with the orang-utan, but the gibbon may
also be intended, which is swifter and more agile, when in an upright
position, than the orang-utan.
Subsequent to the remote period which we have cited, there is a long
silence respecting these remarkable animals. Only at the time when
Portugal became subject to the power of Spain, we hear something about
them from Congo and Angola. The sailor Eduardo Lopez gave an account of
the chimpanzee, which was published by Pigafetta in 1598 (5). There are
later accounts of very large apes in the writings of Pedro da Cintra
(6), Father Merolla of Sorrento (7), Froger (8), and William Smith (9).
Smith gives a representation of the chimpanzee under the erroneous name
of the mandril (_Cynocephalus Maimon_). The illustration is bad, but
it may be recognized by his description. In 1641 the Dutch anatomist
N. van Tulpe (Tulpius) gave a better illustration of this anthropoid
(10). This naturalist observed that the animal in question, _Homo
sylvestris_ or orang-utan (_Satyrus indicus_), is called quojas morrou
by the Africans. An anatomical description of the chimpanzee, which is
still of great value, was given by Tyson in 1699 (11). The anatomical
illustrations included in this work are remarkably well executed for
that time.
Our biological acquaintance with the West African anthropoids is
considerably increased by the account given in the sixteenth century by
the adventurer Battel, of Leigh, in Essex. This man passed through the
forests of Lower Guinea, as sergeant of the Portuguese troops under
the command of the Governor of Angola, Don Manuel Silveira Pereira.
In 1613 Battel’s account was published by his neighbour Purchas in
his _Pilgrims_ (12). Battel speaks of two kinds of large apes, the
engeco and the pongo, which inhabited the forest on the banks of the
Banna and the Mayombe. The engeco corresponds to the ndjéko or nschégo
(chimpanzee), the pongo to the n’pungu of Loango, or the gorilla.
Battel’s description of the habits of these animals affords some
characteristic touches which will concern us presently. We may date our
earliest acquaintance with the largest of all the anthropoids from this
adventurer’s career.
The Dutch physician Oliver Dapper published in 1668 a detailed
description of Africa (13), in which there is much of value, and he
mentions the large apes, called quojas morrau or morrou, which inhabit
the kingdom of Congo (14). By these he apparently means the chimpanzee.
Some account, unfortunately rather vague, of the gorilla has been
recently given by Bowdich in his very interesting work on the “Mission
of the Anglo-African Company to Ashanti” (15). He says that there are
several remarkable species of apes in the territory of the Gaboon,
among which the ingenu (gorilla) is the strangest. The natives asserted
that this animal is much larger than the orang-utan, generally five
feet tall, and four feet broad from shoulder to shoulder.
In 1847 Dr. Savage, a Protestant missionary on the Gaboon, reported
to the distinguished anatomist Owen that there was an ape in that
country larger than the chimpanzee. In addition to this information,
he sent some drawings of skulls by the wife of an English missionary,
Prince, in which the supra-orbital arch is strongly developed. Savage
gave to the animal the name of _Troglodytes Gorilla_, to distinguish
it from _Troglodytes niger_, the chimpanzee. Owen also described two
skulls of gorillas, sent to him from the Gaboon (16). The skull of
a gorilla, sent to Boston by the missionary Wilson, was drawn and
described by Professor Jeffreys Wyman, and with it the notes of the
donor were also published (17). In 1851 the skeleton of a gorilla
reached Philadelphia through the medical missionary H. A. Ford, who
also published the latest accounts of the new anthropoid (18). In 1849
some remains of a gorilla reached Paris through Gautier Laboulaye,
and this valuable contribution to natural history was received by de
Blainville and Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire. In 1851 and 1852 more
perfect remains were presented to the Museum in Paris by Dr. Franquet
and Admiral Penaud. In the finely illustrated works by de Blainville
(19), Is. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (20), and Duvernoy (21), they are
represented with great care. A splendid illustration of one of these
specimens, excellently stuffed, consisting of an adult male, adorns
the _Photographie zoologique_, by L. Rousseau and A. Devéria, which
has, so far as I am aware, been published without any text (22). This
illustration is so true to nature that I made use of it in one of my
earlier publications (23).
Paul Belloni du Chaillu, born in North America of French parents,
and reared in his father’s mercantile house on the Gaboon, spent the
years 1855–65 in roaming through the lands bordering on the Gaboon,
the Ogōwē, and the Fernāo Vaz; he professed to have taken part in
gorilla-hunts, and he published several books about his travels (24).
Critical light has been thrown upon these works, especially by A. E.
Brehm and Winwood (25); the illustrations are defective, and the text
is full of tales of adventure. Du Chaillu’s information respecting the
African anthropoids was published in the _Proceedings of the Zoological
Society of London_ (26). His remarkable collection of the remains of
apes has been described by Jeffreys Wyman (27), to whom we are also
indebted for a notice of the materials collected by Savage (17).
Owen has published instructive anatomical treatises on the gorilla
and the chimpanzee, in addition to those already cited. This English
professor had the opportunity of dissecting a young male gorilla,
imperfectly preserved in spirits of wine (28). The travellers Burton
(29), de Compiègne (30), Savongnan de Brazza (31), Lenz (32), the
members of the German-African Loango Expedition (33), and Von
Koppenfels (34) have also contributed some information respecting the
gorilla in a wild state. Other works on the zoology and anatomy of
this animal have been published by Duvernoy, already cited, Dahlbom
(35), Haeckel (36), Flower (37), Issel (38), Giglioli (39), Chapman
(40), Mivart (41), Macalister (41A), Von Aeby (42), Lucae (43), Ecker
(44), Bolau (45), Pansch (46), Lenz (47), A. B. Meyer (48), R. Meyer
(49), Bischoff (50), Ehlers (51), Virchow (52), Von Bär (53), by the
author of this work (54), etc. Duvernoy, Chapman, Bischoff, Bolau,
Ehlers, and I have, like Owen, been able to dissect perfect specimens
of the gorilla. Two of the specimens which came into my hands were
unquestionably in the best condition, since I obtained them immediately
after their deaths in Berlin. A larger specimen of a female, 1000 mm.
tall, was in worse preservation, yet still quite available for the
purposes of study.
The list of anatomical treatises on the gorilla is not yet exhausted.
Valuable information may be found in the anthropological works by C.
Vogt (55), in the writings of Pruner-Bey (56), and Magitot (57), in
Darwin’s works (58), in _Histoire Naturelle des Mammifères_, by Gervais
(59), in Huxley’s _Anatomy of Vertebrated Animals_ (60), in Flower’s
_Osteology of the Mammalia_ (61), in Giebel’s _Odontographie_ (62), and
in many other handbooks and treatises on natural history, which want of
room forbids me to mention.
In 1860, so far as I am aware, the first living gorilla reached
England. It survived its arrival seven months, and a good illustration
of this creature, accompanied by a brief description, has been recently
published in the _Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London_
(63). In 1876, towards the end of June, Dr. Falckenstein brought the
second living gorilla from Loango to Berlin. It had been kept in
confinement in that country at the German station Chinchoxo since 1874,
and it died on November 13, 1877, at the Berlin Aquarium. Dr. Hermes
obtained a third specimen in September, 1881, which died soon after
its arrival in Berlin. In 1883 a fourth still survived in the Berlin
Aquarium.
The chimpanzee became the more general object of zoological and
anatomical study at an earlier period, since the species occupied
a wider area than the gorilla, and is more easily captured. I have
already mentioned Hanno’s observations on the subject, and the animal
described by von Tulpe. In 1740 Buffon had seen a young specimen of the
chimpanzee, and another was in existence in London at the same time. In
vol. 35, pl. 2, of his Natural History, Buffon gives an illustration of
the chimpanzee, and pl. 3 represents an orang-utan, not very true to
nature, but still recognizable (64). It is commonly supposed that the
Dutch traveller Bosman, cited by Buffon, was acquainted both with the
gorilla and the chimpanzee. He speaks of an ape about five feet high,
living near Fort Wimba “d’une couleur fauve” (65). Although Buffon was
acquainted with the names chimpanzee and chimpezée, as well as with
Battel’s surmises about the pongo and the enjeco, yet he regarded the
jockos, pongos, and orangs as animals all belonging to one species. The
young African animals observed by him and von Tulpe (chimpanses) must
have been young pongos (66). The name pongo was afterwards applied to
the old misshapen orang-utan. The skin and skeleton of the chimpanzee
observed by Buffon when still alive, was preserved in the Zoological
Museum in Paris as late as 1842 (67). There is a beautiful illustration
of a young female which lived in the menagerie of the Jardin des
Plantes in Paris in 1838 in the catalogue of this noble institution
(68). This illustration, in which the animal is represented on all
fours, has since been frequently copied. Copies have also been made of
the drawings of the same individual in a walking position, and swinging
by one arm, which originally appeared in Vélins’ famous catalogue of
the Museum of Paris. Is. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and Dahlbom have given
good illustrations of the head and body of an old male chimpanzee (69).
Numerous, and for the most part correct, pictures of the chimpanzee
have been given in several modern works and illustrated papers (70).
Undoubtedly the best representations of the chimpanzee, corrected from
photographs taken from life, are found in my osteological treatise on
the gorilla which appeared in 1880, and also in the little book which
preceded it (71). The form and mode of life of this species of ape
are fairly well described by Bischoff (72), as well as in the books
already mentioned, and especially in those by Temminck (73), Gervais,
Reichenbach, and Brehm. Recently the opportunities of describing the
bodies of chimpanzees have been frequent. Remarks on the anatomy of
this animal may also be found in the works of Tyson (11), Vrolik (74),
Champneys (75), Brühl (76), and Schroeder van der Kolk and Vrolik (77),
as well as in the works we have already mentioned by Owen, Duvernoy,
Bischoff, Issel, Giglioli, Lenz, etc. Du Chaillu (26), Duvernoy (78),
Bischoff (50), Gratiolet and Alix (79), A. B. Meyer (80), and the
author of this work (81) have treated of the external form and internal
structure of new species of apes, and varieties of the chimpanzee.
Much has been written about the orang-utan since Vosmaer’s (82) day,
among others by Rademacher (83), Wurmb (84), Griffith (85), Temminck
(86), Schlegel and S. Müller (87), Is. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (88),
Brooke (89), Abel (90), and Wallace (91). Camper (92), Owen (93), J.
Müller (94), Schlegel and S. Müller (95), Heusinger (96), Dumortier
(97), Brühl (98), Bischoff, Langer (99), etc., have studied the anatomy
of this animal. Good illustrations of the orang-utan are found in
Vélins’ catalogue, copied by Chenu (100) and Gervais (101), and in
Wallace; also in the designs by Mützel (102) and Max (103), and in my
work on the Gorilla, already cited.
It had been already shown by Tilesius (104) and Cuvier (105) that
Wurmb’s young pongo is identical with the orang of Linnæus. We now
know certainly that the name pongo (n’pungu in Loango) should only be
applied to the gorilla.
The fourth and smallest species of anthropoid apes, the Indian
long-armed apes or gibbons, have been recently described, with
reference to their form and mode of life, by various travellers and
naturalists, especially by Duvaucel (106), Bennet (107), Martin (108),
Lewis (109), S. Müller (110), Diard (111); also by Buffon (112), Is.
Geoffrey Saint-Hilaire (113), and Blyth (114), etc. Gulliver (115),
Bischoff (116), and the author of this work have studied the anatomy of
these creatures.
CHAPTER II.
THE EXTERNAL FORM OF ANTHROPOID APES.
In the gorilla, the chimpanzee, and the orang-utan the external form is
subject to essential modifications, according to the age and sex. The
difference between the sexes is most strongly marked in the gorilla,
and these differences are least apparent in the gibbon.
When a young male gorilla is compared with an aged animal of the same
species, we are almost tempted to believe that we have to do with two
entirely different creatures. While the young male still displays an
evident approximation to the human structure, and develops in its
bodily habits the same qualities which generally characterize the
short-tailed apes of the Old World, with the exception of the baboon,
the aged male is otherwise formed. In the latter case the points of
resemblance to the human type are far fewer; the aged animal has become
a gigantic ape, retaining indeed in the structure of his hands and
feet the characteristics of the primates, while the protruding head
is something between the muzzle of the baboon, the bear, and the
boar. Simultaneously with these remarkable alterations of the external
structure there occurs a modification of the skeleton. The skull of an
aged male gorilla becomes more prognathous, and the incisor teeth have
almost attained the length of those of lions and tigers. On the upper
part of the skull, which is rounded in youth, great bony crests are
developed on the crown of the head and on the occiput, and these are
supported by the high, spinous processes of the cervical vertebræ, and
thus supply the starting-point for the powerful muscles of the neck and
jaw. The supra-orbital arches are covered with wrinkled skin, and the
already savage, and indeed revolting, appearance of the old gorilla is
thereby increased. A comparison of the two illustrations (Figs. 1 and
3) which accompany the text, will make this clear.
These distinctions are not so striking in the female as in the male
gorilla. Although there is much which is bestial in the appearance
of an aged female, yet the crests, so strongly marked in the male,
the projecting orbits, and strong muscular pads are absent in the
female, as well as the prognathous form of the skull and the length
and thickness of the canine teeth. The aged female gorilla is not, in
her whole structure, so far removed from the condition of the same sex
in youth as is the aged male. The structure of the female has on the
whole more in common with the human form. It has been said, and indeed
on good authority, that the female type should take the foremost place
in the study of the animal structure, since it is the more universal.
But H. von Nathusius maintains that we must take both sexes into
consideration in the study of domestic animals, since both are needed
to determine the breed.[2] I accept this condition in the scientific
study and description of wild animals also, of every kind and species.
All that is said of the universal type of the female animal is and
must remain in my eyes a mere phrase. Only the accurate observation of
males and females, and of young individuals of both sexes, can throw
sufficient light on the history of the race. The male animal is the
larger, and predominant with respect to the complete development of
certain peculiarities of form in the specific organism, since these
are doubtfully present in the adult female, and are either altogether
absent in the immature young, or only rudimentary.
Let us now consider, in the first place, the prototype of the species,
the aged male gorilla in the full strength of his bodily development
(Fig. 1). This animal, when standing upright, is more than six feet
in height, or 2000 mm. The head is 300 mm. in length. The occiput
appears to be broader below than above, since the upper part slopes
like a gabled roof towards the high, longitudinal crest of the vertex.
The projecting supra-orbital arches start prominently from the upper
and central contour of the skull. In this species, as in other apes,
and indeed among mammals generally, and especially in the case of the
carnivora, ruminants, and multi-ungulates, eyebrows are present.
In the gorilla these consist of a rather scanty growth of coal-black
bristles, about 40 mm. in length. Beneath the projecting supra-orbital
arches are the eyes, opening with somewhat narrow slits, and with lids
which display many and deep longitudinal folds. The upper lid is set
with longer and thicker eyelashes than the lower. The dark eyes glow
between the lids with a ferocious expression.
[Illustration: Fig. 1.--Aged male gorilla.]
The bridge of the nose rises gradually outwards from between the inner
corners of the eyes, and is keel-shaped in the centre. This part of
the head is from 70 to 80 mm. in length, longer and narrower in one
individual, shorter and wider in another. The skin in this region is
covered with a network of wrinkles of varying size. The end of the
nose and the nostrils are high, conical, and very wide at the base.
This part of the nose, attached to the very projecting forehead, has
the effect of an altogether snout-like muzzle. It is intersected by a
central longitudinal furrow, which divides the whole tip of the nose
into two symmetrical halves. This furrow is more strongly marked in the
case of adult animals than in the young. The aperture of the nostrils
is large and triangular, with the cartilaginous point turned upwards,
and the edges applied to the bridge of the nose and to the cheeks
have a somewhat retreating appearance. The lateral margins of this
part of the nostril take an arched form, first diverging in different
directions, then gradually converging again towards the upper lip. The
lip is short, and this, combined with the large nose, gives a certain
resemblance to the mouth of an ox. This resemblance is the more
striking, as the whole of this region is covered with glandular skin of
a deep black colour, which is either glabrous or provided with a few
scattered hairs, but furnished with small flattened warts.
Below the eyes the cheeks are broad and very round, dwindling away and
becoming depressed in the lower part of the face. They are seamed with
curved wrinkles of varying depth, which tend downwards in the same
direction as the wrinkles on the lower eyelids. The short upper lip is
provided with oblique folds which converge outwards in the centre. The
points of the strong canine teeth, which in many individuals are from
38 to 40 mm. long, and 20 mm. wide, diverge a little from each other,
and stretch the upper lip in an oblique direction, so that this part
of the face takes the form of a triangular, bevelled surface, with its
prominent base-line between the canine teeth. It may also be observed
that in many individuals of this species the nose is not very deeply
set on the upper lip; that in others, again, the nose is decidedly
raised, and the lip only presents a small hem below the nose. In many
such cases the prognathism of the face is strongly marked, so as to
give a baboon-like effect. In other specimens, again, this debased type
is not allied with strongly marked prognathism.
If we take a front view of the skull of an aged male gorilla we see
that the upper edges of the great supra-orbital arches are bevelled
off below and at the sides. This bevelled form is repeated in the
broad cheek-bones, as we see them in front. The front view of the
head, and indeed of the whole animal, presents a strongly projecting
contour, an impression which is strengthened by the puffed cheeks, with
their lateral pads of fat. The lower jaw, with its scarcely indicated
chin, retreats in the centre and dwindles into a triangular form. This
contour is characteristic of the species. The whole skin of the face is
glossy, set with few hairs, and of a deep black colour.
[Illustration: Fig. 2.--Ear of a male adult gorilla.]
The ear (Fig. 2) averages 60 mm. in length, and from 36 to 40 mm. in
width. It seems to be fastened to the head by the back and upper part,
is generally of an oval shape, and furnished with a strongly marked
helix. The helix varies in width in different individuals, and often
terminates on its inner edge in the projecting peaked excrescence
described by Darwin, of which I shall have more to say presently. The
anti-helix, tragus, and anti-tragus, and the cleft which lies between
these two latter parts (_incisura inter tragica_) are generally fully
developed; the lobule is more rarely present. Individual variations in
the special structure of these parts may frequently be observed.
The strong trapezoid muscles are prominent on the neck, and when the
head is stretched they stand out like pillars on the sides of the neck.
Owing to the great development of the spinous processes of the cervical
vertebræ and of the muscles attached to them, and to the occipital
bones of the skull, the neck is very powerful, almost like that of a
bull. The shoulders are remarkable for their breadth, and the pectoral
muscles for their large size. The nipples of the breast, which are not
surrounded by any visible _areolæ_, stand out in youth, and afterwards
assume a horny texture which stiffens into a kind of bone. When one of
these animals is gorged with food the navel is still apparent on the
tun-shaped, rounded belly, of which the sides fall in when the stomach
is empty.
On the upper and forearms the plastic form of the strongly developed
flexor and extensor muscles is very apparent, testifying to the
enormous strength of the upper extremities. The hands are large,
and very wide, with short, thick fingers. The thumb, of which the
extremity takes a conical form, is short, extending little beyond the
middle of the second metacarpal bone. The extremities of the otherwise
broad fingers are somewhat laterally compressed. The fore-finger is
not materially shorter than the middle finger. The third finger is
sometimes shorter than, sometimes of the same length as, the first,
and the fourth is decidedly shorter. The back of the wrist is covered
with deep oblique folds. A network of wrinkles, oblique or curved,
also covers the skin on the back of the fingers, on which there are
callosities up to the first joint. The gorilla closes the fingers when
going on all fours, and turns the back of the hand on the ground, thus
producing this thickening of the upper skin on the joints. Callosities
of the same nature, although not so extensive, are not rare on the
second finger-joints. The palm of the hand is covered with a hard,
horny skin, generally beset with warts, especially at the roots of the
fingers. In spite of the blackness of the skin which covers them, these
characteristics are still apparent.
The fingers are united by a strong web, reminding us of the membrane
found on the otter and other web-footed animals, and reaching nearly
to the first finger-joint. A thick coat of hair extends to the root of
the fingers, although on the backs of the fingers there are only a few
isolated hairs.
The trunk of the body of a gorilla, seen from behind, somewhat
resembles a trapezium in form, of which the longer of the two parallel
sides extends between the shoulders, and the shorter between the two
halves of the pelvis. The longitudinal sides, which are not parallel,
correspond to the sides of the back. The arrangement of all the
lower part of the trunk, on which the bones of the pelvis stand out
prominently in an oblique direction, somewhat resembles a four-sided
pyramid with its apex reversed. The gluteal muscles are not strongly
developed. The tuberosity of the ischium projects in a somewhat angular
form.
While the external sexual organs of the male are so covered by the
wrinkled skin of the abdomen that they are not prominent in their
passive condition, those of the female are, on the contrary, very
apparent; the external lips of the vagina, provided with large nymphæ,
and a large clitoris, are only apparent when the sexual instinct is
excited.
The thighs are covered with strong muscles, which appear to be smoothed
off on the inner side, and somewhat arched on the outside. The lower
part of the leg is also muscular, and its section is of a long-oval
form; the region of the calf is more strongly developed than in other
anthropoids. The bones of the foot are not at all prominent, and the
same remark applies to those of the hand. The contour of the back of
the long, broad foot is flat; the sole is convex, covered with strong
muscles, and padded with layers of fat. When the animal puts the sole
of the foot on the ground, its muscles go back to the region of the
heel, and forward into the inner side of the foot, thus presenting the
primitive formation of a heel.
The great toe, as in all apes, is detached like a thumb from the other
toes, and can be used as such. The metatarsus serves as a base for its
projection, in the same manner as the thumb starts from the fore part
of the contour of the wrist. The great toe sometimes extends as far as
the joint between the first and second phalanges of the second toe,
sometimes nearly as far as the middle of the second phalanx. This
characteristic varies in different individuals. At the point of union
of the first metatarsal bone with the hinder extremity of the first
phalanx of the great toe, there is a round projection on the inner side
of the foot. The great toe is very broad at its root, then becomes
smaller, and widens again into a broad final phalanx. With its strong
lateral ridges of skin, which cover the sinews and cushions of fat, all
this part of the foot appears to be wide and flattened off from the
back to the sole.
The second, third, fourth, and fifth toes are more slender than the
great toe. The second toe is in most cases rather shorter than the
third. The third and fourth toes are almost of the same length,
and only a little longer than the second toe.[3] The fifth toe is
considerably shorter than the fourth. The last phalanges of the toes
taper in front, and are furnished on their lower surface with long,
laterally compressed pads. The section of such a phalanx is almost
trapezoidal, with a long upper parallel side. The upper part of the
foot, although generally flat, rises a little in the neighbourhood of
the first metatarsal bone, and slopes thence to its outer edge.
The hair grows thickly on the back of the foot as far as the extremity
of the metatarsal bones, more sparsely on the back of the toes.
There are strongly marked oblique furrows on this part of the foot,
especially on the joints, often combined with horny callosities,
since the animal sometimes doubles up the toes and runs upon the back
of them. The nails of the hands and feet are black, like the whole
of their skin-covering, distinctly grooved, very much arched, and
generally somewhat wider at the base than in front.
[Illustration: Fig. 3.--The young male gorilla, from the specimen in
the Berlin Aquarium of 1876–77.]
On the sole of the foot we find the region of the heel, the ball
of the great toe, in this case resembling the ball of a thumb, the
roots and tips of the toes, together with pads consisting of muscles,
tendons, and skin. The several divisions of these padded balls are
separated from each other by furrows which are longitudinal, oblique,
and transverse, and more or less distinct from each other. The black
skin which covers the sole of the foot is thick and horny, but provided
with a series of papillæ. The whole skin of an aged animal is of a deep
black colour, somewhat glossy, and covered with intersecting wrinkles.
[Illustration: Fig. 4.--The same animal at a still earlier age.]
The young male gorilla does not essentially differ from the old male
in its general and external appearance. Its skull is, however, without
the crest which characterizes the latter animal, and is still of a
rounded form in the region of the crown and occiput. At this age the
head is not so high at the back and on the top as in aged males. The
orbits are less prominent, the general aspect of the face is not so
decidedly prognathous, and the bridge of the nose is shorter. The lines
of the body in the young male are softer and less exaggerated, and the
expression of the face is less ferocious than in an aged male. The
horny callosities on the hands and feet are altogether wanting or only
faintly indicated, and the hands, fingers, and toes have not arrived at
the powerful development which we observe in the older animal. (Comp.
Figs. 3 and 4.)
Considerable differences may be observed in the whole structure of the
adult female gorilla. The animals of this sex are smaller and weaker
than males of the same age. The skull of the female is smaller and
more rounded than that of the male, and the great bony crests are also
absent. The orbits are less prominent, and a front view of the head
gives the impression of a trapezoidal form. The coronal arch rises
above this trapezoid. In the male, on the contrary, the crown seems to
lengthen above and behind into a pyramidal form. In the aged female
the bridge of the nose is generally shorter than in the aged male,
but even in this particular there is great variation in different
individuals. Sometimes the bridge of the nose in a female is much
depressed, and then the interval between the orbits and the end of the
nose is shorter: I intentionally avoid the term _tip_ of the nose, on
account of the blunted form of this organ. Even when the bridge of the
nose is more prominent, the interval between its end and the orbits is
sometimes very short.
The aged female gorilla usually has wider cheeks, a smaller nose, and
a higher upper lip. This last peculiarity is shown in the correct and
well-stuffed specimens in the museums at Paris and Lübeck. Although,
in the process of drying, the skin of the nose may have shrunk a
little, yet there is still room for the upper lip, provided with folds
which are either vertical and parallel or diverge like a fan. Owen and
Mützel[4] have given satisfactory illustrations of these parts. In the
aged female the shape of the neck is not, as in the aged male, strong
and bulging, so as to resemble a cowl. Yet it is enlarged in conformity
with the not inconsiderable development of the spinous processes of
the cervical vertebræ, and with that of the powerful cervical muscles.
Even in a young male, of the age of the specimen which was kept in
the Berlin Aquarium, between July, 1876, and November, 1877, this
enlargement of the neck was present in a marked degree. In still
younger individuals, however, under a year old, in which the spinous
processes of the vertebræ have not yet been developed, there is no such
enlargement, but, on the contrary, this region of the neck takes a
concave form.
In conformity with the smaller size of the body, the shoulders, arms,
and thighs of the adult female are smaller than those of the full-grown
male, but they are still very powerful. While giving suck, the breasts
of the female are swelled in the form of a half-cone, instead of
assuming the convex shape which is observed in many European women,
and still more frequently in those of the negro, Indian, and South
Sea races. The nipple is cylindrical rather than conical in shape, and
covered with finely wrinkled black skin, which is sometimes hard and
horny. When not giving suck, the breasts hang slackly down, like short
empty pouches. The belly swells in the neighbourhood of the crest of
the ilium, and increases in thickness at the groin. The external sexual
organs, in the period of excitement, swell in a manner resembling the
lips of a woman’s pudenda.
In a young female the cranium is rounded, and the face is only slightly
prominent. In aged specimens, especially in those of the male sex,
there is a somewhat typical prolongation of that part of the face which
lies between the eyes and the end of the nose, and this is to a slight
extent apparent in the young female. Variations in form and in the
extent of the prolongation are, however, apparent even at this early
period. The trunk and limbs are more slenderly built than in a male of
the same age.
The hairy coat of the gorilla consists of long, thick, straight or
stiffly curved bristles, and also of shorter, thinner, and curled
woolly hair. On the crown of the head the hair is somewhat stiff,
from 12 to 20 mm. in length, and it becomes erect under the influence
of anger. While the sides and fore-part of the chin are only clothed
with short, stiff hairs, they grow thickly on the back part of the
chin, like a beard or forelock. The hairs which turn outwards from
the sides of the face and on the neck are 30 or more mm. in length.
On the shoulders the hair is from 130 to 150 mm. long, hanging down
on the upper arms and the back. In the middle of the upper arm the
hair is from 50 to 70 mm. long, growing downwards as far as the bend
of the elbow. At this point it generally begins to grow in an upward
direction. On the back of the forearm it again grows downwards. In
the middle of the forearm on its inner side, a parting of the hairs
takes place, as one portion goes in front of the radius, while the
other portion turns behind the ulna. On the back of the wrist a tuft
of curved hair turns upwards; a middle tuft goes directly back; and
the lower tuft, also curved, turns outwards. On the back of the hand
the hairs turn towards the fingers. On the breast and belly the hairs
are shorter and grow more sparsely. On the breast their direction is
as a rule upwards and outwards. On the belly they converge from the
ribs towards the centre and the navel. On the thighs the hairs are
about 160 mm. long, and here, as on the lower part of the leg, they
tend outwards, while on the back of the foot they grow towards the
toes. On the back, shoulders, and on the thigh and leg, the bristles
are slightly curved. This quality increases the general impression of
shagginess and fleeciness which is produced by the hairy coat of these
creatures. The woolly hair does not grow very thick, and is not much
matted.
The colour of the hair not only differs on different parts of the body,
but also in different individuals. On the crown of the head it is of
a reddish brown, or rarely of a decided brown or black. The hairs in
this region are sometimes dun-coloured at the root, greyish white in
the centre, and brownish red, shading into the dark brown tip. The
hair on the lips is sometimes of a blackish brown, sometimes whitish,
or both colours are found together. The hair growing at the sides of
the face is grey below, dark brown or almost black above. On the neck
and shoulders the hair is of a grey colour at the root, and gradually
becomes lighter towards the tip. In the centre it is brown, shading
into a lighter colour at either end, but this ringed form of colour
is not universal. The tips of the hair are dark, sometimes brown or
reddish. The hair on the back, on the upper arms and thighs, is whitish
or light grey for half its length, with a blackish brown ring towards
the tip, which is of a dark grey colour. Many of these hairs on the
back have two brown rings on them. The forearms, hands, shanks, and
feet are covered with hairs which are grey at the root, brownish grey,
dark brown, or black at the tip. Round the posteriors there is a circle
of white, grey, or brownish yellow hairs from 10 to 20 mm. in length.
In both sexes variations from the colour of the coat here described are
not rare. It has been already observed that the brownish red colour
of the hair on the head is sometimes exchanged for another shade. In
many individuals the neck, shoulders, and back are of a dark grey,
brown, or even black colour. In others the forearms, hands, shanks, and
feet are covered, like the rest of the body, with grey and brown hair
intermingled.
The second species of anthropoid apes is the chimpanzee. In this case
also we must consider successively the aged and young male, and the
aged and young female animals.
The full-grown chimpanzee is smaller than the adult gorilla. In this
species also the male is larger than the female. The chimpanzee is,
speaking generally, of a slighter build than the gorilla.
The head of the aged male chimpanzee fundamentally differs from that of
the aged male gorilla, since the skull of the former has a depressed
crown, and the transverse occipital ridge is only faintly indicated.
Since the orbits are also less strongly developed than in the aged male
gorilla, and the spinous processes of the cervical vertebræ do not
assume the same elevated form which is characteristic of the latter
species, the countenance of the chimpanzee is not of a square shape,
and there is not space for the strong muscular system arching over
the neck like a cowl, which is so characteristic of the gorilla. The
head of the chimpanzee displays, both in aged and young specimens, the
concave neck which is common among apes, that is to say, a depression
between the head and the throat. In an aged male the crown of the head
presents a rounded, arched contour, since, as we have already said,
the prominent bony processes are wanting. Although the supra-orbital
arches are not so excessively prominent as in a gorilla of the same
age, they are strongly developed, covered with wrinkled skin, and in
this case also there is a species of eyebrow, stiff and bristly, with
shorter hairs between. The large, wrinkled lids are furnished with
thick eyelashes. The inner angle of the eye somewhat resembles that of
the gorilla.
A general physiognomical distinction between the gorilla and the
chimpanzee consists in the fact that the bridge of the nose is shorter
in the latter than in the former. In the chimpanzee this part of the
organ is depressed, yet the depression is of a conical and convex
form, and is covered with a network of wrinkles of varying depth. In
the chimpanzee the interval between the inner angle of the eye and the
upper lateral contour of the cartilaginous end of the nose is shorter
than in the gorilla. There is also some difference in the form of
the nose: it is on the whole flatter, the tip is less apparent, the
nostrils are not so widely opened nor so thickly padded. (Fig. 3.)
In the chimpanzee, as well as in the gorilla, a central and vertical
furrow directly divides the triangular nostrils, and these are likewise
divided from the rest of the face by the broad pear-shape furrow which
surrounds them. The upper lip is generally high, sometimes as high as
30 mm.; but in some individuals it is much lower. As in the gorilla,
the chin forms a triangle of equal sides, with its apex reversed.
The external ear of the chimpanzee has on the whole less resemblance
to the human ear, and its contour is larger than that of the gorilla.
But this organ varies so much in individuals that it is difficult to
lay down any rule for its average size. It ranges from 59 to 77 mm.
in length, and from 42 to 80 mm. in width. Many individuals have a
distinct lobule to the ear, others not. (Fig. 5.) In this example
the helix and anti-helix are developed, in others they are wanting.
The tragus and anti-tragus are more or less apparent in different
individuals, as well as the other modifications of the external
cartilage of the ear.
[Illustration: Fig. 5.--Ear of chimpanzee.]
An aged male chimpanzee has broad, rather rounded shoulders, a powerful
chest, long muscular arms, reaching to the knees, and a long hand,
which seems to be very slender in comparison with that of the gorilla.
The thumbs vary in length, for the most part reaching as far as the
metacarpal phalanges, but not in all cases. The middle finger is longer
than the other three; the first and third fingers are shorter by the
length of the last phalanx, the third is a little longer than the
first, and the fourth is again shorter. A web, which reaches to the
middle of the first row of phalanges, stretches between the bases of
the four fingers. There are horny callosities on the back of the hand
of the aged male, since the chimpanzee, like the gorilla, supports
himself on the backs of his closed fingers. The fingers are laterally
compressed, but slightly arched on the back of the hand, and more
decidedly so on the palm. A network of furrows covers the back of the
hand, and these are more deeply impressed on its palm. The thumb is
separated from the palm by a distinct furrow; and from four to six
furrows of varying depth cross the centre of the palm. The finger-nails
are short, wide, and arched, very convex at their free edges.
In the aged male the sides of the belly are compressed, the thighs
are broad and muscular, and somewhat flattened both on the inner and
outer sides. The knees are rather prominent, the shanks are somewhat
laterally compressed, and the calf of the leg is very slightly
developed. As in the gorilla, the long, wide feet have a thumb-like
formation of the great toes, which are of considerable size. They
extend, when drawing anything towards them, as far as the second
phalanx of the second toe. The four other toes are more slender and
only a little longer than the great toe. The heel is but slightly
developed, and slopes away below. The joint between the first phalanx
of the great toe and the first metatarsal bone is marked by an angular
projection on the inner edge of the foot. The back of the foot is very
slightly convex. The last phalanx of the great toe is very much sloped
off on its upper surface, but this is less apparent in the other parts
of this member. The last phalanges of the other laterally compressed
toes are strongly arched on the under surface. Considerable convexities
may also be observed under the metacarpo-phalangeal joint of the great
toe and under its last phalanx. The shape of the toe-nails resembles
that of the fingers. Large callosities are not unfrequently found on
the backs of the toes, since the animal sometimes supports himself on
these parts. A connective web is found between all the toes except the
great toe and its neighbour, but it does not extend so far as that
between the roots of the fingers.
[Illustration: Fig. 6.--Young chimpanzee.]
Although the young male chimpanzee is distinguished from the aged
male of the same species by differences in the structure of many
of its parts, yet these distinctions are not so characteristic as
those between the young and aged male gorillas. The skull of the
younger animal, which is altogether devoid of the prominent bony
crest and ridges, is shaped almost like a truncated cone in the
region of the crown; in some individuals of only a few years old, the
bony development of the orbits has already begun, starting from the
principal part of the frontal bone, and covered with pads of wrinkled
skin. The short and depressed bridge of the nose becomes longer and
higher, the cartilaginous end of the nose becomes larger, and the
prognathism of the face increases with each successive stage of growth.
The strength of the trunk and limbs is early developed. The sexual
characteristics are gradually and plainly developed; but the male
gorilla far exceeds the chimpanzee in demoniacal ferocity.
The adult female is smaller, and has a smaller head, with an oval crown
to the skull. The orbits are not so strongly developed as in the aged
male, the nasal parts are less prominent, and the teeth are not nearly
so strong. The body of an animal of this sex is rounder in all its
parts; and the belly, with its wider pelvis, is more tun-shaped than in
the aged male. Neither do the limbs display the same angular formation
of muscles.[5] The hands and feet of the female are also smaller and
slenderer. In a young female the characteristics here described are
presented in the mitigated form which corresponds with its youthful
condition. But the female sometimes becomes a very strong and even
violent creature. This was often proved in the Hamburg Zoological
Garden, where a female specimen, in splendid condition, survived for
several years under the faithful care of old Siegel.[6]
The skin of the chimpanzee is of a peculiar light, yet muddy flesh
colour, which sometimes verges upon brown. Spots, varying in size and
depth of colour, sometimes isolated, sometimes in groups, and of a
blackish brown, sooty, or bluish black tint, are found on different
parts of the body of many individuals, especially on the face, neck,
breast, belly, arms and hands, thighs and shanks; more rarely on the
back. The face, which is soon after birth of a flesh colour, merging
into a yellowish brown, assumes a darker shade with the gradual
development of the body. The hairy coat is sleek, or only in rare cases
slightly curled, and the coarser and bristly hair is generally stiff
and elastic. The parting on the forehead is often so regular that it
might have been arranged by the hairdresser’s art (see Fig. 6). Close
behind that part of the head at which the projecting supra-orbital
ridges of the gorilla generally meet, there is in the chimpanzee an
altogether bald place, or only a few scattered hairs. Round the face
the growth of hair streams downwards like a beard. On the neck it is
from 60 to 80 or 100 mm. in length, and it falls in the same long locks
over the shoulders, back, and hips. The hair on the limbs is not so
long, and takes a downward direction on the upper arm, and an opposite
direction on the forearm, while there is often a longitudinal parting
on the centre of the inner surface of this part of the limb. On the
back of the wrist the hair grows in a kind of whorl; the upper hairs
turn upwards and backwards, the middle ones turn backwards, the lower
ones backwards and downwards. The backs of the hands and the roots
of the fingers are hairy. On the front of the thigh the hair takes
a downward direction, while behind it grows backwards. On the shank
it grows downwards in the region of the tibia, and turns back on the
inside of the leg. The back of the foot and the roots of the toes are
likewise hairy. There is a shorter growth of these scattered hairs on
the face, chin, and ears. On the supra-orbital arches there are from
eight to twenty, or even more, stiff, scattered hairs, after the manner
of eyebrows; and eyelashes are likewise present.
In most cases the hair of the true chimpanzee is of a black colour.
Short whitish hairs may be observed on the lower part of the face and
chin, as well as round the posteriors. Sometimes the colour of the hair
is shot throughout with reddish or brownish black.
The orang-utan, the chief representative of the anthropoids in
Asia, differs from the African forms of this group, almost at the
first glance, in the height of his skull, of which the fore-part is
compressed and shortened in a backward direction. In the aged male it
is, however, provided with high and erect bony crests, which give a
prognathous appearance to the countenance. We take an aged male as the
type of our description.
The forehead is high and erect, not retreating like that of the
chimpanzee; it is open, and has moderately convex frontal eminences.
From the centre of the forehead a round or bluntly oval eminence
sometimes projects. The supra-orbital ridges are strongly arched,
yet not so prominent as that of the aged male chimpanzee, setting
aside that of the gorilla. The eyes are not widely opened, nor are
their lids large and furrowed, but on the lower lids there are deep
wrinkles. The small bridge of the nose is generally much depressed, but
sometimes assumes a slightly conical form as it issues from the central
longitudinal depression of the face. The end of the nose, further
removed from the eyes than is generally the case in the chimpanzee,
is not so broad as it is in the latter animal and in the gorilla. The
wings of the nose are narrow and highly arched in their upper part,
divided from each other by a vertical furrow, and the nostrils are
small and oval, separated by a thin partition. The upper lip is high,
broad, and projecting, and seldom much wrinkled. It is divided from the
cheeks and from the upper part of the face by a deep depression; and
behind the cheeks two large and long-shaped or sometimes triangular
pads of fat often project forwards and downwards.
[Illustration: Fig. 7.--Head and shoulders of an aged male orang-utan.]
The very mobile lips are furrowed, and not remarkably thick. The chin
is very retreating, but somewhat uniformly rounded in front (Fig. 7).
The small ear averages 55 mm. in length, and 12 mm. in width, and has
a general resemblance in structure to the human ear (Fig. 8). On the
fore-part of the short, thick neck there are irregular, and in some
places very deep circular folds of skin. The throat-pouch distends part
of this slack, wrinkled skin, which hangs down in front like a great
empty wallet (see Figs. 7 and 9).
[Illustration: Fig. 8.--Ear of the orang-utan.]
The structure of the other parts of the body lacks even to some extent
the powerful and symmetrical formation which we observe in the gorilla,
and indeed in the chimpanzee. The trunk, with broad yet rather angular
and sloping shoulders, with flattened breast, rounded back, and still
more rounded belly, is tun-shaped, and gives the impression of a
want of proportion. In lean individuals the gluteal region resembles
the projecting rump of a fowl, and this may also be observed in the
young gorilla and chimpanzee. The long, muscular arms reach to the
ankles when the animal is in an erect position, and are altogether
out of proportion with the rest of the body. The powerful upper arm
is shorter than the lean forearm. The hand is long and narrow. The
thumb, which reaches as far as the metacarpo-phalangeal joint, has a
displeasing and almost rudimentary effect. A web unites the fingers,
sometimes extending along a third of the first phalanx, sometimes along
half. The middle finger is somewhat longer than the first and third
fingers, and the third is next to it in length. The fourth finger is
comparatively long. The palm of the hand is flat, only marked by a few
deep furrows. The long, slender fingers are laterally compressed, and
the nails on their tapering ends are arched.
[Illustration: Fig. 9.--Adult male orang-utan.]
The thighs, somewhat compressed on the inner side, are, however, very
muscular, but become much smaller on their back side. The calf of
the leg is less developed than in the gorilla, or even than in the
chimpanzee. The feet are, like the hands, long and slender. The narrow,
flat heels project very slightly behind. The great toes are short, with
wide extremities, rounded above, and provided on the sole with thick,
fatty skin. In old age these animals not only often lose the nails of
their great toes, but sometimes even the last phalanges themselves.
This is not merely a disease produced by confinement, as is the case
with sea-cat monkeys, hyenas, etc., which in this condition lose
portions of their tails or toes, but it also occurs among orang-utans
in their wild state. The middle toe is the longest, and the fourth toe
is the shortest. Layers of fat may be observed on the under side of all
but the great toe, where they rarely occur. The backs of the hands and
feet are covered with very ribbed and wrinkled skin, and on the hands
there are callosities.
This animal, of a quieter and more phlegmatic disposition than the
gorilla and chimpanzee, has a very strange appearance, with its
projecting head and short neck; its face widening in the middle
and tapering towards the forehead and chin; its tun-shaped trunk,
long, thin extremities, and shaggy coat. It differs widely from the
chimpanzee and gorilla in these particulars. In the young male the
compression of the forehead is less marked than in aged animals, and
the bony crests which conduce to raise the coronal arch in its upper
and hinder part are also absent. The supra-orbital arches are less
strongly developed, the jaws are less prominent, and the layers of fat
upon the cheeks are absent. The head is more detached from the neck,
the structure of the whole body is slenderer, the expression of the
countenance is milder. A small, conical nail, blunted at the end, may
generally be observed on the great toe.
In the adult female, as I have pointed out elsewhere, the physical
characteristics of the young male are repeated in an exaggerated form.
The skull, displaying only very small bony crests, is indeed high, but
more rounded than in the aged male; the face is prominent, but the head
is more detached from the neck than in the latter case. On account of
the greater width of the pelvis, the body is still more tun-shaped than
in the aged male. When giving suck, the breasts are distended in the
form of a half cone, but when this condition ceases they fall together
and only present two short, wrinkled, slightly prominent folds of skin;
the small, horny nipples are almost cylindrical; and the areola, of
which the traces are scanty at all times, altogether disappears. The
throat-pouch is less strongly developed than in the aged male, but the
limbs are as fully developed. The head of the young female is still
more rounded, with a more flattened though still projecting face, and
the limbs are slenderer, and thus still more out of proportion with
the thick trunk than is the case with a young male.
The orang-utan’s skin is of a greyish blue colour, sometimes mixed
with brown, but the greyish blue shade is predominant. A yellowish or
brownish grey is less common. Round the eyes, nostrils, upper lips, and
chin there is often a ring of a dirty, yellowish brown colour, forming
a strange contrast with the general bluish grey tone of the face. The
arms, legs, hands, and feet are black or greyish black, more rarely
brown or reddish brown.
The hairy coat of the orang-utan consists of long, curved, waving
bristles, and some scanty downy hairs. On the back of the head, on the
shoulders, back, and hips I have measured hairs from 220 to 235 mm.
in length. In other individuals they were, however, much shorter--20,
40, or 60 mm. long. There is often a natural parting of the hair of
the head, which falls asunder on either side. In some cases there is
no parting, and the hair streams wildly down; and in others, again,
it stands upright, stiffening from the sides and top of the head in a
demoniacal manner (Figs. 7 and 9). A beard frequently encircles the
cheeks and chin. The hair grows upwards and outwards on the neck and
fore-part of the throat, on the shoulders, back, breast, belly, upper
arms, and thighs, while it takes the opposite direction on the forearm.
On the wrist the hair grows in the manner described in the case of the
gorilla. There is only a scanty growth of hair on the breast and belly,
and it is also short and weak on the face, ears, and backs of the hands
and feet. I have not observed eyebrows on the animals I have seen, but
they may occur, and the eyelashes are fully developed.
The hair is of a reddish brown colour, something like burnt sienna,
and the hair-tips on the back parts of the body are generally brown.
In some individuals the hair is darker, of a russet or blackish brown;
in others it is lighter, and in the latter case the breast and belly
are of a yellowish white. The beard is sometimes dark yellow. Some
individuals almost devoid of hair have been observed.
The gibbons, or long-armed apes (_Hylobates_), constitute the fourth
group of anthropoids. Many kinds of this group are known, and I feel
bound to describe, at any rate, a few of them, in order to be able
to give an idea of their structure. With respect to these animals, I
cannot only rely on the materials which are accessible to me, but must
also make use of the descriptions given by others.[7]
The gibbons have as a rule very long arms, reaching to their ankles
when they stand upright. The face is not very prognathous, the crown
of the head is rounded off, and the nails are flat. There are small
callosities on their posteriors, which are absent in the gorilla, the
chimpanzee, and the orang-utan.
The largest species of these animals, which inhabit part of the
continent and of the islands of Asia, is the siamang (_Hylobates
syndactylus_, F. Cuvier).[8] According to Diard, its arms are not
quite so long as those of the wauwau (_H. agilis_, F. Cuvier). This
animal’s head is small, with a somewhat retreating forehead, a long,
moderately arched crown to the head, and a slightly arched occiput. The
base of the nose is depressed, the region of the jaws is only slightly
prognathous in the aged male. According to Diard, the eyes are deeply
set, the nostrils are very wide, the cheeks fall in below the zygomatic
arch, the mouth opens widely, the chin is of insignificant size. It is
the only one of the gibbons which possesses the throat-pouch, already
described as common to the other forms of anthropoids, and in aged
animals it hangs slackly down, almost bare in front. The second and
third toes are connected together by a thin web, reaching to the last
joint in the male, and to the penultimate joint in the female. The
hairs on the forearm turn their points upward, and form a kind of whorl
on the wrist. The animal is of a glossy black colour, with a thick and
tolerably long coat of hair on the body and limbs. According to Bock,
the face is encircled by a grey or white beard. This animal is about a
metre in height, and inhabits the woods of Sumatra.
The lar (_Hylobates Lar_, Illig) is another species of gibbon. The
structure of the body is much more slender than that of the animal
just described; the head is round, the eyes are large, the nose
projects from its depressed surroundings with only a very slight ridge,
and the cartilaginous end is shaped like a triangle with unequal
sides. This triangular end is divided by a longitudinal furrow, and
the small nostrils converge downwards and inwards, and are divided
from each other by a thin partition. The structure of the upper lip is
peculiar. In the centre, just below the base of the nasal partition,
it is depressed, and divided into two symmetrical lateral halves by a
vertical furrow. Each of these halves forms a rounded edge, overhanging
the small lower lip. Above the upper lips, between them and the
zygomatic arch, which slopes away below the lower eyelids, there are
the flat, depressed cheeks. The small chin presents itself below the
central cleft of the upper lips and their convex rims. The face of this
gibbon, of which the general appearance is very singular, is surrounded
by a circle of thick hair, which resembles the circular hood of an
Eskimo. This characteristic form of the head, both generally and in
detail, is not confined to the lar, but applies to other species of
gibbons, including the siamang (see Figs. 11 and 15). It is a feature
which distinguishes the long-armed apes, almost at the first glance,
from the other forms of anthropoids already described. The colour of
the lar’s face is reddish brown or tawny; the hair which surrounds it
is of a light grey: the body is of a dark grey, with short, light grey
hair on the backs of the hands and feet. The black ears are almost
hairless. The lar has up to this time seldom found a place in our
zoological collections. It is found in Malacca and Siam.
[Illustration: Fig. 10.--Head of the white-handed gibbon.]
The white-handed gibbon (_Hylobates albimanus_, Vigors and Horsfield)
is often confounded with _H. Lar_. But _H. albimanus_ has a black face,
and the general colour of the skin is black, including the inside of
the hands and feet. Thick white hair encircles the face, and the backs
of the hands and feet are covered with short white or light grey hairs,
while the rest of the coat is quite black. The hair of the forearm
grows downwards, towards the wrist. The ears of these apes are almost
of the shape of an equilateral triangle. The helix of the ear runs like
a flap round its free outer edge. The anti-helix passes through the
centre of the slightly depressed external surface of the ear, of which
the whole arrangement does not essentially differ from that of the ear
of other anthropoids. The cartilaginous substance of the organ is a
good deal inflected, broad behind and in the upper part, dividing into
two limbs in front and below. There are indications of the tragus and
anti-tragus. The detached lobule of the ear is absent (Fig. 11). This
structure of the external ear is common to other species of gibbons,
although in many cases the upper part of the helix is wrinkled, and the
anti-helix is sometimes more fully developed, and more like that of the
human ear.
[Illustration: Fig. 11.--Ear of the white-handed gibbon.]
The face in this species is small. The supra-orbital arches are
strongly developed, and almost join in the centre. The eyes are large,
dark, and have a mild and placid expression. The cheeks are prominent
in the region of the zygomatic arch, and depressed below it. The bridge
of the nose is imbedded between the cheeks, which, especially when
seen in profile, take a slightly conical form. The nose is covered
with cross-folds. Its cartilage is of the shape described in the
former species, and so are the upper lip and chin (Fig. 10). Long,
bristly hairs stand out on the supra-orbital arches and upper lip, and
short, thin hairs cover the end of the nose. The white hairs which
encircle the face grow like a beard on the chin. The whole face has a
melancholy, almost tearful expression. The neck is short, the trunk
drawn out. On the long, narrow hand there is a short thumb, laterally
compressed, which does not quite reach to the metacarpo-phalangeal
joint. The ball of the last phalanx forms a thick, rounded pad, which
is repeated in a lesser degree on the under side of the first phalanx
of the thumb, and on its ball. The thumb-nail is bent back, as unlike a
claw as the flattened, long, and narrow nails of the other fingers. The
middle finger is only a little longer than the first, and the fourth
not much shorter than the third finger (Fig. 12).
[Illustration: Fig. 12.--Left hand of _Hylobates albimanus_.]
The foot is neatly made, short and narrow, without a projecting heel.
The great toe is very long, reaching almost to the last phalanx of the
second toe. The sole of the foot, and the under side of the great toe,
especially its last joint, are provided with thick, rounded pads. The
middle toe is not much longer than the second, the fourth is shorter
again, and the fifth is only half as long as the fourth. There is only
a very short web between the roots of the fingers, but it extends much
further on the toes (Fig. 13). This species of ape is found in Further
India.
[Illustration: Fig. 13.--Left foot of the same animal.]
The wauwau (_Hylobates agilis_, F. Cuvier, Fig. 14), an ape of a rare
species, may, according to Duvaucel, be recognized by his prominent
supra-orbital arches, sunken eyes, a moderately flat nose, and large
nostrils with lateral openings. The face of the male is hairless, and
of a bluish black; that of the female is brown. The face is encircled
by thick, whitish hair, through which the ears are only partly visible.
There are a few black hairs on the chin. In the male the head, belly,
inner surface of the arms and of the thighs are dark brown. The neck
and shoulders are of a lighter shade, and the hair on the heels is dun
or whitish. The backs of the hands and feet are dark brown. The sides
of the posteriors and the backs of the thighs are brown, chestnut,
or white. In the female the white hair which encircles the face is
shorter, and verges on dun colour. The young animals are light yellow
or brown. This animal inhabits the island of Sumatra.
[Illustration: Fig. 14.--A wauwau in the left foreground (_Hylobates
agilis_); in the background to the light, two slender apes
(_Semnopithecas entellus_).]
The grey gibbon (_Hylobates leuciscus_, Kuhl) is covered with a thick,
long, and woolly coat, with scattered hairs which are curly, and have
two or three rings of dark colour on a light ground. The upper part
of the head is black; light, or sometimes white, hair encircles the
blackish face. The general colour is dun. The front of the throat, the
breast, and belly are of a lighter shade; while the back of the neck,
the shoulders, upper arms, and thighs are darker. A brown or black
stripe runs down the breast and belly from the armpits. The insides of
the hands and feet are black. The colour of young specimens is more
uniformly grey or dun. This animal is found in Java and Sumatra.
The hulock, otherwise called yulock or yoluck (_Hylobates Hoolock_,
Harlan), has, in its adult condition, a prognathous face with prominent
supra-orbital arches, a long, low bridge to its nose, with high, narrow
nostrils, and a very small upper lip. In aged animals there are two
oblique folds over the eyes, of a light grey colour. The rest of the
hairy coat, the face, hands, and feet are black, or, in the younger
animals, brownish black, with grey extremities. A line of grey extends
from the breast downwards over the belly. This animal inhabits the
mountainous district of Assam.
The unko (_Hylobates Rafflesii_, Is. Geoff. Saint-Hilaire) is of a
black colour, shading into reddish brown on the back and sides. Hair,
of a grey colour in the male and white in the female, encircles the
face. This ape is a native of Sumatra.
The dun-coloured gibbon (_Hylobates entelloides_, Is. Geoff.
Saint-Hilaire) is so called from its coat, which is thick and woolly,
and furnished with long hairs of a greyish yellow or dun colour.
This coat is somewhat darker on the inner surface of the arms and on
the neck, where it shades into reddish yellow. The growth of hair
surrounding the face is lighter, verging upon white. The female is
generally more yellow in colour than the male, and the hair on her face
is of a reddish yellow rather than white, but not without a trace of
white hairs. The face and the bare places on the hands and feet are
black. Between the second and third toes there is a connective web
reaching as far as the first joints. This animal inhabits the Malacca
peninsula. The name of the species is derived from its assumed likeness
to the Indian hanuman (_Semnopithecus Entellus_, F. Cuvier), of which
an illustration is given in the background to the right of Fig. 14.
The white-bearded gibbon (_Hylobates leucogenys_, Ogilby[9]) is
remarkable for the long, erect hairs which grow on the upper and back
part of the scalp, and for the long white beard on the cheeks and chin,
which joins the thick growth above the eyes. The rest of the body is
dark black. Its native place is doubtful.
The general colour of the tufted gibbon (_Hylobates pileatus_, J. E.
Gray) is black, shading into grey on the shoulders, back, and thighs.
A white ring surrounds the hands, feet, face, and scalp; and there
is also a patch of white on the sexual organs, and often a patch of
black on the breast. The whiskers are black. In other respects the
animal varies according to its sex and age. It is found in Siam and
Kambodja.[10]
The dark grey gibbon (_Hylobates funereus_, Is. Geoff. Saint-Hilaire)
is of an ashen grey colour on the upper and outer side of its limbs,
verging into brown; and on the under side it is dark brown. There is a
narrow strip of light grey round the face, with a darker band round the
back of the head. It is found in the island of Sulu.[11]
In addition to these species of gibbons of which we have given a
brief account, there are several others--as, for example, _Hylobates
concolor_ (Harlan), from Borneo; _H. Muelleri_ (L. Martin), from the
same place; _H. choromandus_ (Ogilby), from India, and many others. But
since our space is limited, the description given above must suffice
for a diagnosis of the species.
CHAPTER III.
THE EXTERNAL AND ANATOMICAL STRUCTURE OF ANTHROPOID APES, COMPARED WITH
THE HUMAN STRUCTURE.
In order to complete as far as possible the description which we
propose to give of the general natural history of these remarkable
animals, it is necessary to examine their anatomical structure. Yet it
is not so much our aim to give a detailed and exhaustive description
of their anatomy, as to glance rapidly at those peculiarities of their
inner structure which catch the eye. It seems to me expedient in this
case to follow the method of systematic and descriptive anatomy, and
to take the several natural organs in succession. This method, which
has long prevailed for studying the structure of the human body, should
also be our guide in our researches in comparative anatomy. Our readers
need scarcely be told that the anatomy of anthropoids is only a small
branch of the comparative anatomy of vertebrate animals in general.
I begin by considering the bony structure of anthropoids, and, in
particular, of the gorilla. And it will be well to note the important
differences between the structure of the skull of a young and aged
male, and of a young and aged female gorilla.
[Illustration: Fig. 15.--Skull of an aged male gorilla in profile.]
The skull of the aged male animal is large and heavy. Its average
weight is one and a quarter kilogrammes. The longitudinal diameter,
from the alveolar point of the upper jaw to the occipital point, may
be as much as 294 mm. The overhanging orbits are high in front, and
flattened off behind, and their upper edges unite to form a ridge in
the middle of the face. To these the back parts of the orbits are
attached, in shape like a truncated cone, round and prominent in front,
and narrowing into bony capsules in the direction of the brain-pan.
They open directly in front, and the aperture is generally in the form
of a regular square. The edges are seldom so blunted off as to present
a figure somewhat approaching to a circle (comp. Figs. 15, 16). The
frontal bone, which in the young of both sexes is high, broad, and
arched, becomes depressed in the centre in the aged male. The temporal
ridges, thickened to a hem, pass over this to the coronal crest.
[Illustration: Fig. 16.--Front view of the skull of an aged male
gorilla.]
This crest is highly characteristic. It begins in the region of the
frontal bone, and, rising abruptly, unites itself with the transverse
occipital crest. It is of varying height,[12] but is rarely altogether
absent in an adult male animal. On the top of this coronal crest we
may see the two well-developed bony ridges which almost touch each
other, and which indicate the upper limits of the temporal muscles on
either side. In young animals these ridges tend downwards over the
sides of the head, below the vertex of the skull. Their position and
direction vary with the growth of the skull, and correspond with that
of the coronal crest. The transverse occipital crest is of considerable
height in the case of aged and vigorous animals, and is frequently
somewhat concave in front, and convex at the back. The fore surface of
this crest is formed of the two parietal bones, the hinder surface of
the squamose portion of the occipital bone. The lambdoidal suture is
on the top of this occipital crest, and in this case, as in that of
other mammals, including man, it unites the parietal bones with those
of the occiput. The point of union between the coronal and occipital
crests divides the latter into two symmetrical lateral halves, curving
outwards and downwards. The high, wide squamose portion of the
occipital bone is somewhat flattened behind, or more rarely arched,
while it is abrupt at its base and in some degree in front. Six curved
lines, three on either side, opposite each other, sometimes mark the
limits of the attachments of the cervical muscles on the head. The
mastoid process of the temporal bone is present, but Brühl could find
no trace of a styloid process on the skulls of gorillas and chimpanzees.
The squamous portion of the temporal bone is often connected with the
frontal bone by the process termed Virchow’s frontal process of the
temporal bone. The nasal bones are high, very narrow in their upper
part, and widening below. When they are united in the centre of the
nasal bridge, a sloping, keel-shaped projection may often be observed.
The inferior turbinated bones of the nasal cavity are remarkable for
their size. In the skulls of young animals the inter-maxillary bones,
which are in all anthropoids early united with those of the same
region, stand up high and peaked between the nasal bones and those of
the upper jaw.
The crowns or prominent external surfaces of the enormous canine teeth
project in the centre of the face on either side like pillars, just
below the nostrils, and extend above and below the row of teeth in the
two upper jaws (see Fig. 16). In this way the crowns of the canine
teeth form a retreating triangular space, of which the base-line of
the equilateral triangle corresponds with the row of teeth. The chin
part of the lower jaw, in a front view, also takes the form of an
equilateral triangle. In the latter case the base-line is covered by
that section of the row of teeth containing the incisor teeth. The
sides of the triangle are covered by the converging canine teeth (see
again Fig. 17). The incisor teeth, enclosed between the latter, in
that part of the lower jaw already described, are retreating. The rami
of the lower jaw are high and very wide. The angle of the lower jaw
is obtuse (Fig. 15). The front or coronoid process and the back or
condyloid process of the ramus of this bone are separated from each
other by a deep, hollow cleft. The condyloid process projects abruptly
above, but is less marked behind.
When we consider the internal form of the skull of an aged male
gorilla, the first thing that strikes us is the marked development of
the frontal sinuses, and especially their width in the region of the
nasal portion of the frontal bone. We next observe the wings of the
sphenoid bone, and that these large concave apophyses are provided
with spaces only slightly separated from each other. These sinuses are
not only plainly connected with each other, but with the sphenoidal
sinuses. There is a broad sinus in the malar bone, provided with
vestibules, and this has a deep communication with the maxillary sinus,
or antrum of Highmore, embedded in the body of the upper maxillary
bone. There are, finally, sinuses at the point of junction between the
coronal and occipital crests.
The maxillary region of the cranium of the young male gorilla is
already somewhat prognathous, and the keel-shaped elevation of
the bridge of the nose is also very apparent, but the development
of these parts is not nearly so advanced as in the aged male. The
whole contour of the cranium is oval, and without the high crests so
characteristic of the aged male animal. It is well known that the
Swedish anatomist and anthropologist Anders Retzius has classified the
skulls of different races of men as long-headed (_dolichocephali_)
and short-headed (_brachycephali_). In the former class, the length
is considerably greater than the height; while in the latter, the
difference is either slight or non-existent. The skulls of the
_dolichocephali_ are long and oval; those of the _brachycephali_ are
short, round, or square. In addition to this division, which is of
great value in the rapid and superficial, yet sound classification of
racial skulls, Retzius has constituted another. He has characterized
skulls of which the profile is straight, or nearly straight, as
_orthognathous_ (_rechtzähnige_); and those of which the maxillary
region is very prominent, as _prognathous_ (_schiefzähnige_). These
orthognathous and prognathous skulls may be either dolichocephalic or
brachycephalic.[13]
In applying this classification by Retzius to anthropoids, the
gorillas and chimpanzees have been characterized as dolichocephalic
and prognathous, the orang-utans and the gibbons as brachycephalic
and prognathous. Several scientific men have sought to establish the
noteworthy distinction that dolichocephalic anthropoids are found
in Africa, and brachycephalic anthropoids in Asia. This distinctive
characteristic is held to agree with the geographical and ethnological
conditions of the continents in question.[14] Virchow remarks in a
later work that the skull of a gorilla becomes longer with every year
of life, but that this is not so much due to the cranium as such, as
to its bony outworks, such as the strongly developed supra-orbital
arches, the enlargement of the frontal sinuses, etc. Measurements
rather tend to show that the young gorilla is brachycephalic, but that
this characteristic diminishes with increasing age, at any rate, if the
external excrescences are taken into account. But it is quite otherwise
when the furthest point of measurement is taken from the frontal arch,
not from the nasal prominence. In such a case the increase of the
brachycephalic condition is established.[15]
In the skulls of such young males as those here mentioned, the temporal
ridges, which in aged animals are in close proximity in the region
of the developed bony crests, have already in some cases begun to
approach each other, but they are still far apart. In young specimens
we can distinguish, on each side of the parietal bones, two temporal
ridges, opposite each other, and taking a nearly parallel course. The
upper ridge, which loses itself on the external surface of the mastoid
process, which is already developed, corresponds to the junction of the
fascia of the cranial muscles (_Galea aponeurotica musculi epicranii_)
with the fascia enclosing the large temporal muscles. The lower ridge,
which is gradually merged in the upper edge of the zygomatic process of
the temporal bone, forms the demarcation of the fleshy origin of the
temporal muscle. This corresponds to the spot at which the two layers
of the temporal fascia unite. In a very young male these temporal
ridges can be only faintly traced; they become more strongly marked
as his growth advances, and as they approximate more closely to each
other on the vertex of the cranium. I have examined a skull of which
the sutures were still open, and could already trace the development
of the coronal crest in two divisions, separated from each other by a
longitudinal furrow. The upper edges of these divisions corresponded
to the two temporal ridges, which were in close proximity to each
other. If the animal had not died at this stage of its development,
it is probable that, with advancing growth, the two divisions of the
crest would have been welded into one structure. Such a condition only
characterizes a transitory stage of development, repeated in each
individual.
In the centre of the vertex of the cranium, where the longitudinal
crest of which we have so often spoken is subsequently developed, we
may often observe on the sagittal suture of the cranium of a young male
a longitudinal swelling, which increases very gradually. In the region
of the two upper semicircular curved lines (_lineæ semicirculares s.
nuchæ supremæ_), on the squamous occipital portion, or between these
and the two central cervical lines, a transverse swelling is early
developed; this swelling sometimes extends to the lambdoidal suture,
or, at any rate, to its neighbourhood. This bony excrescence, of which
the anatomical term is _Torus occipitalis transversus_, corresponds to
the first layer of the transverse occipital crest so characteristic of
the old male gorilla (see Fig. 15).
In several skulls of young gorillas, in the region of the coronal
suture, a small, insulated, intermediate bone may be observed
(Virchow’s _os epiptericum_) between the squamous portion of the
temporal bone and the greater wing of the sphenoid, with which it
is sometimes completely welded. In this case there is, above the _os
epiptericum_, a direct connection between the temporal and frontal
bones by means of the frontal process (Virchow’s _processus frontalis
squamæ temporalis_), which is not rare in anthropoids.[16] This process
often owes its origin to the _os epiptericum_, which is in its early
stages attached to the temporal bone. I shall have to refer again to
this frontal process.
The orbits are more rounded in young than in aged skulls; in the latter
they are always angular, although the angles, especially the upper and
external angles, may be more or less blunted. Virchow remarks that
in the skull of a very young gorilla the height of the orbit exceeds
its width, and that at that age the skull is therefore high. In the
aged male gorilla the height of the orbit, according to the several
measurements I have taken, varies between 39 to 52 mm., and the width
between 37 to 45 mm.
[Illustration: Fig. 17.--Skeleton of an aged male gorilla.[17]]
The rest of the skeleton of the aged male gorilla corresponds in its
powerful and massive form with the general structure of the body,
which is remarkable for its height and strength (see Fig. 16). In
the skeleton of the trunk there are seven cervical, thirteen dorsal,
and four lumbar vertebræ, thirteen ribs, and, even in aged animals,
a sternum composed of several pieces of bone. The cervical vertebræ
display long spinous processes, which are most strongly developed
between the fourth and seventh vertebræ. The extremities of this
colossal structure, combined with the elevation of the occipital
region, present a convex outline when seen from behind. This structure
provides the point of insertion and support for the powerful cushion of
cervical muscles. The dorsal vertebræ, which increase in height, width,
and depth as they stand lower on the column, taper, and are keel-shaped
at their junction with the cervical vertebræ. The central parts of the
widely arched ribs, which are thirteen or sometimes fourteen in number,
are very thick and powerful in the aged male. Only seven pairs of ribs
are attached by the costal cartilages to the sternum, and two other
costal cartilages are in proximity with them. The other cartilages
are only rudimentary, and the terminations in the muscular system of
the belly are free. There are, indeed, variations from the type here
established, and from ten to eleven ribs are sometimes attached to the
sternum by thread-like strips of ligament or cartilage.
The formation of the pelvic girdle in this animal is of special
interest. The chief parts of this portion of the skeleton--that is,
the hip, pelvic, or innominate bones--are high, tapering in their
lower part, and broad and flat above, where they terminate in the
crest of the ilium, which describes a quarter of a circle. There
is, for the most part, only one small superior iliac spine, and
the ischii are somewhat turned outwards, and furnished with broad,
rounded tuberosities, and for the most part with only a single large
sacro-sciatic notch. The horizontal rami of the pubes are narrow, while
the descending rami are wide. The os sacrum is narrow, and shaped
like a protracted cone, turning abruptly outwards, and resembling the
basal joint of a true tail. The coccyx appears to be the rudiment of a
genuine tail.
The bones of the shoulder-girdle present interesting peculiarities.
The clavicles are long and slender, with a leaf-shaped, flattened end
articulating with the scapula, and a thickened end articulating with
the sternum. The scapula is a very large triangular bone, resembling
the human scapula in its general form, and the supra- and infra-spinous
fossæ are not strongly marked. The long and powerful humerus has
its head inclined at an angle of sixty degrees towards the axis of
the shoulder. Frequently, but not invariably, the lower, flattened
extremity of the humerus is pierced on one or both sides above its
rounded eminence, and this is termed by Darwin the intercondyloid
foramen.
The radius has a powerful head, and a shaft considerably curved
outwards, while it is, on the other hand, curved backwards and inwards
at the elbow. The bones of the carpus, metacarpus, and phalanges
are remarkably long, broad, and deep. The development of the femur
corresponds to that of the whole skeleton. Its middle piece or shaft
is curved in front and flattened behind. The shaft of the tibia is
generally rounded off, but is sometimes rather laterally compressed.
The os calcis of the foot is slender, curved outwards in the centre and
inwards behind the astragalus. The head, with its cuneiform extremity,
is of a transverse oval shape, turned inwards. The scaphoid bone,
which is generally in connection with this projection, takes the same
direction towards the inner side of the foot. This peculiar contortion
causes the tarsus of the gorilla to appear almost as if it had been
subjected to a deviation or fracture of its longitudinal axis.
In young and adult males, as well as in young females, the structure of
the bones is generally less massive than in aged males. In the female
skeleton the strongly developed depressions and ridges, especially in
the bones of the extremities, are absent. The head of the ulna is, for
example, less deeply set in the case of a female, and its projections
are smaller than in the male animal. In the female, also, the head
of the radius is smaller, and the triangular shape of its shaft is
less strongly marked. The pelvic bones of a female gorilla are wider,
flatter, and less concave on their very projecting inner surface. They
diverge more widely from each other, and this is also the case with the
tuberosities of the ischium. The pubic arch is less depressed than in
the male gorilla. Although the spinous processes of the vertebræ attain
to some length and thickness, their development in the female is not so
great as it is in the male sex.
The bony structure of the chimpanzee offers many points of resemblance
to that of the gorilla, while it differs in certain particulars from
the structure of other anthropoids. And first, the size of the skeleton
is smaller than that of the gorilla, which is in agreement with the
smaller relative size of the body of the chimpanzee.
[Illustration: Fig. 18.--Skull of an aged male chimpanzee.]
We must begin with a general view of the skull of the chimpanzee. In
both sexes the frontal regions are smaller, while the coronal region is
more rounded than in the gorilla. The high bony crests and prominent
supra-orbital arches are wanting in the chimpanzee; the peculiar
character of the bony ridges, projecting like tubes from the other
parts of the skull, is less marked, and they belong more directly
to the frontal region (see Fig. 18). The bony bridge of the nose is
more concave in the chimpanzee; the jaw-bones are smaller and less
compressed in the centre than they are in the gorilla.
When we undertake to describe the skull of the chimpanzee in detail,
it becomes necessary to consider separately the skulls of aged and
young males, and of aged and young females; for in this case also
the distinctions of sex and age are very evident. On the skull of an
aged male chimpanzee the temporal ridges are not much developed on
the coronal arch. They meet on this arch from 60 to 90 mm. behind the
orbits, and form only a small coronal crest. The transverse occipital
crest is somewhat developed, and at its point of union with the coronal
crest the temporal ridges divide to form its upper edges. This is
the case not only with the Rio Quillu skull, from which Fig. 18 is
taken, but with that of the so-called troglodyte Tschègo given by
Duvernoy.[18] In some other specimens belonging to aged male animals
the presence of a coronal crest cannot, however, be detected. In these
the temporal ridges are very small, and more or less distant from
each other. While the transverse occipital crest maintains an almost
uniform height on the gorilla skull, like a detached ridge, it is
only slightly elevated behind in those chimpanzee skulls in which the
crest is partially developed. In the gorilla male this ridge divides
the squamous occipital portion, which is sometimes bevelled, sometimes
slightly convex; in the male chimpanzee this part is more decidedly
arched, and takes the form of a half-oval. The mastoid processes are
also present in the chimpanzee. The external occipital crest and the
curved lines are generally apparent. The styloid processes are more
plainly traced than in the gorilla. In the latter, as well as in the
chimpanzee, there is a blunt, tubular process of the temporal bone,
opposite to another bony process, issuing from the occipital bone. This
has been observed by Virchow, and is termed by him the carotid process
(_Processus caroticus_).
The orbits of the chimpanzee are generally more rounded, with a
distinctly circular rim, while the nasal bones are as long and narrow
as in the gorilla. The region of the jaws is very prognathous; the
external nasal openings are rounder and smaller than in the gorilla.
The crowns of the canine teeth project in the same pillar-shaped form
(Fig. 18). The triangular space enclosed by these and by the row of
teeth in the upper jaw is often very wide and projecting, even more so
than in the gorilla. But whereas in the latter the canine teeth are
shaped almost like a three-sided pyramid, in the chimpanzee they are
more rounded and conical. In the general structure of the teeth of both
species there are certain differences of which we shall speak presently.
The brain-pan of a young male chimpanzee is still more arched than
it is in aged animals. The temporal ridges are still far apart.
The transverse occipital crest displays near the mastoid process
well-defined wing-shaped indentations. In the skulls of very young
males the transverse occipital swelling of which we have spoken
(_Torus occipitalis transversus_) is already developed. The orbits
are distinctly detached from the skull; the bridge of the nose is
depressed; the crowns of the canine teeth are, in conformity with the
still slight development of the teeth themselves, less marked, and the
triangular space enclosed by the teeth is less convex than in older
animals.
The skull of the adult chimpanzee is, in its coronal and occipital
parts, more uniformly arched, narrower, and more elongated than in aged
males. The transverse occipital ridge usually develops itself in the
region of the upper curved lines, or in the bony parts enclosed between
these and the central lines. The nasal and upper maxillary region is
depressed. That section of the upper jaw which contains the incisor and
canine teeth is small. In the skulls of all chimpanzees, of whatever
sex or age, the body of the lower jaw is comparatively small, with two
low but wide rami, of which the coronoid and condyloid processes are
divided from each other by a comparatively wide cleft. The rami of
the chimpanzee’s lower jaw are still more abruptly retreating than is
usually the case in the gorilla.
The skull of a very young female gorilla is shaped almost like a
half-sphere. The orbits are scarcely detached from the forehead; the
want of elevation of the orbital arch, and the slighter prognathism of
the jaw, is marked by the deep depression between it and the nose and
forehead (Fig. 20).
The cancellous texture of the bones of the chimpanzee’s skull admits
of a whole system of cavities communicating with each other, which
are of the nature of the so-called sinuses present in the frontal,
sphenoid, ethmoid, and maxillary bones of the human skull. In the
chimpanzee, however, the sinuses are more extensive than in man,
or even than in the gorilla. The large cavities of the forehead
communicate with those of the nose and jaws. The sphenoidal sinuses and
ethmoidal cells are large and deep. The greater wings of the sphenoid
bone and its pterygoid processes are provided with considerable
cavities. The mastoid cells of the temporal bones are in connection
with the cells of the greater wings and pterygoid processes of the
sphenoid bone, and also extend through the squamous portions and
zygomatic processes of the temporal bones, losing themselves in their
upper part in the smaller cells of cancellous bone which are found
between the outer and inner walls of the skull. These are of more
uniform shape and size.
[Illustration: Fig. 19.--Skull of a very young female chimpanzee.]
The skeleton of the chimpanzee, in accordance with the smaller size
of the species, is relatively of a slenderer build than that of the
gorilla. The spinous processes of the seven cervical vertebræ are more
slightly developed, and have undivided extremities. The transverse
processes of the fifth and sixth cervical vertebræ are almost of the
same shape as cervical ribs. There are thirteen dorsal vertebræ,
somewhat laterally compressed: this compression is greater than in
man and in the gorilla. The four lumbar vertebræ of the chimpanzee are
furnished with long, thin, riblike transverse processes. The so-called
mammillary processes of the final vertebra are strongly developed in
the male. The intervertebral foramina are small, as they are also in
the gorilla and orang-utan. The thirteen ribs of the chimpanzee remind
us of the human structure. The collar-bone is slightly curved, as in
the gorilla. There is a marked difference between the sexes in the
structure of the scapula which is broad and three-sided in the male,
small and leaf-shaped in the female.
[Illustration:
Fig. 20.--Skeleton of the forearm and hand of the Central African
bam-chimpanzee. _a_, Ulna. _b_, Radius. _c_, Scaphoid bone.
_d_, Semi-lunar bone. _e_, Cuneiform bone. _f_, Pisiform bone.
_g_, Trapezium. _h_, Os magnum. _j_, Trapezoid. _k_, Unciform
bone. _l_, Phalanges of thumb. _m_, Metacarpal bones. _n_,
Phalanges.
]
The humeri have slender shafts, with well-developed condyles and
ridges. The bones of the forearm are much curved, so that the interval
between them is, as in the gorilla, somewhat wide. From the wrist to
the final phalanges the hand is more slender than in the gorilla.
The pelvis in this species of ape has high, narrow ilia, spreading
in their upper parts, and projecting forwards, so as to form the
cavity of the abdomen, and, especially in the male sex, the anterior
spines of the ilium are more strongly developed than in the gorilla
and orang-utan. The ischiatic tuberosities are of a spreading form,
and diverge considerably from each other. The pubic arch is deeply
hollowed, but the point of juncture is elevated. As in the gorilla, the
os sacrum resembles the basis of a tail, but it is less developed and
less conical in form.
In the chimpanzee, as well as in other anthropoids, the coccyx gives
altogether the impression of a laterally compressed and rudimentary
tail. This is especially the case in young animals, in which the coccyx
always appears to be very narrow and prolonged. In older animals
this part gradually widens, yet without losing its resemblance to a
rudimentary tail.
The head of the femur resembles a section of a sphere, of which the
upper part is sometimes wanting. Its shaft, which is curved in front,
is much slenderer in the female than the male. The patella is oval. In
the tibia the narrow shaft is laterally compressed, and bent inwards.
The bones on the inner side of the foot take a backward direction,
while those on the outer side, attached to the fibula, turn outwards.
In the ankle-joint the head of the astragalus is much arched, and
turned inwards. The scaphoid bone is thick and deeply hollowed. The
metatarsal bones and phalanges have a considerable upward convexity
(Fig. 21).
[Illustration: Fig. 21.--Skeleton of foot of the Central African
bam-chimpanzee. _a_, Astragalus. _b_, Os calcis. _c_, Scaphoid bone.
_d_, _e_, _f_, Cuneiform bones. _g_, Cuboid bone. _h_, First metatarsal
bone. _j_, Second to fifth metatarsal bones. _k_, Phalanges.]
The skeleton of the orang has also its special characteristics. We have
already remarked, in describing the external form of the heads of these
animals, that the skull is high and projecting, and retreating in its
hinder part. In the old male orang this part of the bony structure is
of smaller size than in the old male gorilla. The arch of the cranium
is shorter and rounder than in that animal and in the chimpanzee. The
central longitudinal crest of the vertex is present, but in accordance
with the more spherical shape of the coronal part of the cranium, this
crest is more arched above than in the gorilla, in which it slopes
gently upward to the transverse occipital crest, which rises high
and peaked from the back of the head. This latter crest is indeed
developed in the orang, but it is not so high, and is more retreating.
In consequence of this formation, the upper posterior part of the
gorilla-skull appears in profile to be much more abrupt and peaked
than that of the orang. In the latter, also, the orbital arches are
not so high and abrupt, and not so much detached from the rest of the
skull. In the orang the squamous occipital portion declines abruptly in
front and below, yet it is generally more arched than in the gorilla.
The orbits of the orang, which are sometimes rounded, sometimes more
square, are divided from each other by a narrow partition. The space
between them and the anterior nares is not so great as in the gorilla.
While in the last-named animal the space between the root of the nose
and the teeth of the upper jaw-bone is convex, in the chimpanzee it
is generally vertical, and in the orang it is depressed (Fig. 22).
The maxillary parts, furnished with strong canine teeth, are very
prognathous, yet hardly to the same extent as in the chimpanzee. The
body of the lower jaw is high, and its rami are high and wide. The
bony crests of which we have spoken are absent in the female. The
coronal part and the squamous occipital parts are arched; the upper jaw
is smaller, and the lower jaw is also less massive, than in the male
animal. In very young animals the predominance of the strongly arched
cranium over the countenance is apparent, and the increase of size in
the latter occurs gradually (Fig. 23).
[Illustration: Fig. 22.--Skull of middle-aged female orang.]
The anterior nares are narrow at the top, and wide at their base. They
are more decidedly pear-shaped (_Apertura pyriformis_) than those of
the gorilla and chimpanzee. In the latter animals these apertures are
generally wider and more uniformly rounded. Bischoff justly observes
that the bony part below the orbits, which in the gorilla is wide
above, tapering away in the lower part of the face, is narrower and
more vertical in the orang. The nasal bones of the orang are high and
of moderate width. Brühl mentions the styloid process of the orang’s
skull, which is, however, somewhat abortive when we compare it with
that of the human skull. It has its origin in a tolerably deep groove.
On the other hand, Brühl, as we have already observed, can find no
trace of the styloid process in the skulls of the gorilla and the
chimpanzee![19]
[Illustration:
Fig. 23.--Skeleton of young orang-utan. _a_, Sternum. _b_,
Radius. _c_, Ulna. _d_, Tibia. _e_, Metacarpus. _f_, Phalanges.
_g_, Great toe. _h_, Fibula. _j_, Hip-bones. _k_, Coccyx. _l_,
Vertebral column. _m_, Scapula. _n_, Femur.
]
There are many large-celled bony cavities in the orang’s skull. These
may be observed in the greater wings and pterygoid processes of the
sphenoid bone, in the mastoid and squamous parts of the temporal
bones, in the lachrymal bones, in the body, and in the condyles of
the occipital bone, and in the zygomatic arch. The larger fore-cells
on the squamous part of the temporal bones are connected by a wide
aperture with the sinuses of the greater wings and pterygoid processes
of the sphenoid bone. A sinus which may be observed on the greater wing
generally communicates by a large round hole with the temporal cells.
There is generally, but not always, a communication between the sinuses
of the greater wing and pterygoid process and the nasal cavity. These
cavities sometimes communicate with each other through a wide aperture
at the base of the nose. The squamous part of the temporal bones has
a cellular sinus, which communicates with the cells of the mastoid
process, in its lower part with the tympanum, and in its fore-part with
the ossicles of the lower wall of the tympanum. The maxillary sinuses
are in connection with the cells of the lachrymal bone. There is
nothing in the orang’s skull corresponding to the Vidian canal of the
sphenoid bone, but it may be traced in the gorilla and the chimpanzee.
The vertebral column of the orang has not the same colossal spinous
processes which distinguish that of the gorilla. It differs also
in many other, though less striking, particulars both from the
gorilla and the chimpanzee. In the orang there are generally twelve
dorsal vertebræ, tapering in their lower parts; while their long,
thick, transverse processes, which are full of knots, take an upward
direction. The upper articular processes of the four lumbar vertebræ
present short and rather insignificant mammillary processes. The
sternum of the young orang is generally formed of one large upper
bone, with six smaller bones below. In older animals the body of the
sternum appears to consist of a tier of three bones connected together.
The ribs resemble those of the human skeleton, the clavicle is long
and straight, and the scapula also resembles that of a man in form.
The flat pelvic bones of the orang also turn outwards; the ischiatic
bones are short, with spatula-shaped tuberosities; the pubic arch is
high, and the obturator foramen is narrow and oval. The sacrum and
coccyx do not resemble a rudimentary tail so much as in the case of the
anthropoids we have already described. We are reminded of the human
structure in the humerus, of which the shaft is much curved behind,
and on its outer side. The ulna is very slender, and provided with a
protracted, jagged styloid process. The neck of the radius is tapering,
while its shaft is arched like that of the ulna, and the anterior
border and oblique line are sharp. The wrist, metacarpus, and fingers
are long and narrow.
The femur of the orang is remarkable for its large head, shaped like
a section of a sphere, and its slender shaft. The latter is less
bent than in the gorilla. The patella, which, in my opinion, should
be classed among the so-called sesamoid bones, is in this case of an
irregular form. The shank and foot-bones are remarkably slender. The
scaphoid is tapering; the head of the astragalus does not turn inward
so much as in the gorilla. The hinder surfaces of the metatarsal bones
and of the phalanges turn decidedly outwards.
We have now to consider the bony structure of gibbons, in which there
are many specific variations which our space will not allow us to
consider in detail, but a slight sketch of their organic system must
be given. The brain-pan of this animal’s skull is of an oval shape,
without the crests so characteristic of other anthropoids, and even
in the aged males of this species their development is so slight as
to be scarcely perceptible. The occipital bone of male animals is,
indeed, generally rounded, and the whole occipital portion is somewhat
compressed in a downward direction, while the coronal region is at the
same time flattened. The cranium gradually widens behind, so that,
when seen from above, its form is somewhat pear-shaped. In aged males
the orbits project from the low, retreating frontal bone, and are
surrounded by a bony, circular rim.
The face is not very prognathous, and the short wide nasal-bones form
a wide, depressed partition between the orbits. The edges of the
jaw-bones describe a parabolic curve and are considerably elongated.
The palate is consequently long and narrow. The rami of the lower
jaw are wide and low, and their coronoid processes are only slightly
developed. In aged males the teeth, and especially the canine teeth,
are long and projecting; yet, comparatively speaking, they never attain
to the great development of those of other anthropoids.
The number of vertebræ seems to be subject to considerable variation
even in the same species, and various estimates are given by different
naturalists. Müller, for example, has said that in several species
(_Hylobates syndactylus_, _H. leuciscus_, _H. variagatus_, and _H.
concolor_) there are thirteen dorsal, five lumbar, six sacral, and four
coccygeal vertebræ. Cuvier counted in the siamang, thirteen dorsal,
five lumbar, four sacral, and three coccygeal vertebræ. In _Hylobates
agilis_ I counted thirteen dorsal, six lumbar, five sacral, and four
coccygeal vertebræ. _Hylobates syndactylus_ has long coccygeal bones,
and an elongated os sacrum, which gives the impression of serving for
the application of a short tail, or, indeed, of being in itself a
rudimentary tail. In other respects the cervical, dorsal, and lumbar
vertebræ differ little in structure from those of man.
The ribs on the sternum, which widens abruptly outwards, are strongly
arched. The lowest of these project, owing to the width of the shaft.
In the sternum there is a want of proportion between the smallness
of its body and the size and width of its extremity. The ensiform
appendix of this bone is long and wide, and spatula-shaped at its lower
extremity. In the shoulder-girdle the clavicles are very slender, and
much arched. The scapulæ, on the other hand, are high and narrow,
spatula-shaped, and provided with a steeply projecting acromion
process, a strongly developed coracoid process, and deep glenoid
cavities. The upper limbs are, in conformity with the general structure
of these apes, very slender; the shafts of the bones of the upper and
forearm are elongated, with small extremities. The condyles are small,
especially those of the elbow. The bones of the wrist, the metacarpus,
and the fingers are also long and slender.
In the pelvis we note that the ilia are narrow below, and expand in the
form of a spatula above, and that their position is almost vertical.
Their inner surfaces are only slightly concave, and are directed
somewhat forwards. The ischiatic bones are low, with wide, flattened,
rugged tuberosities, and rounded _foramina obturatoria_. The ischiatic
rami project forwards in an almost horizontal direction. There are
large prominences on the pubic arch of the siamang.
The leg-bones are much shorter than those of the arm. The heads of the
femurs stand out plainly from their short necks and large trochanters,
as segments of perfect spheres. In this case, as in that of other
anthropoids, the third trochanter (_trochanteres tertii_), often so
apparent in the human femur, is barely indicated. The shank-bones are
arched. The tibia is often laterally compressed, so that its transverse
section forms a scalene triangle. The malleoli are compressed from
before backwards. The elongated heel-bones appear to be laterally
compressed. The canal between the astragalus and the os calcis (_Sinus
tarsi_) is very wide. The metatarsal bones and phalanges have large
bases, long slender shafts, and heads projecting on the under side.
Even the final phalanges are long and slender.
[Illustration: Fig. 24.--The Zulu king, Ketchwayo, in fighting array,
with two of his men.]
We shall now find it profitable to compare the external characters of
anthropoids with those of man. We are sometimes disposed to see the
true likenesses of anthropoid apes in dark-skinned, naked savages.
These savages are often insufficiently fed, the skin is wrinkled,
the face, even at an early age, is deeply furrowed, and their general
appearance is neglected. The dark silhouette of such people stands
out so distinctly against a clear background, their habit of life
is so rude, their attitudes impress us so disagreeably, that we
are involuntarily led to make such a comparison. This tendency
unfortunately gives a wide field for exaggeration among dilettanti
naturalists, and such as are zealous to establish a preconceived
theory. A conscientious inquirer must, however, be cautious, and avoid
too great generalization in such comparisons. For instance, much has
been said of the pithecoid structure of all African negroes, yet this
only applies to some peculiarly hideous races, in a state of physical
degradation. There are many negro tribes in different parts of Africa
which are remarkable for their well-formed bodies, and for a not
ignoble bearing. The warlike demeanour of the natives of Ashanti,
Dahomey, and Ibos is well known. Although the Hausanese are flat-nosed
and thick-lipped, yet when armed and dressed in uniform, as we see
in the photographs of Captain Glover’s force, their military bearing
is very apparent. The tribes of Schilluk, Nuehr, Bari, Niam-Niam,
and A-Bantu present examples of distinguished warriors, however rude
and savage. Dabulamanzi, commander of the Zulus at the butcheries of
Isandlhwana and Ulundi, and his chiefs, give me, in a photograph in my
possession, the impression of gallant warriors, however uncivilized.
In all these cases it is difficult to establish the resemblance to
anthropoid apes (see also Fig. 24).
The Papuans, especially on the Australian continent, are generally
classed with the African negroes in such comparisons. We admit that a
horde of Australian blacks, degraded by hunger and fatigue, emaciated
and dirty, may, as they roam through the shadeless woods, the steppes
and thick scrub of their native country, present a strange and
brute-like appearance. And if the foreign intruder takes a coarse
pleasure in giving drink to these savages, their immodest gestures
may afford a revolting impression of their bestial nature. Yet the
habits even of these dark-skinned savages are altogether different
under more favourable conditions. Although of small stature, they are
not badly proportioned, and their manners and bearing are capable of
improvement, so that they can act as native police, messengers, etc.
This was the case also with the natives of Queensland, Australia, whom
I saw in the Zoological Gardens, Berlin, throwing the boomerang. Even
in these tamed savages, however, we must note the projecting orbits,
the deep depression between the forehead and nose, and the flatness of
the latter organ. There are aged, wrinkled bushmen, negroes, Papuans,
Malays, Japanese, and Mongols of inland Asia whose countenances are
altogether pithecoid. And such a cast of face may even be found in
Europe.
Some years ago, Mr. Bond, a land-surveyor in British India, asserted
that he had found the missing link between man and apes in the
mountainous district of the Western Ghauts. And indeed, the race he
describes seems to have a strong resemblance to apes. “The forehead is
low and retreating. The lower part of the face projects like the muzzle
of an ape; the legs are short and bent outwards. The trunk and arms are
comparatively long. The hands and fingers are contracted so that the
latter cannot be freely extended; a thick skin covers the hollow of
the hand and the fingers, especially their tips; the nails are small
and imperfect; the feet are broad, and covered both on their backs and
soles with a thick skin. This tribe seems to worship nature. They have
no fixed dwellings; they live chiefly on roots and honey, and exchange
the latter, together with wax and other productions of their forests,
for tobacco, clothes, and rice.”[20]
Nothing more, so far as I am aware, has been published concerning
this race. The description given above leaves much to be desired. The
assertion respecting the contracted fingers is obscure, and such a
condition is directly opposed to any resemblance with the flexible hand
of apes.
[Illustration:
Fig. 25. Aidanill, hairless Australian.
Fig. 26. The same in profile.
]
Let us turn from a tribe of which the existence is still dubious, to
consider the portraits we subjoin of a man and woman, aborigines of
Queensland, in a district watered by the Ballone. These are Aidanill,
the brother, and Dewan, the sister, members of a hairless family. The
indefatigable Miklucho-Maclay went to Gulnarber, 140 miles from Tulba,
in order to examine them, and took the photographs from which our
illustrations are taken.[21]
A likeness to the chimpanzee, when deprived of its hair, may be traced
in the keel or roof-shaped form of the skull; in the prominence of the
supra-orbital arches; in the deep depression between the forehead and
nose, of which only the centre of the bridge has a slight vertical
elevation; in the broad, flattened nostrils, bounded by deep furrows;
in the wide, fleshy mouth, and the large, laterally projecting ears.
Gratiolet and Alix give such a head in their treatise on _Troglodytes
Aubryi_ (Figs. 25, 26, 27). When we add to this the dark brown skin,
the deeply furrowed countenance, and the dark brown eyes, as they are
described by Miklucho-Maclay, the external resemblance between many of
the Australian aborigines and apes becomes more marked.
[Illustration: Fig. 27.--Dewan, Aidanill’s sister.]
Projecting ears are common among men of different races, and I have
observed them in Europeans who are otherwise well formed. Even in
this latter case the effect is ape-like. Much has been said of the
resemblance which may often be observed between the human ear and that
of apes. It is admitted that hardly any part of the organism varies
so much in its characteristics as the external ear. This is the case
with anthropoids, and almost more frequently with men. Individuals
of all nations are found with defective development of this or that
characteristic helix, angle tragus, notch concha, and fossa, with
lobules imperfectly formed or altogether absent. I have frequently
observed such misshapen ears, which vary from the perfect type, and
bear a certain resemblance to the ear of apes, among the hard-featured
peasantry of Germany, Switzerland, France, Italy, and Poland, who
cannot be said to count beauty as part of their inheritance. In Africa
I found this defective formation more common among the Maltese, Greeks,
and Turks who were living in the country, than among the fellaheen,
Berbers, and negroes. The latter have been unjustly charged with the
possession of “hideous ape-like ears,” whereas, among the African
races, these organs are, in the majority of cases, of a pleasing form.
With respect to the Australian blacks, and to the Malay, Mongolian, and
Indian races, I cannot rely on my personal observation. According to my
very limited experience, there is much individual variation among these
races, and ears of the hideous, ape-like formation might be sought
for with success. The specific resemblance to apes can, indeed, only
be ascertained by one who is accurately acquainted with the organism
of these animals. These and similar ideas are often expressed by the
unlearned, who do not really understand the characteristics in question.
Darwin speaks of the anthropoid form of the ear in the chimpanzee and
orang.[22] “The ears of the chimpanzee and orang are curiously like
those of man, and I am assured by the keepers in the Zoological Gardens
that these animals never move or erect them, so that they are in an
equally rudimentary condition, as far as that function is concerned, as
man. Why these animals, as well as the progenitors of man, should have
lost the power of erecting their ears, we cannot say. It may be, though
I am not quite satisfied with this view, that owing to their arboreal
habits and great strength they were but little exposed to danger, and
so during a lengthened period moved their ears but little, and thus
gradually lost the power of moving them. This would be a parallel case
with that of those large and heavy birds, which from inhabiting oceanic
islands have not been exposed to the attacks of beasts of prey, and
have consequently lost the power of using their wings for flight.
“The celebrated sculptor, Mr. Woolner, informs me of one little
peculiarity in the external ear which he has often observed both in
men and women, and of which he perceived the full signification. His
attention was first called to the subject whilst at work on his figure
of Puck, to which he had given pointed ears. He was thus led to examine
the ears of various monkeys, and subsequently more carefully those of
man. The peculiarity consists in a little blunt point, projecting from
the inwardly folded margin, or helix. These points not only project
inwards, but often a little outwards, so that they are visible when
the head is viewed from directly in front or behind. They are variable
in size and somewhat in position, standing either a little higher or
lower; and they sometimes occur on one ear and not on the other. Now
the meaning of these projections is not, I think, doubtful; but it may
be thought that they offer too trifling a character to be worth notice.
This thought, however, is as false as it is natural. Every character,
however slight, must be the result of some definite cause; and if it
occurs in many individuals deserves consideration. The helix obviously
consists of the extreme margin of the ear folded inwards; and this
folding appears to be in some manner connected with the whole external
ear being permanently pressed backwards. In many monkeys, which do not
stand high in the order, as baboons and some species of macacus, the
upper portion of the ear is slightly pointed, and the margin is not
at all folded inwards; but if the margin were to be thus folded, a
slight point would necessarily project inwards and probably a little
outwards. This could actually be observed in a specimen of the _Ateles
beelzebuth_ in the Zoological Gardens; and we may safely conclude that
it is a similar structure--a vestige of formerly pointed ears--which
occasionally reappears in man.”
[Illustration: Fig. 28.--Human ear.]
I subjoin an illustration of the human ear, in which the pointed tip
mentioned by Darwin may be easily discovered. This point may also be
perceived in the ears of anthropoids, and especially in those of the
orang-utan. Meyer has attempted to show that this Darwinian pointed tip
is only due to the abortive development of part of the helix, and in
this case we should not regard the occurrence as an ape-like pointing
of the helix, but rather as its partial interruption owing to the
pathological condition of that organ.[23] In a later edition of his
work, Darwin admits, in reply to Meyer, that this explanation may apply
to many cases in which there are several very small points, or when the
whole of the helix is sinuate. In one case, photographed by Darwin,
the prominence was so large that, if we were to assume with Meyer that
the ear would have been normal if the cartilage had been uniformly
developed along the whole extent of the helix, the latter must have
occupied a third part of the ear. Two cases were mentioned to Darwin in
which the upper edge of the ear had no inner fold, and was so pointed
that it was very like that of an ordinary mammal. The ear of the fœtus
of an orang given in Darwin’s illustration appears to be pointed,
although in the adult animal that organ is very like the human ear. The
Darwinian tip may also be seen in the fœtus of an orang described and
illustrated by Salvatore Trinchese in the _Annali del Museo civico di
Storia Naturale di Genova_ (1870). The tip of the helix is pointed in
very young individuals of the gibbon species, especially in _Hylobates
Lar_. Among the lower apes the pointed ear is very common (see Fig. 29).
[Illustration: Fig. 29.--Magot (_Innuus ecaudatus_).]
The eyelids of anthropoids greatly resemble those of man in their
structure. In adult gorillas and chimpanzees there is always a
semilunar fold (_plica semilunaris_) corresponding to the _membrana
nictitans_, or third eyelid of birds. In man there exists, instead of
this, only a rudimentary apparatus, the _caruncula lachrymalis_. In
some individuals it attains to a considerable size, as I have observed
in the fellaheen, Berbers, Shillook, and other tribes. On the other
hand, the conversion of the caruncula into a true, although only
rudimentary, _plica semilunaris_ has not been observed by me in the
human eye. Miklucho-Maclay describes the caruncula in Melanesians (the
Papuans of New Guinea), in the Orang-Sakay (of the Malay peninsula),
and in the Mikronesians (of the island of Japan and of the Palau
archipelago), as two or three times as wide as that of the average
European.[24]
The eye of the young male gorilla which was kept alive in the Berlin
Aquarium from 1876–77 was carefully examined by me in June, 1877.
I found that the sclerotic membrane of the eyeball was whitish,
surrounded by a dark brown ring. A second darker ring, sharply defined,
surrounded the cornea. The iris was of a yellowish brown. The sclerotic
membrane, however, gradually deepens in colour so as to give the effect
of a uniform dark brown. The iris retains a light brown colour for a
longer period, but it darkens with age. In an aged animal there is no
brightness in the eye, except from reflected light. In the chimpanzee
the iris is light brown, verging on yellow; and this is also the case
in the orang.
The expressionless, indifferent look of anthropoids has often been
observed, and undoubtedly chimpanzees and orangs generally gaze
placidly before them. I have, however, observed an animated expression
in the eyes of the former species, and W. L. Martin has also observed
a flash and brightening of their eyes. I shall never forget the
expression of malicious anger in the eyes of the female animal Mafuca,
at Dresden, as soon as she was teased. The expression of the eyes of
the gorilla in the Berlin Aquarium also changed frequently, especially
when he was about to perform some mischievous trick, or when he was
provoked to anger. The expression of this animal was very human, but
necessarily it could only recall the darkly coloured eyes of negroes
and other black races. In 1876 there were two very young orangs in the
Berlin Aquarium, one hairy and the other hairless. These animals clung
together in a close embrace. If they were separated, their eyes became
bright and restless, and they again sought to embrace each other while
uttering plaintive cries. On tickling one of the animals under the
chin, it made a most absurd grimace, and its eyes brightened, as Martin
has observed in similar cases. The eyes of the gibbons which I have
observed had a thoroughly mild and placid expression, rarely animated
by any fire.
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.
[Illustration: Fig. 30.--Capucin ape (_Cebus capucinus_).]
“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.
[Illustration: Fig. 31.--Hand of a very aged male gorilla.]
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.
[Illustration: Fig. 32.--Hand of a Hammegh from Roseres, on the Blue
Nile.]
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.
[Illustration: Fig. 33.--Satan’s ape (_Pithecia Satanas_). Shows the
formation and mode of using the feet in apes of the New World.]
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]
[Illustration:
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.
[Illustration: Fig. 35.--The Neanderthal skull. A. In profile. B. A
front view.]
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]
[Illustration: Fig. 36.--Lower jaw of Moulin-Quignon.]
[Illustration: Fig. 37.--Naulette lower jaw.]
[Illustration: Fig. 38.]
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.
[Illustration: Fig. 39.--Sagittal section through the skull of a
bam-chimpanzee.]
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.
[Illustration:
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.
]
[Illustration: Fig. 41.--Skeleton of an aged male gorilla.]
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.
[Illustration:
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]
[Illustration:
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.
]
It is important to remark that platycnemy has been regarded as a
pithecoid structure, and for this reason the attempt has been made
to establish the degraded position of those peoples which are most
remarkable for platycnemy. But, as Boyd-Dawkins has already observed,
although the tibiæ of the gorilla and the chimpanzee are to some
extent platycnemic, they are much less so than the platycnemic bones
of the human skeleton. The tibia of a male gorilla in the College of
Surgeons Museum has an index width of 68·1, that of a female of 65·0,
while the index of the chimpanzee’s tibia is 61·1, which is about the
average of the tibias of Perthichwareu. It is unnecessary to indicate
the other marked distinctions between the tibiæ of men and apes; if
platycnemy is to be regarded as genetic, it must be admitted that man
has in this particular far exceeded apes.[57] Neither the gorilla,
the chimpanzee, the orang-utan, nor even the baboon possesses a tibia
which is flattened in its upper or middle part. In all these apes the
middle of the bone is more or less rounded, almost as if it had been
rounded by a turning-lathe. According to my experience, the degree of
platycnemy in anthropoids is subject to certain variations. It appears
to me to be least marked in the aged male gorilla (Fig. 41), and in
the gibbon (_Hylobates agilis_, _syndactylus_), in which latter animal
the transverse section of the tibia represents an almost equilateral
triangle. The platycnemy was more marked in an almost adult female
gorilla, still more decided in an aged male chimpanzee, which came
from the river Kiulu, and again in an aged female chimpanzee. On the
other hand, the centre of the shaft of the tibia in another aged male
chimpanzee which came from Loango, was rounded, and not platycnemic. In
the tibia of an adult orang-utan which I examined, the platycnemy was
very marked. But I agree with Boyd-Dawkins in never having met with an
anthropoid in which the platycnemy is so considerable as it is, for
instance, in the Cro-Magnon tibia, and in another found at Troy.
[Illustration:
Fig. 46.--Skeleton of the human foot, seen from above. _a_,
Astragalus. _b_, Os calcis. _c_, Scaphoid bone. _d_, _e_, _f_,
Cuneiform bones. _g_, Cuboid bone. _h_, Metatarsal bones. _ii_,
Phalanges.
]
If we give a cursory glance at the lower limbs of apes, we see that all
the same characteristics are present in their tarsus that we find in
the human tarsus. In each case there is an astragalus, an _os calcis_,
a scaphoid bone, three cuneiform bones, and a cuboid bone. There are
undoubtedly several peculiarities in which the tarsus differs from
the corresponding part of the human foot. The first metatarsal bone
is joined to the first cuneiform bone by an articular facet which
extends from the back to the sole of the foot. This joint plays a part
resembling that of the thumb of the human hand (see Figs. 20 and 46).
In Huxley’s opinion, the hinder limbs of the gorilla terminate in
a true foot, with a very movable great toe. It is undoubtedly a
prehensile foot, but in no sense a hand. It is a foot which does not
differ from the human foot in any essential characteristics, but only
in relative circumstances, in the degree of flexibility, and in the
subordinate arrangements of its parts. Huxley adds that it must not
be supposed that he wishes to undervalue differences which, however,
he does not regard as fundamental. They are important enough of
their kind, since in any case the structure of the foot is in close
correlation with the other parts of the organism. Although it cannot be
doubted that the increased division of labour in man, which relegates
the function of support entirely to the legs and feet, is a significant
advance in structure; yet, regarded as a whole from the anatomical
point of view, the points of agreement between the human foot and
that of the gorilla are much more striking and significant than their
differences.
The differences in the foot of the orang are still greater; in the very
long toes and short tarsus, the short great toe and the removal of
the heel from the ground, in the great obliquity of the joints which
connect the foot with the shank-bones, and in the absence of a long
flexor muscle to move the great toe, the orang’s foot differs still
more from that of the gorilla than the latter differs from the human
foot. In some of the lower apes the hands and feet are still further
removed from those of the gorilla than in the case of the orang. In the
American apes the thumb can no longer be opposed; in the ateles it is
reduced to a mere rudiment, covered with skin; in the sahius it is bent
forwards and provided with a curved claw like the other fingers. In all
these cases there is no doubt that the hand differs more from that of
the gorilla than the gorilla’s hand differs from that of man.[58]
Flower remarks that the chief distinction between the foot of a man
and an ape consists in the fact that the latter is transformed into a
prehensile organ. The tarsal and metatarsal bones, and the phalanges
are of the same number in both orders, and in the same relative
position, only in the foot of the ape the facet for articulation of
the first cuneiform bone with the great toe is saddle-shaped, and
obliquely directed towards the inner or tibial side of the foot. Thus,
the great toe is separated from the others, and so placed, that when
it is bent, it is directed downwards towards the sole, and is opposed
to the other toes, much more opposed to them than is the case with the
thumb of the human hand.[59] Owen also speaks of the characteristic
transformation of the great toe of an ape’s foot into a thumb, opposed
to the other toes, and adapted for grasping.[60]
[Illustration: Fig. 47.--Coaita (_Ateles paniscus_).]
K. E. von Bär does not agree with Huxley in considering that there is
less difference between man and the gorilla than that which exists
between different species of apes. “There are,” Von Bär remarks,
“differences of various kinds among apes. In some the thumb is only
a stump; in others, as in the orang-utan, the fingers of the hinder
extremities are so long and curved that they cannot be extended on flat
ground; in many of the smaller apes this member is still more like a
hand than in the larger species, and the fingers can be easily spread
out on the ground. In this case the foot is of a much blunter form, and
is more flexible, so that the sole, which is properly turned inward,
can lie flat on the ground. The heavier the body of the animal, the
more sharply cut the structure of the foot must be, so that it does
not admit of the free movements which are possible in the hand. But
all these are only modifications of a climbing foot, or prehensile
member--that is, of a hand, not modifications of a foot resting firmly
on the ground and supporting the whole weight of the body.
“It must not be forgotten that the structure of the skeleton is subject
to mechanical laws, which may be traced through the whole series of
the animal world. This is readily apparent when we turn to the human
structure.
“The human foot rests for the greater part of its length on the
ground, that is to say, with the heel and centre of the foot, which
form together a firm arch. The tarsus consists of the astragalus, and
also of the _os calcis_, which in man form a very prominent part,
taking a backward and downward direction, and of five other bones.
The metatarsus consists of five bones, on which the five toes are
inserted. In man these metatarsal bones are considerably longer than
the separate phalanges. Thus, the arch on which man is supported in
an erect position extends from the heel to the extremities of the
metatarsal bones. The several bones are slightly movable, but they are
so firmly connected that they can diverge but little from each other,
unless muscular power is exerted. In order to press the toes upon the
ground, it is again necessary to exert the muscles. The arched instep
has this advantage, that the foot can take a better hold of the slight
inequalities of the ground. In a profile view of the skeleton of a
human foot, the shortness of the toes, in comparison with the length of
the arched instep, is very apparent. In any natural position, even when
man is not walking or standing, the sole of the foot is not turned
inwards, but downwards.... The toes of the gorilla take the form of
a hand, since the great toe stands separate like a thumb, while the
other toes are turned outwards. In the gorilla the tarsus is short,
and the heel is bent inwards. The several bones of the human foot are
undoubtedly present in the hind hand of a gorilla, but the organ is
changed into a prehensile organ or hand. The conditions are the same as
in the parts of the mouth in insects which in some cases form movable
mandibles, while in others they are attenuated into a proboscis. When
it is asserted that apes are not quadrumanous, it is as if we were to
say that flies have no proboscis, but attenuated mandibles.”[61]
All apes, including anthropoids, occasionally make use of their hinder
extremities in order to snatch at objects. They also grasp with them in
climbing. On such occasions, when they wish to secure the fruit they
have seized from the voracity of their fellows, they take it between
the toes of one hinder extremity, in order to be able to get away more
quickly by means of the other, and by the use of both hands.
From what we have said, it will be seen how difficult it is to
reconcile the views of different observers with respect to the fitting
term to be given to the hinder extremities of apes. Against those who
uphold the designation of _hind hands_ we must oppose the anatomical
structure, and also the fact that a true hand ought to possess the
power of rotation in a degree which exists in the fore, but not in the
hind, extremities of apes. On this account I have already adopted, as
more suitable and equally distinctive, the term of _prehensile foot_
for this member.[62] I agree with Haeckel in rejecting the common
designation of apes as four-handed or quadrumanous.
The bands or ligaments which connect the different parts of the
anthropoid skeleton together, and convert the detached elements into
a movable machinery, do not on the whole differ much from the same
structure in man. A detailed account of these ligaments would, for
several reasons, be out of place in this work, and I shall only mention
a few special and more interesting distinctions. Such, for example,
is the uncommon strength of the _ligamentum nuchæ_ in the gorilla,
which is quite in harmony with the great development of the spinous
processes of the upper cervical vertebræ, and with the flattening of
the squamous occipital portion. Since the sacral vertebræ are deeply
inserted between the high ilia, the ilio-lumbar ligaments (_ligamenta
iliolumbalia_) and the sacro-iliac ligaments (_ligamenta iliosacralia_)
are of considerable size. In agreement with the projection in a
downward direction of the high, narrow ischial bones, the sacro-sciatic
ligaments which extend between these and the sacrum are very long
in the chimpanzee. Although in this case the ischial spine is only
represented by a roughness of the bone, yet there is on either side
between this and the sacrum a powerful lesser sacro-sciatic ligament
(_ligamentum spinoso-sacrum_).
The well-known anatomist, J. F. Meckel, has asserted that the
depression in the head of the femur (_fovea capitis_), which serves for
the insertion of the round ligament (_ligamentum teres_), is absent in
the chimpanzee and orang, and he adds that it is also absent in the
gibbon. In a skeleton of a young chimpanzee which had not shed its
milk-teeth, and of which the ligaments were also preserved, Welcker
found a fully developed round ligament inserted almost in the centre of
the head of the femur. This agrees in every particular with the same
formation in man. On the other hand, no trace of a round ligament was
to be found in the hip-joint of a young orang-utan. The cartilaginous
envelope of the head of the femur was smooth throughout, without any
indication of a place for inserting the ligament. Welcker again found
no such depression in the femur of an aged male orang-utan, nor was
there any trace of it in another aged male orang, designated as _Simia
Morio_. Welcker believes that he has established the fact that the
round ligament is wanting in the orang-utan, but that it is present in
the gorilla, chimpanzee, and gibbon. The same naturalist remarks that,
although we may certainly assume that the round ligament is absent
wherever there is no depression in the head of the femur, yet the
existence of such a depression in the acetabulum (_fovea acetabuli_)
is not enough to prove that a round ligament was inserted in it. The
innominate bones of an adult orang-utan were examined by Welcker, and
displayed a small, but well-defined depression, as if destined for
a receptacle for this ligament,[63] running from the cotyloid notch
down to the bottom of the acetabulum, between the two horns of the
semilunar-shaped articular cartilage.
In a subsequent paper, Welcker states that the absence of the round
ligament in the orang-utan, and its presence in the chimpanzee, had
been previously established by Camper and Owen.[64] In three specimens
of orangs which he had obtained immediately after death, Owen found
that the round ligament was imperfectly developed on both sides. The
chimpanzee differs from the orang in possessing a depression on the
head of the femur. In the gorilla, as Owen observes, this depression
has almost the same depth and relative position as in man. At Welcker’s
request, Professor Dippel ascertained the presence of the depression
in the femur of a gorilla skeleton which is preserved in the natural
history collection at Darmstadt. St. George Mivart saw the skeleton
of an orang in which the femur was marked with a slight but plainly
indicated depression, just where the round ligament is usually
attached. Welcker thinks it probable that in some specimens of the
gorilla the round ligament is only slightly developed, and that in
others it is altogether wanting. On several femurs of gorillas, this
naturalist observed only doubtful traces of the depression in question.
Duvernoy found the round ligament fully developed in the gorilla and
chimpanzee. Vrolik failed to find it in the orang-utan, but ascertained
its presence in the chimpanzee. Gratiolet and Alix saw that it was
fully developed in _Troglodytes Aubryi_.
In addition to these somewhat conflicting assertions, I have myself
observed, in the gorilla innominate and femur bones examined by me,
more or less distinct indications of the depression which receives
the round ligament. The ligament itself has been preserved with the
body of a gorilla. The same remark applies to the skeletons and
bodies of chimpanzees. In the case of the skeleton of an orang,
slight indications of a depression were observed on the head of the
left femur, and these indications were absent in the femurs of other
specimens. In a large orang-utan which died in the Berlin Aquarium,
only short, filamentous tufts of streaky fibres were apparent in the
right acetabulum, and these were intermingled singly or in groups
with the cartilaginous cells, somewhat resembling the cartilaginous
corpuscles of the synovial membrane. From these facts we may conclude
that the round ligament is generally but not invariably present in
the gorilla and chimpanzee, and that it is altogether absent in the
orang-utan. In the gibbon it is present in the majority of cases.
I have myself observed it in _Hylobates agilis_, _leuciscus_, and
_syndactylus_. Owen asserts that the unsteady gait of the orang is
partly due to the absence of this ligament, but the truth of this
surmise is rendered doubtful by the fact that the ligament is not
unfrequently absent in other anthropoids. Moreover, the gait of all
these arboreal and climbing animals is extremely ungainly.
The muscular system of anthropoid apes is very interesting. I must
necessarily refrain from giving a detailed account of it, and will only
mention some points in connection with this organic system, and their
relation to corresponding points in the muscular system of man. I rely
partly on the researches of others, and partly on my own. The amount of
material which has been collected up to this time is, unfortunately,
too scanty to enable us to draw satisfactory conclusions in all cases.
We are often unable to decide whether the conditions presented to us
in the case of anthropoids are normal or exceptional. Nor are the
statistics of muscular variations in the human subject by any means
firmly established. My own labours in this direction are not yet
concluded. The assertions on the subject which have been published to
the world and accepted as authoritative have already been shown to be
to some extent untrustworthy. Even the little which I am now able to
produce may not altogether stand the test of subsequent research. Brühl
justly remarks that in no department of anatomy more than in that which
treats of the muscles, is it more essential that we should not decide
whether a form is normal or exceptional until it has been repeatedly
examined.[65]
[Illustration:
Fig. 48.--Muscles of the head and face of a European. 1,
1′, Occipito-frontalis. 2, 3, Orbicularis palpebrarum. 4,
Pyramidalis nasi. 5, Levator labii superioris alæque nasi. 6,
Compressor naris. 7, Levator labii superioris. 7′, Zygomaticus
minor. 8, Levator anguli oris. 8′, Zygomaticus major. 9,
Orbicularis oris. 9′, Levator menti. 9″, Depressor labii
inferioris. 10, Depressor anguli oris. 11, Masseter. 12,
13, Risorius and the buccinator by which it is covered. 15,
Trapezius. 16, Attrahens. 17, 19, Attollens. 20, Retrahens
aurem. 21, Sterno-mastoid. 22, Splenius. A. Tendinous
aponeurosis. C. Malar bone (the parotis is removed). F. Skin of
neck.
]
The cranial muscles of anthropoids are formed like those of men,
except in a few unimportant particulars (comp. Figs. 48 and 50). I have
not observed in anthropoids the muscular fibres which in man branch
out from the orbicular muscle of the eye, and overlap the cheeks and
temples, and which are considerably developed in the head of a Monjalo
negro which was dissected by me (Fig. 49, ~3~, ~3′~). In apes that
portion of the orbicular muscle which covers the supra-orbital ridge
is very marked. There is generally a considerable layer of muscle on
the nose and upper lip. I have dissected it in detail in anthropoid and
other apes, including those of America; _i.e._ the zygomatic muscles,
the levator labii superioris, and the levator labii superioris alæque
nasi. This has also been done by Duvernoy, Alix, and Gratiolet, in the
case of anthropoids dissected by them, as well as by Macalister and
Bischoff.
[Illustration:
Fig. 49.--Head-muscles of a Monjalese negro. 1, 2,
Occipito-frontalis. 3, 3′, Orbicularis palpebrarum. 4,
Pyramidalis nasi. 4′, Levator labii superioris. 6, Levator
labii superioris alæque nasi. 6′, Compressor naris. 7′, Levator
anguli oris. 8, 8′, Zygomatici major et minor. 9, Orbicularis
oris. 9′, Levator menti. 9″, Depressor labii inferioris. 9‴,
Depressor anguli oris. 11, Masseter. 13, Buccinator. 14,
Platysma. 15, Trapezius. 17, 18, Attollens and attrahens
aurem. 19, Embedded temporal muscle. 20, Retrahens aurem. 21,
Sterno-mastoid. 22, Deeply set muscles of neck. A, Tendinous
aponeurosis. C, Zygoma. E, Parotis. *, Stensonian duct.
]
Bischoff was only able to identify a wide zygomatic muscle in the
orang with the small zygomatic in man. In the orang, the gibbon, and
the baboon, as well as in _Innus sinicus_ and _Ateles_, I myself was
quite able to trace a division into a large and small zygomatic. In the
gorilla dissected by me the levator labii superioris alæque nasi was
very wide (Fig. 50, ~6~). In the case of a gorilla, Ehlers dissected
the small zygomatic muscle, together with the levator labii superioris
alæque nasi, in the manner introduced by Henle as a single square
muscle of the upper lip (_Musculus quadratus labii superioris_). In the
gorilla I observed a levator alæque nasi, together with the already
mentioned levator labii superioris; but I failed to find any separate
levator labii superioris. The very wide cartilage of the nose is
occupied by a considerable amount of muscular tissue. All these muscles
are present in the orang, but they are of small size and separated
into detached bundles. The pyramidalis nasi may be traced in every
instance, especially in the gorilla (Fig. 50, ~4~) and in the orang. It
is not so strongly developed in the chimpanzee and gibbon, but is not
absent in these apes, nor in those which are not anthropoid, such as
the baboon, and ateles, or climbing ape.
[Illustration:
Fig. 50.--Head-muscles of gorilla presented in Fig. 3. 1,
2, Occipito-frontalis. 3, 3′, Orbicularis palpebrarum. 4,
Pyramidalis nasi. 5, Levator alæ nasi. 6, Levator labii
superioris alæque nasi. 7, Zygomaticus minor. 7′, Levator
anguli oris. 8, Zygomaticus major. 9, 9′, Orbicularis oris.
10, Risorius. 11, 16, Masseter. 1′, Buccinator. 12, Depressor
anguli oris. 13, Buccinator. 14, Platysma. 15, Trapezius. 17,
Temporal. 18, 19, 20, Attrahens, attollens, and retrahens
aurem. 21, Lesser muscle of helix. A, Tendinous aponeurosis. B,
Cartilage of nostril. C, Zygoma. D, External ear. *, Stensonian
duct.
]
I myself follow the original division of the muscles into those which
belong to the nostril and upper lip, in accordance with the principles
of Duchenne, Darwin, Gamba,[66] and others, and I do so the more
readily, since it is impossible not to perceive the manifold and lively
mimetic action which takes place in this particular region of an ape’s
head. The distinct action of the levator labii superioris alæque nasi,
the dilation of the nostrils, the function of a strongly developed
levator anguli oris, are especially characteristic of the gorilla; but
they are also perceptible in the chimpanzee and gibbon. The orang’s
face is the least mobile. I observed that in the gorilla the risorius
was very long, branching slightly in the fore-part of the corner of the
mouth, and behind into three distinct wide bundles. The lowest bundle
covered the platysma myoides, but could not be regarded as part of
the latter. In one chimpanzee I found that the risorius was slightly
developed, and in other animals of that species I failed to trace it
at all. Alix and Gratiolet represent the Aubry chimpanzee (Plate ix.
Fig. 1, ~15~) with the risorius strongly developed. I have not observed
this formation either in the orang or the gibbon, but it was apparent
in one of the ateles (_Ateles leucophthalmos_). In this case the muscle
covered the platysma myoides and Stenson’s duct, _i.e._ the duct
leading out of the parotid gland (Fig. 50, *).
For some time I was disposed to regard the risorius of this ape as only
a radiation of the platysma myoides, but my opinion upon this point is
again shaken.
In the gorilla a faint depressor anguli oris and an equally faint
depressor labii inferioris may be observed, the latter partly covered
by the large and predominant orbicularis oris (Fig. 50). In the
chimpanzee the two depressors are plainly apparent, and in the gibbon
the one first named was at any rate developed. The platysma myoides,
the depressors just mentioned, and the crescent-shaped orbiculares
are in this animal in close connection with each other. Froriep’s
suggestion becomes ever more probable, that these muscles of the lower
lip owe their origin to the intersection of the opposite portions of
the skin-muscles of the neck which overlap the face. The buccinator
muscle in anthropoids resembles on the whole that of man, and in
both cases is pierced by Stenson’s duct (Fig. 50). The form of the
masseter muscle is common to both (see Fig. 50, ~11, 16~). In the
external ear of anthropoids there is an attrahens, attollens, retrahens
(Fig. 50). Compared with that of a white man, and still more with
that of a negro (see Figs. 48, ~19~, and 49, ~17~), the attollens
is only slightly developed. The muscles attached to the cartilages
of the ear are extremely scanty or partially wanting, which is also
sometimes the case with man. The muscles of the helix are most strongly
marked in the gorilla (see, for example, Fig. 50, ~21~). Tiedemann,
Bischoff’s brother-in-law, carefully observed two living chimpanzees
in Philadelphia for six months without detecting any movement of the
ears. My own observation confirms his assertion and the remarks of
Darwin, which I have already quoted, to the effect that anthropoids are
incapable of moving their ears. I know of no individual exceptions.
This is the more remarkable since some men have retained the power of
voluntarily moving their ears, and the same power is also found in some
species of apes, such as the sea-cats, baboons, macacas, and magots.
It will not here be out of place to say something of the
characteristics, previously mentioned, of the physiognomical expression
of anthropoid apes. Thus, for example, when the gorilla is agitated, he
can move the skin of his head and bristle the hair which covers this
region. The chimpanzee can also move the skin of the head, but with no
very apparent bristling of the hair. The large male orang, which was in
the Berlin Aquarium in 1876, bristled his hair and the skin of his head
when he was much enraged. It is known that in some instances man also
possesses this power.
I have already spoken of the expression of the eyes of these animals. I
will only add that when anthropoids of every species are in great pain
or seriously ill, the expression of their eyes is often most affecting.
The forehead of these animals is frequently marked by transverse
furrows, and especially, as Darwin justly observes, when they raise
their eyebrows. The same great observer considers that the countenances
of anthropoids are, in comparison with those of men, generally
inexpressive, and indeed, chiefly in consequence of the fact that they
do not wrinkle the forehead when they are excited. The wrinkling of
the forehead, which is one of the most significant forms of expression
in man, is due to the action of the corrugatores supercilii, by which
the eyebrows are drawn down and closer to each other, so as to form
vertical folds on the forehead. It has been asserted that the orang
and chimpanzee possess these muscles, but they seem to be rarely
exercised--at any rate, to any remarkable extent.[67] When Darwin
brought a chimpanzee out of his dark chamber into bright sunshine, he
only once observed a slight wrinkling of the forehead. When the same
observer tickled the nose of a chimpanzee with a straw, its face was
slightly wrinkled, and faint vertical furrows appeared between the
eyebrows.[68] Darwin never observed any wrinkling of the forehead in
an orang. I myself have observed a contraction of that region of the
brows which is covered with bristly hairs, and a wrinkling of the skin
which covers the bridge of the nose in the gorilla and the chimpanzee,
and have illustrated this expression by a drawing.
Darwin goes on to say that when a young chimpanzee is tickled, to
which, as in the case of children, their armpits are peculiarly
sensitive, he generally utters a chuckling or laughing sound, although
sometimes the laugh is silent. The corners of the mouth are then drawn
back, and this sometimes causes the eyelids to be slightly wrinkled.
This wrinkling, which is so characteristic of the human laugh, is still
more apparent in some of the other apes. In the chimpanzee the teeth of
the upper jaw are not exposed when he utters this laughing sound, and
in this respect he differs from man. Darwin further observes that when
the tickled young orang ceases to laugh, an expression passes over his
face, which, according to Wallace, may be called a smile. Darwin has
observed something similar in the chimpanzee.[69]
My own observation confirms what has been said of the chuckling
of a tickled chimpanzee. When Dr. Hermes, the director of the
Berlin Aquarium, played with the chimpanzee which was kept in that
establishment, a contortion of the corner of the mouth, resembling
a somewhat sardonic smile, at once appeared. No specimen displayed
this smile with so much effect as the lively Augustus, who delighted
visitors by his inexhaustible humour in 1879. The gorilla, of which
an illustration is given in Fig. 3, also drew down the corner of his
mouth when he was pleased, by means of the muscular system which we
have just described.
When the gorilla is provoked, he displays both rows of teeth, and opens
his mouth to utter sounds of fury, while making ready to fight. It is
well known that anthropoids are able to pout and project their lips;
and Darwin says that they do this, not only when they are slightly
teased, and are sullen or disappointed, but also when anything occurs
to make them uneasy.
I have often observed in chimpanzees a slight wrinkling of the region
of the nasal cartilage, and even a vibration in a lateral and upward
direction. In any case, the muscles which we have described as acting
on the nose and upper lip are exercised.
The platysma myoides, which extends in man from the lower row of teeth
to just below the clavicle, occupies about the same area in the gibbon
and in other apes (Fig. 50). In the chimpanzee, however, this muscle
extends as high as the zygomatic arch, or even higher. In the gorilla
also I observed that this part extends comparatively high on the face.
In chimpanzees, orangs, and gibbons the upper fibres of this muscle
seem to form the risorius. In one case the platysma myoides sent forth
a fasciculus, about 18 mm. in width, to the beginning of the lower
temporal ridges. In the gorilla I saw that the uppermost fibres of the
platysma myoides were partly covered by the risorius (Fig. 50, ~10~).
From the corresponding muscle in the orang the lower fibres tend far
backward, and are in connection with the deltoid muscle covering a
segment of the capsular ligament. This muscle wrinkles the skin of
the neck, and helps to draw down the lower jaw. In cases in which it
extends far in an upward direction, as in those we have cited, it
affects the lateral extension of the middle and lower skin on the faces
of these animals, as well as the grinning contortion of the corner of
the mouth. It may also have to do with the grumbling sound issuing from
the throat-pouch, which is uttered by the animal when agitated, as he
rapidly opens and closes his mouth.
The strong sterno-cleido-mastoid muscle found in these animals, and
especially in the orang and gibbon, can be divided without difficulty
into a sternal and clavicular portion. The two portions diverge from
each other in a downward direction. As Bischoff justly states, a
muscle not hitherto observed in man may be traced in all four species
of anthropoids, a muscle which extends from the external part of the
clavicle to the transverse process of the first cervical vertebra.
Bischoff has called it the musculus omocervicalis. It is found in other
apes, although the site of its origin varies, sometimes occurring on
the spine of the scapula. Our Munich anatomist differs from Huxley in
regarding this muscle as “a brilliant proof of the relation of all apes
with each other.” I give this assertion without further comment.
The muscles which extend between the head, sternum, and clavicle,
together with the muscles of the acromion process of the scapula, make
an external covering to the throat-pouch, which I shall describe
presently. The pectoralis major of the gorilla, as well as that of man,
divides into two portions, one attached to the clavicle, the other
to the cartilages of the true ribs. The former is divided from the
deltoid by a wide interval, filled with connective tissue and fat. But
both portions of the pectoralis major are divided by a tolerably wide
space, into which, in Bischoff’s opinion, the throat-pouch is inserted.
This, however, I do not believe, since that organ would be compressed
and strangulated between the two portions of muscle whenever they were
exercised. It may, however, be supposed that room for an enlargement
of the throat-pouch when the animal is bellowing is afforded by the
existence of these spaces. Bischoff is right in the assertion that
the clavicular portion of the pectoralis major is wanting in the
orang-utan. The upper part of this muscle springs directly from the
sternum. The lower sternal ribs give origin to the pectoralis minor.
The chimpanzee and gibbon display clearly in this muscle the separation
we have mentioned into a clavicular and a sternal portion.
The structure of the pectoralis minor in these apes is full of
interest. In the gorilla it divides into an upper portion of firmer
tissue, less easily separable into digitations, which arises from the
third to the fifth ribs, and a lower portion, separable into three
digitations, of which the upper segment laps considerably over the
lower segment of the upper portion. In the chimpanzee an upper portion
of less firm texture extends from the second to the fourth, and a
lower with three digitations from the fourth to the seventh ribs. This
second lower portion is sometimes absent. I have seen the upper portion
attached to the coracoid process of the scapula, and the lower portion
to the ridge of the greater tuberosity of the humerus. In the orang
an upper portion, separable into three digitations, extends from the
second to the fifth ribs, and is attached to the coracoid process. A
lower portion, also separable into three digitations, extends from the
fifth to the seventh ribs, and is also attached either to the greater
tuberosity of the humerus or to its edge; this latter portion projects
below over the pectoralis major. In the gibbon (_Hylobates albimanus_),
the upper portion starts from the second, the lower from the third to
the fifth ribs. It may here be remarked that the pectoralis minor is in
man also sometimes separable into digitations, which may be connected
both with the coracoid process and with the capsular ligament of the
shoulder-joint. In anthropoids the tendon of insertion of this muscle
is remarkably slender.
According to Duvernoy, in the gorilla a fibrous, hood-like fascia
covers the whole region of the occiput and neck. In adult males
this fascia is 20 mm. in thickness. In a female dissected by me
the rudiments of a similar hood-like cervical fascia were present.
Duvernoy is justified in supposing that this is not yet developed in
the young gorilla, and that a layer of connective tissue and fat is
substituted for it. In a young gorilla I saw the trapezius divided
into distinct bundles of flesh by layers of fat (Fig. 50, ~15~). The
fascia corresponds to the great development of the trapezius, and the
same characteristic development exists in other anthropoids. The adult
male gorilla displays a powerful _ligamentum nuchæ_ in connection
with the long spinous processes of the cervical vertebræ, as well as
powerful inter-spinales muscles, spinales colli, and semi-spinales
colli and dorsi. The great development of the spinous processes of
the dorsal vertebræ of gorillas (Fig. 17), and also chimpanzees and
orangs, involve the development of powerful semi-spinales, as well
as of strong, fourfold spinales and inter-spinales muscles. The
whole of the fleshy formation of the neck of an adult male gorilla
which is covered by the trapezius is very voluminous, and especially
the splenius capitis and colli, the long cervical muscle (_Musculus
longissimus cervicis_), and the long head-muscle (_Musculus longissimus
capitis_), which have also been regarded by me as parts of the long
spinal extensor, and finally the oblique and vertical muscles at the
back of the head. With Chappuy, I am disposed to regard the latter as
modifications of the spinales and inter-spinales.
The levator anguli scapulæ is divided in anthropoids as in man. The
subclavius is slender, except in the gorilla, and in the latter animal
it sends a tendon obliquely to the coracoid process.
In all anthropoids the deltoid is strongly developed. In the gorilla
it projects forwards and outwards in order to attach itself to the
humerus, almost in its centre. Here it is separated from the brachialis
anticus in a manner with which we are only imperfectly acquainted. It
extends nearly as far in the gibbon and orang, while in the chimpanzee
its attachment is higher up. Bischoff observes, and it was previously
suggested by Vrolik, that in the chimpanzee the coraco-brachialis
muscle possesses at its origin a moderately large second portion, which
tends downwards over the lesser tuberosity of the humerus, and adheres
to its edge. But I have seen both portions of the muscle in question
attached to the coracoid process of the scapula in apes of this
species. In the gorilla, orang, and gibbon the position of this muscle
corresponds to that in man.
Chapman and Bischoff speak of a muscle common to all apes which starts
from the tendinous attachment of the _latissimus dorsi_ on the edge
of the lesser tuberosity of the humerus, and tends downwards on the
inner side of the humerus, and to this muscle they give the name
_latissimo-condyloideus_. Bischoff goes on to say that this muscle goes
in some cases into the fascia which covers the biceps; and in others,
as in the baboon, it is attached to the inner inter-muscular septum and
to the internal condyle of the humerus. In the gibbon it only extends
as far as the centre of the humerus, but in the orang it reaches to the
condyle, where it is pierced by the ulnar nerve. Bischoff adds that
this formation is wanting in man.
This structure is indeed remarkable in anthropoids. The muscle starts
in a lateral direction from the insertion point of the _latissimus
dorsi_. In the gorilla alone I observed that it started from the
coracoid process of the scapula, together with the two portions
of the pectoralis minor; it was connected for a space with the
coraco-brachialis, and finally it was attached, in the upper part of
the lower third of the humerus, to the inter-muscular septum which
is found between the brachialis anticus and the triceps. In the
chimpanzee, on the other hand, it has its origin in the _latissimus
dorsi_, and divides into an anterior and posterior portion; the former
is attached to the inner condyle of the humerus, while the latter is
connected either with the middle or inner head of the triceps. In the
orang the same division of this muscle may occur. In one of these
animals I observed an anterior portion, very thin and semi-membranous,
attached by an extremely slight tendon to the coracoid process of the
shoulder-blade, while the hind portion issued from the _latissimus
dorsi_. They were both in connection with the triceps and brachialis
anticus. In other instances the muscle consisted only of the posterior
portion, issuing from the _latissimus dorsi_. In the white-handed
gibbon, the muscle issued from the region in which the tendons of the
_latissimus dorsi_ and of the teres major are united, and was inserted
into the fascia which is found between the bicipital and the brachialis
anterior. This attachment may also occur in the centre of the shaft of
the humerus. Chapman and Chudzinsky have observed anomalous instances
of this formation in coloured races.[70]
It is well known that in man the biceps is inserted into the tuberosity
of the radius by means of a flattened round tendon. This tendon,
however, opposite the bend of the elbow, gives off a broad expansion,
which passes into the fascia of the forearm, and is termed _Aponeurosis
bicipitis_. In the gorilla this aponeurosis is carried on as strong
fibrous bundles of the fascia of the forearm into the palmar fascia. In
the gibbon the short head of the muscle does not always start from the
lesser tuberosity of the humerus, nor from the tendon of the pectoralis
major (Huxley), but sometimes from the edge of the lesser tuberosity,
which is here connected with the _latissimus dorsi_, as well as with
the sub-scapularis, the brachialis anticus, which is more to the side,
and with the triceps. In the gibbon, as Bischoff justly observes, the
supinator longus only reaches as far as the centre of the radius,
instead of extending to the styloid process of that bone, as it does in
other anthropoids, and in man.
The palmaris longus is wanting in the gorilla, but not in other
anthropoids. The long flexor muscles of the fingers and the lumbricales
resemble those of man (Figs. 51, 52). The flexor longus pollicis is
absent in the gorilla. Duvernoy considers that it is replaced by a
tendon of the long flexor of the fore-finger, but I have been unable
to verify the existence of this tendon. The same muscle is also absent
in the chimpanzee and the orang, but it may be traced in _Hylobates
albimanus_. Chapman states that in the gorilla the pronator radii teres
only sends forth one head,[71] but I have found it to be bicipital
in animals of this species. The lower or hinder head issues, as in
man, from the coronoid process of the ulna. Both in the gorilla and in
the chimpanzee it extends far in a downwards direction on the radius
(Fig. 52). The flexor carpi radialis starts in the chimpanzee with one
head from the inner condyle of the humerus, and with the other from
the radius. Bischoff describes the structure of the long abductor of
the thumb in the orang, the baboon, the _pithecia_, and the _hapale_
as resembling that of man. But in the gorilla, the chimpanzee, and
the macaca the tendon divides into two parts. Nor does one tendon
belong, as in man, to a short extensor of the thumb, but the latter is
wholly absent, and the division of the tendon only implies a continued
division of the attachment to the trapezium, as well as to the
metacarpal bones of the thumb. This division of the tendon also occurs
in the gorilla, which likewise possesses a short extensor of the thumb.
In this point, again, apes display a greater likeness to one another
than to man.
[Illustration:
Fig. 51.--Palmar muscles of man. _a_, Ligaments of wrist,
especially the anterior ligament. _c_, _c′_, Sheathing
ligaments. _d_, _e_, _f_, Oblique fibres of the ligaments
of the sheath of the flexor tendons. 1, 2, Tendons flexor
sublimis, and of the flexor profundus muscles of the fingers.
3, The reciprocal perforation of these tendons. 4, Continuation
of the tendons of the flexor profundus of the fingers. 5,
Tendon of the flexor longus pollicis. 6, Abductor pollicis. 7,
8, 9, Flexor brevis, adductor, and opponens pollicis. 10, 11,
12, Flexor brevis, abductor, and opponens minimi digiti. 13,
Lumbricales. 14, First dorsal inter-osseous muscle.
]
According to my own researches, the long abductor of the thumb in
anthropoids forms a muscle not more considerable than one in proximity
with it, of which the origin and more central direction recall the
short extensor of the human thumb. In all four species I found that
the abductor had two tendons, and was attached to the trapezium.
The muscle in its vicinity is inserted above the base of the first
metacarpal bone. I have not been able to discover an extra extensor of
the thumb in the gorilla. The question now arises what we should think
of the second muscle, which is found in these animals in the vicinity
of the abductor. In my opinion, it may be confidently accepted as a
short extensor of the thumb, since it always effects an extension of
the metacarpal bone of that member, and in this act of extension it
is supported by the long extensor which acts upon the phalanges. It
must be remembered that the comparatively short thumbs of anthropoids
have not to be employed in so many different ways as the human thumb,
and that we cannot therefore be surprised that the development of the
short extensor is less complete. A special extensor muscle of the index
finger is either altogether absent in the gorilla or very slightly
developed, while it is very apparent in _Hylobates albimanus_ (~6~,
Fig. 53). In the chimpanzee this muscle sends a tendon to the middle
finger. In the orang there is one extensor common to the four fingers.
In the gibbon’s hand, this, as well as the other extensor and flexor
muscles, is remarkable for its excessive slenderness. The manifold
connections of the extensor tendons with each other are an interesting
peculiarity (Fig. 53).
[Illustration:
Fig. 52.--Palmar muscles of gorilla. _a_, Anterior ligament.
_b_, Remains of the skin of palm, here covered with a very
sinewy skin. _c_, _f_, Oblique fibres of the ligaments of the
sheath of the flexor tendons of fingers. 1, 2, Flexor tendons.
3, Spaces between the heads of the flexor brevis pollicis,
whence in man the tendon of the flexor longus pollicis issues
(comp. Fig. 51, ~5~). 4, 3, 3′, 5, Abductor, flexor brevis,
abductor pollicis. 6, 7, 8, Opponens, flexor brevis, abductor,
minimi digiti. 9, Dumbricales. 10, Supinator longus. 12, Flexor
sublimis digitorum. 13, Flexor minimi digiti. 14, Flexor carpi
ulnaris.
]
In the chimpanzee I observed a superficial flexor, common to the
fingers, and enlarged in the region of the third and little fingers.
A superficial flexor, belonging to the index finger, started from the
inner condyle of the humerus, and from the back of the inter-muscular
septum. The deep finger-flexor was attached to the four fingers. In
the orang the first of these flexors forms a two-tendoned belly for
the index finger, as well as one for the other three fingers. The deep
flexor only displayed two bellies. In the gibbon, on the other hand,
the superficial flexor displays four bellies.
[Illustration:
Fig. 53.--Muscular system of the back of a gibbon’s hand. 1, The
extensor carpi radialis longior and brevior. 2, Abductor longus
pollicis. 3, Extensor primi internodii pollicis. 4, Extensor
secundi internodii pollicis. 5, Extensor communis digitorum. 6,
Extensor indicis. 7, Extensor minimi digiti. 8, Extensor carpi
ulnaris. 9, First dorsal inter-osseous muscle. 10, Continuation
of the same to index finger. 11, 12, The other inter-osseous
muscles of this region. A, The posterior annular ligament.
]
In the carpus of the chimpanzee there is, so far at least as my
experience goes, a so-called sesamoid bone. It is in this instance in
connection with the scaphoid and trapezium bones, just where the fibres
of the anterior and posterior ligaments of the wrist pass into each
other. In the chimpanzee the tendon of the long abductor muscle of the
thumb sends some fibres into this sesamoid bone, while the other fibres
of the tendon of this muscle, which divides into several strips, are
inserted in the trapezium bone, and a few also in the base of the first
metacarpal bone.
The short flexor muscle of the thumb, of which Bischoff has denied the
existence, is certainly present in these animals. In the chimpanzee
the lower fibres of the short abductor muscle of the thumb have their
origin in the sesamoid bone. The middle fibres, of the same muscle
issue from the strips of ligament attached to the sesamoid bone. On the
other hand, the upper part of the muscle has its origin in the anterior
annular ligament. In the orang, the lower fibres of the short abductor
of the thumb likewise have their origin in the sesamoid bone, while
the central fibres again start from the anterior annular ligament.
The upper fibres are strong, and are inserted into the base of the
first metacarpal bone. In a dissection of the orang the flexor longus
pollicis sent a thin, tendinous expansion on to the bone. This sesamoid
bone is also found in the gorilla, although Duvernoy and Rosenberg do
not appear to be aware of its existence.[72]
In the palm of the gorilla’s hand there is a short abductor, a short
bicipital flexor, an opponens, and an abductor of the thumb. The
longer belly of the short flexor extending in a more radial direction,
and in connection with the opponens, is only slightly developed. In
the muscular system of a gorilla’s little finger we may observe an
abductor, a short flexor, and an opponens. The palm of the chimpanzee
displays a short abductor, an opponens, a short bicipital flexor,
and an adductor of the thumb; also an abductor, a short flexor, and
an opponens of the little finger. In the orang I observed a short
abductor, a short flexor with two bellies, an opponens, and an adductor
of the thumb. In addition to the short flexor of the thumb, Langer and
Bischoff describe another short, independent muscle, representing the
long flexor, and attached to the second phalanx, but I have not myself
ascertained the existence of this muscle. The same anatomists mention
an adductor between the third metacarpal bone and the first joint of
the thumb, and another between the second metacarpal bone and the
second joint of the thumb, passing on into the extensor tendon. I am
myself convinced of the existence of a twofold adductor, but not of the
fact that the tendon of one of the muscles (termed by Langer the second
opponens) passes on into the extensor tendon. In the little finger of
the orang there is an abductor, a short flexor, and an opponens. In
the gibbon there is a short abductor, a faintly indicated opponens, a
short bicipital flexor, and an adductor of the thumb. In _Hylobates
albimanus_ this adductor divides into four or five portions, which
are attached to the whole of the first metacarpal bone. In the little
finger there is an abductor, a short flexor, and an opponens. In the
same animal the first inter-osseous muscle is attached by one portion
to the second metacarpal bone, by the other to the base of the second
phalanx of the index finger (Fig. 53, ~9~, ~10~).
Bischoff has described the muscles which Halford terms _Contrahentes
digitorum_ (contractors of the digits), which lie deep in the palm of
the hands and feet of the chimpanzee and gibbon, the mandril, baboon,
and other apes.[73] They rest upon the inter-osseous muscles, and are
covered by the tendons of the long flexors of the digits, as well as
by the lumbricales muscles. I have been unable to trace these _Musculi
contrahentes_ in the gorilla. In a female chimpanzee I observed a
_Musculus contrahens_ for the fourth, and another for the fifth finger,
and the same for the fourth and fifth toes. In the orang I observed a
_Musculus contrahens_ for the fourth, and one for the fifth fingers,
and two faintly indicated _Contrahentes_ for the fourth and fifth toes.
Similar muscles of the second, fourth, and fifth fingers, and of the
fourth and fifth toes, may be observed in the white-handed gibbon.
In correspondence with the height of the pelvic bones, the gluteus
maximus of these animals only displays a moderate width in comparison
with its length. The tendon which attaches it to the femur extends
low down, almost as far as the knee-joint. The gluteus medius and
minimus are also long, in correspondence with this structure of the
pelvis, although they are attached to the large trochanter, and to
the posterior inter-trochanteric line. The climbing muscle (_Musculus
scansorius_), which extends between the hip-bone and the condyles of
the femur, was discovered by Troill in the chimpanzee, and by Bischoff
in the orang, and is described by them as strongly made; it appears
to be absent in the gorilla and the gibbon. The pyriformis generally
forms portions of the neighbouring muscles. The tensor vaginæ femoris,
which is strong and wide in most anthropoids, is either greatly reduced
or altogether absent in the orang. The sartorius is not, as in man,
attached to the inner surface of the tibia, just below the internal
tuberosity, but it is inserted much lower down on this surface. In
the gorilla it has a tricipital attachment, one to the deep fascia of
the thigh, and two others to the internal border of the tibia. In the
chimpanzee and the gibbon the muscle extends equally low down. In the
orang it does not go so far, but the _gracilis_ and _semi-tendinosus_
are in the same relative position. The biceps of the femur is very
apparent in the orang; its long head divides in two parts, of which the
lower is inserted in the fibula, and is here united with the short head.
Bischoff at first denied the existence of the plantaris in the
chimpanzee, and Brühl had previously done the same, but it is as
normally present in that animal as in man, in whom also it is sometimes
absent. I, however, as well as other observers, have failed to discover
it in the gorilla, orang, and gibbon. The popliteus is developed in
every instance. The tibio-fibular muscle (_Musculus peroneotibialis_),
covered by the popliteus, of which the existence was ascertained by
Gruber, has not been observed by me in any of the anthropoids, with the
exception of the chimpanzee. But it was very apparent in a red sea-cat
monkey (_Cercopithecus ruber_).
The gastrocnemius, which is easily separable into two heads, and the
peroneal muscles have not the same relative width in anthropoids and
man, since in the former case the calf of the lower limb is small, and
it lacks the pleasing roundness which characterizes this part of the
human structure. These muscles, especially in the orang and gibbon,
appear to take a lateral direction. The Tendo Achillis is present,
but it has not the prominent development in height and width which
we observe in man. The long extensor, flexor, and tibial muscles are
in all cases fully developed. The peroneus tertius, as it is termed,
although it should only be regarded as a part of the extensor longus
digitorum, is absent in anthropoids.[74] I myself am not disposed, with
Huxley, Bischoff, and others, to regard this muscle as an abductor.
Brühl perceived in a chimpanzee a fourth rudimentary peroneal muscle
(_Musculus peroneus intermedius_), extending between the peroneus and
the little toe, a muscle sometimes found in man, and which I have
myself only observed in one adult chimpanzee. In the gorilla and the
chimpanzee the extensor longus digitorum passes through a remarkably
strong transverse ligament, formed of fibrous cartilage, which covers
the tarsus. It acts upon the four outer toes (Fig. 55). Brühl has
described the characteristic contraction and extension of the tendons
of the long and short extensors of the toes in the chimpanzee, but I
have myself found some difficulty in producing this action. In Fig. 55
I have endeavoured to represent this condition in the most natural way.
The extensor proprius pollicis is in all cases developed. The extensor
brevis digitorum produces a large, oblique belly for the great toe
(Fig. 55). In the gorilla there is for the great toe an abductor, a
bicipital flexor, an adductor, and an opponens (comp. Fig. 54).
From the extensor brevis digitorum the belly for the great toe rises
with a certain independence. On the right foot of a chimpanzee I
observed a fifth belly of this muscle, going to the little toe (Fig.
55). As my illustration is taken from this specimen, I have represented
the foot with, or in spite of, this interesting anomaly, which, as we
know, sometimes occurs in man.
[Illustration:
Fig. 54.--Muscular system of the human foot. 1, Tibialis anticus
and extensor proprius pollicis. 2, Extensor longus digitorum.
3, Tendon of peroneus tertius. 4, 5, Peroneus longus and
peroneus brevis. 4′, 5′, Tendons of the same. 6, 7, Tendons of
the extensor longus and extensor brevis digitorum.
]
The flexor brevis digitorum displays perforated tendons, belonging
to the second and third toes. The flexor longus digitorum displays
perforated tendons for the fourth and fifth toes. The flexor longus
pollicis divides into two tendons, one of which goes into the toe
itself, while the other is connected with the flexor longus digitorum,
and displays perforated tendons for the third and fourth toes, while
the perforated tendons of the second and fifth toes have their origin
in the other flexor.
[Illustration:
Fig. 55.--Muscles on the upper side of chimpanzee’s foot. 1.
Tibialis anticus muscle. 2, Extensor proprius pollicis. 3,
Extensor communis digitorum. 4, 5, Peroneus brevis and peroneus
longus. 6, Tendon Achilles. 7, Extensor brevis digitorum. 8,
Slip of the same for great toe. 9, First dorsal inter-osseous
muscle. 10, Adductor pollicis. 11, Abductor minimi digiti.
]
In the gorilla the lumbricales muscles of the foot are powerful. The
first inter-osseous muscle is likewise well developed and bicipital.
There is a short flexor and an abductor for the little toe. I have not
yet been able to assure myself of the existence of an opponens for that
toe. In the chimpanzee the muscular system of the great and little
toe does not essentially differ from that which we have described in
the gorilla. The flexor brevis digitorum forms the perforated tendons
of the second and third toes. The flexor longus digitorum provides
the fourth and fifth toes with perforated, and the second and fifth
toes with perforating, tendons, while those which belong to the third
and fourth toes have their origin in the flexor longus pollicis. As
in the gorilla, the latter muscle produces a fibrous investment for
the tendons of the flexor longus digitorum. In the orang there is an
abductor of the great toe, a very slightly developed opponens, a short
bicipital flexor, and an adductor. One of the long flexors of the toes
appears to represent the flexor longus pollicis in man. It provides
the second and fifth toes with perforating tendons, while those of the
third and fourth toes have their origin in the other flexor longus
digitorum. There is no long flexor tendon on the great toe. The
perforated tendons in this case generally belong to the short flexor
muscle. In addition to the perforated tendons of the fourth toe, there
is the long flexor already described.
In a gibbon’s great toe I observed an abductor, a short bicipital
flexor, and a slightly developed opponens, to which a wide fan-shaped
adductor is attached. The first dorsal inter-osseous muscle is, as in
the same animal’s hand (Fig. 53), attached to the first phalanx of the
second toe. The flexor longus digitorum provides the third and fourth
toes with perforating tendons, and also gives off a tendon for the
great toe. On the little toe there is a remarkably slender perforating
tendon. While the first of the two long flexors represents the human
flexor longus pollicis, the flexor longus digitorum is in this instance
limited to the little toe. In the gibbon, as well as in the orang, the
gorilla, and the chimpanzee, the two muscles are connected together
by an aponeurosis. It may be here mentioned that in the human foot
the flexor longus pollicis occasionally gives off a flexor for the
second and even for the third toes. In the gibbon, as Bischoff justly
observes, a muscle covers the flexor longus digitorum, which is still
undivided, but already enlarged. From this muscle perforated tendons
issue for the third and fourth toes. The second toe is provided with
such a tendon from the flexor brevis digitorum. The muscle we have
mentioned seems to represent the Quadratus plantæ, which is often
developed in the other anthropoids, although only to a slight extent.
With respect to the muscles of the small toe of the orang and gibbon,
I need only say that in the latter species the opponens seems to be
absent (Fig. 55).
It will be seen from the foregoing account that, in spite of several
apparently important peculiarities, in spite of great and manifold
variations which are established, even although our authorities do
not always agree together, the muscular system of anthropoids is on
the whole very like that of man. It displays, especially in the lower
limbs, peculiarities of structure which render them capable of walking
in an upright position, and others again which they have in common with
the lower animals, but on the whole the anthropoid characteristics of
the muscular system of these animals are predominant.
The digestive system of anthropoids likewise affords interesting points
of comparison. The cavity of the mouth is, as we have seen, bordered
by large and flexible lips. The mucous membrane of the mouth and the
gums are flesh-coloured; they assume a darker colour in older animals,
and are then sometimes marked with spots of a bluish or brownish grey.
Ehlers describes, as a peculiarity in the mucous membrane of the mouths
of the gorilla and chimpanzee, that there are what he calls buccal
folds, which pass on both sides from the fore surface of the upper and
lower jaw into the mucous membrane of the cheeks, and are of the height
of the canine teeth.[75] I have myself only observed these folds in the
gorilla, of which an illustration is given in Fig. 3, and not in any
other specimen. I have observed scarcely any indications of these folds
in other anthropoids, and then only of such a doubtful nature that I am
not disposed to regard the circumstance as of any special significance.
A small band on the upper and lower lips, sometimes only slightly
developed, but always perceptible, is present in all anthropoids.
The tongue is small, and not provided at its base with several
great concave follicles as in man; these are at least only faintly
represented, and not easy to observe. Around them there rise pock-like,
tufted warts, very close together, which in an aged gorilla are apt to
become hard and horny. These are also prominent between the follicles
of the tonsils. The circumvallate papillæ of the tongue are less
numerous than in man, and often, especially in the chimpanzee, they
take the form of a cross, or of the letter T, or in the gorilla of a V.
The uvula and palate present no special variation from the human
type. On the hard palate there are a number of folds, or rather
swellings, which extend laterally from the central suture of the
palate, towards the row of teeth in the upper jaw; these are sometimes
simple, sometimes complex, and vary in their details in individual
cases. They are particularly marked in the adult chimpanzee, and
are also very apparent in the gibbon, and they are arranged with a
somewhat ornamental regularity. These inequalities are not altogether
insignificant in the human palate, but this subject has not been much
studied since Gegenbaur directed the attention of scientific men to
them, and special light has been thrown upon it by Bischoff and Ehlers,
as far as anthropoids are concerned.
The teeth afford us important material for comparison. In the case of
anthropoids the formula for the teeth of the slender-nosed or Old-World
apes (_Catarrhina_) will generally apply: _i_ 2/2 _c_ 1/1 _p_ 2/2 _m_
3/3. The following is the formula for the milk-teeth: _i_ 2/2 _c_ 1/1
_m_ 2/2. Magitot and Giglioli[76] have shown that the milk-teeth are
cut in the same order as those of man--first, the lower; second, the
upper incisor teeth; third, the front pre-molars; fourth, the back
pre-molars; fifth, the canine teeth. According to the same authors, the
permanent teeth are cut in the following order:--first, the first molar
teeth; second, the lower, and then the upper incisor teeth; third, the
pre-molars; fourth, the canine teeth; fifth, the second molar teeth;
sixth, the third molar teeth. In the skull of a male gorilla, Giglioli
found that the permanent canine teeth were cut almost simultaneously
with the third molar teeth, and after the appearance of the second
molar teeth. The cutting of the canine teeth appears to be a longer
process than that of the other teeth.
In anthropoids the structure of the permanent teeth varies with the
species, and even with the sex. In the gorilla the two upper central
incisor teeth are wide, chisel-shaped, and much larger than the pair of
lateral incisors. The four lower incisor teeth are of about the size
of the upper lateral incisors, and, like these, are chisel-shaped, but
not so wide. The powerful upper canine teeth of an aged male are curved
in their lower part, both outwards and inwards. Their form is that of
a three-sided, cuneiform pyramid. The anterior surface is rounded, and
near its inner edge a deep furrow may be observed, extending from the
neck of the tooth almost to its point. The outer and inner sides of
the tooth meet in a sharp angle, somewhat convex in front, and level
or slightly concave behind. The inner side is concave, and furnished,
nearly in the centre, with a deep longitudinal farrow. The lower canine
teeth of an aged male are shorter than the upper, curved on their
upper and outer surface, and somewhat behind. Their form is also that
of a three-sided pyramid, rounded in front. The longitudinal furrow
which traverses their inner segment is much shorter than that on the
upper tooth. The outer side is somewhat convex, and at the same time
somewhat retreating, and is provided on its posterior segment with
two longitudinal furrows, or more rarely with one, reaching from the
neck to about the centre of the tooth. The inner side, like that of
the upper teeth, is somewhat concave. The lower canine teeth project
like pillars over the upper ones (Figs. 15, 16). The canine teeth of
a young male gorilla are less sharp in their angles, although they
already present the form of a three-sided pyramid. The canine teeth of
the adult female gorilla are much smaller than those of the adult male,
and are laterally more compressed. The three-sided pyramidal form is
only slightly marked. The outer surface is convex and furnished with
a scarcely apparent central longitudinal ridge. On the inner surface,
or that which is turned to the cavity of the mouth, there are from two
to three longitudinal furrows reaching from the neck to the centre
of the tooth. The lower teeth are of a three-sided, pyramidal form,
presenting an interior, posterior, and inner superficies.
The pre-molars of an aged male gorilla are wide, and are furnished
with a large outer, and a smaller inner, cusp. The three four-cusped
upper molars display a more regular and symmetrical arrangement of
their cusps than is the case with the female, in which the position of
the cusps is rather variable. Except for the difference of size, the
relative conditions of these teeth are the same in male and female.
The first pointed lower pre-molars are in the male of the form of a
four-sided pyramid, convex on the anterior and outer surface, flat on
the side directed to the cavity of the mouth, and marked with furrows
on the posterior surface. The small second and lower pre-molars have
two anterior and one posterior cusp. The last is generally worn away
at an early age. Each molar tooth has two outer and two inner cusps,
opposite to each other, and one posterior cusp. We cannot here fail to
notice the likeness to the conditions of the human teeth, a likeness
which is still more striking in the female.
In the chimpanzee, also, the upper central incisor teeth are broadly
chisel-shaped, while the upper and lower lateral incisors are
smaller. In the male there is often a considerable gap between these
and the canine teeth. The latter present the form of a three-sided
pyramid, of which the anterior edge is blunt and tends outwards,
while the posterior angle is sharp, scooped out in its upper third,
and terminating at the base of the crown in a posterior cusp. The
pre-molars have an external and an inner cusp; the molars have two
external and two inner cusps, connected with each other by their
enamel. The lower canine teeth of these animals are likewise of
the shape of a three-sided pyramid, of which the anterior angle is
very blunt, while the inner and posterior angles are sharply cut.
The anterior surface is not grooved like the upper canine teeth.
The lateral angle is much rounded. The back teeth plainly display
the posterior fifth cusp, which may also be observed in man. In the
orang-utan the characteristics of the upper incisors are such as we
have described in the case of other anthropoids. The upper canine
teeth are shaped like a three-sided pyramid, and are furnished with a
longitudinal furrow on the anterior side. A similar furrow is found on
the posterior superficies of the lower canine teeth. The back teeth
display no special characteristics when compared with those of other
anthropoids.
The canine teeth of these anthropoids are much worn down by age
on their posterior surface. Deep transverse grooves of varying
size characterize the teeth of anthropoids, owing to the unequal
distribution of the coating of enamel. These are developed with their
advancing growth. In addition to these incised furrows, longitudinal
marks, with raised edges, also appear, and especially on the anterior
surface of the incisor teeth.
In the gibbon the anterior surface of the incisor teeth is smooth; in
this animal the upper central incisor teeth are the largest, while the
lower central incisors are the smallest. The long and strong upper
canine teeth, which are laterally compressed, display a sharp posterior
angle, and an anterior and inner longitudinal furrow.
It has sometimes been said that the grooves found on the external
contour of the back teeth of anthropoids, extending to their roots,
constitute a not unimportant distinction between their structure and
that of the human teeth, in which the grooves do not extend to the
roots. But the corresponding human teeth do sometimes exhibit very
deep and extensive furrows. I cannot, therefore, ascribe any peculiar
significance to this assumed distinction. The development of the canine
teeth, like those of beasts of prey, seems to me much more important. A
supernumerary back tooth may sometimes be observed both in man and in
anthropoids, including also the gibbon.[77]
The stomach and intestines of these animals present only a few striking
differences from the same organs in man. The length of the intestines
varies in man as well as in anthropoids. I have only observed the
_valvulæ conniventes_ to be somewhat clearly developed in the gorilla
and the orang. The cæcum of these apes is long, broad, placed with the
power of free movement in the peritoneum, and furnished, especially in
the case of the orang, with a large, very long, and spirally coiled
vermiform appendix.
The liver is divided into two principal lobes, but in the orang
this division is not very clearly marked. I have not myself observed
a subdivision of these lobes, occurring on their edges, which is
mentioned by Bolau and Auzoux in the case of the gorilla. Bischoff
notices in the gorilla the absence of the H-shaped arrangement of the
fissures on the under surface of the liver, so noticeable in man; and
the same remark applies to other species of anthropoids. Moreover, the
fissures on this part of the liver are not incised on the substance
with the same uniform depth. The gall-bladder of the gorilla and the
orang is not remarkable for its size; in the chimpanzee I found that
this organ is large and twisted, and it is also large in the gibbon.
The spleen is elongated in the gorilla, chimpanzee, and gibbon, shorter
and wider in the orang. On its left contour it is uniformly bevelled
off. There is nothing in the pancreas which calls for remark.
The larynx of anthropoids possesses on the whole a structure resembling
that of man. This is especially the case at the entrance to that organ.
The anterior and specially vocal portion of the glottis is short, about
as long as the respiratory portion. In the chimpanzee there is a deep
cavity in the body of the hyoid bone. In the gorilla, chimpanzee, and
orang the throat-pouches or air-sacs correspond to Morgagni’s sacs.
These are the thin-skinned elastic sacs, closely united with their
surroundings by connective tissue. The right laryngeal sac appears
to be of larger diameter than the left. According to Duvernoy’s and
Ehlers’ accurate account only the upper portion of this organ occurs
in the gorilla. In that animal, and in the orang, a lower projection is
displayed, extending behind the sterno-mastoid as far as the shoulder,
and another extending to the pectoralis major muscle. In the chimpanzee
only the posterior segment is developed. It has been asserted that
in several cases there is found a single, irregular laryngeal sac,
communicating with the two Morgagni sacs, but I agree with Ehlers in
thinking this improbable. In such instances it seems likely that, owing
to the great want of symmetry in this organ, one of the sacs has been
overlooked. In an aged orang the throat-pouches, fastened together by
connective tissue, and covered by the external skin of the throat,
hang down slackly and heavily over the middle of the breast (see Fig.
9). According to Sandifort, the siamang is the only one of the gibbons
which displays a single throat-pouch; while Broca asserts that it
has two detached sacs, placed close to the larynx.[78] The halves of
the thyroid cartilage are generally connected with each other by an
intermediate piece.
The trachea of anthropoids generally includes from sixteen to eighteen
cartilaginous rings, but in the siamang there are twenty-one. They
ramify into branches which are, as a rule, wider on the right than on
the left side.[79] There is a further lateral ramification on the
right side, situated above the artery. Huxley and Ehlers hold that the
lungs of a gorilla are cleft like those of the human organism, the
right divided into three, and the left into two lobes. I have myself
observed this type, and in one instance I found three lobes on the
left. In the chimpanzee I saw that the right lung was divided into
three, and the left into two lobes. Bischoff observed an instance of
a chimpanzee which had four lobes on the right and two on the left
side. In an orang dissected by me I found only one lobe on each side,
with thin, slightly indented notches on the anterior edges of the
right lobe, and two on the left, and there was at the same time a
strongly marked indentation between the lobes. The lungs of a gibbon
are described as having four lobes on the right, and only one or two
on the left. I myself have examined a gibbon in which there were three
lobes on the right, and two on the left. It appears that there are not
unimportant individual variations of this structure in every species of
anthropoids; and indeed, human lungs are by no means exempt from them.
The male sexual organs correspond on the whole with the form and
arrangement of these organs in man. I must not omit to mention that the
penis of the swine-snouted baboon, and of other dog-headed apes, is
much more like the penis in man than is the case with anthropoids, with
the exception of the gorilla. In the last-named animal the scrotum is
short and tightly stretched. The right testicle is a little higher than
the left, and is divided from it by a wide raphé. The internal female
organs are also like those of the human organism, with only slight
variations. Bischoff is correct in the assertion that the external lips
of the pudendum and the mons veneris are almost wholly absent. Bolau,
Ehlers, and Hermes have ascertained that there is a menstruation which
occurs periodically, at any rate in the case of the chimpanzee, and the
other species cannot be exempt from the process. At such times there
is a blush and enlargement of the external parts, and a profusion of
the external lips of the pudendum, which are at other times scarcely
apparent. The nymphæ and the clitoris are of considerable size and
importance. There is often an excessive enlargement and reddening
of these parts, as well as of the posterior callosities in the
chimpanzee, and also in the baboon and macaca, during the period of
sexual excitement.
[Illustration:
Fig. 56.--The brain of an orang, seen from the side (Vogt, from
Gratiolet). F, Frontal lobe. P, Parietal lobe. O, Occipital
lobe. R, Fissure of Rolando. S, Fissure of Sylvius. C,
Cerebellum.
]
_Nervous system._--In this part of the organism we are especially
interested in the structure of the brain. Bastian justly remarks,
with reference to the brain of apes, that this family possesses many
cerebral characteristics in common, by which their close connection
with each other may be verified. Distinct stages of development have
been observed, which, however, cannot be classified in a consecutive
series. Starting from the brains of lemurs, which do not greatly
differ from those of rodents, we can advance by means of very distinct
transition forms to the more highly developed cerebral hemispheres
of the large anthropoid apes, the chimpanzee, the gorilla, and
orang-utan.[80]
[Illustration:
Fig. 57.--Brain of the chimpanzee, seen from above. The upper
part of the right hemisphere is removed so as to lay bare
the lateral ventricle (Vogt, from Marshall). L, Longitudinal
fissure (other indications the same as in Fig. 56). _c s_, The
corpus striatum in anterior cornu of the ventricle. _c a_,
Hippocampus major in descending cornu. _h m_, Hippocampus minor
in posterior cornu.
]
Very opposite views prevail among anatomists with regard to the
question which species of anthropoids possesses the most highly
developed brain. Some regard the chimpanzee’s brain as the simplest,
and that of the orang as the most highly developed. In all these apes
the lateral halves of the cerebrum, always divided from each other
by a deep longitudinal fissure, overlap the cerebellum as far as a
minute posterior segment. In this respect I find the brain of the
gorilla a little behind the other anthropoids. Up to this time, I have
only observed the projection of the cerebellum through the cerebrum
in the case of an orang[81] (see also Fig. 56). Retzius asserts that
the cerebellum of Lapps is incompletely covered, while the covering
is generally complete in the case of Slav and Tartar races. In German
and Latin races the cerebrum overlaps the cerebellum. In Mongolian,
Indian, and Negro races the covering appears to be generally imperfect.
[Illustration:
Fig. 58.--Brain of gorilla, side view (from Bolau and Pansch).
I., Frontal lobe. II., Fissure of Rolando. III., Parietal lobe.
IV., Temporal lobe. C, Cerebellum. _f s_, Fissure of Sylvius.
_s c_, External fissure parieto-occipital.
]
While the ground form of the gorilla brain approximates to a long
oval, and in this respect resembles the human brain, the brain of
chimpanzees and orangs is of a round-oval form. This is especially the
case with the chimpanzee (Fig. 57). In my opinion, the gorilla brain
is distinguished from that of the chimpanzee, but not from that of the
orang, by its very complex convolutions (Fig. 56).
[Illustration:
Fig. 59.--Brain of orang, seen from above (Duncan, from a
specimen in the Museum of Royal College of Surgeons). F,
frontal lobe. O, Occipital lobe.
]
In the gorilla, chimpanzee, and orang, the island of Reil in
the fissure of Sylvius is generally--at least, according to my
experience--overlapped by the operculum, although there are instances
in which this is not the case. In these three anthropoids, as Bastian
justly observes, the fissure of Sylvius is much less horizontal than
in man, and occupies a position more like that which it takes in the
black sea-cat monkey, the wanderers, and other macacas. In the gorilla
its direction is more horizontal than in the two other species of
anthropoids. The central fissure, termed fissure of Rolando, is very
marked, especially in the chimpanzee (Fig. 57 R); but it may also be
easily traced in other species of anthropoids (Fig. 58, II., 56, R).
The so-called simian fissure between the parietal and occipital lobes
of the cerebrum (Meynart’s elongated external occipital fissure),
presented in Fig. 58 _s c_, is very marked in the chimpanzee (Fig. 57,
_d_). The frontal lobes of the gorilla brain are high, while those of
the chimpanzee are short and low. It is said that those of the orang,
which are high and short, terminate in a beak-shaped curvature, but
this is not invariably the case.
[Illustration:
Fig. 60.--Longitudinal section of a gorilla’s brain (Bola and
Pansch). _s.cm_, Colloso marginal fissure. _f, p_, Internal
parieto-occipital fissure. _f, c_, Calcarine fissure, the
posterior part of the hippocampal fissure.
]
In the anthropoids we have been considering, and also in several of
the lower species of apes, there are three other fissures of less
importance in addition to those we have mentioned, namely, the fissure
parallel to the fissure of Sylvius, and placed behind it, the _corpus
callosum_ fissure, placed immediately above the _corpus callosum_ on
the inner side of the hemisphere of the cerebrum, and the calcarine
fissure (_Fissura calcarina_) (Fig. 60). The latter ends near the point
of junction of the inner and lower surfaces of the posterior division
of the hemisphere. The upper temporal convolution, termed by several
anatomists _Gyrus supramarginalis_, is said by Gratiolet to be absent
in anthropoids; but Rolleston, Bastian, and myself have all found it
well developed[82] (Fig. 56, orang, and Fig. 58, gorilla).
Bischoff asserts that the third frontal convolution (Broca’s
convolution) is very slightly developed in the chimpanzee, orang,
and gibbon. “Its great development in men,” Gewährsmann writes,
“constitutes one of the most marked distinctions between the brains
of apes and of men.”[83] In most of the other species of apes this
convolution is altogether absent, but Pansch is justified in the
assertion that it is fully developed in anthropoids. I cannot wholly
agree with Pansch in his analysis; but I must accept his statement
on this point (see the orang, Fig. 59). Gratiolet remarks that the
so-called annectant gyri (_plis de passage_) which serve as a covering
or _operculum_ for the posterior lobes in apes, are only superficially
apparent in man. In the chimpanzee the upper of those convolutions
is absent, while it is large in the orang, and likewise large and
undulated in man. In the orang the second annectant gyrus is covered,
but this covering is absent in man.[84]
In considering the inner structure of the brain of these animals, we
are first struck by the shortness of the _corpus callosum_. The soft
and thick anterior commissure of the third cerebral ventricle and the
thin posterior commissure have also been justly noted. In the lateral
ventricles more of the characteristics described in the human brain are
absent. The four eminences resemble those of man; nor does the fourth
cerebral ventricle present any remarkable differences of form. Neither
does the base or lower surface of the brain display any important
deviation from the human type. The transverse section of the nerves at
their intersection appears to me, however, to be somewhat more oval
than is the case in man.
There has recently been an attempt to recognize a pithecoid character,
or atavism, in microcephalic men, the smallness of whose heads is
allied with a greater or less degree of idiocy. A pithecoid structure
of the brain has also been traced in several individuals who are not
microcephalous, but subject to pathological affections. We will first
consider those who belong to the latter category. Krause examined
the brain of an ape-like boy aged seven years and a half, which, as
the author remarks, approximated in structure to the pithecoid type,
although without displaying microcephalic characteristics. The two
cerebral hemispheres were wanting in symmetry; they diverged from each
other in the region where the parieto-occipital fissure occurs on the
left cerebral hemisphere, and they formed an edge which curved outward
and backward so that the cerebellum remained uncovered. On the lower
surface of the frontal lobes there was a strongly marked ethmoidal
prominence. Neither of the fissures of Sylvius were closed, the left
less so than the right; the operculum was only slightly developed;
and the island of Reil and its fissures were almost uncovered. This
formation is almost the same as that of the brain of anthropoids.
The two central fissures of Rolando were close together, or less
deeply impressed on the edge of the hemispheres than is normally the
case, and forming no joint angle. Large and deeply marked pre-central
fissures seemed to represent the central fissures. The intra-parietal
fissures, diverging outwardly further than in man, received the
parieto-occipital fissure, a structure in conformity with the typical
brain of apes. The transverse occipital fissure became in this case a
deep fissure like the simian fissure, crossing the occipital lobes,
and almost completely dividing them from the parietal lobes. The
so-called _Fissura calcarina_, to which we have referred above, had
its origin on the upper surface of the occipital lobe, then joined
the parieto-occipital fissure, and went directly into the hippocampal
fissure (_Fissura hippocampi_) on its right side. This abnormal
structure is also in conformity with the typical brain of apes. The
first occipital convolution is divided from the upper parietal lobes by
the parieto-occipital fissure. Gratiolet asserts that this formation
occurs in many species of apes. The upper temporal convolution was
remarkably reduced on both sides, possessing only an average width of 5
mm. This characteristic reminded Krause of the brain of the chimpanzee.
In that animal the upper temporal convolution is always reduced.
Krause therefore asks whether some human brains may not possess the
typical structure of apes without being microcephalic. The brain we
have described scarcely differed from the normal weight; it possessed
all the convolutions and fissures, and indeed, the convolutions
were perhaps more numerous than in the normal structure, yet it was
different in every respect, and approximated in its whole structure to
the simian rather than to the human type. Krause adds that if the brain
had been placed before him without any intimation of its origin, he
should have been quite justified in concluding that it belonged to an
anthropoid ape, which stood somewhat nearer to man than the chimpanzee.
It is an unquestionable fact that some human beings, whether children
or adults, who are endowed with a defective bodily structure, and who
are affected with more or less pronounced physical incapacity and
mental weakness, by their appearance, ungainly tricks, and helpless
and aimless motions, impress us in the most forcible way with their
resemblance to apes. Different degrees of idiocy affect individuals of
limited intellect, and remind us of an absolutely brutish condition.
Krause describes the “ape-like” boy of seven and a half years old,
whom he had examined, as cheerful and inclined to play and dance, but
as passionate when he was teased. The child was very supple, fond of
climbing, and with great strength in his arms and hands, of which
the latter had a horny appearance, reminding him of the hands of a
chimpanzee. He could sit on the ground with his legs wide apart. His
gait was uncertain, and he was apt to tumble, falling with his knees
bent forward and his legs doubled under him; he was fond of hopping,
and at such times looked still more like an ape. The great toes of
both feet were at an angle to the foot, and thus gave the impression
of a prehensile foot. At first Krause supposed that this deviation was
produced by the child’s endeavour to supply a broader basis of support
for his uncertain gait; but he subsequently changed his opinion, since
he did not find the same peculiarity in other children of diseased
brain, as, for instance, in those suffering from water on the brain.
The boy could say very little, only papa and mamma, and it was long
before he could pronounce these words in two syllables; for the most
part, he only uttered a sound resembling a grunt. He imitated the
barking of a dog, with the sound of rolling _r_’s. He often stamped
his feet and clapped his hands together, making a grunting noise as
Krause had observed in the case of gorillas and chimpanzees. The boy
was smaller than other children of his age, and had weak eyes; his head
was sore, and his forehead narrow. His imitative tendency was strongly
marked, and his whole nature and all his movements strikingly resembled
those of apes. He had been much neglected by his parents.[85]
When I was a student at Berlin I had the opportunity of observing
a similar being of twelve years old, in what was at that time the
Weinbergswege, near the Rosenthaler Gate. This was a boy with a large
head, a low retreating forehead, glazed eyes, a morose expression, a
thin neck, prominent belly, crooked legs, large hands and feet. The
boy was of a slouching appearance, and his gait was unsteady: saliva
often dribbled from his wide mouth; and as he walked he held on to the
furniture, walls, etc., and often he fell powerless on his side, and
so remained in a crouching position. It seemed to give him peculiar
pleasure to creep on his hands and knees, and at such times he would
stamp with the closed fingers of one or the other hand upon the
ground, as if in triumph. This habit, his gait, and the gurgling sound
which was all that the boy could utter, constituted the points of his
resemblance to apes. All the other conditions of life were those of a
being whose mental and physical growth was arrested, and who, although
not epileptic, was to a certain extent idiotic. I am ignorant what
afterwards became of him.
In the course of a discussion on the instance adduced by Krause,
Virchow asks whether the psychological conditions of such a brain
are indeed simian. He is convinced that whoever has studied the
microcephalic child Margaret Becker (of Bürgel, Hanau) will find that
psychologically she had nothing in common with an ape. In her case
all the positive faculties and qualities of the ape were wanting;
the simian psychology was altogether absent, and there was only the
psychology of an imperfectly developed and deficient young child. Every
characteristic was human. Virchoff had the child in his room for hours
together during a period of two months, and was constantly occupied
about her, without observing anything in her nature which reminded
him even remotely of the psychological conditions of apes. She was a
degraded specimen of humanity, differing in no respect from the human
type.[86]
I also examined Margaret Becker, as well as another microcephalic
girl, who was in the Berlin Asylum in the years 1868 and 1869. With
respect to the former and more animated being, I have nothing essential
to add to the information published by Virchow. Ida X----, the other
individual whom I examined at Berlin, was at the time of my researches
aged thirteen years and five months. Her figure was slightly made and
well proportioned, while her profile reminded me to a modified extent
of that of the microcephalic Aztec, and also of the heads represented
in ancient sculpture of Mayapan, Palenque, and Copan. I must not omit
to say that Ida had light blue eyes and fair, glossy hair. She was
altogether impassive; could only utter the syllables _da-da_; and
once betrayed a slight sign of displeasure when the cold metal of the
measuring-rod was placed against the inner side of her thigh, for the
sake of obtaining the dimensions of the different parts of her body.
Virchow’s information respecting Esther Jacobwitz, of Waschahel, is
also extremely interesting. She was a microcephalic girl of the age of
fourteen, and a Hungarian Jew by race.[87] Virchow remarks that, in
his opinion, all Esther’s most striking characteristics presented the
strongest contrast to those of apes, since only negative traits have
hitherto been established, while all which characterizes the positive
development of the psychical life of apes was absent in this case. The
same remark applies to Ida X----. Virchow goes on to say that there
was undoubtedly something brute-like in the defects in question, but
that in order to reproduce the animal in its actual form and nature, so
as to show that the microcephalic child was really theromorphic, the
positive side of animal life must to some extent be presented to us,
and this was absolutely wanting.
Virchow also had the opportunity of examining a pair of twin children,
one of whom was quite normally developed, while the other (Karl
R----) was microcephalic. This was a very significant case, since two
individuals of the same birth were under consideration, so that the
question could be asked with greater confidence--Is this atavism, or a
morbid condition? From this point of view, it was of special interest
to establish the fact that the microcephalic child had, in fact,
displayed positive signs of a morbid condition.[88]
When I go through the accounts collected by C. Vogt of the lives
of well-known microcephalic beings,[89] I can find nothing which
specifically reminds me of the actions and habits of apes, although
we have an intimate acquaintance with their ways. These individuals
give the general impression of human beings whose bodily and mental
development has been arrested. According to Virchow’s experience,
all the cerebral disturbances are concentrated in the cerebrum in
these microcephalous cases. The anterior portions of the cerebrum are
affected to the greatest, and the posterior to the least, extent. Those
parts which are developed latest suffer the most, while those which are
the first to be developed generally escape disturbance.[90]
Klebs, Schaaffhausen, and others have sought to show that the mothers
of microcephalic children have suffered from severe pains of the uterus
during pregnancy. All scientific men consider that spasms of the uterus
distinctly affect the development of the brain of the offspring. Flesch
thinks it possible that these spasms of the uterus may have something
to do with the origin of microcephaly.[91] But he also asks whether
this morbid condition of the uterus may not have been produced by a
previously diseased condition of the offspring. This observer is,
moreover, still more inclined to make the influence of the father
responsible for the occurrence of microcephaly. In view of the fact
that there is much reason to suppose there has been a compression of
the uterus, and in default of any better suggestion, Flesch feels
justified in looking for a compression which has perhaps resulted
from some growth on the ovary. Hence ensues a disturbance, probably
inflammatory, of the organ of nutrition.[92]
Aeby also regards microcephaly, not as an expression of atavism, but
as the result of a morbid degeneration. “Microcephalic subjects do
not point back to the milestone which man left behind him in hoar
antiquity, and it is not through them that the chasm between man and
animals can be bridged over, nor even rendered less wide.”
Virchow’s researches led to the following conclusions, which we must
here subjoin:--1. There is no species of apes which presents that
precise configuration which is found in a microcephalic brain. 2.
Psychology offers the strongest arguments against men-apes. 3. The
instinctive side of psychical activity, which is almost wholly absent
in microcephalic subjects, is very prominent in anthropoids as well as
in other animals.[93]
In addition to these remarks, it may also be observed that among savage
races the medicine-men, shamans, sorcerers, rain-doctors, etc., often
assume ape-like attitudes in the contortions, leaps, dances, and other
gestures which are inseparable from their trade. Owing to their state
of excitement, in which they are not always mentally responsible for
their acts, this imitation may be often partly or wholly unconscious.
It is very common among the inspired Arabs termed Haschasch, who,
sometimes as dervishes, sometimes as poets or beast-tamers, roam
through the country and extend their wanderings from the interior
of Africa to the latticed gates of Dolma Bakhtsche. To them belong
also the dancing mendicant monks of Islam, who display their ape-like
gesture in the market-places and streets of Bokhara, as well as in the
other chief cities of Central Asia. In this case, indeed, many gestures
are conventional, and even adopted as the means of stimulating the
proposed effects, but at the same time they impress us with the idea
that a man under such conditions of life and work involuntarily adopts
the gestures of anthropoids. When we see a Zikr, an Islamite rite of
worship, accompanied by obligatory howls and contortions of body, we
are tempted to imagine ourselves in the midst of a troop of wild apes.
And the illusion is still stronger if the performers in the Zikr are
black fakirs, dressed as warriors.
The peripheral nervous system of anthropoids has not, up to this
time, been analyzed with the completeness we could wish. As far as
the observations of Vrolik, Gratiolet, and Alix go, together with my
personal experience in this department, no marked distinction can be
established between the structure of these organs in anthropoids and
those of the nervous system in man.
H. von Ihering has studied the relation of the nervous lumbo-sacral
plexus to the vertebral column of men and animals, and has come to
the conclusion that there is the most complete agreement between men
and animals with respect to the relations of the vertebral column to
the peripheral nervous system. According to this author, man, from
the anatomical point of view, stands so completely within the class
of anthropoids, that the attempt to assign to him any other place in
zoology is open to the charge of being biassed by considerations which
have nothing to do with facts.[94]
The organs of the senses in anthropoids do not present any noteworthy
points of difference from these organs in man. I have written, but not
yet published, a treatise on the eyes of these animals, showing their
general agreement with the conditions of the human eye. On the skin
of the fingers and toes of anthropoids developed corpuscles may be
detected which are connected with the sense of touch.
The vascular system of anthropoids has not up to this time been studied
in any exhaustive manner. The heart strongly resembles that organ in
man. In the gorilla, the chimpanzee, and the orang the great arterial
branches have the same relative conditions as in the human organism.
A common origin from one branch of the subclavian artery, and of the
right and left carotid arteries, often occurs in the orang and with
a certain constancy in the gibbon, so far as we can judge from the
researches which have been made up to this time. But we know that this
form of deviation from the common type is not altogether rare in man.
Bischoff and others have justly maintained that the resemblance to man
which is found in these animals in the arrangement of the heart and
larger blood-vessels appears to be connected with their mode of life.
For although their habits are arboreal, this very fact implies that
they are for the most part in an upright position.
The division of the femoral arteries displays a somewhat interesting
deviation from the normal human type. High up near the femoral arch
an artery, accompanied by veins and a large nerve, diverges from the
femoral artery, which extends, together with its accompanying parts,
as far as the back of the foot. In the gorilla this branch pierces the
sartorius.
CHAPTER IV.
ON VARIETIES IN THE FORM OF ANTHROPOIDS.
Up to recent times it was generally supposed that there was only
one species of gorilla, and the differences in the structure of the
skeleton and of the external body which were observed in the several
specimens under examination, were either regarded as the expression of
a purely individual variation or as due to differences in age and sex.
Not long ago Alix and Bouvier obtained from Landana on the Congo the
skeleton and skin of an aged female gorilla, which had been killed by
Lucan and Petit in the village of the negro chief Mayema, on the Kuilu
river in 4° 35′ south latitude. This specimen was of less bulk than
the common gorilla (_Gorilla Gina_), and its head was comparatively
small. The occipito-temporal crest, or transverse crest of the occiput,
was much more strongly developed in this animal and the temporal
fossæ were deeper. That part of the skull which extends behind the
supra-orbital arches was narrower, and so also was the space between
the eyes. The keel-shaped prominence rising in the centre of this
space is more marked, the nasal bones are arched and not flattened, the
orbital aperture is larger in comparison with the general size of the
skull, and the frontal processes of the malar bones are wider and more
arched. One interesting characteristic consists in a small, vertical,
styloid prominence on the posterior surface of the orbital process. On
the vertebral column the spinous processes of the first, second, and
third cervical vertebræ are only slightly developed in height, while
the spinous processes of the three lower cervical vertebræ are as high
and large as those of _Gorilla Gina_. The transverse processes of the
first lumbar vertebræ are remarkable for their length, and in their
transverse extension reach almost to the angle of the last rib.
In this supposed variety of the gorilla the iliac crest is more convex,
the tuberosity of the ischium is somewhat more everted, the neck of
the femur is more oblique, the os calcis is slenderer, and its lower
surface is more arched. The clavicle appears to be shorter and less
curved: the scapula is more arched near its inner border; its outer
border is distinctly concave, while in _Gorilla Gina_ it is prominently
convex. The base of the acromion process is larger, and the olecranon
fossa of the humerus is perforated. The bones of the forearm and
hand, as well as of the shank and foot, are more slender, and their
prominences and inequalities are less marked. The smaller bulk of the
fore and hind limbs corresponds with the comparative smallness of the
head.
The colouring, grey and brown on the trunk, black on the limbs, with
red patches on the head, and reddish in the pubic region, does not
essentially differ from that which has been described by different
authors in the case of other skins which have indeed been artificially
restored. But the hide essentially differs from that of other specimens
in the sharp division of the brown colouring of the belly from the
grey of the back, by the reddish tint of the hair which clothes the
pubic region, and also in the abundant growth of hair which so closely
encircles the cheeks and chin. But, according to our authorities, the
most remarkable difference consists in the fact that the whole of the
back is covered with long, thick hair, while in _Gorilla Gina_ this
part is either bare or only covered with short hair, partly worn away.
Hence these authors conclude that this species, which they assert to
be new, and have named _Gorilla Mayema_, from the negro chief of that
name, does not rest its back against a tree so often as the _Gorilla
Gina_, but leads a more arboreal life, climbing from tree to tree.[95]
I admit that if I were to take into account all the individual
differences of the gorilla skulls and skeletons of the same sex and of
about the same age, I should be able to produce a half-dozen or more
species of gorillas. I have observed such differences in the case both
of male and female individuals of about the same age, and have given
an exact description of them in my osteological work on the gorilla
to which I have so often referred. I cannot, however, refrain from
regarding these differences as of a purely individual character.
Much in the description by Alix and Bouvier--as, for instance, their
remarks on the comparative smallness of the head, on the slenderness
and smoothness of the limb bones--appears to me to point to the
youthfulness of this Landana specimen. The unlearned may be struck
by what is said of the small spinous processes of the upper cervical
vertebræ in this specimen, but in the common gorilla the processes of
the three upper vertebræ are also small (see Fig. 17). Individual and
sexual variations in the general development of the cervical spines may
be observed, not only in this case, but in the chimpanzee, and even in
man. I think it very doubtful whether a characteristic of species can
be founded only or chiefly on this distinction. What is said of the
colouring of the coat of the so-called new species appears to me still
less worthy of consideration. I have spoken above in detail of the many
individual varieties of the colour of the hair in different specimens
of gorillas. I have also observed long, thick hair, not always short,
scanty, and worn away, on the backs of many gorillas of different
sexes. The condition described by Alix and Bouvier must refer to the
hides of aged and sickly animals, or to those younger individuals
affected by the kind of mange which is widely diffused in Africa. Every
gorilla delights to rub his back against the trunk of a tree, and leans
against it in a contented mood, and so also does the chimpanzee. This
is the habit of many other mammals, such as cats, lions, boars, deer,
and elephants. Man himself will sometimes adopt such an attitude.
Without more convincing proofs that _Gorilla Mayema Alix et Bouvier_
constitutes a distinct species, I should prefer to leave the matter in
suspense.
I frankly admit that I am more doubtful how to decide the question
whether we can at present assume that there are several or only one
species of chimpanzees. _Troglodytes niger_ has always been regarded
by me as to a certain extent a typical form of this animal, and in
the second chapter of this work I selected it as the subject for my
general description. It is this type of chimpanzee which has usually
reached Europe from the West Coast of Africa. The face of this animal
is moderately prognathous; the head, even in aged males, is round,
the ears are large and of somewhat the form presented in Fig. 6, the
skin is of a dirty flesh-colour, and the hair is black. Reichenbach’s
_Pseudanthropos (Troglodytes) leucoprymnus_[96] is only so specified on
account of the whitish hair which clothes its posterior--a character
observed in all true chimpanzees, and therefore without specific value.
Lainier, the keeper of the Museum at Havre, has had an illustration
made from a damaged skin of a large (probably male) chimpanzee; but we
can only form an imperfect opinion of its general external appearance
from this figure.[97] There is as little certainty about Gray’s
_Troglodytes vellerosus_ from the Kamarum mountains.[98] Duvernoy’s
remarks on _Troglodytes Tchégo_, which he asserts to be a new species,
relate to an aged male specimen of which the form is also doubtful.
From the materials brought home by Du Chaillu, Jeffries Wyman has
sought to establish two new species of anthropoids, the Nschiego Mbouvé
(_Troglodytes calvus_) and the Koolo-Kamba (_Troglodytes Koolo-Kamba_).
I have vainly endeavoured to obtain a satisfactory account of these
two supposed new species from the descriptions which are intended
to establish them. The whole matter is unfortunately rendered more
confused by the illustrations he subjoins. That of the Nschiego Mbouvé
is only taken from a very badly stuffed skin of a chimpanzee, that of
the Koolo-Kamba from the skin of a female gorilla. But we may come to
the general conclusion that there are, in fact, not inconsiderable, and
perhaps even specific, variations from the ordinary type of chimpanzee.
[Illustration: Fig. 61.--Mafuca.]
Much was said in the years 1875 and 1876 of the female ape Mafuca
(often erroneously termed Mafoca), which was brought from the Loango
coast and placed in the Zoological Gardens at Dresden. This was a
wild, unmanageable creature, 120 cm. in height, reminding us in many
respects of the gorilla. The face was prognathous; the ears were
comparatively small, placed high on the skull, and projecting outwards;
the supra-orbital arch was strongly developed; the end of the nose was
broad; and there were rolls of fat on the cheeks. The creature was,
moreover, strongly built, and the region of the hips and the belly were
contracted, while the hands and feet were large and powerful. When I
first saw this savage creature, early in September, 1875, it was full
of vigour, and I was almost convinced that I saw a female gorilla,
not quite adult, an opinion shared by such zoologists as K. Th. von
Siebold and others, while it was vehemently opposed by Bolau and A. B.
Meyer. At that time I made a drawing of its profile, which is given in
Fig. 61, and which was taken at a moment when the animal happened to
be resting from its wild gambols. In spite of some slight errors,[99]
the illustration faithfully reproduces its general and quite original
character, and especially the expression of its countenance. From the
structure of the brain Bischoff attempted to show that this animal was
simply a chimpanzee. No rational explanation can be attached to this
suggestion.
If, while Mafuca was still alive, I had examined the dead body of the
female gorilla of which I have already spoken, and which was of about
the same age, I should have been still more disposed to regard Mafuca
as a true gorilla. The general physiognomical resemblance between these
animals was very great. As I have mentioned in detail in my earlier
works, the female gorilla had a high upper lip, and a somewhat small
nose. Mafuca’s upper lip is undoubtedly still higher, but otherwise
the physical correspondence between the two animals is very great. The
hands of the female gorilla are still broader than those of Mafuca;
and indeed, Brehm proposes to classify the latter animal as a new
slender-handed species of anthropoid. The assumption which I have
already contested in the earlier pages of this work, that the female
type should be placed in the foreground in describing the species, is
especially untenable in the case of the gorilla, in which the male
character is extremely predominant.
To what species, then, did Mafuca belong? A cross between the gorilla
and the chimpanzee was often suggested at the time. I was myself
inclined to take this view, and it was advocated by C. Vogt in his
contemporary treatise on the subject, as well as in the magnificent
work which has lately appeared, remarkable for the beauty of its
illustrations and the genius of its style.[100] H. von Koppenfels
heard much of such crossings when he was on the Ogowe, nor is their
occurrence by any means impossible, and indeed they have been directly
observed among other species of apes while in confinement. Koppenfels
also affirmed that he had shot two such cross-bred animals, which were
associating with a troop of gorillas. The traveller sought to kill
others of the troop, but, when creeping on hands and knees through
the thick bushwood, he was constrained to retreat by the attacks of
some stinging ants (_Anomma arcens_). The skins and skeletons of the
supposed cross-breds were brought to the Natural History Institution in
Dresden. A. B. Meyer observed that the traveller was mistaken in these
instances, and that the remains sent by him to Europe were undoubtedly
those of chimpanzees.[101] It must be remembered that Koppenfels was
a clever hunter, and on the whole a good observer of nature, but that
he was no zoologist, and may have been mistaken as to the nature of the
animals he had shot. At the same time the possibility of the existence
of such cross-bred animals cannot by any means be disputed. Meyer must
be convinced that his assertion cannot be generally accepted: “Any
consideration of the question as to cross-breeding is like fighting
with windmills--that is, making difficulties where none exist.”
If the trophies of von Koppenfels’ hunting are merely chimpanzees,
it is, at any rate, very interesting to learn that these animals
were found in the company of gorillas. We must hope that scientific
travellers will in future feel bound to devote their special attention
to this question.
In the end of June, 1876, von Falkenstein, who was attached to
Güssfeldt’s Loango Expedition, brought from Chinchoxo to Berlin a
female chimpanzee, Paulina, which varied a good deal in countenance
from the chimpanzees we have commonly seen. The ears projected widely
in a lateral direction, the supra-orbital arches were prominent, the
nose was wide, the colour of the skin dark and blending into russet.
I have seen chimpanzees, both living and dead, which reproduced these
characteristics of Paulina with more or less distinctness. I have
nothing to urge against those who wish to regard such individuals
as the representatives of a special variety. I would only warn them
against the risk of accepting as such the species entitled by Du
Chaillu and Wyman, _Troglodytes Koolo-Kamba_, which appears to be
ill-established.
An attempt has been made, chiefly by the unlearned, to regard
Paulina as the image of Mafuca. There is, however, a considerable
physiognomical difference between the two animals. For me and many
other naturalists Mafuca remains up to this time an enigma, which is
slurred over by others with the help of a few phrases. Paulina, on
the other hand, and animals of the same character, display much to
remind us of the illustration given by Gratiolet and Alix of their
_Troglodytes Aubryi_, although the drawing was taken from a specimen
dissected by the French naturalists which had lost its hair through
maceration in an impure preserving fluid. The growth or the lack of
hair involves considerable external differences in specimens of these
animals, yet I repeat my assertion that there is a resemblance between
Paulina and her fellows, and Aubry’s chimpanzee.
The certain special characters presented by chimpanzee forms here
mentioned (Paulina and _Troglodytes Aubryi_) remind us of the bam
found on the Niam-Niam in Central Africa, which was probably first
discovered by A. de Malzac, and was afterwards more exactly described
by Schweinfurth.
In _Cassell’s Natural History_ (i. 39) the Nschiego-Mbouvé
(_Troglodytes Tschégo Duvernoy_; _Troglodytes calvus Du Chaillu et
Wyman_), is described and drawn by Duncan, but only in profile, from
a stuffed specimen. In this there is much to remind us of the profile
of Mafuca, including the very shrivelled nose. An illustration is
given in the same work of the anthropoid Koolo-Kamba, here given as
a distinct species, and identified in the systematic catalogue as
_Troglodytes Koolo-Kamba_, together with _Troglodytes Aubryi_; here we
see a full-grown chimpanzee of the ordinary kind, to which a front view
of the head of the Aubry chimpanzee, as it was published by Gratiolet
and Alix, has been affixed. Honest research should stand aloof from
such confusion. By Brehm, the Mafuca was given as the representative
of the species already established by Duvernoy, _Troglodytes Tschégo_
or _Anthropopithecus_, and this assertion is accepted by Martin.[102]
The latter remarks that this ape cannot be classified either with the
chimpanzee or the gorilla, and gives some reasons for his assertions.
In my opinion it is a difficult question to decide whether there are
several or only one species of chimpanzee. As things are at present,
my conviction is strengthened that it is only possible to make a
provisional settlement, and I am able to admit a certain constancy in
the varieties of chimpanzees. First, The original representative of the
species (_Troglodytes niger_, Is. Geoff. Saint-Hilaire). This animal
has a round head, and the supra-orbital arches are strongly developed
in the male, more slightly in the female; the countenance is not very
prognathous, and has an angle of 70 degrees; the ears are from 75 to 78
mm. in height; and the whole height of the body varies between 1100 and
1300 mm. The face, hands, and feet are of a dark reddish flesh-colour,
or rarely of a blackish brown or speckled general colour. The hair is
either wholly black or black shot with reddish brown. Second, Another
variety, bam or mandjaruma (_Troglodytes niger varietas Schweinfurthii
Giglioli_). The head of this animal is somewhat long, the supra-orbital
arches are only slightly developed, the nose is wide, and the upper lip
rather low in comparison with the other variety; the ears are somewhat
smaller, and the face is more prognathous, with an angle of 60 degrees.
The limbs of this variety are slenderer, yet still strongly developed.
The skin is of a dark reddish flesh-colour in youth, and with the
increase of physical development it becomes a reddish brown, dark
brown, or blackish. The hairy coat is black, shot with reddish or dark
brown, or sometimes of a reddish brown colour, tipped with tawny or
yellowish grey, especially on the back. To this variety the mandjaruma
belongs, of which an illustration is given by von Issel, and also the
portrait taken from life of Paulina of Loango, which is given in my
osteological work on the gorilla,[103] as well as _Troglodytes Aubryi_
(?), and similar animals, of which I have given illustrations in the
_Archiv. für Anatomie_.[104]
The question might now be raised whether we may assume that there is
any distinct species of anthropoids intermediate between the gorilla
and the chimpanzee. As such, we may perhaps regard Du Chaillu’s
_Troglodytes Koolo-Kamba_, Duvernoy’s _Troglodytes Tschégo_, the large
stuffed animals in the Museum at Havre, and the heads of which I have
given illustrations in the _Archiv für Anatomie_, plate vii. fig. 1
(1875); and in the _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, p. 121 (1876). Perhaps
Mafuca and the ape which Livingstone found in Manyema might also be
included.[105] Duvernoy’s name for the species, _Troglodytes Tschégo_,
seems to me not quite suitable, since the West African chimpanzees in
general are distinguished by that Latinized specific name. However,
this scientific term may be accepted in default of a better, until we
are enabled by the possession of more abundant materials to establish
the existence of such an independent species.
With respect to the orang the unity of species is also not yet
ascertained. The Malays of the country to which they belong assert that
there are different forms of this animal, which go by the general name
of meias. The descriptions current among that people respecting these
varieties are surprising. We are tempted to believe in the existence of
different species, and some zoologists, Brühl among others, hold that
there are, at any rate, two such species. Wallace, who is intimately
acquainted with the species, says nothing on this point in his work on
the Malay Archipelago, but it seems to appear from his general remarks
that he is disposed to recognize only one species of this animal. There
are, perhaps, constant varieties, limited to different places, and the
future will throw more certain light on this question. It is better,
therefore, to leave it in abeyance, instead of indulging in peremptory
and unnecessary negations. With respect to the gibbon, the question of
variety of species has been long decided.
CHAPTER V.
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION, HABITS IN A STATE OF NATURE, AND NATIVE
NAMES OF ANTHROPOIDS.
The gorilla inhabits the forests of West Africa, between lat. 2° N.
and 5° S., and long. 6° and 16° E. They are most widely diffused in
the northern part of this territory, on the rivers Ogōwē, Gaboon, and
Danger. Ford asserts that these apes are chiefly found in the chain
of mountains which extends for about a hundred miles from the coast
of Guinea, between the Camaroon and Angola, and which is known as
the Serra do Cristal. They have also been found at the source of the
Danger (Muni, Mooney). In Ford’s time, about 1851, he saw them half a
day’s journey from the mouth of that river. In the years 1851 and 1852
gorillas were seen in large numbers on the sea-coast, probably driven
thither from the interior by a scarcity of food. At that time four
or five specimens were obtained in the course of a few months. After
this they again completely disappeared from the neighbourhood of the
coast, so that an American merchant captain offered 6000 dollars for
a live specimen without being able to obtain it. According to H. von
Koppenfels, the gorilla inhabits the district which lies between the
mouth of the Muni and that of the Congo.
According to Pechuël-Lösche, the gorilla is rare on the Loango coast.
In this district it inhabits the mountainous forests or the strip
of country in their immediate vicinity. Some years ago these apes
were found on the Luemme and Kuilu, even down to the mouths of these
rivers, and also in the ravines of the plateau of Buala; but they now
only come to the coast at Banya, where the same authority believes
that he once heard gorillas. Neither Pechuël-Lösche, Falkenstein,
nor Güssfeldt have ever seen the species in its wild state.[106] The
specimen brought to Berlin by these travellers in 1876 was obtained by
Falkenstein in October, 1875, at Ponta-Negra on the Loango coast, where
it was presented to him by the Portuguese trader Laurentino Antonio dos
Santos. This animal, which was then extremely young, had been brought
from the Kuilu district by a negro, who had shot its mother.[107]
In earlier accounts given by Owen, the district most frequented by
gorillas was in the region of the Gaboon, which presents a pleasant
variety of hill and dale. Here the high ground is clothed with fine,
tall trees, while the valleys are rich in grass, with a scattered
growth of underwood. There are a number of trees and shrubs, bearing
fruits which the natives find inedible, but which are greedily
devoured by gorillas. They show a special preference for the following
fruits:--First, those of the oil palm (_Elaeis guineenis_), of which
they also devour the developed, folded leaves, called the palm-cabbage;
second, the grey plum tree (_Parinarium excelsum_), which bears a mealy
and insipid stone-fruit; third, the melon tree (_Carica Papaya_);
fourth, the pisang (_Musa paradisiaca_, _Musa sapientum_); fifth, two
sorts of scitamines (_Amomum granum paradisi s. Afzelii_, _Amomum
malaguetta_), the last of which, according to Lindley, produces the
malaguetta pepper; sixth, _Amomum grandiflorum_; seventh, a tree
bearing a walnut-like fruit, of which the gorilla cracks the shell
with a stone (this is probably one of the _Sterculiaceæ_, like the
Kola-nut); eighth, another tree with which we are not yet botanically
acquainted, bearing a cherry-like fruit. Du Chaillu asserts that these
animals are also very fond of sugar-cane and the wild pine-apple.
Although they live in places far from human habitations, yet they
rob the cane-plantations and the rice-fields of the negroes in the
harvest-time, and this is a fact confirmed by Koppenfels. Savage
reports that gorillas also devour the bodies of animals killed in
hunting, and even human bodies, and this does not sound improbable.
Like most species of apes, the gorilla preys upon the smaller mammals,
upon birds and their eggs, and upon reptiles. The gorillas which have
been kept in confinement at Berlin have been quite omnivorous, and have
displayed a special taste for animal food.
In the little village of Ntondo, near the Kuilu, Güssfeldt saw a
fetish called Bunsi, constructed of the skulls of animals, and quite
peculiar to Bakunyaland. It consisted of a pile of the skulls of
animals which had been slain in hunting, and which were brought as an
offering to the fetish by the hunter in order that his good luck might
be maintained. The heap consisted for the most part of the skulls of
antelopes, buffaloes, and wild boars, but there were also many skulls
of gorillas. Among these Güssfeldt saw two fine specimens with high
bony crests. When he inquired where gorillas were found and killed, the
natives of Ntondo pointed to a neighbouring forest.[108]
Güssfeldt describes the character of the forest of Mayombe, where
gorillas are also found, somewhat as follows:--This forest does not
correspond to our idea of a primeval tropical forest, and would perhaps
perplex a South American traveller, since it is more like the forests
of mountainous districts in Germany. The luxuriant growth of lianas is
characteristic of a tropical primeval forest: they form a second roof
of leaves above the green masses of the closely set trees. But in this
case the parasitic vegetation is scanty, although not wholly absent,
as the kautschukranke (_Landolphia florida_) shows, which was at one
time very abundant, but is now nearly extinct. Its growth no longer
obstructs the view of the tall and slender trees, somewhat resembling
beeches. The underwood of our German forests is here chiefly supplied
by the large linear leaves of the scitamines, of which the most common
variety is termed matombe by the natives. Ferns, or rather tree-ferns,
are not wanting, and the ground is covered with dead leaves. The trees
of this forest have been untouched by the axe, except in places cleared
for the construction of a new village. Where a tree falls there it
lies, encumbering, as it may for years, the narrow path which leads
through the thicket. An eternal twilight always prevails here, and
on cloudy days it might be supposed that the sun was eclipsed. The
atmosphere is close and damp, like that of a hothouse, and its weight
is most depressing to mind and body. The dense stillness is rarely
broken by the wailing cry of a bird, and no wild creature can be seen.
Those who wander in these forests are always going up or down hill,
since there is no level ground, and by paths scarcely wide enough for a
white man, which are covered with smooth and slippery roots, while the
feet and clothes are constantly caught by boughs and lianas, which also
sting the face, so that the traveller longs for free, unimpeded motion,
for light and air, and rejoices to see the cleared space on which the
village of Bayoma stands, surrounded by palms and bananas.[109] In
the work I have quoted on the Loango Expedition, a fine water-colour
drawing, by Pechuël-Lösche, of a forest frequented by gorillas is
reproduced, and I subjoin a copy of this interesting illustration (Fig.
62).
[Illustration: Fig. 62.--The home of the gorilla.]
The gorilla lives in a society consisting of male and female and their
young of varying ages, and the family group inhabits the recesses of
the forest.[110] According to von Koppenfels, they frequent the same
sleeping-place not more than three or four times consecutively, and
usually spend the night wherever they happen to be when night comes
on. Koppenfels differs from other narrators in the assertion that the
gorilla constructs a bed for his night lair upon the trees. He chooses
for this purpose a full-grown tree, not more than 0·30 m. in thickness,
breaks and bends the branches together at a height of from five to six
metres from the ground, and covers them with the twigs he has torn off,
or with the leaf-moss, which grows scantily in this part of Africa. The
male animal spends the night crouching at the foot of the tree, against
which he places his back, and thus protects the female and their young,
which are in the nest above, from the nocturnal attacks of leopards,
which are always ready to devour all species of apes.
In the daytime the gorillas roam through the tracts of forest which
surround their temporary sleeping-places, in order to seek for food.
In walking they place the backs of their closed fingers on the ground,
or more rarely support themselves on the flat palm, while the flat
soles of the feet are also in contact with the ground. The toes are
generally extended, and a little separated from each other, but
occasionally they are doubled under. Their gait, as Huxley justly
observes, is tottering; the movement of the body, which is never in
an upright position as in man, but bent forward, rolls to some extent
from one side to another. As their arms are longer than those of
the chimpanzee, they do not reach out so much; but the gorilla also
throws his arms forward, sets his hands upon the ground, then gives a
half-swinging, half-springing motion to his body. When assuming the
position for walking, the body is much sloped, and its great bulk is so
balanced as to bend the arms upwards. In spite of his apparently clumsy
and unwieldy form, the gorilla, like the bear, displays great bodily
dexterity. He is a very skilful climber, and, as Koppenfels asserts,
when ranging from tree to tree, he will go to their very tops. He first
tries whether the branches will bear his weight, and if one branch is
not strong enough, he makes use of three or four at once. He will also
run along the branches on all fours, stepping warily. Koppenfels saw
a full-grown animal, as danger approached, spring down from a tree
which was thirty or forty feet high, and then hastily crash through the
brushwood. All Huxley’s informants concur in the assertion that there
is only one adult male attached to each group. As soon as the young
male reaches maturity, a conflict for the mastery takes place, and,
after his rival is killed or driven away, the stronger animal becomes
the head of the community.
I have already spoken of the diet of the gorilla. Koppenfels once
observed a male and female with two young ones when they were feeding.
The head of the family remained at his ease, while his wife and
children plucked fruits for him from a small tree which stood by, and
if they were not sufficiently nimble, or if they took too large a share
for themselves, the old gorilla growled furiously and inflicted a box
on the ear.
The gorilla is regarded as a dreadful and very dangerous animal by the
negroes who inhabit the same country, and who themselves are often
deficient in spirit, while their tales of exaggerated horror serve to
increase their scanty fame as hunters. And what even the luxuriant
fancy of negroes could not paint as sufficiently terrible has been
exaggerated by Du Chaillu for the benefit of his readers. We will not
here repeat these bloodthirsty tales, of which Brehm justly says that
they seem to have been devised by an indifferent romance-writer, who
has given his pen free play.[111] In the letters to Bastian, which are
in my hands, Koppenfels has endeavoured to modify the accounts of the
alleged ferocity of the gorilla. This appears in the fragment of poetry
given by that esteemed traveller in one of his letters.
The same author writes in another place: “As long as the gorilla is
unmolested he does not attack men--and indeed, rather avoids the
encounter.” These apes generally utter deep guttural sounds, sometimes
protracted like _kh-eh, kh-eh_, sometimes roaring or growling. When the
animal is scared by man, he generally takes to flight screaming, and
he only assumes the defensive if wounded or driven into a corner. At
such times his size, strength, and dexterity makes him a by no means
despicable enemy. He sends forth a kind of howl or furious yelp, stands
up on his hind legs like an enraged bear, advances with clumsy gait in
this position and attacks his enemy. At the same time the hair on his
head and the nape of the neck stands erect, his teeth are displayed,
and his eyes flash with savage fury. He beats his massive breast with
his fists, or fights the air with them. Koppenfels adds that if no
further provocation is given, and his opponent gradually retreats
before the animal’s rage has reached its highest point, he does not
return to the attack. In other cases he parries the blows directed
against him with the skill of a practised fighter; as is also done by
the bear, he grasps his opponent by the arm and crunches it, or else
throws the man down and rends him with his terrible canine teeth.
The native hunter stalks the gorilla and kills him with his firearm.
Savage states that the hunter awaits the approach of his prey with
levelled gun, and if he cannot take a sure aim he allows the animal to
seize the barrel of the gun, and fires when, as is commonly the case,
he tries to carry it to his mouth. If the weapon does not go off, the
barrel, which is not strongly made, is crushed between his teeth. When
hunters of the Ogōwē are attacked by a gorilla, they will sometimes
make a last attempt to defend themselves from the animal’s fury with
the axe used for felling trees. Buchholz told me that he had seen the
skin of a male gorilla which was injured in the region of the arms,
probably in this way. But such a duel generally ends in the death of
the hunter.
Pechuël-Lösche talked with two Loango hunters who had killed gorillas.
They stated that they had not gone in search of the dreaded animals,
but that they chanced to encounter them in the forest. Only if they
met a solitary animal did they venture to creep close to it and shoot
it, and then they escaped as quickly as possible in order to be safe
from the fury of any of its companions which might be lingering near.
After several hours they would return in a larger company to carry off
their prey. In Loango the flesh of these animals was not eaten; but,
according to Ford and Savage, it was cooked by the negroes, in the
Gaboon territory, and constituted one of their favourite dainties.
Up to this time Europeans have been rarely successful in killing
gorillas. Du Chaillu asserts that he has been one of the luckiest, but
this assertion has been disputed by others. Fruitless attempts were
made by Winwood Reade, de Compiègne, Buchholz, Lenz, and de Brazza. In
the letters quoted above from Koppenfels to Bastian, he mentions that
he had already, up to March, 1874, four gorillas. In the number of the
_Gartenlaube_ shot which we have mentioned above, he describes some
of his hunting adventures, and goes into details scarcely adapted for
the readers of such a publication. On December 24, 1874, Koppenfels,
accompanied by a young Galloa, was on the shores of Lake Eliva,
observing a gorilla family, consisting of the parents and two young
ones. The female climbed up an iba, or wild mango tree, and shook down
its fruits. The male went to the water’s edge to drink, and was then
shot by Koppenfels, while the female and her young swiftly escaped.
Another time this traveller was in the neighbourhood of Busu, in the
Bakalayan country, which is on the Eliva Sanka, and is bounded on the
south-east by the mountains of Aschangolo and by extensive primeval
forests. It was here that he observed the troop of chimpanzees and
gorillas of which we have already spoken, feeding on the kola nuts,
of which they are very fond. He shot a large and a small specimen of
the chimpanzee; and again in the Aschangolo mountains he shot a male
gorilla, 1090 mm. in height. The bullet pierced the animal’s heart, and
it sprang into the air with outstretched arms, and then crashed down
upon its face. It dragged down in its fall a liana of great strength
with all its dry and green branches.
Adult male gorillas attain to a height varying between 1500 to 2000
mm., and very rarely exceed that height. The height of the females
is about 1500 mm. An ape of this species, examined by Ford, weighed
170 lb. without the viscera. The gorilla shot by Koppenfels in the
Aschangolo mountains was more than 400 lbs. in weight. By the people
of Mpongwe, Orungu, Kamma, Galloa, and Bakalay the gorilla is called
Njina, Njeïna, or Indjina, and by the people of Fan it is called
Nguyala. On the Loango coast it is called N’Pungu or M’Pungu.
As I have already remarked, the chimpanzee occupies a much wider area
than the gorilla. In West Africa it is found in the latitude of the
Portuguese territory, which ranges from Cachêu in the north down to the
Coanza in the south. The species is known to exist in certain districts
of north and south Central Africa, and its presence is surmised in East
Africa, to the south of Abyssinia, in the Djuba territory, and, as
the missionary A. Nachtigall asserts, even in the remote district of
Sofalla in the south-east of Africa, but I cannot pledge myself to the
truth of this fact.
The chimpanzee is also a denizen of forests. They subsist on wild
fruits of various kinds, but they will also visit forsaken plantations,
and even those which are still under cultivation, and in some cases it
seems that they do not reject animal food. Pechuël-Lösche says that
on the Loango coast they frequent the mountains and their vicinity.
They are found in the district of Luemme as far as the lagoon of
Tschissambo, and in those of Kuilu and Banya, as far as the coast.
The chimpanzee either lives in separate families or in small groups of
families. In many districts, as, for example, in the forest regions of
Central Africa, its habits are even more arboreal than those of the
gorilla. Elsewhere, as, for instance, on the south-west coast, it seems
to live more upon the ground. The bam-chimpanzee of Niam-Niam inhabits
the galleries, as they were called by Piaggia and Schweinfurth; that
is, the forest trees growing one above the other in stages, of which
the growth is so dense that it is difficult to get at them. Here
the pisang plantain rises from the soil. The powerful stems, thickly
overgrown with wild pepper, bear branches from which hang long streams
of bearded moss, and also a parasitic growth of that remarkable fern
to which Schweinfurth gave the name of elephant’s ear. The large
tun-shaped structures of the tree-termites are found on the higher
branches. Other stems, rotten and decayed, serve as supports for the
colossal streamers of _Mucuna urens_, and form bowers overhung with
impenetrable festoons, which are as large as houses, in which perpetual
darkness reigns.[112]
When the chimpanzee goes on all fours, he generally supports himself on
the backs of his closed fingers rather than on the palm of the hand,
and he goes sometimes on the soles of his feet, sometimes on the closed
toes. His gait also is weak and vacillating, and he can stand upright
on his feet for a still shorter time than the gorilla. At the same time
he seeks support for his hands, or clasps them above his head, which is
a little thrown back, in order to maintain his balance.
These animals send forth loud cries, which echo plaintively through
the great tropical forests. Pechuël-Lösche says that the horrible
wails, the furious shrieks and howls, which may be heard morning and
evening, and often in the night, make these creatures truly hateful to
travellers. “Since they are really accomplished in the art of bringing
forth these unpleasant sounds, which may be heard at a great distance,
and are reproduced by the echoes, it is impossible to estimate the
number of those who take part in the dreary noise, but often we seemed
to hear more than a hundred. They generally remain upon the ground
among the dense underwood and thickets of scitamine, and only climb
trees for the sake of obtaining fruit. Their track may be plainly
discerned on soft ground: they stop short wherever the _amomum_ grows,
of which they are very fond, and the red husks of its fruit may be seen
scattered all around.” The same narrator observes that the mischievous
and active sea-cat monkeys, which abound on the Loango, frequently
provoke the defenceless chimpanzees by their malicious tricks until
the tormented creatures cause the forest to echo with their discordant
cries.
These animals wander about, always in search of fresh feeding-grounds.
They also construct nests and, as Koppenfels states, the male passes
the night below the nest of his family, which is placed on a forked
branch. Du Chaillu asserts that the Nschiego-Mbouvé also builds a
pent-house. An illustration of this structure, which is only moderately
successful, and has undoubtedly been embellished in London, is given
by him. Koppenfels believes that the so-called pent-house is only the
family nest, under which the male places himself; while Reichenfels
thinks it possible that some parasitic growth, perhaps a _Loranthus_,
gave rise to the belief that such a pent-house is erected.
When chimpanzees are provoked they strike the ground with their hands,
but they do not, as the gorilla does, beat their breasts with the fist.
They generally take to flight at the sight of men, but if driven to
extremity, or wounded, they defend themselves with their hands and
teeth. The direct conflict with a full-grown chimpanzee demands, in
order to obtain the mastery over him, all the strength and presence
of mind of a strong and courageous man. I shall always remember the
large female animal at Hamburg, which was able to stand up against a
powerful man. Great daring was required to control the fury of Mafuca.
The Soko also, which Livingstone found in Manyema, to the west of Lake
Tanganyika, bravely defended itself, when attacked.
The native hunters shoot chimpanzees with firearms or arrows, and also
kill them with javelins. The Niam-Niam tribe go in hunting-parties
of twenty or thirty men, to track the bam in the woodland galleries
so closely interwoven by the liana, and when they have thrown nets
over these, they kill the animals with lances. Their flesh is eaten
in different parts of Africa, and their skulls sometimes serve for
fetishes. In a Niam-Niam village, by the stream Diamwonu, Schweinfurth
saw the skulls of men, chimpanzees, sea-cat monkeys, baboons,
antelopes, wild boars, etc., hung on the stump of a tree.
In the Gaboon district, as we have already said, the chimpanzee is
called Nschégo, Nschiego, Ndjéko, and the same names serve for the
people of Mpongwe, Galloa, Kamma, and Orungu. By the people of Aschira
and Malimba the animal is called Kulu. The natives of Niam-Niam call
the chimpanzee Ranja or Mandjaruma. The traders who speak Arabic adopt
the name Bam or M’Bam.
The orang-utan is found in the large Asiatic islands of Borneo and
Sumatra, more frequently in the former island. It is particularly
common a few days’ journey to the west of Sungi-Kapajan, on the river
Sampiet, in Kotaringin, and in other remote districts on the southern
and western coasts.[113] The Dyaks of Long-Wai told the traveller Bock
that the orang was also found further to the north, and at Teweh, as
well as in Dusem, to the west of Kutai.[114] Wallace states that this
animal is widely diffused in Borneo, inhabiting many parts of the
south-west, south-east, north-east, and north-west coasts, but that
it is restricted to the low-lying marshy forests. It seems at first
sight inexplicable that this ape should be unknown in Sarawak, while it
abounds in Sambas on the west, and in Sadong on the east, but a closer
acquaintance with the habits and mode of life of the orang enables us
to discern sufficient grounds for the apparent anomaly in the physical
conditions of Sarawak. In Sadong, where Wallace observed the orang,
he only found it in low marshy districts which were at the same time
covered with primeval forests. Many isolated hills rise from these
marshes, upon which the Dyaks have settled, and have planted them with
fruit trees. These are a great attraction to the orang, which devours
the unripe fruits, and then retires again to the marsh. He cannot live
on high and dry ground. Thus, for example, he comes in troops into the
low parts of the Sadong valley; but on reaching the limits where the
ebb and flow of the tide are perceptible, and the ground, though flat,
is dry, the orang is no longer found. The lower part of the Sadong
valley is indeed marshy, but it is not covered throughout with a growth
of tall trees, only for the most part with the Nipa palm; and near the
town of Sarawak, the country becomes dry and hilly, interspersed with
scattered tracts of primeval forest, and with jungle which was formerly
cultivated by the Malays and Dyaks.
The orang is more rare in Sumatra than in Borneo, and in the former
island is chiefly found in the north-eastern districts of Siak and
Atjin. Rosenberg states that the orang only frequents the flat, marshy
forests on the coast between Tapanoli and Singkel, living in thick
woods which, on account of their impenetrability, are seldom trodden by
the foot of man.
The chimpanzee also frequents the marshy forests which are not too
thickly overgrown, while the gorilla prefers such tablelands as are not
wholly devoid of water.
Wallace declares that a large area of unbroken and tolerably high
primeval forest is necessary for the well-being of the orang. Such
forests are like open ground to them, since they can move to and fro in
every direction, with the same ease that the Indians cross the prairie
and the Arabs the desert; they go from the top of one tree to the other
without ever touching the ground. Those tracts of country which stand
high and dry, being more frequented by men, and more often traversed
by clearings, and subsequently covered with a low-growing jungle, are
unsuitable to the motions characteristic of this animal. He is, in
these tracts, more exposed to danger, and more frequently constrained
to descend upon the ground. It is also probable that in the district
frequented by orangs there is a greater variety of fruits, since the
low hills, which stand like islands in the marshy plain, serve as
gardens or plantations in which the trees of the hill country flourish.
Wallace observes that it is strange and interesting to watch an orang
passing at his ease through the forest. He goes with circumspection
along one of the larger branches in a half-upright position, which is
rendered necessary by the great length of his arms and the shortness of
his legs. He seems always to choose such trees as have their branches
interwoven with those which surround them, and when these are within
reach he extends his long arms, seizes the boughs in question with
both hands, as if to try their strength, then swings himself carefully
on to the next branch, and goes on as before. The woodcut we subjoin,
taken from a photograph by Hermes, in the Berlin Aquarium, may help to
explain this ape’s mode of climbing[115] (Fig. 63).
[Illustration: Fig. 63.--Climbing orang-utan, seen from behind.]
As Wallace further remarks, the orang never leaps or springs, seems
to be in no haste, and yet makes his way through the forest almost as
fast as a man can run on the ground below. His long, powerful arms
are of the greatest use, enabling him to climb the highest trees with
ease, to seize the fruits and young leaves from branches which would
not bear his weight, and to collect the young leaves and boughs with
which he forms his nest. This structure, which serves for his nocturnal
refuge, is generally placed on some low, small tree, which stands only
from twenty to fifty feet from the ground, probably because such a
situation is warmer and less exposed to the wind. It is said that the
orang makes a fresh layer for himself every night, but Wallace thinks
this improbable, since, in this case, the deserted nest would be more
frequently found; this author saw some such nests in the neighbourhood
of the coal mines of Simunjon, but since many orangs must have been
there every day, in the course of a year their forsaken layers would
be very numerous. The Dyaks say that when the orang is wet he covers
himself with pandanus-leaves or large ferns, and this has perhaps led
to the belief that he builds himself a hut in the trees. The orang only
leaves his layer when the sun is tolerably high, and the dew has dried
off the leaves. He feeds throughout the middle of the day, but seldom
returns two days running to the same tree.
These animals seem to be much afraid of man. Wallace never saw two
full-grown specimens together, but both male and female are often
accompanied by their half-grown young, and three or four young animals
may be seen going about together without their parents. The orang
generally lives on fruit, but occasionally also on leaves, buds, and
young shoots, as, for instance, on the bamboo. They are particularly
fond of the durian, of which the smell is so offensive and the taste
so good (_Durio zibethinus_). They destroy much more than they
consume, and leave many fragments below the trees on which they have
been feeding. I do not know whether orangs, as well as gorillas and
chimpanzees, display any taste for carnivorous food. Huxley, who has
collected much information about anthropoids which is not accessible to
others, states that it is not known whether the orang destroys living
animals.
The same naturalist terms the orang’s gait on all fours laborious and
unsteady. If chased, he runs faster than a man, but is soon overtaken.
The very long arms, which are only slightly bent in running, raise
the body in a remarkable way, so that the orang almost assumes the
position of a very old man, bowed by age, who supports himself with a
stick. When walking, this ape places the closed fingers, or rarely the
open palm, of the hands upon the ground. The toes of the feet are also
curved inwards, so that the outer edge of the foot is turned downwards.
More rarely the toes are completely closed, or the whole of the sole of
the foot serves as the support. The use of the outer edge of the foot
in walking, as Huxley justly observes, is such as to bring the heel
more upon the ground, while the curved toes partly touch the ground
with the upper surface of their first phalanges, and the surface of the
outermost toes of each foot rest altogether on the ground.
Wallace says that the orang seldom comes down upon the ground, and
indeed only when he is driven by hunger to seek for the juicy young
shoots on the banks of rivers, or when in very dry weather he goes
down to the water, of which he generally finds a sufficient supply
in the hollow of leaves. This traveller on only one occasion saw
two half-grown orangs on the ground in a dry hole at the foot of
the Simunjon hills. They were at play together, standing upright
and alternately seizing each other by the arms. This observer also
considers that the orang is only able to stand upright when he has some
support for his hands, or when he is attacked.
Like other anthropoids in a state of nature, when the orang drinks,
he crouches down to the water’s edge and sucks in the liquid with his
lips. Occasionally, also, he draws water in the palm of his hand, and
gulps or licks it off; at any rate, he does this when in captivity. In
an old number of the _Penny Magazine_ there is a woodcut of an orang
which is very true to nature, in which he is represented as squatting
down by the water, washing his hands, and this is really his habit.
Müller and Schlegel[116] state that the adult males live alone except
during the pairing season. Aged females and young males are often seen
together in parties of two or three, and the mothers generally keep
their young with them. Pregnant females generally live apart, and
continue to do so for a good while after the birth has taken place.
The young, which are slow in coming to maturity, live long under the
protection of their mother, who, when she is climbing, carries her
little ones in her bosom, while they cling to her long, shaggy hair.
It is not yet ascertained at what age the orang becomes capable of
propagating his species, nor how long the females continue to bring
forth young.
This animal is slow, phlegmatic, and has none of the agility of the
chimpanzee, nor even of the gibbon. Hunger alone seems to prompt his
actions, and when appetite is appeased the animal relapses into repose.
In sitting, the back is so bent, and the head so depressed, that the
orang’s eyes are directed downwards to the earth. Sometimes he holds on
with his hands to the higher branches, but generally his arms fall idly
by his sides. In such positions the orang will remain for hours in his
place, almost motionless, and only occasionally sending forth a note of
his deep, gruff voice. By day he is accustomed to go from one tree-top
to another, and he only comes down to the ground at night. When
anything occurs to scare him, he conceals himself in the underwood.
When not hunted, he remains long in one place, and indeed, for several
days together on the same tree. He seldom passes the night on a high
tree, which he finds too cold and windy, and when night approaches he
scrambles down to the lower and more sheltered parts, or to the top of
some low, leafy tree, such as the Nibong palm, the pandanus, or the
parasitic orchids which are characteristic of the primeval forests
of Borneo. He constructs his nest out of small branches and leaves,
laid crosswise, and lined with fronds, or with the leaves of orchids,
_Pandanus fascicularis_, _Nipa fruticans_, etc. The nests observed by
Müller were some of them still quite fresh, placed at a height of from
ten to fifteen feet from the ground, and were from two to three feet in
diameter. Some of them had a lining of pandanus leaves several inches
thick. In others the branches intertwined for a foundation were united
in a common centre, forming a uniform surface.
The Dyaks say that the orang generally leaves his lair about nine a.m.,
and repairs to it again about five p.m., or a little later, when it is
growing dusk. He sometimes lies on his back, or, by way of change, on
his side, drawing his legs up to his body, and supporting his head on
his hand. When the night is cold, windy, or rainy, he covers his body,
and especially his head, with pandanus or nipa leaves, or with fronds
of fern.
Although the orang lives in the daytime on the branches of large trees,
he seldom crouches on a thick bough, as other apes, and especially the
gibbon, are in the habit of doing. He keeps rather to the slender,
leafy branches, so that he really reaches the tree-top. He has not the
sessor-callosities found on other apes, including the gibbon, and the
hips are not so wide and prominent as in those species provided with
callosities.
The orang is a slow and deliberate climber. He is particularly careful
about his feet, and seems much more sensitive to any injury to them
than is the case with other apes. In climbing he alternately uses one
hand and one foot, or else, as soon as he has taken a firm hold with
his hands, he draws up both feet together. In his passage from one
tree to another, he always looks out for a place where two branches
come close together, or intertwine. Even when hotly pursued, he
displays wonderful caution, trying the strength of the branches, and
pressing them down by the weight of his body, so as to make a bridge
from tree to tree. On this point the accounts of the Dutch naturalists
essentially agree with those of Wallace.
There is an eager search for these apes in their native place. Bock
states the Malays of Samarinda, in the south-east of Borneo, capture
them near the small brooks and streams which flow into the Mahakkam
close to that town. These animals come down to the river-bank in the
early morning and return in the course of the day to the thicket. When
the natives take an orang alive, they sell him for three dollars to the
Chinese, who at first feed the animal on fruit, and afterwards on rice,
but are never able to keep him alive for any time in captivity.[117]
Although, in the ordinary course of his existence, the orang shows
himself to be melancholy, slothful, and indifferent, yet in moments of
danger he becomes angry and able to defend himself. When pursued, he
is said to pelt his aggressors with broken branches, and the thick,
thorny outer husks of the durian fruit. This is the more probable since
the Tscheladas (_Cynocephalus Gelada_), the Hamadryas (_Cynocephalus
Hamadryas_), and other baboons are in the habit of hurling branches,
stones, and hardened clods of earth with great adroitness at those
who attack them. In a hand-to-hand fight, the orang seizes the arm
of his opponent, biting and scratching it whenever he can get at it.
Wallace says that no wild animal ventures to fight with these powerful
creatures, and that they can even obtain the mastery over crocodiles
and gigantic snakes.
The name orang-utan is derived from the words orang, man, and utan
(belonging to woods), and is therefore merely wood-man. It is an error
to write orang-_utang_, which, according to Von Martens, signifies an
_indebted_ man.[118] The Malay name, meias, is often used, and they are
distinguished as meias-pappan or zino, meias-kassu, and meias-rambi.
According to Rosenberg, the orang is called mawas in Sumatra, and Bock
says that the Dyaks of Dusun call it këu.
The gibbon in all its movements, and especially in those of its long
arms, has a very singular appearance. In the second chapter of this
work I have already described the geographical distribution and
grouping of the species of these remarkable animals. Although they
occasionally come down upon the ground, they are for the most part
arboreal in their habits. They prefer the tropical forests of high and
even of mountainous districts to any others. Many find shelter in the
bamboo thickets, especially in those formed by the gigantic stems of
_Bambusa macroculmis_ and _Bambusa gigantea_.
The siamang, properly Si-Amang, since Rosenberg asserts that the first
syllable is merely the article, lives gregariously in Sumatra, and
possibly in Malacca. Martens saw one of these animals in Sumatra,
swinging himself from tree to tree, right across the path, about fifty
feet in front of him. Diard states that a powerful old male acts as
leader to each troop. They raise a fearful clamour at sunrise, and keep
quiet during the day, always on the watch, and scampering off at the
slightest noise. They find it easy to get away on trees, but, according
to some accounts, when surprised upon the ground, they show no agility,
and are readily captured. Rosenberg says that in Sumatra the siamang
and unko inhabit mountainous forests 3000 ft. above the sea, keeping
to the trees which grow on the mountain-side, and rarely descending
to the ground. At the slightest sign of danger they hasten down the
mountain with speed which rivals the flight of birds, in order in a few
moments to disappear in the dark ravines. In the forests which partly
enclose Tobing, as well as on the mountains of Barissa, the siamang
is not rare. Bock says that in the recesses of the Sumatran forests,
this animal subsists chiefly on the leaves of a plant called _Daun
simantung_. This ape makes a horrible roaring noise.[119] When a young
one is wounded, its mother turns in a threatening manner towards the
aggressor, yet without being able to do him any serious injury. The
mothers seem to act with great tenderness towards their young, taking
them down to the water to wash and dry them, etc. Diard affirms that
before they are able to run alone the young animals are always carried
by the parent of the same sex, the male by the father, the female by
the mother. The siamang must fall an easy prey to tigers and panthers
(_Felis macroscelis_). The species is considered by the natives to be
slothful and unintelligent; and Bock adds that, although the Malays are
skilled in the care of animals, they are unable to keep these stupid
and slothful apes alive in captivity for any length of time.[120]
Harlan states that the hulock is found on the Garrau mountains, near
Gulpara, in Assam. These apes prefer the adjoining hilly ground to
the mountains themselves, which are several hundred feet higher, and
exposed to the winds. Their favourite food is a fruit called propul,
which is very abundant in this district. A traveller named Owen
encountered troops of these animals, from 100 to 150 together, near
the Naga and the Abors in the wooded hills to the east of Assam. The
noise they made was deafening. On one occasion, when Owen crossed their
path, he was threatened by them, and pursued with angry gestures and
piercing howls. They had also attacked a native of the district. Snakes
of considerable size (_Python reticulatus_) were torn to pieces by them.
The wauwau, or, as Martens calls it, the uwa-uwa, appears to live
more commonly in pairs than in troops. We learn from Duvaucel that
these animals move through the trees with great swiftness, grasping the
slenderest and most flexible branches. They swing two or three times
to and fro, and then spring with outstretched arms so that the flat
surface of the body resists the air like a parachute, and in this way
they can pass through spaces of forty feet, and go on for hours without
fatigue.
Gibbons are generally more capable than other anthropoids of walking
upright. Some species, such as the lar, the white-handed, and the
slender gibbon, display special dexterity and endurance in maintaining
this position. They press the flat soles of their feet upon the ground,
turn out their knees and toes, hold their bodies fairly erect, draw the
shoulders together, and place their half-bent arms by their sides, with
the slender hands hanging slackly down. Others walk with their raised
arms crossed above the head. When a gibbon is walking on perfectly flat
ground, he sways his arms to and fro like balancing poles. On irregular
ground they seize any projection in the way with their outstretched
arms, and, holding on to it, swing the body strongly forwards. In this
way they make better progress over wide tracks of country, since every
such effort enables them to pass more readily over difficult ground.
When in great haste, they go upon all fours without closing either
fingers or toes. In repose, these animals take a sitting position
upon their posteriors, cross their long arms and stare at whatever is
before them with an air of indifference. When seated on the branches
of trees, they lay hold of the higher branches above them for the
sake of security (Fig. 14). In this position some gibbons (_Hylobates
lar_, _Hulock_, _Albimanus_) have recently been photographed in the
Zoological Gardens, London. Although they are for the most part content
with a vegetable diet, gibbons sometimes eat animal food, such as
lizards; and Bennet saw a siamang seize and devour one of these animals
whole. I do not at this moment remember Huxley’s authority for the
statement that gibbons, when they drink, dip the hand in water and
lick it off, but I have myself seen this done by a captive animal.
They sleep in a sitting position without building nests: like other
anthropoids, they digest their food quickly.
In the case of gibbons, as of anthropoids generally, the length of the
period of gestation is still a matter of uncertainty. The young are
of slow development, and are not fully mature before their fourteenth
or fifteenth year. Neither is the duration of their lives accurately
known, since observations made on captive specimens only lead to vague
conclusions. If we observe the processes of osseous development in the
skeletons of aged specimens of gorillas in order to make an approximate
estimate, we may infer that the duration of the life of anthropoids,
at any rate in their larger forms, hardly falls short of the average
length of human life. But up to this time the question remains
undecided.
These creatures do not appear to be free from morbid conditions in the
wild life which is in conformity with their nature. In addition to
the injuries to the hide and skeleton which may often be observed, and
which have been caused by the weapons of man, or by the teeth and claws
of their own kind, there are often traces, especially on the skulls of
chimpanzees, of the decay of teeth and maxillary necrosis, as well as
of curvatures, excrescences, and united fractures of other parts of the
bony structure.
This brief description is enough to show that anthropoids in their
free life develop an intelligence which sets them high above the other
mammals. They do not, however, display the keenness of scent and
quickness of sight which distinguish some animals of a lower order,
such as canine beasts of prey and ruminants manifest in many different
ways. The structure of their nests is rude in comparison with that of
some other mammals--as, for example, of rodents. But we must not forget
that several of the lower races of men, such as the degraded Bedja, the
Obongo, the Fuegians, many aborigines of the Brazilian forests, and the
Australian blacks, scarcely rise above the inartificial structure of an
anthropoid’s nest in the construction of their huts.
CHAPTER VI.
LIFE IN CAPTIVITY.
The accounts given by the earliest observers of gorillas would lead
us to expect that the attempt to tame even young apes of this species
must be fruitless. Du Chaillu tells us that he obtained a young male
gorilla, a creature of from two to three years old, which was quite as
furious and unmanageable as any adult specimen could have been. The
negroes of the district between the Rembo and Cape Santa Catharina
had surprised the mother and her young one in the forest, and after
killing the former, they succeeded, with great difficulty, in capturing
the latter by throwing a cloth over his head. By means of a wooden
slave-fork, fixed upon its neck, the animal was transported to the
village in which Du Chaillu was staying at the time. Young as he was,
the gorilla displayed extraordinary strength, and after he had been
successfully fastened into his cage, he contrived to attack his new
master again, tearing his trousers, and then retreating sullenly into
a corner. He would only eat the wild berries and fruits collected for
him in the forest, and also the soft parts of pine-apple leaves. He
escaped from his cage, and was only recaptured, after many fruitless
endeavours, by throwing a net over him. The traveller adds that he had
never seen so furious a creature as this gorilla. He flew at every one
who came near him, bit the bamboo lattice-work of his cage, and showed,
on every possible occasion, that he was of a thoroughly malicious and
unkindly nature. He broke loose a second time, and was again captured,
and at the end of ten days he died suddenly.
Somewhat later Du Chaillu obtained a young female gorilla, which clung
affectionately to its mother’s dead body, so that all the spectators
were affected by its grief. The creature was too young to be fed on
anything but milk, and since this was unattainable, it died three days
after its capture.
Reade, Lenz, and Buchholz were more fortunate in their experience with
the gorillas captured by them, and Lenz wrote to me as follows about
one of these animals:--“On my return to the Gaboon from a journey to
Okanda, I was attacked by a somewhat serious fever which hung about me
for a long while. A living gorilla, which was brought to the German
factory on the Gaboon, was some compensation to me for this involuntary
idleness. The creature came from Kamma (Fernand Vaz), the place from
which Du Chaillu also obtained his specimens, and was captured out of
a troop of eight animals. A small dog, which had been somewhat injured
by an old gorilla, afterwards killed, prevented the young one from
escaping until a negro came up, seized it by the neck, and got another
man to bind its hands. In this way the gorilla was conveyed to the
basket-factory of the house, and there, as is unfortunately done in
most cases, the two large canine teeth were filed off for fear of his
using them to bite his captors.
“This gorilla is a young, male specimen, probably two years old, and
has reconciled himself to captivity and to intercourse with men with
no great difficulty. A long, slender iron chain is fastened round his
neck, which gives him plenty of room to move about; but for the greater
part of the day he sits in a cask, and makes himself very comfortable
in the straw. He is very susceptible to cold, wind, and rain, and a
thick sail-cloth is wrapped round the cask at night. He generally
adopts a squatting position, with his arms folded across his breast,
and he is always observant of surrounding objects. He always seats
himself so as to have nothing at his back, but to keep his enemies
before him. When asleep, he stretches himself at full length on his
back or side, using one hand as a kind of pillow; and he never sleeps
like other apes, in a squatting position. He goes upon all-fours with
the soles of his hindhands on the ground, while the forehands are
closed, so that he goes upon the knuckles, and he has the lateral gait
characteristic of the species. At this moment he suffers terribly from
the so-called dissous or sand-fly; both his forehands are full of
blisters, which contain the eggs of this annoying little insect.
“In any attempt to transport the gorilla, the question of food is
necessarily the most important. We have already offered him rice,
bread, milk, etc., such things as may be obtained on board ship, as
well as in Europe, but with indifferent success. He has occasionally
eaten some bread, and has taken ship’s biscuit more readily, and once
he ate some rice, but for the most part he does not touch it. His
favourite food is a red fruit, very common here, of which he eats the
inner kernel; he is likewise fond of bananas and oranges, and above
all, of sugar-cane, which he takes from my hand with evident pleasure,
and chews. He will also take a glass of water from my hand, carry it
steadily to his mouth, and drink it up. Only on rare occasions, when he
was much excited, I have heard him utter a growling noise; generally he
is quite dumb.” This animal died on the voyage to Europe, and its body,
preserved in rum by Pansch and Bolau, was used by me in some of the
researches of which I have given an account.
Falkenstein gives an attractive description of the gorilla represented
in Figs. 3, 4, during the first months of his captivity: “When this
animal reached the station (Chinxoxo, in Loango) it was our first care
to procure all the forest fruits within reach, as well as a she-goat,
in order to restore the young anthropoid’s failing strength. It can
easily be supposed that we watched his attempts to eat with great
interest, and were very much relieved when he not only readily drank
milk, but ate various fruits with evident increase of appetite, and
especially those of _Anona senegalensis_, which are of about the size
of a walnut, with a rough husk, and grow in the savannahs. In spite
of this, however, he remained for a long while so weak that he would
fall asleep while eating, and he passed great part of the day crouching
asleep in a corner. He gradually became accustomed to cultivated
fruits, such as bananas, guavas, oranges, and mangoes, and as he became
stronger, and was more often present at our meals, he began to demand
for himself whatever he saw us eating. Since he was thus gradually
accustomed to eat all kinds of food, the likelihood of transporting him
successfully to Europe was increased.”
This is perhaps the only way in which other and possibly older
specimens can be rendered fit to endure the passage to Europe. Every
attempt to embark them immediately after their capture, without
previously weaning them from their old modes of life, and adapting them
slowly and systematically to their altered conditions, has invariably
resulted, sooner or later, in sickness and death. Falkenstein also
recommends, relying on the experience he has had of apes in a state of
nature, that this species should be supplied with some form of animal
food. He gives this further account of the captive gorilla:--
“In the course of a few weeks he became so accustomed to his
surroundings, and to the people whom he knew, that he was allowed to
run about at liberty, without fear that he would make any attempt to
escape. He was never chained, nor confined to a cage, and was watched
only in the way that little children are watched when they are at play.
He was so conscious of his own helplessness that he clung to human
companionship, and displayed in this manner a wonderful dependence
and trustfulness. He showed no trace of mischievous, malicious, or
savage qualities, but was sometimes self-willed. He expressed the
ideas which occurred to him by different sounds, one of which was the
characteristic tone of importunate petition, while others expressed
fright or horror, and in rare instances a sullen and defiant growl
might be heard.
“In his moods of exuberant satisfaction and simple pleasure, he might
be seen to rub his breast with both fists, while raising himself on
his hind legs. Moreover, he often expressed his feelings after quite
a human fashion, by clapping his hands together, an action which
no one had taught him; and he executed such wild dances, sometimes
overbalancing himself, reeling to and fro, and whirling round, that we
were often disposed to think that he must be drunk. Yet he was only
drunk with pleasure, and this impelled him to display his strength in
the wildest gambols.
“His dexterity in eating was particularly remarkable. If any of the
other apes chanced to enter his chamber nothing was safe from them;
they snatched greedily at everything, only to throw it away with a
certain aversion, or carelessly to let it drop. The gorilla behaved
quite differently: he took up every cup or glass with instinctive
care, clasped the vessel with both hands, and set it down again so
softly and carefully that I cannot remember his breaking a single
article of our household goods. Yet we never taught the creature the
use of our vessels and other manufactured articles, since we wished
to bring him to Europe, as far as possible in a state of nature. His
behaviour at meal-times was quiet and mannerly; he only took as much
as he could hold with his thumb, fore, and middle finger, and looked
on with indifference when any of the different forms of food heaped
up before him were taken away. If, however, nothing was given him,
he growled impatiently, looked narrowly at all the dishes from his
place at table, and accompanied every plate carried off by the negro
boys with an angry snarl or a short, resentful cough, and sometimes
he sought to seize the arm of the passer-by in order to express his
displeasure more plainly by a bite or a blow. In another minute he
would play with the negroes as with his fellows, and this distinguishes
him altogether from other apes, and especially from baboons, who appear
to feel an instinctive hatred against many of the black race, and take
a peculiar pleasure in displaying their animosity against them.
“He drank by suction, stooping over the vessel without even putting
his hands into it or upsetting it, and in the case of smaller vessels,
he carried them to his mouth. He was a skilful climber, but sometimes
his high spirits made him careless, and he once fell to the ground
from a tree, which was fortunately not very high. His cleanliness was
remarkable, for if by accident he touched a spider’s web, or rubbish of
any kind, he sought to brush it off with absurd horror, or held out his
hands to have it done for him. There was no offensive smell about him.
It was his favourite amusement to play and paddle about in the water,
nor did the fact that he had just taken a bath prevent him from amusing
himself by rolling in the sand with other apes immediately afterwards.
His good-humour and shyness, or rather roguishness, deserves special
mention as his strongest characteristic. When he was chastised, as it
was necessary to do at first, he never resented the punishment, but
came up with a beseeching air, clinging to my feet, and looking up with
an expressive air which disarmed all displeasure. When he was anxious
to obtain anything, no child could have expressed its wishes in a more
urgent and caressing manner. If in spite of this he did not obtain what
he wanted, he had recourse to cunning, and looked anxiously about to
see if he was watched. It was just in these cases, when he obstinately
pursued a fixed idea, that it was impossible not to recognize a
deliberate plan and careful calculation. If, for example, he was not
allowed to leave the room, or, again, was not allowed to come in, he
would, after several attempts to get his own way had been baffled,
apparently submit to his fate and lie down near the door in question
with assumed indifference. But he soon raised his head in order to
ascertain whether fortune was on his side, edging himself gradually
nearer and nearer, and then, looking carefully round, he twisted
himself about until he reached the threshold; then he got up, peered
cautiously round, and with one bound galloped off so quickly that it
was difficult to follow him.
“He pursued his object with equal pertinacity when he felt a desire for
the sugar or fruit which was kept in a cupboard in the eating-room; he
would suddenly leave off playing and go in an opposite direction, only
altering his course when he believed that he was no longer observed.
He then went straight to the room and cupboard, opened it, and made a
quick and dexterous snatch at the sugar-box or fruit-basket, sometimes
closing the cupboard doors behind him before beginning to enjoy his
plunder, or, if he was discovered, he would escape with it, and his
whole behaviour made it clear that he was conscious of transgressing
into forbidden paths. He took a special, and what might be called a
childish, pleasure in making a noise by beating on hollow articles, and
he seldom omitted an opportunity of drumming on casks, dishes, or tin
trays, whenever he passed by them--a noisy amusement to which he was
much addicted during our homeward voyage on board the steam-vessel, in
which he was at liberty to roam about. He very much disliked strange
noises. Thunder, the rain falling on the skylight, and especially the
long-drawn note of a pipe or trumpet threw him into such agitation as
to cause a sudden affection of the digestive organs, and it became
expedient to keep him at a distance. When he was slightly indisposed,
we made use of this kind of music with results as successful as if we
had administered purgative medicine.”
My personal observations enable me to add but little to this excellent
and exhaustive account. It is well known that this ape throve in the
Berlin Aquarium. His skin, especially on the extremities, was at first
covered with dry, cracked patches, which the late veterinary surgeon
Gerlach believed to be due to mange; but these gradually disappeared,
and as they scaled off the skin became smooth and of a dark black
colour, and there was a fresh growth of hair. The creature generally
slept in the bed of his keeper Viereck, covered himself up in an
orderly manner, and ate at the man’s table of plain but nourishing
food, cooked by the keeper’s wife. He sometimes ate fruit, and bananas
were occasionally provided for him. When taking his meals, drinking,
etc., I saw that he always behaved with good manners. He often moved
freely about in an office-room of the Aquarium, and he was as obedient
to the Director as to his keeper. He was generally good-tempered,
fond of play, but rather mischievous, and he would snatch roughly,
and occasionally try the sharpness of his teeth. Sometimes he tried
to seize from visitors things which attracted his curiosity, such as
the trimmings of ladies’ bonnets, lace falls, and the like. But on the
whole he behaved with propriety, playfulness, and good temper, and
there was much which resembled man in his look and bearing.
Early in 1876, before leaving Africa, this ape suffered from malaria,
and he subsequently suffered from other complaints, from which he
recovered. He died in November, 1877, of a galloping consumption.[121]
The gorilla now living in the Berlin Aquarium is also very playful and
affectionate.
The chimpanzees which have up to this time been observed in captivity,
have been, while in good health, lively and amusing animals, and
generally good-tempered. Buffon in 1740 possessed a specimen about
two years of age, and this ape always walked upright, even when he
carried heavy loads. It is known that other apes can also be trained to
adopt this posture. Buffon’s chimpanzee had a serious and melancholy
expression, moved slowly, was gentle and patient, and obedient to a
word or sign. He offered people his arm, walked with them in an orderly
manner, sat down to table like a man, opened his napkin and wiped his
lips with it, made use of his spoon and fork, poured out wine and
clinked glasses, fetched a cup and saucer and put in sugar, poured
out tea, let it get cold before drinking it; but, while doing all
this, he did not seem happy. He ate all the ordinary food of men, but
preferred fruit, and he was not so fond of wine as of milk, tea, and
sweet liqueurs. He was friendly with every one, coming close to them,
and taking pleasure in their caresses. He took such a fancy to one
lady, that when other people approached her he seized a stick and began
to flourish it about, until Buffon intimated his displeasure at such
behaviour.
Dr. Traill, of Liverpool, obtained a female chimpanzee which likewise
came from the Gaboon, and which, as soon as she came on board, reached
out her hand to some of the sailors, and remained on good terms with
the whole crew, including the cabin-boy. When the sailors were at meals
the ape regularly appeared, and begged for her portion. When angry she
made a baying noise like a dog, and on another occasion she wailed
like a spoiled child, scratching herself vehemently. She was lively
and cheerful in warm regions, but the nearer the vessel approached to
northern latitudes the more inert she became, and was glad to wrap
herself in a warm coverlet. She seemed uneasy in an upright position,
and when she assumed it she rested her hands on her thighs. Her hands
were very strong, and she could hold on to a cord and swing for a long
while without interruption. She gradually acquired a taste for wine,
and once stole a bottle and uncorked it with her teeth. She was fond
of coffee and sweetmeats, ate with a spoon, drank from a glass, and
took pleasure in imitating the behaviour of men. She was attracted by
shining metals, pleased with articles of clothing, and often put on a
hat. She was unclean, and of a timid disposition.
According to the account of Captain Grandpré, a female chimpanzee on
board his vessel would heat the oven, taking care that no coals fell
out, and carefully watching until it was of the right heat, of which
she would inform the baker. She fulfilled all the duties of a sailor,
such as drawing up the anchor, furling and making fast the sails. She
patiently endured maltreatment by a brutal mate, stretching out her
hands imploringly to ward off his blows. But after this she refused all
food, and died in five days of grief and hunger.
A chimpanzee in Brosse’s possession was sick, and twice blooded.
When he again fell ill, he held out his arm as if to demand another
venesection.
In reading these accounts, which have gone the round of various
old-fashioned books on natural history, the question arises what we are
or are not to believe, for many particulars appear to be exaggerated.
Dr. Hermes, the director of the Berlin Aquarium, disputes the assertion
made by others that the female chimpanzee, Molly, which was kept for
a long while in that establishment, poured out wine for herself at an
evening party, and clinked glasses with a neighbour.[122]
There is, however, an account given by Broderip of a male chimpanzee,
which was brought from the Gambia, and placed in the London Zoological
Gardens in 1835, which appears to be simple and faithful. The creature,
clothed in a little jacket, nestled for the most part in the lap of an
old female keeper. When he had nothing else to do, he played with his
toes, just as a child does under like circumstances. He took Broderip’s
hand without fear, and touched the ring on one of his fingers with
his teeth, but without bending it. He tried all artificial substances
with his teeth. He held fast to his keeper’s gown when she proposed to
leave him, and he played with Broderip like a child. He displayed great
terror when an anaconda was brought into the room in a basket, and did
not dare to take an apple from off the closed lid of the basket; but
as soon as the snake and its basket were removed, he ate the apple
and became cheerful again. He willingly placed himself in a swing, and
held on to the cords with both hands. He generally slept in a sitting
position, leaning forwards with folded arms, or sometimes resting his
face on his hands. But he would also sleep upon his belly, with his
feet drawn up, and his head on his arms.
A male chimpanzee, which was kept in the Berlin Aquarium in 1876, was
remarkable for his excessive liveliness. He had contracted a friendship
with a fellow-captive, a young female orang, and their intimacy was
confirmed by their games together, accompanied by many tender embraces.
The small orang, a good-tempered, phlegmatic creature, allowed the
chimpanzee to do what he pleased with her, and the former betrayed
remarkable intelligence. In consequence of a general repair of his
cage, Dr. Hermes, the director of the institution, to whom we owe this
account, was obliged to keep the chimpanzee in his office, in company
with himself and other officials. The chimpanzee soon accustomed
himself to his new surroundings, and was on particularly friendly
terms with Dr. Hermes’ two-year-old boy. When the child entered the
room, the chimpanzee ran to meet him, embraced and kissed him, seized
his hand and drew him to the sofa, that they might play together. The
child was often rough with his playfellow, pulling him by the mouth,
pinching his ears, or lying on him, yet the chimpanzee was never known
to lose his temper. He behaved very differently to boys between six
and ten years old. When a number of schoolboys visited the office, he
ran towards them, went from one to the other, shook one of them, bit
the leg of another, seized the jacket of a third with the right hand,
jumped up, and with the left gave him a sound box on the ear; in short,
he played the wildest pranks. It seemed as if he were infected with the
joyous excitement of youth, which induced him to riot with the troop of
schoolboys.
One day when Hermes gave his nine-year-old son a slight tap on the
head, on account of some miscalculation in his arithmetic, the
chimpanzee, who was also sitting at the table, gave the boy a smart box
on the ear. If Hermes pointed out to him that some one was staring or
mocking at him, and said, “Do not put up with it,” the creature cried,
“Oh! oh!” and rushed at the person in question in order to strike or
bite him, or express his displeasure in some other way. As he made
distinctions in the age of human beings, so also with animals. He was
gentle and considerate in his behaviour to young dogs and apes, while
with older animals he was as boisterous as he was with the schoolboys.
When he saw that Hermes was writing, he often seized a pen, dipped it
in the inkstand, and scrawled upon the paper. He displayed a special
talent for cleaning the window-panes of the aquarium. It was amusing to
see him squeezing up the cloth, moistening the pane with his lips, and
then rubbing it hard, passing quickly from one place to another.
Mafuca was a remarkable creature, not only in her external habits, but
in her disposition. At one moment she would sit still with a brooding
air, only occasionally darting a mischievous, flashing glance at the
spectators; at another she took pleasure in feats of strength, or
she roamed to and fro in her spacious enclosure like an angry beast
of prey. She would insert the index finger of her right hand in the
opening of a vessel which weighed thirty pounds, climb up the pole with
it, and let it fall with a crash and clatter from a height of six feet.
This ape would sometimes rattle the bars of her cage with a violence
which made the spectators uneasy. She was fond of playing with old
hats, which she set upon her head, and if the top was quite torn off,
she drew it down upon her neck. Mafuca clawed at people who entered
the vestibule of her cage and tried to tear their clothes. She hardly
obeyed any one except Schöpf, the director of the Dresden Zoological
Gardens, and when in a good humour she would sit on his knee and put
her muscular arms round his neck with a caressing gesture. In spite of
this, Schöpf was never secure from Mafuca’s roguish tricks, since her
good-humour was of short duration. She was rather fond of the keeper,
but not always obedient to him, and the whip was often in request, even
at feeding-times. Mafuca was able to use a spoon, although somewhat
awkwardly; and she could pour from larger vessels into smaller ones
without spilling the liquor. She took tea and cocoa in the morning and
evening, and a mixed diet between whiles, such as fruit, sweetmeats,
red wine and water, and sugar.
Mafuca, for a while, was pleased with the companionship of a pretty
sea-cat monkey, but she teased the creature so much that a special
refuge was set apart for it, into which she could not enter. She was
so scared and terrified by a heavy thunderstorm that she seized her
sleeping playfellow by the tail and dashed it to the ground. She chased
the mice which ran about her cage with deadly fury. She was much afraid
of snakes, which is not usually the case with chimpanzees. If she was
left alone for any time she tried to open the lock of her cage without
having the key, and she once succeeded in doing so. On that occasion
she stole the key, which was hanging on the wall, hid it in her axilla,
and crept quietly back to the cage. With the key she easily opened the
lock, and she also knew how to use a gimlet. She would draw off her
keeper’s boots, scramble up to some place out of reach with them, and
throw them at his head when he asked for them. She could wring out wet
cloths, and blow her nose with a handkerchief. When her illness began,
she became apathetic, and looked about with a vacant, unobservant
stare. Just before her death, from consumption, she put her arms round
Schöpf’s neck when he came to visit her, looked at him placidly, kissed
him three times, stretched out her hand to him, and died.[123] The last
moments of anthropoids have their tragic side!
We owe to Wallace an interesting account of young orangs in a state
of captivity. This observer shot, near Simunjon, in Borneo, a large
female ape of this species, which had a young one about a foot long.
As Wallace carried this creature home, it took such a firm hold of his
beard that he had much difficulty in getting free, for the unequal
phalanges of the fingers in these animals are hook-shaped. At that time
the creature had not a single tooth, but the two lower front teeth were
cut a few days later. Unluckily, there was no milk, nor any female
animal to give suck to the little ape. Wallace was obliged to give
it rice-water from a bottle, with a quill inserted in the cork, from
which, after some attempts, it learned to suck very well. Sugar and
cocoa-milk were added, to make the pap more nourishing. When Wallace
put his finger in the creature’s mouth, it sucked at it vigorously,
then pushed it angrily away and began to scream, as a child does in
like circumstances. When it was fondled and caressed, it was quiet and
content, but began to scream again as soon as it was laid down; and for
the first two nights it was very noisy and restless.
Wallace arranged a little box for the creature’s cradle, with a soft
mat which was changed and washed every day. The little ape itself liked
to be washed. As soon as it was dirty it began to scream, and never
stopped until carried to the spring by its master, when it became quiet
at once, although it struggled when first touched by the cold water,
and made absurd grimaces when water was poured over its head. It was
extremely fond of being dried and rubbed, and appeared to be perfectly
happy when Wallace brushed its hair, lying quite still with extended
arms and legs while the long hair on its back and arms was brushed
out. At first it clung helplessly by all-fours to whatever it could
get hold of, and Wallace had to be always on the watch to save his
beard. When restless, it worked its hands above in the air, in search
of something to hold, and if it got hold of a stick or piece of cloth
with two or three of its hands, it was perfectly happy. In default
of anything else, it nursed its own foot, and after a while it often
folded its arms, and seized with each hand the long hair which grew
below the opposite shoulder. The strength of the creature’s gripe soon
diminished, however, and Wallace had to invent expedients for giving
it exercise and strengthening its limbs. With this object he made a
short ladder of three or four rounds, to which he suspended the young
orang for a quarter of an hour at a time. At first it was pleased, but
finding itself unable to assume a comfortable position when holding on
by all four hands, it let go with one after another and at last fell
to the ground. Often, when only hanging by two hands, it let go with
one, in order to cross it over the opposite shoulder, and get hold of
its own hair, and on finding this much more agreeable than the piece
of wood, it let go with the other, and so fell to the ground, where it
lay on its back with folded arms, quite content and apparently none the
worse for its numerous tumbles.
When Wallace saw how fond the creature was of hair, he endeavoured
to construct an artificial mother by stitching together a piece of
buffalo hide which he suspended about a foot from the ground. At
first this seemed quite successful, since the small orang could
cling round it and always find something hairy to which it held fast
with great persistency. Wallace now hoped that he had made the little
orphan happy, and so it was for a while, until it remembered its lost
mother and tried to suck. It raised itself so as to be quite close to
the hide, and hunted about for promising places; but when its mouth
was only filled with wool and hair it was much displeased, cried
vehemently, and gave up the attempt after two or three endeavours. On
one occasion it got some wool into its throat, and Wallace was afraid
it must be choked; but after a good deal of cough it threw it up, and
he destroyed the mock mother and relinquished the last attempt to give
the little creature some occupation.
At the end of a week Wallace began to feed the ape with a spoon. He
mixed soaked biscuit with egg and sugar, and sometimes with sweet
potatoes. It took this food readily, and made droll grimaces in order
to express its satisfaction or displeasure with what was offered. The
little being licked its lips, drew in its cheeks, and screwed up its
eyes with an expression of extreme content when it had a mouthful of
anything it particularly liked. On the other hand, when the food was
not sufficiently sweet and savoury, the orang turned it about in its
mouth for a moment, as if to taste it thoroughly, and then spat it out.
If the same food was presented again, it screamed violently and threw
its arms about like a passionate child.
Three weeks after Wallace obtained the young orang, a macaca (_Macacus
cynomolgus_), likewise young, was brought to him. The two animals
became at once the best of friends, neither showing the least fear of
the other. The small macaca had not the slightest scruple about sitting
on the other’s body, and even on its face. When Wallace fed the orang,
the macaca sat by to pick up any morsels which dropped, and when the
meal was over it licked off whatever remained on the orang’s lips,
and even tore open its mouth to see if anything remained there; then
it lay down on the poor creature’s body as if it were a comfortable
cushion. The small, helpless orang endured all these insults with the
most unexampled patience, only too glad to have something warm to cling
to and encircle fondly with its arms. But it had its revenge, for when
the other little ape wished to get away, the orang held on as long as
possible to the movable skin of the back or head, or to its tail, so
that it cost the macaca many violent struggles to escape.
Wallace carefully observed the different behaviour of these two
animals, which were of nearly the same age. All the observations
hitherto made show that very young anthropoids display a helplessness
resembling that of children of about the same age, although other
families of apes, in common with most young mammals, kittens, puppies,
etc., early attain to greater activity and independence.
When Wallace had kept the orang for about a month, and placed it on
the ground, its legs straggled outwards, or it overbalanced itself and
fell heavily forwards. When lying in its box, it would hold on to the
edge, and once or twice it fell out in consequence. If allowed to be
dirty or hungry, or otherwise neglected, it would cry loudly until it
received attention, or sometimes would cough or struggle like an adult
animal. If there was no one in the house, or if no one paid attention
to its cries, it would be quiet for a time, and only renew them when a
step was heard.
At the end of five weeks the two upper front teeth were cut, but
throughout that period the creature had not grown, and remained of the
same size and weight. This was doubtless owing to the want of milk or
other nourishing food. Cocoa-milk seemed to produce diarrhœa, of which
it was cured by castor-oil. A week or two later it sickened of what
appeared to be intermittent fever, and died within a week.[124]
In 1837 the Zoological Gardens in London received an orang of two or
three years old. He was for the most part sluggish and inert, but had
occasional fits of better humour and playfulness. When angry he would
attack strangers, but he generally sat cross-legged on a low stool,
or on the ground before the fire, wrapped in a woollen rug. When the
giraffes of the establishment inquisitively stretched their long
necks over the bars of the ape’s cage, the creature evinced no fear,
but tried to seize the long-legged animals by the muzzle. This orang
answered to his name, and was obedient to his keeper, often searching
in his pocket for the dainties concealed there. He was uneasy when
separated by the cage-bars from his master; and when confined in an
enclosure of cane interwoven with wire, he bent the wire asunder and
squeezed himself through the hole, so that the cage had to be made
stronger. The creature presented an absurd appearance dressed in a
jacket and breeches. When he desired any dainty that he saw, he looked
alternately at it and his keeper, and protruded his lips like a snout.
In drinking, this animal took the vessel in his hand, brought the rim
to his lips, and then drank with an air of gravity. I may here observe
that when anthropoids drink in this way, they generally take the vessel
in one hand, and support it with the back of the fingers of the other.
When the orang we have just described was disappointed in his desire to
obtain anything, he threw himself on the ground, howling and screaming
until he got his own way. He sometimes had furious fits of passion, in
one of which he tried to destroy the bars of his cage by hitting them
with the stool. As he did not succeed in this attempt, he gave vent
to his fury in a loud outcry, which only ceased on the return of his
keeper.
An orang brought by Montgomery to Calcutta in 1827, was less phlegmatic
than animals of this species usually are. He played with those who
carried him when they stooped over him, caught them by the hair, and
so on. He tried to scour his tin vessel with a cloth, throwing one
end over his shoulder, as he had seen the servants of the house do.
He was particularly fond of milk, tea, wine, and pandanos fruit. He
was very inquisitive, and tried everything that he could reach, first
with the fingers, then with the lips, and finally with his teeth. He
was fond of biting off the coat-lappets of his visitors. His absurd
gestures, combined with his air of solemnity, excited laughter even in
the grave natives. He was once drinking tea, when some one filled the
empty mug with water; he emptied it out upon the floor, threw himself
on his back, screamed, and struck his breast and belly with his hands.
His gait was clumsy and unsteady when he tried to walk upright. When
he went on all-fours, he sometimes supported himself on his hands
and swung himself forward with his feet. If he lost his balance in
walking upright, he fell upon his head, and then went on by turning
somersaults. As soon as he was unchained, he went into the house and
tried to get a portion of his master’s breakfast. In spite of his
usual inquisitiveness, he was not at all excited by the sight of his
melancholy countenance in the glass.
The large orang which was in the Berlin Aquarium in 1876 was a
sullen companion, and looked like an old Bedouin as he crouched down
and peered from under the covering which was thrown over him. His
keeper could only trust him when he brought him an orange, and if he
approached the bars of the cage without food, the ape flew at him,
gnashing his teeth. He was sluggish whenever he was not excited by
hunger. Then he started from his usually sitting position, and devoured
the food which was cautiously passed through the door. If kept waiting,
he threw himself on his back in a rage. When his hunger was satisfied,
he played with the straw, the cord, or with his blanket. When it was
necessary to change his straw, he was lured away by holding out an
orange at the top of his pole, and the change was effected while the
ape was tearing open the rind and sucking out its contents. In the
evening he never omitted to clear out a hole in the straw, and to roll
himself in his blanket. Gabriel Max has drawn a striking likeness of
the resigned attitude of a sick orang.
Gibbons have often been observed in a state of captivity. Of the
slothful and inanimate siamang there is nothing of much interest to
report. The other species are, with few exceptions, phlegmatic, shy,
and timid, but hardly ever averse from human society. Within a month
Harlan was able to make a hulock so tame that he would hold on with
one hand to him, while putting the others on the ground, and so walk
about with his keeper. He came to his master’s call, seating himself
close to him on a chair, shared his breakfast, and took an egg or
chicken-bone off the table so neatly as not to soil the cloth. He was
fond of cooked rice, bread soaked in milk, bananas, oranges, coffee,
tea, chocolate, milk, etc. Generally he only dipped his fingers in the
drinking vessels and licked off the liquid, but he could drink in human
fashion. He searched the house for spiders and other creeping things,
and brushed away flying insects with his right hand. The creature was
very affectionate, and when Harlan came to him in the morning, he
greeted him with a joyful sound like a bark, which went on for about
a minute. He came to a call even when at a distance, and was pleased
to be combed, brushed, and fondled. Two other hulocks taken by Harlan
behaved in the same way.
The _Hylobates albimanus_ of the Berlin Aquarium, which I have already
mentioned, was, as described by Hermes, and also according to my own
observations, a very peaceable creature, although, if compelled to do
what he did not like, he sometimes tried to bite a little, especially
when just taken from his warm bed. But as soon as he was taken by the
hand or lifted up, his anger was appeased. Although much less lively
than the chimpanzee which was his companion, and less inclined to play,
he was pleased with children, and watchfully observed their movements.
His dexterity was wonderful. He was almost always present at dinner
and supper, when the table was covered with dishes, and he ran up and
down it, in order to go from one person to another, without touching,
still less upsetting, the smallest article. His food consisted chiefly
of white bread, milk, sweet cocoa, fruit, and Kiel sprats, of which
he was particularly fond, as well as of sweet grapes. Before taking
any liquid, he cautiously touched it with his tongue, to ascertain
that it was not too hot; then he drank it up, without taking the cup
or vessel in his hand, as the chimpanzee did. He did not like cold or
moist food, and would seldom touch a peeled pear, while willing to
eat it from Herme’s hand. Grapes were his favourite dainty, and if
hungry when he saw them, he uttered a gentle noise which resembled
the cry of a wood-pigeon. He often repeated this noise, _Hu_, _Hu_,
to express pleasure, surprise, or curiosity, or when the same sound
was uttered by others; and it was in this way that he greeted Hermes
when he came to his bed in the morning. He was happiest when seated on
a woman’s arm, with his long arms wound round her neck, and would sit
quiet in this position as long as he was permitted to do so, and when
taken away would scream like a child. When Frau Hermes left the room,
he would run after her, and try to scramble up as soon as he reached
her; if she took his hand, he went with her quietly. This gibbon may
be compared favourably with other anthropoids, on account of his
extraordinary cleanliness. He always returned to the place first used
for his necessities, and never made his bed or the room unclean. There
was not a trace of smell about him, so that he was quite an agreeable
companion; and he shared the bed of one of Dr. Hermes’ children without
causing the least disturbance or discomfort. He was fond of swinging to
and fro by a cord, to which he held with one hand.
A specimen of _Hylobates funereus_ was kept in Paris for about a year.
It was very intelligent, yet less so than other anthropoids. It knew
its keepers and frequent visitors, and was pleased to be fondled; but
it showed no preference for one person more than another, not even for
its keeper.
Martin describes how in 1840, in Paris, a live bird was let into the
cage of an _Hylobates agilis_. After watching its flight, the ape swung
himself on to a distant bough, which he seized with one hand and the
bird with the other. Its objects, both the bird and the bough, were
attained with as much certainty as if only one object had arrested its
attention. He bit off the bird’s head, plucked out the feathers, and
then threw it away.
Another female specimen of _Hylobates agilis_ suddenly attacked her
keeper, sprang upon him, scratched him with hands and feet, and bit him
on the breast, so that it was fortunate for the man that the creature
had shortly before lost her canine teeth. It was said that the same ape
had killed a man in Macao.
Anthropoids when kept in confinement suffer from caries of the teeth
and jaws, from chronic and acute bronchial and intestinal catarrhs,
from inflammation and consumption of the lungs, from inflammation of
the liver, from pericardial dropsy, from parasites of the skin and
intestines, etc. When ill, as we learn from many sources, these animals
display much resemblance to men. Among others, Bock observed an aged
male orang-utan in Sumatra, suffering from consumption, which lay
nearly all day wrapped in a coverlet, and was constantly racked by a
violent cough.[125]
On the skulls of wild gorillas and chimpanzees we find traces of caries
of the teeth and jaws, by which, therefore, these animals may be
affected in a state of nature, as well as by parasites on the skin and
intestines.
CHAPTER VII.
POSITION OF ANTHROPOIDS IN THE ZOOLOGICAL SYSTEM.
The racial history of apes can only be traced with any certainty up
to the Miocene period. The fact of the contemporary existence of apes
and pachydermata has been frequently asserted, but it is still too far
from being established to merit further consideration here. Traces of
the slender ape (_Semnopithecus_) have, however, been found in the
Miocene of Greece, Wurtemburg, the mountains of Sewalik, and in the
region bordering on the Himalayas. The name given to one of these
fossil species (_Semnopithecus subhimalayanus_) seems to establish its
locality. The numerous remains of _Mesopithecus Pentelici_ in Attica
have, however, given rise to controversy. Gaudry and Beyrich were
disposed to assign these specimens exclusively to the slender ape, but
Gaudry has since declared that, while the structure of the skull and
teeth is that of _Semnopithecus_, the structure of the limbs is that of
a macaca. He regards, therefore, _Mesopithecus_ as an interesting form
of apes, and this is expressed by its scientific name.[126]
The separation of these two species of apes (_Semnopithecus_
and _Macacus_) must, he considers, have occurred rather late.
_Pliopithecus_, from the fresh-water marl, Sansan, is assigned by
Gaudry and others to the gibbon. Lartet and Quenstedt believe, however,
that it is nearer to the next neighbour on the south, the magot
(_Inuus_), on account of the five fangs of its last tooth. Köllner
thinks the connection with _Semnopithecus_ not improbable.
_Dryopithecus Fontanii_, of which I have already spoken, seems, as
I judge from a cast taken by Fric in Prague, to be of an expressly
anthropoid character; but the scantiness of the materials do not allow
us to form any precise conclusions as to the zoological position of
this extinct animal. The structure of the back teeth, as we have
already said, is certainly anthropoidal. Quenstedt, always cautious
in his judgments, is of opinion that the ape’s teeth found in the
ironstone of the Suabian Alps in the secondary mammal formation,
are of a decidedly anthropoid character, and the animals to which
they belonged must therefore have been of the same type. Fossil
remains of the African stumpy ape (_Colobus_) have also been found at
Steinheim.[127] _Macacus priscus_ of the valley of the Arno seems to
be allied with the African macaca.[128] Owen’s _Macacus pliocenus_
from Essex is closely related to _Macacus sinicus_. Fossil apes have
also been observed in America. _Protopithecus_ was a very large animal,
related to _Mycetes_. Another fossil species, found in South America
(_Laopithecus_), must have been closely related to man. This latter
fact is the more remarkable, since it has generally been assumed, and
indeed with reason, that there is a marked division between the apes of
the Old and New Worlds.
The species now found in tropical America of the silky apes (_Hapale_),
the Sahui (_Jacchus_), the leaping apes (_Callithrix_), the bellowing
apes (_Mycetes_), and the rolling apes (_Cebus_), were already
represented in the diluvial period of that continent. It does not
appear that any extensive generic diffusion of apes has taken place
since that period. It is otherwise with the development of species,
which seems, at any rate to a partial extent, to have occurred late.
This may be inferred from the physical characteristics of gorillas and
chimpanzees, which, with all their differences, have much in common
with each other. In the fourth chapter we have described forms of apes
lying between the gorilla and the chimpanzee, and it seems possible
that these are a reversion to one or the other form. The numerous
varieties of form among anthropoids point to a continuance of the
process of severance in this family of apes, and little more than an
isolating influence is needed to produce the gradual conversion of
varieties into constant species.
On account of their external bodily characteristics, of their
anatomical structure, and their highly developed intelligence,
anthropoids not only stand first among apes, but they take a still
higher place, approximating to the human species. In accordance
with what I have said in the second and third chapters, I set aside
the order of the _Quadrumana_, and accept the Linnæan order of the
_Primates_, both for men and apes. I would include men as _Erecti_ with
anthropoids as _Anthropomorpha_ in a sub-family of the _Primarii_. In
the case of apes (_Simiina_) I should retain the convenient distinction
between those with a narrow and those with a wide nasal aperture
(_Catarrhina_ and _Platyrrhina_). The semi-apes (_Prosimii_) should
constitute a separate order of mammals. The following systematic scheme
shows the classification I suggest:--
I. MAMMALS (_Mammalia_).
A. _Monodelphia_, Blainv. (_Placentalia_, Owen).
I. Order: _Primates_, Linnæus.
1. Family: _Primarii_.
(1) Sub-family: _Erecti_ (_Homo sapiens_).
(2) Sub-family: _Anthropomorpha_, Linnæus.
(_a_) _Dasypoga_, _i.e._ Anthropomorpha, without
the sessor callosities.
(α) Genus: _Troglodytes_, E. Geoffroy.
Species: The gorilla (_Troglodytes Gorilla_, Savage
and Wyman). The chimpanzee (_Tr. niger_,
E. Geoffroy).
The other species are not accurately known.
(β) Genus: _Pithecus_, E. Geoffroy.
Species: Orang-utan (_Pithecus Satyrus_, E. Geoffroy).
(_b_) _Tylopoga_, _i.e._ Anthropomorpha, with
sessor callosities.
(λ) Genus: _Hylobates_, Illig.
Species: see p. 45.
2. Family: Apes proper (_Simiina_).
(1) Sub-family: _Catarrhina_.
Genera: _Semnopithecus_, _Colobus_, _Cercopithecus_,
_Inuus_, _Macacus_, _Cynocephalus_.
(2) Sub-family: _Platyrrhina_.
Genera: _Mycetes_, _Lagothrix Ateles_, _Cebus_, _Pithecia_,
_Nyctipithecus_, _Callithrix_, _Chrysothrix_, _Hapale_.
CHAPTER VIII.
A SUMMARY, TOGETHER WITH SOME FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS OF THE
ANTHROPOMORPHISM OF THE GORILLA, CHIMPANZEE, ORANG, AND GIBBON.
Huxley’s statement, that the lowest apes are further removed from
the highest apes than the latter are from men, is, according to my
experience, still perfectly valid. It cannot be denied that the highest
order of the animal world is closely connected with the highest created
being.
In the third chapter I have sought to show in what way the pithecoid
characteristics of men may be proved. From the latter chapters, also,
much may be learned with respect to the anthropoid characteristics of
anthropoids. The external form first provokes the comparison. There is
much in the bodily structure which spans the apparent chasm between men
and apes, and this is evident to the simplest understanding. The head,
and the general form of the body, especially in young male and female
gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangs, and even in gibbons, if we exclude
the length of their arms, display many points of resemblance with man.
It is shown even in separate organs of the body--as, for instance, in
the ear. The illustrations given in the second chapter of the ears of
apes, including that of the gorilla, were intentionally taken by me
from such specimens as had least resemblance to man, and yet even in
these a certain likeness must be recognized.
I have already observed that the old males of an anthropoid species are
always further removed from man than the young, and this is especially
the case with the gorilla. The head of an aged male gorilla, with its
great cranial crests and powerful jaw, displays striking differences
from the human type. This is an important fact, since in the case of
man we almost without exception regard the fully developed male adult
as the typical form.
In considering the limbs, the differences between the arms and hands
of man and those of anthropoids are apparent, but less striking than
in the case of the lower limbs. For the prehensile foot of apes has in
it something abnormal which distinctly differs from the human foot,
adapted for walking. Nor can the prehensibility of the human toes
in certain cases be directly compared with the prehensibility of an
ape’s foot, in which the great toe has the action of a thumb. Haeckel
remarks that newly born children can also take a strong grip with the
great toe, and if a spoon is inserted they can hold it with the foot as
firmly as with the hand.[129] This power is, however, only partial and
subordinate, compared with the manifold and developed prehensibility
of an anthropoid’s foot. The possibility of walking upright to a
certain, although sometimes to a very limited, extent is no exclusive
privilege of anthropoids, since this power may be acquired by training
in the case of other apes, as well as of dogs, pigs, horses, etc.
Many apes of the New World, such as the tailed and climbing apes, as
well as some semi-apes, bears, ichneumons, scaled and rodent animals,
can go for some distance in an upright position, quite as readily as
anthropoids, and without being trained to do so.[130] The structure of
anthropoids is, indeed, better adapted for going on all-fours, or for
climbing. The projection of the coccyx in the form of a rudimentary
tail has, as is well known, been observed in some isolated cases in the
human species. This peculiarity is supposed to be hereditary in the
case of some non-European peoples, such as the Niam-Niam of Central
Africa, and some of the Southern Malays. But this surmise has not yet
been confirmed.
It has already been said that when we compare men and anthropoids,
the profile of the coloured man presents a striking likeness to that
of anthropoids. This is believed by the coloured people themselves,
who, especially among negro races, regard the large apes as accursed
individuals of their own species, as dumb and hairy men, and so
on. It should, however, be noticed that anthropomorphism plays an
important part in the religious life of rude peoples, and that it is
comparatively easy for uncivilized men to place themselves on the
same level as animals, while civilized races reject such ideas with
self-conscious pride. I may add that civilized men are revolted by the
proverbial ugliness of apes, and therefore reject with abhorrence any
admission of actual relationship with them. We must, however, remember
that men are by no means generally endowed with physical beauty,
and especially with beauty of feature. Among all nations we find
individuals whose ugliness is little inferior to that of anthropoids,
and which sometimes even exceeds it. A claim to a widely diffused
physical beauty may be made by the peoples of classical antiquity; by
the Teutonic, Roumanian, and Slav races; by the Circassians, Armenians,
Tartars, Turks, Senites, Berbers, Bedja; and by some of the Indians,
Polynesians, American Indians, and negroes: but such attractions
are rare among other peoples of the world, such as the Mongols, the
majority of negroes, Papuans, Guaranis, and Malays. We have already
shown that among some of the lower races it is impossible not to
recognize a purely external and physical approximation to the simian
type.
Some men, again, altogether on psychical grounds, shrink from admitting
any relationship between men and apes, since the mental organization
of the former seems to them to be allied by no connecting-link
with the anthropoids of which they think so meanly. Yet it should
not be forgotten that the modes of living in degraded races differ
little from those of anthropoids. I may here refer to what I have
said of the Australian aborigines, whose brutal instincts demand
our whole attention when we undertake such comparisons. A horde of
Botocudos, mentioned by the intelligent observer Prince Maximilian
of Neuwied,[131] and a village on the upper Yupurá, inhabited by the
Mirenhas, and described by Martius,[132] left upon the travellers a
grisly impression of their brutal degradation. This impression might
be further strengthened if we could inspect a hutted encampment of the
Obongo or the Doko.
It has been observed that the rudest savage is in a condition to show
pity and loyalty to his own fellows. Thus, for example, in the winter
of 1881–82, when some Fuegians were exhibited in Europe, one of them
fell sick, and was cared for by his savage companions with affection,
and even with a certain appearance of tenderness. But, as we have
seen, anthropoids take care of and defend the members of their family
in the same way, and display mutual dependence and loyalty; this has
been especially noticed in the case of several orang-utans which have
tended each other. Love for their young, and not rarely love for their
mates expressed in the strongest manner, is, speaking comparatively,
deeply rooted in the animal world. It is well known that both rude
and civilized peoples are capable of showing unspeakable, and as it
is erroneously termed, inhuman cruelty towards each other. These acts
of cruelty, murder, and rapine are often the result of the inexorable
logic of national characteristics, and are unhappily truly human, since
nothing like them can be traced in the animal world. It would, for
instance, be a grave mistake to compare a tiger with a bloodthirsty
executioner of the Reign of Terror, since the former only satisfies his
natural appetite in preying on other mammals. The atrocities of the
trials for witchcraft, the indiscriminate slaughter committed by the
negroes on the coast of Guinea, the sacrifice of human victims made
by the Khonds, the dismemberment of living men by the Battas, find no
parallel in the habits of animals in their savage state. And such a
comparison is, above all, impossible in the case of anthropoids, which
display no hostility towards men or other animals unless they are first
attacked. In this respect the anthropoid ape stands on a higher plane
than many men.
A great chasm between man and anthropoids is constituted, as I believe,
by the fact that the human race is capable of education, and is able
to acquire the highest mental culture, while the most intelligent
anthropoid can only receive a certain mechanical training. And even
to this training a limit is set by the surly temper displayed by
anthropoids as they get older. They are interesting subjects of study
in the menagerie, but they never become, like our ordinary domestic
animals, useful members of the household economy. I myself hold that
all human races are capable of culture, while differing in the degree
to which it is possible for them to attain. I do not, for example,
suppose that a tribe of Queensland Australians can be so educated as
to be placed on a level with the highest intellects of our own nation.
But how many ages it has taken to raise us so far above the Papuans!
It is indeed manifest that even very rude savages may be constituted
serviceable members of human society, as we may see from the changes
which have taken place among the Sandwich Islanders, the Tahitians,
and the Maoris in the course of the last eighty years. In our days the
envoys of the Queen of Madagascar have understood how to move in the
highest Berlin circles with high-bred demeanour, and we must recognize
this fact as significant, without, however, deluding ourselves by too
wide deductions from it.
The remark has often been made that the African blacks, Indians, etc.,
display great docility when young, and are very receptive of wisdom and
culture, but stop short at a certain point, as if unable to advance
beyond it, and sometimes, indeed, like apes in advancing age, relapse
into their originally savage state. It may, however, be inferred that
these attempts to educate young savages are generally wrecked by
mistaken methods of instruction. The young sons of nature are often
too much indulged, their childish performances are over-estimated,
their minds are over-taxed, the due development of mind and body is
checked; they become arrogant, and then people are surprised that,
as self-consciousness increases in their immature brains, a greater
or less amount of conceit is developed. There are cases in which a
savage, who has been with much labour educated and civilized, relapses
into barbarism, and comes to a violent end as the enemy of his former
protector, as a robber or a rebel; yet, even to the end of his life,
he has developed qualities and conditions which recall to him better
times. We see an example of this in some of the civilized Maoris who
afterwards joined the revolted tribes, and who introduced among their
countrymen the strength of a firmer organization against the English
supremacy. The bearing of these relapsed savages always has in it
something higher than we can trace in the savage obstinacy of a morose
old chimpanzee or orang.
Nor have the attempts to educate savages been uniformly unsuccessful.
The great Indian chief Tekumseh; the presidents Benito Juarez, and
Ramon Castilla; the negro Toussaint l’Ouverture; the Hova king, Radama
I.; the Polynesian rulers, Kamehameha I., Pomare II., Georges, and
Kokabau, show what may be made of such materials under favourable
circumstances. The poor Indian from Oaxaca; the steadfast leader Perus,
who belonged to a needy Arriero family; the Haytian who was formerly
driver on a plantation, are as far removed from aboriginal savages as
the Malagasy and Polynesians educated by European missionaries.
It is well known that nations, in the earliest periods of their
existence, have to pass through certain rude conditions of their
development, and the most highly civilized nations are not exempt
from this law. The transition period of the Stone Age is necessary
for all, and with the use of metals a higher and more cultivated life
has been gradually developed. Even for those who do not recognize any
sharp line of demarcation between the stone and metal periods, yet,
speaking generally, they will admit that the times in which stone
instruments, and those in which bronze and iron instruments were
chiefly used, present tokens of actual epochs in historical culture.
As we know, there are also certain phases of development in the Stone
Age. In its earliest stages the rudely shaped and unworked tool could
not procure for its owner any regular shelter: he lived in caves,
clefts, or under a scanty covering of leaves, and made use of his tool
in killing wild animals; in cutting wood; in preparing skins, tendons,
and gourd-vessels; in dismembering the prey obtained in hunting; and in
extracting marrow from bones. With the art of shaping and sharpening
these stone tools, a progressive improvement in the conditions of human
life went hand in hand.
We can picture to ourselves the physical and psychical conditions of
the first and earliest men of the Stone Age as those of extremely
rude savages, but who were endowed with the gift of working out for
themselves higher conditions of life.
In the year 1868 Colonel Laussedat, of the Berlin Academy of Sciences,
exhibited the lower jaw of a rhinoceros, found in the Miocene at
Billy, Allier, in which there was a notch which must, in the opinion
of many naturalists, have been made by the hand of man. The Abbé
Delaunay found in the Miocene of Pouancé, Maine-et-Loire, the rib
of a Halitherium, which was notched, and which likewise appeared to
have been subjected to human manipulation. Garrigou is of opinion
that certain bones found at Sansan were broken by the hand of man,
and Dücker expressed a similar belief about the fossils of Pikermi.
These ideas have been strongly opposed. Many of the marks on these
bones have been represented to bear traces of the teeth of carnivora,
rodents, etc. The Abbé Bourgeois found flints in the Miocene of Thenay,
near Pont-Levoy, Loir-et-Cher, of which he ascribes the working to
beings of a higher intelligence than the animals of that period.
This opinion is shared by eminent anthropologists, such as Vibraye,
Worsaae, Mortillet, de Quatrefages, and Hamy. Gaudry does not doubt
the accuracy of the account given of their position at Thenay, by so
experienced a geologist as Bourgeois. The illustrious observer of the
quaternary epoch is only concerned with the question whether these
flints at Thenay were artificially worked or not. The stones were found
in a layer of the same kind of rubble. When a number of such flints
are placed together, only a few people can discover an incontestable
distinction between the artificially shaped and the unshaped stones.
The alleged presence of shaped flints in the Miocene Age still demands
careful examination. The epoch of the Middle Miocene is very ancient,
and Léberon distinguishes between fauna found in the limestone of
Beauce and Faluns and those of the Upper Miocene, of Eppelsheim and
Pikermi. According to this author, the next in succession was the Lower
Pliocene of Montpellier; then the Pliocene of Perrier, Solilhac, and
Coupet. Next came the fauna of the forest bed at Cromer, and then those
of the boulder clay. To judge from the Norfolk strata, these latter
were of very long duration. Above the fauna of the boulder clay are
those of the diluvium, followed by the fauna of the reindeer period and
of our own time.
Whatever may be thought of the many changes which have taken place,
whether they are regarded as the result of distinct and independent
creations or as the result of transformations, no geologist can doubt
that an immense tract of time was required for the production of these
forms. In the Middle Miocene there is not a single species of mammal
which corresponds to any of our extant species. If we start from the
standpoint of simple palæontology, it would be difficult to assume that
the being which shaped the flints at Thenay can have remained unaltered
in the midst of all these changes. If, as Gaudry remarks, it can be
shown that the flints collected by Bourgeois in the Beauce limestone
were really artificially shaped, he as a geologist would not hesitate
to recognize in the _Dryopithecus_ the author of this handiwork.[133]
But, speaking provisionally, the _Dryopithecus_ which is assumed to
have used these flints, and of which we, unfortunately, know only
the little which can be gleaned from a few fragments of bone, must
remain the object of an interesting hypothesis, so far as his advanced
anthropomorphism is concerned. No anthropoid now in existence has
shown itself capable of adapting stones, etc., to his personal use.
Moreover, the most fanatical advocates of the doctrine of descent are
becoming ever more convinced that man cannot be the issue of any extant
form of anthropoids. It is true that a close, and in many respects
a very close, physical connection may be traced between men and
anthropoids, but not the possibility of a direct descent from the one
to the other. This is especially shown from the physical development
of the larger apes, which only strongly resemble men in their youthful
stages, and lose this character more and more as they grow older. The
absolute deficiency of any capacity for the further development of the
intellectual qualities of our modern species of anthropoids is another
proof of this fact; their intelligence is, indeed, higher than that of
other mammals, and also of other apes, but they are still far behind
the intelligence of man, which is capable of still further development.
In the process of physical growth, as I feel myself compelled often
to repeat, anthropoids constantly diverge further from the human
organization. C. Vogt justly observes: “When we consider the principles
of the modern theory of evolution, as it is applied to the history of
development, we are met by the important fact that in every respect
the young ape stands nearer to the human child than the adult ape does
to the adult man. The original differences between the young creatures
of both types are much slighter than in their adult condition: this
assertion, made long since in my lectures on the human race, has
received a striking confirmation from recent autopsies of young
anthropoids which have died in the Zoological Gardens of Europe. In
proportion to the age of the specimen, the characteristic differences
in the form of the jaw, the cranial ridges, etc., become more evident.
Both man and apes are developed from an embryonic condition, and from
the period of childhood in a diverging or almost opposite direction
into the final type of their species, yet even adult apes still retain
in their whole organization features which correspond to those of the
human child.”[134] Quenstedt also says: “However much _Homo sapiens_ is
raised by his intelligence above all other animals, however important
the physical differences are which divide him from apes, yet the
scene of their existence in the world is by no means so wide that, as
time goes on, the narrow limits between them may not approximate more
closely.”[135]
In these words the opinion I have already expressed is set forth, an
opinion which continues to gain ground; namely, that man cannot have
descended from any of the fossil species which have hitherto come to
our notice, nor yet from any of the species of apes now extant. It
is more probable “that both types have been produced from a common
ground-form, which is still more strongly expressed in the structure of
young specimens, because the age of childhood is less advanced” (Vogt).
This supposed progenitor of our race is necessarily completely
hypothetical, and all the attempts hitherto made to construct even a
doubtful representation of its characteristics are based upon the
trifling play of fancy.
Darwin came to the conclusion that man has, at any rate, descended from
a highly organized form. He goes on to say:
“The grounds upon which this conclusion rests will never be shaken, for
the close similarity between man and the lower animals in embryonic
development, as well as in innumerable points of structure and
constitution, both of high and of the most trifling importance, the
rudiments which he retains, and the abnormal reversions to which he is
occasionally liable--are facts which cannot be disputed. They have long
been known, but until recently they told us nothing with respect to the
origin of man. Now, when viewed by the light of our knowledge of the
whole organic world, their meaning is unmistakable. The great principle
of evolution stands up clear and firm, when these groups of facts are
considered in connection with others, such as the mutual affinities of
the members of the same group, their geographical distribution in past
and present times, and their geological succession. It is incredible
that all these facts should speak falsely. He who is not content to
look, like a savage, on the phenomena of nature as disconnected, cannot
any longer believe that man is the work of a separate act of creation.
He will be forced to admit that the close resemblance of the embryo of
man to that, for instance, of a dog; the construction of his skull,
limbs, and whole frame, independently of the uses to which the parts
may be put, on the same plan with that of other mammals; the occasional
reappearance of various structures--for instance, of several distinct
muscles, which man does not normally possess, but which are common
to the Quadrumana; and a crowd of analogous facts;--all point in the
plainest manner to the conclusion that man is the co-descendant with
the other mammals of a common progenitor.”[136]
“The most ancient progenitors in the kingdom of the vertebrata,”
observes the same great English naturalist in another place, “at which
we are able to obtain an obscure glance, apparently consisted of a
group of marine animals, resembling the larvæ of existing Ascidians.
These animals probably gave rise to a group of fishes as lowly
organized as the lancelet; and from these the Ganoids, and other fishes
like the Lepidosiren, must have been developed. From such fish a very
small advance would carry us on to the amphibians. We have seen that
birds and reptiles were once intimately connected together; and the
Monotremata now, in a slight degree, connect mammals with reptiles. But
no one can at present say by what line of descent the three higher and
related classes, namely, mammals, birds, and reptiles, were derived
from either of the two lower vertebrate classes, namely, amphibians
and fishes. In the class of mammals, the steps are not difficult
to conceive which led from the ancient Monotremata to the ancient
Marsupials; and from these to the early progenitors of the placental
mammals. We may thus ascend to the Lemuridæ, and the interval is not
wide from these to the Simiadæ. The Simiadæ then branched off into
two great stems, the New World and Old World monkeys; and from the
latter, at a remote period, Man, the wonder and glory of the universe,
proceeded.”[137]
Setting aside for the present this long pedigree of man, let us
consider some of the isolated phases which have been established in
the still incomplete condition of modern science. As far as semi-apes
are concerned, whose near relation to men and apes has of late been
strongly urged, I agree with those who, like Vogt, consider that their
order, with its variety of forms, points to a complex origin, probably
from marsupial animals, with which their organization presents many
common features; hence it appears that some of their forms belong to
the earliest Tertiary mammals with which we are well acquainted. “In
conclusion,” he writes, “it appears, from these facts, that any very
close connection between the semi-apes and apes, and hence with man,
cannot be proved. With the exception of the opposing thumb, which is
and was a widely diffused characteristic common to many species, the
semi-apes have not a single anatomical feature in common with apes.
Their jaw, the most permanent characteristic, places them in the
insectivorous class; to enroll them among the ancestors of man is to
set at nought all the principles of scientific research.”[138]
That purely hypothetical being, the common ancestor of man and apes,
is still to be found, and this is the task assigned to palæontology.
Whether this science, to which a great future belongs, will ever
accomplish the task, is a question which concerns itself. Meanwhile,
considering the great palæontological achievements of our day, the
discovery of the _Odontornithes_, _Ætosauri_, _Rhamphorynchi_,
_Holoptychia_, etc., we need not despair of the possibility of
discovering the true link between the world of man and mammals.
This purely speculative side of research, this purely scientific
mode of treating the descent of man, is no longer satisfied with
unproved assertions, but will rather trust to the strenuous labour of
future times, and this need not disturb any religious or political
convictions. Even if the assumed ancestral type should really be
discovered in some geological stratum, yet research will have to
overcome immense difficulties, if it is to explain the development of
the understanding and of speech, and the growth of independent human
intelligence. Yet we must not, on this account, refuse to recognize
the possibility of achieving some new discoveries in this direction.
To do so would be to stifle the impulse to scientific research, and
this would be unworthy of our former intellectual achievements. Let us
therefore labour on with courage.
In matters which concern ethnology we are constantly shown that even
those races of men which are very remote from each other, and of whom
it cannot be supposed that they were in earlier times united in one
nation, have made the same technical discoveries, and have adopted
similar manners and customs and similar religious observances. This
allows us to infer that there is a physical and psychical unity of
human nature which indeed separates into races and varieties, but not
into distinct species. Certain tokens of what is hypothetically the
primeval type will predominate even in the progeny which has been
modified by a distinct and separate development, and we need not be
surprised by reversions to the animal structure, even in man, the
ultimate scope of organic development. Nor will the developed culture
of man offer any hindrance to such reversions. The theromorphic
conditions which we have pointed out in the third chapter of this work,
such as the frontal process of the squamous temporal portion, the
transverse enlargement of the occipital bone, the pointed ear, etc.,
occur both in the higher and lower races of man; just as, for example,
both in primitive and high-bred races of horses there are reversions to
fossil forms in hind toes, cloven hoofs, etc.
Not only the physical, but the mental development of man advances
uniformly, and not _per saltum_. Physical qualities and defects may
occur in a given number of negroes and Papuans, and may be absent in
an equal number of Europeans, and conversely may occur in the one and
be absent in the other; yet, in their mental condition, negroes and
Papuans must always be regarded as in a lower order than Europeans. And
if physical superiority is more widely diffused in European peoples
than elsewhere, owing to higher culture, less exposure, and better
nourishment, a more regular mode of life, and often also to the sexual
selection prompted by æsthetic considerations, yet the reversion to
such animal characteristics as do not exercise any modifying influence
on the bodily development of the individual, occurs both in these and
other races. I conclude these remarks with the reproduction of the fine
passage with which Darwin ends his work on the descent of man.
“Man may be excused for feeling some pride at having risen, though not
through his own exertions, to the very summit of the organic scale; and
the fact of his having thus risen, instead of having been aboriginally
placed there, may give him hopes for a still higher destiny in the
distant future. But we are not here concerned with hopes or fears,
only with the truth, as far as our reason allows us to discover it.
I have given the evidence to the best of my ability: and we must
acknowledge, as it seems to me, that man, with all his noble qualities;
with sympathy which feels for the most debased; with benevolence which
extends not only to other men, but to the humblest living creature;
with his god-like intellect, which has penetrated into the movements
and constitution of the solar system;--with all these exalted powers,
man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly
origin.”
APPENDIX.
It was after I had finished this treatise that Mohnike’s _Blicke auf
das Pflanzen- und Thierleben in den indischen Malaienländern_ (Münster,
1883) came into my hands. The author, who was for several years
physician and medical superintendent in the Dutch Indies, has given
an interesting account of the orang-utan. It appears that this animal
is only found in the northern part of Sumatra, and is more common on
the western than on the eastern coast. Even there the orang is only
occasionally captured. The Dyaks of Borneo are fond of the flesh of
this ape, which they shoot, especially in the interior of the island,
with poisoned darts, projected from a blow-pipe. The wounded part is
then carefully cut out.
Mohnike states that in Borneo _Hylobates concolor_ is called Ouo-ouo
by the Malays, and Kalawet by the Dyaks. Dark specimens of _Hylobates
variegatus_ are in the Malay dialect called _itam_, or black Unko, and
light specimens are called _puti_, or white Unko. A good illustration
of _Hylobates leucogenys_ is given in the _Proceedings of the
Zoological Society_, p. 680, Plate 42: London, 1877.
It should be added to what I have said in the text, that the uvula
of the orang-utan is often absent (Bischoff, _Beiträge zur Anatomie
des Gorilla_, p. 37; and Rückart, _Der Pharynx als Sprach- und
Schluck-apparat_, p. 24, plate iii. fig. 10: Munich, 1882). I have,
however, examined a specimen in which the uvula was quite perceptible,
as well as the palate and arched root of the tongue.
In addition to the lower jaw from Naulette, of which I have spoken
above, the fragment of a lower jaw has lately been found in the Schipka
cave, Moravia, declared by Schaaffhausen to be that of an ape-like
child. Virchow has carefully examined this fragment, and considers that
it belongs to an adult of the mammoth age, who suffered from retention
of the teeth, and that there is nothing pithecoid about it. The same
author subjected the Naulette jaw, which he has repeatedly examined in
Brussels, to a close analysis, and is somewhat disposed to admit the
pithecoid character of this specimen (_Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, p.
277: 1882).
R. Baume, on the other hand, considers that both the Naulette jaw and
that from the Schipka cave are pithecoid forms. He finds in these two
specimens the actual proof of the existence of man-apes in the diluvial
period, since they differ widely, in the form of the lower jaw, from
any living specimens. This author is of opinion that in the diluvial
period there must have been races of men far inferior to the lowest
races now in existence (_Die Kieferfragmente von La Naulette und aus
der Schipkahöhle_, Leipzig, 1883).
See Hartmann, _Sitzungsbericht der Gesellschaft naturforschender
Freunde zu Berlin_, November 19, 1878, for remarks on the tendon, the
blood-vessels of the shoulder and thigh in anthropoids, in addition to
those given in the text.
AUTHORITIES FOR CHAPTER I.
(1) “Hinc (_i.e._ Θεῶν ὄχημα) tridui navigatione torrentes igneos
prætervecti in sinum venimus, qui Noti Ceras dicitur (Νότου Κέρας). In
sinus recessu insula erat priori, illi similis; nam lacum habebat, in
quo insula erat altera, referta hominibus silvestribus. Erant autem
multo plures mulieres hirsutis corporibus, quas interpretes Gorillas
(Γορίλλας) vocabant. Nos persequentes viros quidem capere non potuimus,
omnes enim effugiebant quum per præcipitia scanderent et saxis se
defenderent; sed feminas cepimus tres, quæ mordentes et lacerantes
ductores sequi nolebant. Atque occidimus eas et pelles detractas
asportavimus Carthaginem. Neque enim ulterius navigavimus, quum annona
deficeret” (Hannonis Carthaginiensis Periplus. Geographi Græci Minores,
ed. C. Muelleri, vol. i.).
(2) Comp. Temminck, Esquisses zoologiques sur la cote de Guinée
(Leiden, 1853), p. 3.
(3) Marc. de Serres first directed the attention of naturalists to this
mosaic. Comp. Froriep, Notizen zur Natur- und Heilkunde, book 42. It
has been frequently said that the original of this mosaic is in the
Museum of Antiquities at Berlin. Undoubtedly the mosaic in question
also consists of a landscape with hippopotami, crocodile, etc., but it
cannot be compared with that of Palestrina, which is to my knowledge
in the Barberini palace at Rome.
(4) See the Natural History of the younger Pliny, ii. 172; vii. 2.
(5) Regnum Congo: hoc est Vera Descriptio Regni Africani quod tam ab
incolis quam Lusitanis Congus appellatur, per Philippum Pigafettam,
olim ex Edoardo Lopez acromatis lingua Italica excerpta, nunc Latio
sermone donata ab Aug. Cassiod. Reinio. Iconibus et imaginibus rerum
memorabilium quasi vivis, opera et industria Joan. Theod. et Joan.
Israelis de Bry, fratrum exornata (Francofurti, MDXCVIII.).
(6) Abhandlungen der Königl. Bayrischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
(iii. cl. ix. div. 1).
(7) A voyage to Congo and several other countries in Southern Africa,
Church collection of voyages and travels (London, 1744), i. 651.
(8) Relation d’un voyage fait en 1695–97 aux côtes d’Afrique, etc.
(Paris, 1699).
(9) Nouveau voyage en Guinée, p. 74.
(10) Observationes Medicæ (Amsterdam), § 56. I have recently had
occasion to doubt whether Tulpe’s representation of an ape is not
founded on that of an orang-utan of average size. At any rate, the head
of the animal given by this anatomist reminds me more of an orang than
of a chimpanzee.
(11) The Anatomy of a Pygmy, compared with that of a Monkey, an Ape,
and a Man. With an Essay concerning the Pygmies, etc., of the Ancients
(edit. i., London, 1699; edit. ii., 1751).
(12) Purchas, His Pilgrims. I have made use of the edition published in
London in 1625 (vol. ii. 982).
(13) Beschryvinge des Afrikaensche gewesten van Egypten, Barbaryen,
Lybien, Biledulgerid, Negrosland, Ethiopien, Abyssinie, etc.
(Amsterdam, 1688; edit. ii. 1679). I have made use of the German
version of 1760.
(14) The name Quojas Morrou is also used by Tulpe. A living specimen of
these animals was given by Dapper to Prince Frederick Henry of Orange,
and is perhaps the one described by Tulpe.
(15) Mission from Cape Coast Castle to Ashanti (London, 1819: trans.
Weimar, 1820; Vienna, 1826). I have made use of the latter translation.
(16) Trans. of the Zoolog. Soc., vol. iii., 1848: On a new species of
Chimpanzee, by Professor Owen.
(17) A description of the external characters and habits of Troglodytes
Gorilla, by Ph. S. Savage, and of the osteology of the same, by
Jeffreys Wyman (Journal of Nat. Hist., Boston, 1847, vol. v.).
(18) Th. Savage: Notice of Troglodytes Gorilla, a new species of Orang
on the Gaboon (Boston, 1847). Comp. Kneeland in Proc. of the Boston
Soc. of Nat. Hist., 1850, 1852.
(19) Ostéographie (Paris, 1839–64). Atlas, vol. iv., Mammifères, plate
i.
(20) Archives du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris, vol. x.
(21) Ibid., vol. viii.
(22) An impression on steel: A mode of photographic illustration used
by Nièpce de St. Victor, which has since been materially improved.
(23) Der Gorilla, etc. A coloured illustration by G. Mützel, plate i.
(24) Adventures and explorations in Equatorial Africa (London, 1861).
A journey to Ashango Land (London, 1867). The country of the Dwarfs
(London, 1872).
(25) Reade, Savage Life: being the narrative of a tour in Equatorial,
South-Western, and North-Western Africa, etc. (London, 1863). Brehm,
Thierleben, edit. i., i. 16. See also Hartmann, Der Gorilla, p. 4.
(26) Observations on Du Chaillu’s papers on the new species of mammals
discovered by him in Equatorial Africa: Proceed. of the Zool. Soc.,
London. 1861.
(27) Proceed. of the Boston Soc. of Nat. Hist., 1860. See also Du
Chaillu’s Adventures and Explorations, chap. 22; and Reichenbach’s
Vollständigste Naturgeschichte der Affen (Dresden and Leipzig), p. 196.
(28) Description of cranium of an adult male gorilla from the River
Danger, indicative of a variety of the great chimpanzee (Troglod.
Gorilla): Trans. of Zoolog. Soc., London, vol. iv., 1853. Memoir on
the Gorilla (London, 1865): well illustrated. Odontography (London,
1840–45). Article on Teeth, by Todd and Bowman, in the Cyclopedia of
Anatomy and Physiology, vol. iv. part ii. Lectures on the comparative
anatomy and physiology of Vertebrata (London, 1866–68, vol. iii.).
(29) Burton’s Two Trips to the Gorilla land, and the cataracts of the
Nile (London, 1876).
(30) Compiègne’s L’Afrique Equatoriale (Paris, 1875; Gabonais, p. 260).
(31) De Brazza’s Le Tour du Monde, Année 1878, No. 936.
(32) Lenz’s Skizzen aus Westafrika (Berlin, 1878), p. 171.
(33) Die Loango Expedition, pt. ii., by Falkenstein, p. 149.
(34) Koppenfels’ Die Gartenlaube (1877), No. 25.
(35) Zoologiska Studier, Andra Häftet. (Lund, 1857).
(36) Revue d’Anthropologie (1876), p. 1, etc.
(37) The Medical Times, 1872.
(38) Descrizione di una scimmia antropomorfa proveniente dall’ Africa
centrale, in den Annali del Museo Civico di Genova, i. 53.
(39) Studii craniologici sui Cimpanzé. Ibid., iii. 3.
(40) Proceedings of the Academy of Nat. Sciences (Philadelphia, 1879),
pt. iii. p. 385.
(41) On the Appendicular Skeleton of the Primates: Philosophical
Transactions (1867), 299.
(41A) Macalister’s Muscular Anatomy of the Gorilla: Proceedings of the
Royal Irish Academy of Science, 2nd series, vol. i.
(42) Ueber die Schädelform des Menschen und der Affen, Leipzig, 1867.
(43) Die Hand und der Fuss. Abhandlungen der Senckenbergischen
Naturforschenden Gesellschaft, vol. v.
(44) Archiv. für Anthropologie, viii. 67.
(45) Abhandl. aus dem Gebiete der Naturwissenschaften, herausgeg. vom
Naturwis. Verein zu Hamburg-Altona (Hamburg, 1876), pp. 74–83.
(46) Ibid., p. 84, etc.
(47) Die anthropomorphen Affen des lübecker Museums (Lübeck, 1876).
(48) Mittheilungen aus dem königl. Zoolog. Museum zu Dresden (1877),
No. 2, p. 225.
(49) Der Gorilla, mit Berücksichtigung des Unterschiedes zwischen
Menschen und Affen, etc. Denkschrift des Offenbacher Vereins für
Naturkunde (Offenbach, 1863).
(50) Ueber die Verschiedenheit in der Schädelbildung des Gorilla,
Chimpanse und Orang-utan, etc. (München, 1867). Vergleichende
anatomische Untersuchungen über die äussern weiblichen Geschlechts-
und Begattungsorgane des Menschen und der Affen. Abhandl. der königl.
bayrischen Akad. d. Wissensch., cl. ii. vol. xiii. plate ii. Beiträge
zur Anatomie des Gorilla. Ibid. cl. ii. vol. xiii. plate iii.
(51) Beiträge zur Kenntniss des Gorilla und Chimpanse. Abhandl. der K.
Gesellsch. der Wissensch. Göttingen, vol. 28.
(52) Ueber den Schädel des jungen Gorilla. Monatsberichte der königl.
Akademie der Wissensch. zu Berlin (June 7, 1880), p. 516.
(53) Studien aus dem Gebiete der Naturwissensch., plate ii.
(Petersburg, 1876), v. 235.
(54) Various works on the gorilla under the following titles:--Beiträge
zur Kenntniss der sogen. anthropomorphen Affen, Zeitschrift für
Ethnologie, series iv. 198; viii. 129; ix. 117. Ueber das Hüftgelenk
der anthropoiden Affen. Sitzungsber. der Gesellsch. Naturforsch.
Freunde zu Berlin, April 17, 1877. Ueber den Torus occipitalis
transversus am Hinterhauptbeine des Menschen; Ibid., Nov. 26, 1880. Die
menschenähnlichen Affen, No. 247 of the Sammlung gemeinverständlicher
wissensch. Vorträge, by Virchow and Holtzendorff, p. 11.
(55) Vogt’s Vorlesungen über den Menschen (Giessen, 1863).
(56) L’homme et les singes. Bulletin de la Société d’Anthropologie,
vol. iv. series ii., 1870.
(57) Magitot, Bulletin de la Soc. d’Ethnographie de Paris, 1872.
(58) Gesammelte Werke. A. d. Engl. von J. V. Carus, v. 1, 2 (Stuttgart,
1875).
(59) Gervais’s Hist. Nat. des Mammifères (Paris, 1854), vol. i. p. 27.
(60) Huxley’s Manual of the Anatomy of Vertebrated Animals (London,
1871).
(61) Flower’s Introduction to the Osteology of the Mammalia (London,
1870).
(62) Giebel’s Odontographie. Vergleichende Darstellung des Zahnsystems
der lebenden und fossilen Wirbelthiere (Leipzig, 1855).
(63) Proceed. of the Zoolog. Soc. (London, 1876).
(64) Hist. Nat. générale et particulière, vol. 35 (Paris).
(65) I quote here the passage which Bosman has taken from the foregoing
work by Buffon: “Les singes que l’on appelle smitten (forgerons) en
flamand, sont de couleur fauve, et deviennent extrêmement grands: j’en
ai vu un de mes propres yeux qui avait cinq pieds de haut et de bien
moins grand que l’homme. Ils sont méchants et très forts; un marchand
m’a conté, que dans le voisinage du fort de Wimba, le pays est occupé
par un très-grand nombre de ces singes, qui sont de force à attaquer
l’homme, ce dont on citait des exemples.” Bosman goes on to speak of
another species of ape in the same district, which is as hideous as
those of the larger kind (Beschrijving van Guiné (1737), p. 34; Voyage
de Guinée, p. 258).
(66) Comp. on this point Huxley’s very lucid remarks in his work on the
position of man in nature.
(67) Le Jardin des Plantes, by Bernard, Couailhac, Gervais and Lemaout
(Paris, 1842), i. 82.
(68) Ibid., p. 83, together with the illustration.
(69) Copied by Chenu, Encycl. d’Hist. Nat. Quadrumanes (Paris, 1851),
plate i. fig. 36. By Gervais, Hist. Nat. des Mammifères (Paris, 1854),
i. 16, 22. By A. B. Reichenbach, Praktische Naturgesch. des Menschen
und der Säugethiere (New edit., Leipzig), plate i. fig. 4. H. G. L.
Reichenbach, Die Vollständigste Naturgesch. der Affen (Dresden and
Leipzig), plate xxxiv., fig. 466; etc.
(70) J. B. Brehm’s Thierleben (Leipzig, 1876), i. 46, 68.
(71) Hartmann, Der Gorilla, etc. Woodcuts, Nos. vi., vii., viii., xiii.
(72) Beobachtungen an zwei lebenden Chimpanse, by H. Tiedemann,
Philadelphia. Nach brieflichen Mittheilungen bearbeitet by L. Bischoff
(Bonn, 1879).
(73) Temminck’s Esquisse Zoologique, pt. i., etc.
(74) Vrolik, Recherches d’anatomie comparée sur le Chimpanse
(Amsterdam, 1841).
(75) On the muscles and nerves of a Chimpanzee, etc. (Journal of
Anatomy and Physiology, series ii. 1871, p. 176).
(76) Brühl, Myologisches über die Extremitäten des Chimpanse (Wiener
Medicin. Wochenschrift. Jahrg. 1817).
(77) Ontleedkundige nasporingen over de hersenen van den Chimpanse
(Amsterdam, 1849).
(78) Des caractères anatomiques des grands singes
pseudo-anthropomorphes, Archives du Muséum, vol. viii. Vergleichung
der Anatomie des Gorilla mit derjenigen des Chimpanse: very well
illustrated.
(79) Recherches sur l’anatomie du Troglodytes Aubryi (Nouvelles
Archives du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle. Mémoires, vol. ii.).
(80) Mittheilungen aus dem königl. Zoologischen Museum zu Dresden, No.
2 (Dresden, 1877).
(81) Comp. the works cited in note 54. Also Hartmann, Beiträge zur
Zoologischen und Zootomischen Kenntniss der sogenannten anthropomorphen
Affen. Archiv. für Anatomie, Physiologie, etc., by Reichert and Du
Bois-Reymond. Series for the years 1872–76, with many plates, some of
them chromo-lithographs.
(82) Description de l’espèce de singe aussi singulier que très rare,
nommé Orang-Outang, de l’isle de Borneo. Apporté vivant dans la
ménagerie de M. le Prince d’Orange. Description d’un recueil exquis
d’animaux rares, etc. (Amsterdam, 1804). The plates, representing the
orang, which accompany this work are not badly done.
(83) Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap. Tweede Deel.
(Derde Druk, 1826).
(84) Beschrijving van der groote Borneosche Orang-outang of de
Oostindische Pongo. Ibid. Also Briefe des Herrn v. Wurmb und des Herrn
Baron v. Wollzogen (Gotha, 1794).
(85) General and particular descriptions of the vertebrated animals;
order quadrumana (London, 1831): with coloured plates.
(86) Monographies de Mammalogie, vol. ii.
(87) Verhandelingen over de natuurlijke geschiedenis der Nederlandsche
overzeesche besittingen (1839–45). Zoologie, p. 1.
(88) Description des mammifères nouveaux ou imparfaitement connus de la
collection du Muséum d’histoire naturelle. Nouv. Archives du Muséum,
etc., ii. 485.
(89) Annals and Magazine of Natural History (1842), ix. 54.
(90) Calcutta Government Gazette, Jan. 13, 1853. Asiatic Researches,
xv. 489, 491.
(91) Wallace’s Malay Archipelago.
(92) Naturgeschichte des Orang-Utan und einiger anderer Affenarten.
Herbell (Düsseldorf, 1791).
(93) On the Comparative Osteology of the Orang-utan and Chimpanzee:
London and Edinburgh Philosoph. Magazine, vi. 457; x. 259. Trans. of
the Zoolog. Soc. of London, i. pt. iv.
(94) Archiv. für Anatomie, Physiologie, etc., 1836, p. 46; 1839, p. 209.
(95) L. s. cit.
(96) Vier Abbildungen des Schädels der Simia Satyrus von verschiedenem
Alter zur Aufklärung der Fabel vom Orañ-Utañ (Marburg, 1838).
(97) Note sur les métamorphoses du crâne de l’Orang-Outang, Bulletins
de l’Académie de Bruxelles (1838). Annales des Sciences Naturelles
(1839), p. 56.
(98) Zur Kenntniss des Orangkopfes und der Orangarten (Wien, 1856).
(99) Die Muskulatur der Extremitäten als Grundlage einer
vergleichend-myologischen Untersuchung.
(100) L. s. c., Fig. 42, plate vii.
(101) L. s. c., plate i. p. 30 (left figure).
(102) Zeitschrift für Ethnologie (1876), vol. 15. Brehm’s Thierleben,
i. 83.
(103) Copied in Cassell’s Natural History, i. 8 (52), with the
erroneous title, “Sick Chimpanzee.”
(104) Naturhistorische Früchte der ersten kais. russischen
Erdumsegelung (Petersburg, 1813), p. 130.
(105) Le règne animal (nouv. edit.), i. 88.
(106) Is. Geoff. Saint-Hilaire et F. Cuvier, Hist. Nat. des mammifères
(Paris, 1819–35), plate iii. fig. 4.
(107) Wanderings in New South Wales (London, 1834), vol. ii. chap. viii.
(108) Man and Monkeys (London, 1840), p. 423.
(109) Boston Journal of Nat. Hist., i.
(110) See work cited in note 83.
(111) See work cited in note 63, p. 140.
(112) Hist. Nat. des Singes (Paris, an. ix.), p. 154.
(113) Archives du Muséum d’Hist. Nat., v. 529.
(114) Blyth in Journal of the Asiatic Soc., 1846, xv. 172; Ibid., 1847,
xvi. 730.
(115) Proceed. of the Zoolog. Soc. of London, xiv. 11.
(116) Beiträge zur Anatomie des _Hylobates leuciscus_. From the
Proceedings of the Bavarian Academy of Science, 2nd series, vol. x.
plate iii.
FOOTNOTES.
[2] _Vorträge über Viehzucht und Rassenkenntniss_, i. 61: Berlin, 1872.
[3] Comp. Is. Geoffr. Saint-Hilaire, table v.; also Hartmann, _Der
Gorilla_, p. 14, Anm. 4.
[4] Owen, _Memoir_, etc., plate ii.; Brehm, _Thierleben_, i. 56.
[5] Comp. Hartmann, _Der Gorilla_, fig. 8. This is undoubtedly one
of the most successful illustrations of the chimpanzee, its habits,
expression, and disposition.
[6] Comp. Hartmann, _Der Gorilla_, fig. 27, representing the Hamburg
animal in middle age. Fig. 6 gives the wild Paulina of the German
Loango expedition. The inscription, by an error of the press, states
that it is a male, not a female chimpanzee.
[7] While writing these words I obtained a dried specimen, _Hylobates
lenciscus_ (Kuhl), injected with Wickersheiner’s fluid; a large
_Hylobates_ of the same species, preserved in spirits of wine; another
_Hylobates albimanus_ (Is. Geoffr. Saint-Hilaire), preserved in the
same way; and the skeletons of _Hylobates syndactylus_ (F. Cuvier), and
of _Hylobates agilis_.
[8] A very good illustration of this animal may be seen in Ed.
Poeppig’s _Illustrirter Naturgeschichte des Thierreichs_, vol. i. fig.
24 (Leipzig, 1847), which is taken from some English source with which
I am not acquainted. Another woodcut of this animal is in Bock’s _Unter
den Kannibalen auf Borneo_, p. 342: Jena, 1882.
[9] A specimen of _Hylobates leucogenys_ (Ogilby) may be seen in the
British Museum. Comp. J. E. Gray, Catalogue of monkeys, lemurs, etc.:
London, 1870.
[10] A good woodcut of _Hylobates pileatus_ (J. E. Gray) appears in
Huxley’s work, _Man’s Place in Nature_.
[11] A very good coloured illustration of _Hylobates funereus_,
probably taken from life by Werner, may be seen in Is. Geoff.
Saint-Hilaire’s _Description des mammifères nouveaux, ou imparfaitement
connus de la collection du Muséum d’histoire naturelle_. _Archives du
Muséum_, v. 26.
[12] The coronal crest has attained to a quite unusual height in the
fine specimen of the skull of an aged male gorilla, No. 92, in the
Natural History Museum in Paris.
[13] _Ethnologische Schriften, nach dem Tode des Verfassers gesammelt
von dessen Sohne Professor Gustav Retzius_, p. 33: Stockholm, 1864.
[14] _Zur Kenntniss des Orangskopfes_, etc., p. 3. Virchow observes
(_Verhandlungen der Berliner Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_, March
18, 1876): “The fact that the gibbon, as well as the orang-utan, is
brachycephalous is of great geographical interest.”
[15] Monthly report of the Royal Academy of Sciences, Berlin, June 7,
1880.
[16] Virchow, _Ueber einige Merkmale niederer Menschenrassen am
Schädel_, p. 41: Berlin, 1875. _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, xii. 23:
1880. _Monatsbericht der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu
Berlin_, p. 523: 1880. The _os epiptericum_ may be observed in cranium
No. 92 of the Paris collection. It is plainly seen in Fig. 4, p. 127,
in _Darwinismus und Thierproduction_ (Munich, 1876), in which I refer
to this skull. See also Bischoff, _Schädelwerk_.
[17] This illustration is from Duvernoy’s _Des caractères anatomiques
des grandes singes pseudo-anthropomorphes_, plate ii. It is an
excellent illustration of the characteristic spinous processes of the
vertebral column, and of the relative position of the limbs.
[18] Duvernoy, table vi. fig. B.
[19] Brühl, _Zur Kenntniss des Orangkopfes_, pp. 2, 3.
[20] “The Missing Link,” _Engineering and Mining Journal_, xx. 3: New
York.
[21] _Report of Anthropological Society_, Berlin, April 16, 1881.
[22] Darwin’s _Descent of Man_, p. 21.
[23] Virchow’s _Archiv. für Pathologische Anatomie_, liii. 485: 1871.
[24] _Report of Anthropological Society_, Berlin, March 9, 1878.
[25] Darwin’s _Descent of Man_, vol. i. p. 192.
[26] _Geologische Bilder zur Geschichte der Erde und ihrer Bewohner_,
ii. 120: Leipzig, 1851–53.
[27] _Voyage pittoresque dans le Brésil_: Paris, 1839.
[28] _Anthropogenie_, p. 482: Leipzig, 1874.
[29] It appears to be very common among Japanese apes (_Inuus
speciosus_).
[30] Brühl has noted the intermittent occurrence of a connection
between the greater wing of the sphenoid bone and the temporal bone.
[31] _Archiv. für Anthropologie_, p. 121: 1878.
[32] Schlocker, _Ueber die Anomalien des Pterion_. Inaugural
dissertation. Dorpat, 1879.
[33] _Zur Kraniologie der Mongoloiden: Beobachtungen und Messungen_, p.
56. Dissertation. Heidelburg, Berlin, 1882.
[34] _Bulletin de la Société d’Anthropologie_, iv. fig. 305.
[35] _Verhandlungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie_, p.
164: 1872.
[36] _Die vierte allgemeine Versammlung der deutschen Gesellschaft für
Anthropologie_, p. 49.
[37] _Die Urbevölkerung Europas_, p. 46.
[38] _Quarterly Journal of Science_, January, 1864. Comp, also
Fuhlrott, _Der fossile Mensch aus dem Neanderthal_: Duisburg, 1865.
[39] _Archiv. für Anthropologie_, viii. fig. 63.
[40] _Zeugnisse_, etc., 157.
[41] _Crania Ethnica_, plate xxvi.; _Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_,
series 12, plate viii. fig. 2.
[42] _Crania Ethnica_, plate xxxvi.
[43] Ten Kate, _loc. cit._ pp. 17, 42. Virchow is of opinion that the
facts are not sufficiently clear to enable us to judge how far this
formation affects men (_Monatsbericht der Akademie der Wissenschaft
zu Berlin_, p. 258: 1881). The detachment of the malar bone from the
spheno-maxillary fissure of the orbit has up to this time been too
rarely observed in anthropoids to merit serious consideration in this
work.
[44] Joly, _Man before Metals_: London.
[45] Gaudry, _Les enchainements du monde animal_, p. 232: Paris, 1878.
[46] Hartmann, _Der Gorilla_, pp. 68, 109.
[47] _Correspondenzblatt der Deutscher Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_,
p. 148, with illustration: 1878.
[48] _Zur Morphologie des Gesichtsschädel_, pp. 73, 85, 89: Stuttgart,
1877.
[49] Welcker on His und Braune, _Archiv. für Anatomie_, 1881.
Rosenberg, Gegenbaur’s _Morphologisches Jahrbuch_, i. 172.
[50] _Beiträge zur Geburtshülfe_, p. 161.
[51] _Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Wien_, lxxxv.
fig. 1: 1882.
[52] Hartmann in _Archiv. für Anatomie_, etc., by Reichert and Du
Bois-Reymond, pp. 639–643: 1876.
[53] Wiedersheim, _Morphologisches Jahrbuch_, ii. 421.
[54] _Archiv. für Anthropologie_, p. 463: 1880.
[55] _Alttrojanische Gräber und Schädel. Aus der Abhandlungen der
Königl. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, p. 47: 1882.
[56] _Sitzungsbericht der Berliner Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_:
April 17, 1880.
[57] See Spengel’s _Caves and Primitive Inhabitants of Europe_.
[58] _Manual of the Anatomy of Vertebrated Animals_, p. 481: London,
1871.
[59] _An Introduction to the Osteology of the Mammalia_, p. 310:
London, 1870.
[60] _On the Anatomy of the Vertebrates_, ii. 551. Also see my own
works in _Archiv. für Anatomie_, p. 648: 1876.
[61] _Studien aus dem Gebiete du Naturwissenschaften_, ii. 316: St.
Petersburg, 1876.
[62] Hartmann in _Archiv. für Anatomie_, etc., p. 653: 1876.
[63] Welcker in His and Braune’s _Archiv. Jahrg._, i. p. 71.
[64] Camper, _Œuvres_, i. 152; _Naturgeschichte des Orang-utan_, etc.;
Owen, _Transactions of the Zoological Society of London_, i. 365–368;
Ibid., v. 15; Welcker in His and Braune’s _Archiv. Jahrg._, ii. p. 106.
[65] _Wiener medicinische Wochenschrift_, p. 4: 1871.
[66] Duchenne’s _Mécanisme de la physiognomie humaine_. Darwin’s
_Expression of the Emotions_. Gamba’s _Lezioni di anatomo-fisiologia
applicata alle arti belle_.
[67] Macalister, in the _Annals and Magazine of Natural History_, vii.
342 (1871), asserts that he was unable to distinguish the corrugator
from the orbicular muscle, and I have been equally unsuccessful.
[68] Darwin’s _Expression of the Emotions_.
[69] Darwin, _Expression of the Emotions_.
[70] _Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia_,
1879. _Revue d’Anthropologie_, 1873, 1874.
[71] _Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia_,
1879.
[72] Hartmann in _Archiv. für Anatomie_, by Reichart and Du
Bois-Reymond, p. 743 (1875); p. 636 (1876).
[73] Halford, _Not like man, bimanous and biped, nor yet quadrumanous,
but cheiropodus_: Melbourne, 1863. _Lines of demarcation between Man,
the Gorilla, and the Macaca_: Melbourne, 1863. I only know these two
treatises from Bischoff’s quotation. _Anatomie, etc., des Hylobates
leuciscus_, pp. 23, 24.
[74] Ruge also considers this muscle to be part of the extensor longus
digitorum.
[75] _Beiträge zur Kenntniss des Gorilla und Chimpanse_, p. 32, plate
ii. fig. 3.
[76] _Bulletin de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris_ (1869), pp. 83,
113.
[77] As, for example, in _Hylobates syndactylus_. Comp. Giobel,
_Odontographia_, p. 2: Leipzig, 1855.
[78] _Ortleetkundige Beschryving van een volvassen Orang Oetan.
Verhandelingen over de natuurlijke geschiedenis der Neederlandsche
Bezittingen_: Leiden, 1840. _Bulletin de la Société d’Anthropologie de
Paris_, iv. pp. 368–371: 1869.
[79] Comp. Aeby, _Der Bronchialbaum der Säugethiere und des Menschen_,
p. 7, table v. fig. 11: Leipzig, 1880.
[80] _The Brain as an Organ of Mind._ International Scientific Series.
[81] Pansch writes of a gorilla’s brain: “The cerebellum ought, in a
horizontal position, to be somewhat overlapped by the cerebrum.” I do
not understand what he means by the expression _ought_.
[82] _Natural History Review_, p. 201: 1861.
[83] _Sitzung der Mathematisch-physikalischen Klasse der königl.
bairischen Akademie der Wissenschaften_, p. 100: Feb. 4, 1871.
[84] Gratiolet, _Mém. sur les plis cérébraux de l’homme et des
primates_.
[85] _Correspondenzblatt der deutschen Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_,
p. 133: 1878.
[86] _Verhandlungen der berliner Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_, 1877.
[87] Ibid., p. 25: 1878.
[88] _Verhandlungen der berliner Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_, p.
28: 1878.
[89] _Archiv. für Anthropologie_, p. 129: 1867.
[90] _Verhandlungen der berliner Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_, p.
283: 1877.
[91] _Correspondenzblatt der deutschen Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_,
p. 134: 1877. H. Gerhartz, _Ueber die Ursachen der Microcephalie_.
Inaugural dissertation. Bonn, 1874.
[92] _Anatomische Untersuchung eines Microcephalen Knaben._ Reprint of
a paper written for the celebration of the three hundredth year of the
University of Wurzburg, p. 27.
[93] _Verhandlungen der berliner Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_, p.
248: 1877.
[94] _Das peripherische Nerversystem der Wirbelthiere_, p. 219:
Leipzig, 1878.
[95] _Bulletin de la Société Zoologique de France_, p. 1: 1877.
[96] _Die Vollständigste Naturgeschichte der Affen_, p. 191: Leipzig
and Dresden.
[97] See Chenu, _Encyclopédie d’Historie Naturelle, Quadrumanes_, p. 34.
[98] Catalogue of Monkeys, Lemurs, and Fruit-eating Bats in the British
Museum. Appendix, p. 127: London, 1870.
[99] For example, the ears are represented as somewhat too small.
Although the growth of hair on the crown of the head makes them look
larger, the want of proportion must be admitted. It might easily have
been altered, but I preferred to reproduce the original sketch as it
stood.
[100] _Die Säugethiere in Wort und Bild._, by C. Vogt and Specht, p.
11: Munich, 1882.
[101] _Mafoca Betreffendes._ Reprinted from the reports of the
_Gesellschaft für Natur und Heilkunde zu Dresden_, Sitzung, xxvii. p.
9: 1876.
[102] _Thierleben_, ii. 80, 81. _Illustrirte Naturgeschichte des
Thierreichs_, i. 11: Leipzig, 1880.
[103] _Der Gorilla_, vi. p. 25. The inscription to this fine cut
erroneously gives this as a male instead of a female specimen.
[104] Series for 1876, plate vii. figs. 2, 4.
[105] _Livingstone’s Last Journals in Central Africa from 1865 to his
death_, ii. 52–55: London, 1874.
[106] _Die Loango Expedition_, Abth. iii. p. 248: Leipzig, 1882.
[107] Ibid., Abth. ii. p. 150.
[108] _Die Loango Expedition_, Abth. i. p. 123.
[109] _Die Loango Expedition_, p. 103.
[110] The account given by H. von Koppenfels, whose early death we must
all deplore, is taken from his article in the _Gartenlaube_ (1877, No.
25); from his correspondence with his family, which I have been allowed
to see; and from a long paper addressed to Professor Bastian from
Adalinalonga, dated March 26, 1874.
[111] _Illustrirtes Thierleben_, i. 17: Hildburghausen, 1864.
[112] Schweinfurth, _Im Herzen von Afrika_, p. 335: New edition,
Leipzig, 1878.
[113] Duirentuin: Illustrated description of the mammals and birds kept
in the Zoological Gardens, Amsterdam. Published in the Dutch language
about 1862.
[114] _Unter den Kannibalen auf Borneo_, etc., p. 31.
[115] This illustration confirms the remark already made, that the
posterior of this ape somewhat resembles the rump of a bird in
structure.
[116] _Verhandelingen over de natuurlijke geschiedenis der
Nederlandsche overzeesche Bezittingen_: Leiden, 1840–45.
[117] _Unter den Kannibalen auf Borneo_, p. 31.
[118] _Die Preussiche Expedition nach Ostasien. Zoologische
Abtheilung_, vol. i. p. 249: Berlin, 1876.
[119] _Unter der Kannibalen auf Borneo_, p. 327.
[120] Sir Stamford Raffles saw a perfectly white specimen of this
species (_Transactions of the Linnæan Society_, xiii. 241).
[121] G. Broesike, _Sitzungtbericht der Gesellschaft naturforschender
Freunde zu Berlin_: December 18, 1877.
[122] _Verhandlungen der berliner Anthropologischen Gesellschaft_,
March 18, 1876, p. 93.
[123] See also Nissle, _Die Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, pp. 56, 57:
1876.
[124] Wallace’s _Malay Archipelago_, vol. i.
[125] _Unter den Kannibalen auf Borneo_, p. 31.
[126] _Enchainements_, p. 235.
[127] Fraas, _Wurtembergische Jahresheft_, xxvi. plate iv. fig. 1: 1870.
[128] Forsyth, _Atti della Societá Italiana di Scienze Naturali_, xiv.:
1872.
[129] _Anthropogenie_, p. 482: Leipzig, 1874.
[130] We do not here include the leaping and running mice.
[131] _Reise nach Brasilien_, ii. 177: Frankfurt-am-Main, 1821.
[132] _Beiträge zur Ethnographie und Sprachenkunde Amerikas_, etc., i.
534: Leipzig, 1867.
[133] _Les Enchainements du monde animal_, p. 240.
[134] _Die Säugethiere in Wort und Bild_, p. 49.
[135] _Handbuch der Petrefactenkunde_, 3rd edit., i. 38: Tübingen, 1882.
[136] Darwin’s _Descent of Man_, 1st edit., vol. ii. p. 385.
[137] Darwin’s _Descent of Man_, i. p. 212.
[138] _Die Säugethiere in Wort und Bild_, p. 67.
INDEX.
A
A-Bantu, 86
Abel, 10
Abors, 253
Aeby, 6, 130, 131, 206
Africa, 90
African negroes, pithecoid structure of, 86
Aidanill, 88
Ainos, 96
Alix, 9, 149, 207, 213
Angola, 225
Anthropoid apes, development of acquaintance with, 1;
external form of, 11;
external and anatomical structure of, compared with the human, 55;
ears of, and men, 89;
neck of, 100;
trunk of, 100;
carpus of, 102;
hand of, 102;
upper limbs of, 102;
skull of, 107;
vertebral column of, and men, 125;
humerus of, 131;
tibia of, 137;
hinder extremities of, 145;
muscular system of, 150;
skin of head of, 156;
clavicle of, 160;
digestive system of, 181;
teeth of, 182;
tongue of, 182;
vertebral column of, 182;
liver of, 187;
stomach and intestines of, 187;
spleen of, 188;
sexual organs of, 190;
brain of, 192;
nervous system of, 192;
peripheral, 207;
vascular system of, 208;
structure of, 210;
varieties in the form of, 210;
geographical distribution, habits in a state of nature, and native
names of, 225;
life in captivity of, 257;
position of, in the zoological system, 285.
Anthropomorphism of gorilla, orang, chimpanzee, and gibbon, 290
Aschangolo, 236
Aschira, 240
Ashanti, 86
Astarte, temple of, 2
Authorities for Chapter I., 311
Australian blacks, 86, 96
B
Baboon, 11, 92
Baker, 122
Ballone, river, 88
Bam (_Troglodytes niger_), 222, 237
Banya, 237
Bär, K. E. von, 6, 143
Bari, 86
Bartels, 96
Bastian, Ch., 192, 197
Battel, 3, 8
Bennet, 10
Beyrich, 285
Biceps of anthropoids, 165
Bischoff, 6, 78, 152, 167, 188
Blainville, D. de, 4, 134
Blyth, 10
Bock, 45, 241, 284
Bolau, 7, 188, 260
Bond, 87
Borneo, 241
Bosman, 8
Boucher de Perthes, 119
Bourgeois, 299
Bouvier, 210
Bowdich, E., 4
Brain of apes, 192
Brazza, De, 6, 235
Brehm, A. E., 6, 9, 217
Brooke, 10
Brosse, 269
Brühl, 10, 58, 78, 150, 176
Broca, 110
Broderip, 269
Buala, plateau of, 226
Buchholz, 235, 258
Buchta, 107
Buffon, 8, 267
Burmeister, 101
Burton, R., 6
Bushmen, 87
Busu, Bakalaya, 236
C
Cachêu, 237
Camaroon river, 225
Carpus of anthropoid apes, 102
Catharcludi, land of, 2
Champneys, 9
Chapman, 6, 164
Chenu, 10
Chimpanzee, 2, 8, 29, 33, 58, 91, 219, 237, 267;
anthropomorphism of, 290
Chimpezée, 8
Chinchoxo, 7
Chudzinsky, 165
Clavicle of anthropoids, 160
Colobus, 286
Compiègne, A. de, 6, 235
Congo, 226
Cuvier, G., 10, 45, 50
D
Dabulamanzi, 86
Dahlbom, 6, 9
Dahomey, 86
Danger, river, 225
Dapper, O., 4
Darwin, 7, 91, 97, 157, 303, 308
Delaunay, 298
Devéria, A., 5
Diard, 10, 45, 252
Digestive system of anthropoids, 181
Dippel, 148
_Dryopithecus_, 286
Du Chaillu, 6, 215, 227, 257
Duchenne, 154
Dücker, Von, 299
Dumortier, 10
Duncan, P. M., 220
Durand, 122
Duvaucel, 10, 50, 254
Duvernoy, 6, 149, 172, 215
Dyaks, 245;
of Dusun, 251
E
Ears of anthropoids and men, 89
Ecker, 6, 96
Ehlers, 6, 7, 153, 188
Eliva, lake, 236
Engeco, 4
Eyelids of anthropoids and of man, 94
F
Fan, 236
Falkenstein, 7, 219, 260
Femur of mammals, 136
Flower, 6, 142
Foot of anthropoids, 22
Ford, 5, 225
Fortuna, temple of, 2
Four-handed, rejection of the term, 146
Franquet, 5
Froger, 3
Froriep, 126
G
Gaboon district, 5, 226, 240
Galloa, 240
Gamba, 154
Garrau mountains, 253
Garrigou, 298
Gaudry, 285, 299
Gautier Laboulaye, 5
Gegenbaur, 134
Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 5, 9
Geographical distribution of anthropoids, 225
Gervais, 7, 9
Ghauts, 87
Gibbon, anthropomorphism of, 290
Gibbon, skeleton of, 81
Gibbon (_Hylobates_), 11, 45, 251, 281
---- _H. albimanus_, 49, 282
---- _H. entelloides_, 52
---- _H. funereus_, 54, 283
---- _H. Hoolock_, 52, 282
---- _H. Lar agilis_, 45, 50, 283
---- _H. leuciscus_, 51
---- _H. leucogenys_, 53
---- _H. pileatus_, 53
---- _H. Rafflesii_, 52
Giebel, 7
Giglioli, 6, 9
Glover, 86
Gorilla, 12, 26, 55, 60, 210, 225, 257;
skull of an aged male, 56;
skull of young male, 60;
skeleton of aged male, 65;
skeleton of female, 68
Gorilla, anthropomorphism of, 290
Grandpré, 268
Gratiolet, 9, 152, 199, 209
Gray, 214
Griffith, E., 10
Gruber, 111, 135, 175
Gulliver, 10
Gulnarber, 89
Güssfeldt, 228
H
Habit of anthropoids in a state of nature, 225
Haeckel, 6, 107, 146, 291
Hair, growth of, in man and anthropoids, 96
Hamadryas (_Cynocephalus_), 251
Hand of anthropoids, 102;
muscles of, 166
Hanno, 1
Harlan, 253, 281
Hausanese, 86
Head, skin of, 156;
muscles of, 151
Henle, 153
Hermes, 7, 243, 269, 283
Heusinger, 10
Hoeven, Van der, 103
Holl, 128
Hooker, 97
Human foot, skeleton of, 140
Human structure compared with that of anthropoid apes, 55
Humerus of gorilla, 131
Huxley, 114, 143, 176, 190
Hyrtl, 111
I
Ibos, natives of, 86
Ihering, H. von, 207
Issel, 222
J
Japanese, the, 87
Jeffreys Wyman, 5, 215
Jockos, 8
K
Kamma, 240
Klebs, 205
Kolk, Van der, 9
Koolo-Kamba, the anthropoid, 221
Koppenfels, H. von, 6, 219, 231
Kotaringin, 241
Krause, R., 192, 202
Kuilu, 226, 237
L
Lainier, 214
Lambdoidal suture, 58
Langer, 10, 173
_Laopithecus_, 287
Lartet, 286
Larynx, 188
Laussedat, 298
Lewis, 10
Lenz, H., 6, 9, 235, 258
Life in captivity of anthropoid apes, 257
Ligaments of anthropoids, 146
Ligaments, 187
Limbs of anthropoids, 102
Liver of anthropoid apes, 187
Livingstone, 223, 240
Loango, 7, 226, 237
Lopez, Ed., 3
Lucae, 6
Lucan, 210
Luemme, 226, 237
M
Macacu, 92
Macalister, 152
Mafuca, 95, 215, 240
Magitot, 7
Mahakkam, 250
Malays, 87, 250
Malacca peninsula, 53
Malimba, people of, 240
Malzac, A. de, 220
Mammals, femur of, 136
Mammals, systematic scheme of, 288
Mandril, 3
Mandjaruma, 222
Martens, Von, 251
Martin, W. L., 221
Martius, Von, 294
Max, G., 10, 281
Maximilian of Neuwied, Prince, 294
Mayombe, 228
Meckel, J. F., 147
Meias, 251
Merolla, 3
Meyer, A. B., 6, 216
Meyer, B., 93
Meyer, R, 6
Miklucho-Maclay, 89, 94
Mivart, F., 6
Mpongwe, 236, 240
Müller, 10, 247
Muni (Mooney), 225
Mirenhas, 294
Muscular system of anthropoid apes, 150
Mützel, 10, 25
N
Naga, 253
Nathusius, H. von, 13
Native names of anthropoids, 225
Ndjéko (nschégo), 4, 215, 220, 239
Niam-Niam, 86, 240
Nervous system of anthropoids, 192
Neck of anthropoids, 100
Ntondo, village of, 227
Nuehr, 86
O
Obongo, 294
Ogōwē, 6, 225
Orang-utan, anthropomorphism of, 290
Orang-utan, 8, 11, 41, 43, 91, 223, 242, 273;
skull of, 76;
skeleton of, 76, 79
Ornstein, 96
Orungu, 240
Owen, R., 7, 25, 143, 226, 286
P
Pansch, 6, 197, 260
Pechuël-Lösche, 226, 229
Papuans, 87
Pedro da Cintra, 3
Pelvis of anthropoids, 130
Penaud, 5
Petit, 210
Pigafetta, P., 3
Platysma myoides, 159
Plinius, 2
_Pliopithecus_, 286
Pongo, 4
Ponta-Negra, 226
_Primarii_, 288
Prince, Mrs., 5
_Protopithecus_, 287
Pruner-Bey, 7, 114
Q
Quatrefages, 117
Quenstedt, 286, 302
Quojas morrau, 4
R
Rademacher, 10
Reade, W., 235, 258
Reichenbach, 9
Retzius, 60, 194
Rolleston, 197
Rosenberg, 126, 135, 172, 242
Rousseau, 5
S
Sachs, Dr., 110
Sadong, 241
Sambas, 241
Sarawak, 241
Satyrs, 2
Savage, Dr., 4, 227
Schaaffhausen, 205
Schilluk, 86
Schlegel, 10, 247
Schweinfurth, 220, 238
Scott, J., 97
_Semnopithecus_, 285
Sexual organs of anthropoids, 190
Siam, 53
Siamang, 252
Siebold, 96
Simiina, 28
Skeleton of human foot, 140
Skeleton of aged male gorilla, 65;
of female gorilla, 68;
structure of, 107
Skeleton of chimpanzee, 73
Skin of head of anthropoids, 156
Skull of adult chimpanzee, 72
Skull of aged male gorilla, 56;
of young male gorilla, 60
Skull of orang-utan, 77;
of anthropoids, 107
Smith, W., 3
Soko, 240
Spengel, 114
Spleen of anthropoids, 188
Stieda, 111
Structure of anthropoid apes, 210
Stomach of anthropoid apes, 187
Sumatra, 241, 252
Sungi-Kapajan, 241
T
Tapanoli, 242
Teeth of anthropoids, 182
Temminck, 10
Teweh, 241
Throat pouch, 161
Thorax of anthropoids, 131
Tibia of anthropoids, 137
Tiedemann, 156
Tilesius, 10
Tongue of anthropoids, 182
Traill, Dr., 267
Trinchese, Salvatore, 92
_Troglodytes Gorilla_, 5
Trunk of anthropoids, 100
Tscheladas (_Cynocephalus Geleda_), 250
Tschissambo, 237
Tulpe, N. von, 3, 8
Tyson, E., 3, 9
U
Unko, (_Hylobates Rafflesii_), 52, 252
V
Vascular system of anthropoids, 208
Vélins, 10
Vertebræ, cervical, of chimpanzee, 73
Vertebral column of anthropoids and men, 182
Virchow, R., 6, 58, 96, 111, 114, 138, 202
Vogt, C., 7, 204, 218, 301
Vosmaer, 10
Vrolik, 9, 207
W
Waldeyer, 136
Wallace, 10, 99, 158, 223, 244, 273
Wau-wau (_Hylobates agilis_), 45, 50, 253
Welcker, 126, 147
Wilson, 5
Wimba, Fort, 8
Woolner, 91
Wurmb, 10
Z
Zuckerkandl, 124
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BECCLES.
Transcriber’s Notes
Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a
predominant preference was found in the original book; otherwise they
were not changed.
Simple typographical errors were corrected; unbalanced quotation
marks were remedied when the change was obvious, and otherwise left
unbalanced.
Illustrations in this eBook have been positioned between paragraphs
and outside quotations. In versions of this eBook that support
hyperlinks, the page references in the List of Illustrations lead to
the corresponding illustrations.
Footnotes, originally at the bottoms of the pages that referenced them,
have been collected, sequentially renumbered, and placed near the end of
the book, just before the Index.
The index was not checked for proper alphabetization or correct page
references.
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANTHROPOID APES ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
