Chapter 13

1. Hapale jacchus. 2. H. humeralifer. 3. H. chrysoleuca. 4. H. pygmæa. 5.H. melanura.6. Midas labiatus. 7. M. rufiventer. 8. M. mystax. 9. M. pileatus. 10. M. weddelli. 11. M. nigricollis. 12. M. illigeri. 13. M. bicolor. 14. M. midas. 15. M. ursulus. 16.Chrysothrix sciurea.17.C. usta.18. Callithrix torquata. 19. C. cuprea. 20. C. amicta. 21. C. cinerascens. 22. C. personata. 23. C. nigrifrons. 24.C. castaneiventris.25. Nyctipithecus trivirgatus. 26.N. lemurinus.27.N. felinus.28. Brachyurus melanocephalus. 29. B. rubicundus. 30. B. calvus. 31. Pithecia monachus. 32. P. pithecia. 33. P. satanas. 34. P. chiropotes. 35. P. albinasa. 36.Alouatta senicula.37. A. beelzebul. 38. A. ursina. 39.Cebus monachus.40.C. fatuellus.41. C. cirrifer. 42.C. albifrons.43.Lagothrix infumatus.44.Ateles variegatus.45. A. paniscus. 46. A. marginatus. 47.A. ater.

F5.BRAZILIAN SUB-REGION.

The following species are recorded from this Sub-region. In many cases, however, the habitat "Brazil" may be found to be erroneous, as it was often made, in olden days, to include Amazonia.

1. Hapale aurita. 2.H. melanura.3.H. jacchus.4.H. grandis.5.Midas rosalia.6. M. fuscicollis. 7. M. chrysopygus. 8.Chrysothrix usta.9. C. entomophaga.[7]10. Callithrix moloch. 11.C. castaneiventris.12. C. melanochir. 13. C. gigot. 14.C. chlorocnomys.15.C. primæva.16. Nyctipithecus azaræ. 17. Alouatta nigra. 18.A. ursina.19. Cebus lunatus. 20. C. flavus. 21.C. capucinus.22.C. monachus.23. C. variegatus. 24. C. robustus. 25. C. annellatus. 26.C. albifrons.27. C. flavescens. 28.C. fatuellus.29.C. cirrifer.30.C. macrognathus.31. C. vellerosus. 32. C. subcristatus. 33. C. capillatus. 34. C. azaræ. 35. Brachyteles arachnoides. 36.Protopithecus brasiliensis.

Plate XLVI.V. MAP,Showing the distribution of the FamiliesHapalidæ(Red), andCebidæ(Blue).

V. MAP,Showing the distribution of the FamiliesHapalidæ(Red), andCebidæ(Blue).

Plate XLVII.VI. MAP,Showing the distributions of the GeneraPapio,Theropithecus,Cynopithecus,CercocebusandCercopithecus(Blue), andMacacus(Red).

VI. MAP,Showing the distributions of the GeneraPapio,Theropithecus,Cynopithecus,CercocebusandCercopithecus(Blue), andMacacus(Red).

F6.PATAGONIAN SUB-REGION.

The following fossil species have been recorded from this Sub-region:—

1.Homunculus patagonicus.2.Anthropops perfectus.3.Homocentrus argentinus.4.Eudiastus lingulatus.

APPENDIX.

During the passage of this volume through the press, a good deal of additional material has come into the author's hands, while the results of important recent explorations have also been published. The following appendix has, therefore, been added to include the latest additions to our knowledge of the Anthropoids dealt with in its pages.

On page82, the Talapoin (Cercopithecus talapoin) has been relegated to a group (and, indeed, it had been assigned by Geoffrey to a distinct genus—Miopithecus), in which it is the sole example on account of the supposed peculiarity of possessing but three tubercles on the posterior lower molar. A specimen which the author has recently examined shows that this character is not invariable, and the species should, therefore, in his opinion, be transferred to among the Green Guenons—Group II.,Cercopitheci Chloronoti—and be placed next after the Tantalus Guenon on page62.

The extremely important collections made by his friend Dr. Forsyth Major during his adventurous explorations in Madagascar in the years 1894 to 1896—from which he has but just returned—have made it necessary to add on page212a new family to theAnthropoidea. In the marshes of Sirabé, in Central Madagascar, he discovered the fossil remains of a species of true monkey—a group hitherto unknown to occur in that island—which must have been a contemporary of the Æpyornis, the well-known giant moa-like ratite bird which once lived there, but is now extinct. The fragments so far recovered show that in this creature the orbits were directed straight forward andwere separated from the temporal fossæ by a bony wall. The lachrymal foramen was situated inside the margin of the orbit; the inner upper incisors were in contact in the middle line; the nasals were broad and concave in profile, while the facial contour, viewed from the side, was very high. The pattern of the molars closely agreed with that seen in the Guenons (Cercopithecidæ). "The nasals are broad," continues Dr. Major, "and so is the whole of the interorbital region, its transversal diameter almost equalling that of the orbits, and therefore exceeding that obtained in the genera ofAnthropoidea, which show the maximum of external extension of the region (Mycetes,Hylobates,Homo)." This is about the only point in which the fossil approaches some of theLemuroidea. The formula of its upper teeth is I 2, C 1, P 3, M 3 = 18, or that which has been found heretofore to be characteristic of the New World monkeys. "The three molars are each composed of four tubercles, the outer and inner pairs being placed opposite one another and connected together by transverse ridges. This is the pattern of theCercopithecidæ; but, unlike the Old World monkeys, the molars decrease in size from before backwards" (Major). In the lower jaw the formula appears to have been I 2, C 1, P 2, M 3 = 16. Hence "whilst the dental formula of the upper teeth agrees with that of theCebidæ, it is quite peculiar in the lower jaw, and whilst the pattern of the molars is that of theCercopithecidæ, the premolars differ alike from Old and New World monkeys.... These combined characters amply justify the establishment of a separate family ofAnthropoideafor the Malagasy fossil, intermediate in some respects between the South AmericanCebidæand the Old WorldCercopithecidæ, besides presenting characters of its own." Dr. Forsyth Major has, therefore, proposed the new genusNesopithecusfor the reception of this most remarkable monkey, under the new family ofNesopithecidæ. The discovery ofNesopithecus roberti,as he has designated the species, suggests, as Dr. Major has set forth in theGeological Magazinefor October, 1896, page 436, "the following general conclusions:—

"(1) We may look forward in Continental Africa likewise for the discovery of Tertiary monkeys, intermediate betweenCebidæandCercopithecidæ.

"(2) The recent AfricanCercopithecidæare not invaders from the North-East, as has been supposed; on the contrary, most, if not all, of the Tertiary monkeys of Europe and Asia are derived from the Ethiopian region. The home of a part at least of theAnthropoideaseems to have been in the Southern Hemisphere. This assumption is corroborated by the two facts—thatAnthropoideamake their appearance for the first time in the later Tertiary of Europe and Asia, and that they are entirely absent from the Tertiary of North America."

After the first paragraph on page219, the discoveries of Dr. Eugene Dubois, made since these pages were written, necessitate the insertion of the following paragraphs.

In the year 1892 this distinguished geologist made one of the most important contributions to our knowledge of the antiquity of man. In that year he disinterred a large number of vertebrate remains from beds—determined to be of late Pliocene, if not of Miocene age—"of cemented volcanic tuff, consisting of clay, sand, and consolidated lapilli," at Trinil on the slope of the Kendeng Hills in Java. Among these remains were a portion of a cranium, two molar teeth, and a femur, presenting mixed simian and human characters. The dimensions of the skull-cap showed that the internal capacity of the cranium was about 1,000 cubic centimetres, while the largest skulls of theSimiidæaveraged only about 500 centimetres. With the exception of this large capacity, the calvarium presented few characters which were not stronglysimian, and of all the apes it most resembled the Gibbons' (Hylobates); but it was far superior in its cranial arch—low and depressed as the arch was—to that of any ape. The frontal region was narrow and the supraciliary ridges prominent. The neck area of the occipital bone was also ape-like in form. The thigh-bone (femur), on the other hand, presented human characters in a very marked degree, and gave no indication that the individual who owned it was in the habit of sitting on his hams. The molar teeth were likewise more human than ape-like, although they presented many strong simian characters. Dr. Dubois has assigned these remarkable fossils to a species which he has namedPithecanthropus erectus(the Erect Ape-man), as he believes that their owner occupied a place in the genealogical tree below the point of devarication of the anthropoid apes from the human line. Dr. Cunningham, of Dublin, however, who is one of our most eminent anatomists and anthropologists, would place it "on the human line, a short distance above the point at which the anthropoid branch is given off"; for he could "not believe that an ape-form with a cranial capacity of 1,000 centimetres could be the progenitor of the man-like apes, the largest of which had a capacity of only 500. Such a supposition would necessarily involve the assumption that the anthropoid apes were a degenerated branch from the common stem." Altogether, then, a study of these important remains tends to show thatPithecanthropushad the lowest human cranium known, and was the most ape-like ancestor of the human race yet described. He was very nearly as much below the Neanderthal man as he was below the normal European. It should be stated that some doubt has been expressed whether all the remains belong to one and the same species of animal. Dr. Dubois' arguments for their really belonging to the same individual appear, however, very convincing.

On page223, after the close of the first paragraph, insert:—

In the Palæolithic Terrace-Gravels at Galley Hill, in Kent, in strata in which numerous palæolithic implements have been found, one of the most interesting discoveries of the ancient inhabitants of England was made in 1895. In these strata was discovered a human skull with a lower jaw, and parts of the limb bones. The skull is very long and narrow; its breadth index being above 64, and its height index 67. The supraciliary ridges were large and the glabella prominent, with the forehead receding and the occiput flattened below, while the hindmost molar was larger than the first. The skull showed numerous points of resemblance to the Neanderthal and Spy crania; as well as presenting affinities with the skulls of the early Neolithic race. The limb bones gave indication that the individual was short of stature, standing slightly over five feet. The evidence that these remains were embedded naturally in the Pleistocene age in the apparently undisturbed gravels in which they were found, and not interred at a much later period, was very strong.

Plate XLVIII.VII. MAP,Showing the distribution of the GeneraSemnopithecus(Blue),Nasalis(Brown), andColobus(Red).

VII. MAP,Showing the distribution of the GeneraSemnopithecus(Blue),Nasalis(Brown), andColobus(Red).

Plate XLIX.VIII. MAP,Showing the distribution of the GeneraHylobates(Red),Simia(Blue),Gorilla(Brown), andAnthropopithecus(Green).

VIII. MAP,Showing the distribution of the GeneraHylobates(Red),Simia(Blue),Gorilla(Brown), andAnthropopithecus(Green).

ALPHABETICAL INDEX.

Back to Index Next