Part 4 (2/2)
_a._ The superciliary ridge and glabella.
_c._ The apex of the lambdoidal suture.
_b._ The coronal suture.
_d._ The occipital protuberance.]
The cranium is thus described by Professor Huxley. ”It has an extreme length of 8 inches, while its breadth is only 5-3/4 inches, or in other words, its length is to its breadth as 100 is to 72. It is exceedingly depressed, measuring only about 3.4 inches from the glabello-occipital line to the vertex. The longitudinal arc, measured in the same way as in the Engis skull, is 12 inches; the transverse arc cannot be exactly ascertained, in consequence of the absence of the temporal bones, but was probably about the same, and certainly exceeded 10-1/4 inches. The horizontal circ.u.mference is 23 inches. But this great circ.u.mference arises largely from the vast development of the superciliary ridges, though the perimeter of the brain case itself is not small. The large superciliary ridges give the forehead a far more retreating appearance than its internal contour would bear out. To an anatomical eye the posterior part of the skull is even more striking than the anterior. The occipital protuberance occupies the extreme posterior end of the skull, when the glabello-occipital line is made horizontal, and so far from any part of the occipital region extending beyond it, this region of the skull slopes obliquely upward and forward, so that the lambdoidal suture is situated well upon the upper surface of the cranium. At the same time, notwithstanding the great length of the skull, the sagittal suture is remarkably short (4-1/2 inches) and the squamosal suture is very straight.”[38] ... ”The cranium, in its present condition, contains about sixty-three English cubic inches of water. As the entire skull could hardly have held less than twelve cubic inches more, its minimum capacity may be estimated at seventy-five cubic inches.... It has certainly not undergone compression, and, in reply to the suggestion that the skull is that of an idiot, it may be urged that the _onus probandi_ lies with those who adopt the hypothesis. Idiocy is compatible with very various forms and capacities of the cranium, but I know of none which present the least resemblance to the Neanderthal skull.”[39]
Professor Huxley describes this skull to be the most ape-like of all the human skulls he has ever seen, and in its examination ape-like characters are met with in all its parts.[40] Buchner says that the face of the Neanderthal man must have presented a frightfully b.e.s.t.i.a.l and savage, or ape-like expression (see frontispiece).[41] Professor Schaaffhausen and Mr. Busk have stated that ”this skull is the most brutal of all known human skulls, resembling those of the apes not only in the prodigious development of the superciliary prominences and the forward extension of the orbits, but still more in the depressed form of the brain-case, in the straightness of the squamosal suture, and in the complete retreat of the occiput forward and upward, from the superior occipital ridges.”[42]
Professor Schaaffhausen and Dr. Buchner regarded this skull as a race-type, and Professor Huxley has said ”that it truly forms only the extreme member of a series leading by slow degrees to the highest and best developed forms of human skulls.”[43]
That this skull is a race-type is evident from the fact that it is not an isolated case. The fragment of the skull from the loess of the Rhine (Alsace), by its depressed forehead and strongly projecting superciliary arches, greatly resembles the Neanderthal skull. The skull from the calcareous tuff of Constatt, in its low, narrow forehead and strong superciliary arches, resembles the Neanderthal.[44] The cranium found in bone breccia, in Cochrane's Cave (Gibraltar), ”resembles, in all essential particulars, including its great thickness, the far-famed Neanderthal skull. Its discovery adds immensely to the scientific value of the Neanderthal specimen, if only as showing that the latter does not represent, as many have hitherto supposed, a mere individual peculiarity, but that it may have been characteristic of a race extending from the Rhine to the Pillars of Hercules.”[45] In speaking of the Neanderthal skull, Professor Schaaffhausen says, ”It is worthy of notice that a similar, although smaller projection of the superciliary arches has generally been found in the skulls of savage races.... The remarkably small skull from the graves on the island of Moen, examined by Professor Eschricht; the two human skulls, described by Dr. Kutorga, from the government of Minsk (Russia), one of which, especially, shows a great resemblance to the Neanderthal skull; the human skeleton found near Plau, in Mecklenburg, in a very ancient grave, in a squatting position, ... the skull of which indicates a very distant period, when man stood on a very low grade of development;” and other similar discoveries near Mecklenburg, their skulls likewise presenting short, retreating foreheads and projecting eyebrows.[46]
Professor Huxley considers that the Borreby skulls, belonging to the stone age of Denmark, ”show a great resemblance to the Neanderthal skull, a resemblance which is manifested in the depression of the cranium, the receding forehead, the contracted occiput and the prominent superciliary ridges.”[47]
_Human Skull of Arno._--The human skull, found by Professor Cocchi in the valley of the Arno, near Florence, in diluvial clay, together with various bones of extinct species of animals, is considered by Carl Vogt to be of like antiquity with the Engis and Neanderthal skulls.[48]
CHAPTER IV.
PRE-GLACIAL EPOCHS.
The age immediately preceding the glacial, and consequently the post-tertiary, is known as the pliocene epoch, the last of the tertiary.
The tertiary period began with the close of the cretaceous. A map of the early tertiary period would represent parts of Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia, the whole of Florida, the lower parts of Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, the whole of Louisiana, and the adjoining territory on both sides of the Mississippi, as far as Cairo, as covered with water. Also a great sea extending through Nebraska and the western part of Dacotah, and taking a north-westerly course until it emptied into the Pacific. In Europe, the great basin of Paris (excepting a zone of chalk), the greater part of Spain and Italy, the whole of Belgium, Holland, Prussia, Switzerland, Hungary, Wallachia, and northern Russia, as one vast sheet of water. England and France were connected by a band of rocks.
About the middle of the tertiary, a tropical climate and tropical fauna and flora spread over the whole of Europe. Palms, cedars, laurels, and cinnamon trees flourished in the valleys of Switzerland, and more than thirty different species of oak adorned the forests of that time.
In Europe, in the eocene, there have been found thirty species of crocodiles; many species of snakes, one twenty feet long; a dozen species of birds; tapirs (_Palaeothere_ and _Lophiodon_), two species of hogs, some ruminants and rodents.
In the miocene, among _Pachyderms_ may be mentioned the mastodon, elephant, dinothere (an elephantine animal), rhinoceros, hog, horse, tapir, and hippopotamus; among _Carnivores_, the machairodus, hyena, lion, and dog; among _Ruminants_, the camel, deer, and antelope. There were monkeys, and many other animals.
In the pliocene, besides those enumerated, are found the bear, hare, and other animals.
In the tertiary beds of America have been found mastodons, elephants, rhinoceroses, deer, camels, foxes, wolves, horses, whales, and other mammalia.
Owing to the great lapse of time it cannot be expected that many traces of man will be discovered in this early period.
Upon theoretical grounds Lyell thought it very probable that man lived in the pliocene; but in relation to miocene time, he says, ”Had some other rational being, representing man, then flourished, some signs of his existence could hardly have escaped unnoticed, in the shape of implements of stone or metal, more frequent and more durable than the osseous remains of any of the mammalia.”[49] Sir J. Lubbock, while admitting the existence of man in the pliocene, goes farther and says, ”If man const.i.tutes a separate family of mammalia, as he does in the opinion of the highest authorities, then, according to all palaeontological a.n.a.logies, he must have had representatives in miocene times. We need not, however, expect to find the proofs in Europe; our nearest relatives in the animal kingdom are confined to hot, almost to tropical climates, and it is in such countries that we are most likely to find the earliest traces of the human race.”[50] Alfred R. Wallace out-distances any of his cotemporaries, for he says, ”We are enabled to place the origin of man at a much more remote geological epoch than has yet been thought possible. He may even have lived in the miocene or eocene period, when not a single mammal was identical in form with any existing species.”[51]
Some of the older and some of the recent discoveries of geologists have settled the question of tertiary man; and the ”signs of his existence,”
in the ”shape of implements of stone,” as demanded by Lyell, have been furnished.
_Man in the Pliocene._--It has already been intimated that the evidences of man are but few in this early epoch. The first example, in the following list, borders closely on the glacial, but far enough removed as to be referred to the pliocene.
In the construction of a ca.n.a.l between Stockholm and Gothenburg it was necessary to cut through one of those hills called _osars_, or erratic blocks, which were deposited by the drift-ice during the glacial epoch.
Beneath an immense acc.u.mulation of osars, with sh.e.l.ls and sand, there was discovered in the deepest layer of subsoil, at a depth of about sixty feet, a circular ma.s.s of stones, forming a hearth, in the middle of which there were wood-coals. No other hand than that of man could have performed the work.[52]
<script>