of sublime beauty, which is so striking in some works of ancient statuary, as in the head of Apollo, and in the Medusa of Sisocles, is given by an angle which amounts to 100 degrees.

This extremely ingenious theory of Camper, our author thinks, has been entirely overthrown by Owen, by his showing that Tyson and Camper, with other earlier anatomists, who wrote on the structure of the simiæ, made all their observations on the young orangs. Now it is an admitted fact, that the undeveloped, or youthful structure of animals, presents anatomical relations which, as the parts become more perfect, recede altogether, and the developed, or adult being, assumes another aspect. Thus the separate internaxillary bone of the human foetus, dissapears entirely as it progresses to adult age; and as the presence of this bone has been ever considered by the comparative anatomist as the distinguishing anatomical characteristic between man and brutes, "it is no matter of surprise," says our author

That when the skull of the young Chimpantsi was examined at the period when the small deciduous teeth only are developed, the resemblance to the human cranium should have been found surprisingly close. The brain in the ape attains its full size at a very early period; it is not destined for further developement, like the human brain; consequently, at the age when the jaws become enlarged and lengthened, with the increase of the maxillary apparatus, and the zygomatic arch is extended without any corresponding downward growth and development of the brain, or extension of its containing cavity, the proportions of the cranium to the jaws undergo a material change. In the earlier period, when its cranial portion preponderates over the facial and maxillary part, the head of the orang approximates to the human form; the facial angle is wide; the occepital foramen is more central; and the zygomatic arches, when the basis of the skull is examined, appear confined to the anterior half of the cra. nium. All these characters of resemblance are surprisingly changed when adult skulls are compared. It then appears, as Mr. Owen has shown, that strongly marked, and most important characters, distinguish the heads of guadrumanous animals from those of human beings. The cranium, properly so termed, is a small rounded case, and is altogether posterior to, and not above the face. (P.p. 113-14.)

The Norma Verticalis of Blumenbach is thus described by himself:

The best way of obtaining this end—(namely, to survey them in that method which presents at one view the greatest number of characteristic peculiaritiesPrichard) is to place a series of skulls, with the cheek-bones on the same horizontal line, resting on the lower jaws; and then viewing them from behind, and fixing the eye on the vertex of each, to mark all the varieties in the shape of parts that contribute most to the national character, whether they consist in the direction of the maxillary and malar bones, in the breadth or narrowness of the oval figure presented by the vertex, or in the flattened or vaulted form of the frontal bone. (P. 116.)

By this method, Blumenbach imagined that he could discover three varieties in the vertical figure strongly distinguished from each other; these he terms the Caucasian, Mongolian and Ethio

* We do not exactly understand the author here. The Wenzels, who made so many experiments to determine the period when the brain ceases to increase in volume, or grow, declare that it does not increase in size, or grow, after seven years of age.

pian, which three grand divisions of the human race, Prichard illustrates by the skulls of a Georgian, a Tungusian, and a Negro of Guinea. It is quite evident, however, that this grand subdivision is in a great measure fanciful, since all these three varieties run by imperceptible degrees into each other; so that you may meet a Georgian, with the Mongolian skull, a Mongolian with the Georgian, and even Africans, with both the one and the other; though we concede that the latter instances are rare.

We arrive now at the third mode of ascertaining the general configuration of the skull, which is Professor Owen's. It is by this that the relative proportions, extent, and peculiarities of formation of the different parts of the cranium, are more fully discovered, it is said, than by any other mode. To illustrate this, our author gives two wood-cuts-one, the base of the human skull, and the other the base of the skull of an orang. In this view of the cranium, the author says

It may be observed, that the antero-posterior diameter of the basis of the skull is in the orang very much longer than in man. The most striking circumstance which displays this difference, is the situation occupied by the zygomatic arch on the plane of the basis of the skull. In all races of men, and even in human idiots, the entire zygoma is included in the anterior half of the basis cranii; in the head of the adult troglodyte chimpantsi, as well as in that of the satyr or orang, the zygoma is situated in the middle region of the skull, and in the basis occupies just one third part of the entire length of its diameter. Posterior to the zygomata, the petrous portions have, in the simiæ, a large development in the antero-posterior direction.

Another most remarkable character, in respect to which those anatomists have been greatly deceived, who compared only young troglodytes with man, is the position of the great occipital foramen-a feature most important as to the general character of structure, and to the habits of the whole being. This foramen in the human head is very near the middle of the basis of the skull, or rather it is situated immediately behind the middle transverse diameter; while, in the adult chimpantsi, it is placed in the middle of the posterior third part of the basis cranii. A third characteristic in the ape, is the greater rise and development of the bony palate, in consequence of which the teeth are much larger, and more spread, and want that continuity which is, generally speaking, a characteristic of man; and intervals between the laniary, cutting, and bicuspid teeth admit, as in the lower tribes of animals, the apices of teeth belonging to the opposite jaws. Fourthly, the basis of the skull is flat, owing to the want of that downward development of the brain, and the bony case, connected with the greater dimension which the cerbral organ acquires in the human being, compared with the lower tribe.

The outline of the basis displays the position of the great occipital foramen, to which much importance has been affixed by anatomists, in the comparison of human races. Daubenton observed that this foramen holds, in the heads of all the inferior animals, a position somewhat farther backwards than in the human head. In the human head, this foramen is near the middle of the basis of the cranium; or, as Mr. Owen has more accurately defined its position, immediately behind a transverse line dividing the basis cranii into two equal parts, or bisecting the antero-posterior diameter. In the head of the adult troglodyte, the place of the foramen magnum is at the middle of the posterior third part of the basis; or, if the antero-posterior diameter is divided into three equal portions, it will be found in the midst of the third division. In the heads of young apes, which, heretofore have been the subjects of comparison, this foramen is situated much more forward, or near to the middle of the basis of the skull; still its position is obviously posterior to the situation of the same foramen in the human head. Soemmering thought he perceived some difference in this respect, between the skulls of Europeans and Negroes. He considered the difference to be very slight, and expressed himself with doubt upon the

subject; but by all the late writers who have cited his observation, without taking much pains, as it would appear, to verify it, Soemmering's statement has been repeated in much stronger terms. I have carefully examined the situation of the foramen magnum in many negro skulls; in all of them its position may be accurately described as being exactly behind the transverse line, bisecting the antero-posterior diameter of the basis cranii. This is precisely the place which Mr. Owen has pointed as the general position of the occipital hole in the human skull. In those negro skulls which have the alveloar process very protuberant, the anterior half of the line above described is lengthened in a slight degree by this circumstance. If allowance is made for it, no difference is perceptible. The difference is in all instances extremely slight; and it is equally perceptible in heads belonging to other races of men, if we examine crania which have prominent upper jaws. If a line is let fall from the summit of the head, at right angles with the plane of the basis, the occipital foramen will be found to be situated immediately behind it; and this is precisely the case in negro and in European heads.-(Pp. 117–119)

It will be seen here, that notwithstanding the elaborate attempt which the author has made to show a very marked distinctive anatomical characteristic between the basis of the skull of the troglodyte and chimpanzee, and that of the human skull, it amounts to little more than this, that there is a slight resemblance, but that that resemblance is not to be taken into account, because, "it is equally perceptible in heads belonging to other races of men, if we examine crania which have prominent upper jaws." If this be the case, then the principle of comparison laid down by Professor Owen loses much of that weight which our author attaches to it. Alas! we are afraid that novelty has charms in the eyes of physiologists, as well as in the eyes of women, and that a new doctrine in anatomy is likely to be as eagerly embraced by the anatomist, as a new fashion by the lady's maid.

With regard to the troglodyte and chimpanzee, may we not ask, with certain naturalists-Is it not possible, that thay may be the deteriorated descendants from an African origin? The Bushmen of the Cape, and the Epiutes of the Oregon, are in many of their habits and instincts not superior to the chimpanzee and the troglodyte, yet we have almost indubitable evidence, that they are descendants of a superior race to themselves. How, if animals deteriorate in their breed, and from stinted food, cold, and exposure to the seasons, become "small and stunted," as in the hog of Paramos (see p. 29.), why should not a race of men, through a succession of ages of exposure and misery, lose a portion, aye the greater portion, of humanity, and approximate in figure and instinct to the brute, or in other words, why should not vegetative life, in the absence of the natural stimulus to mental and human life, not progress so as entirely to destroy all, or nearly all, semblance to the prototype Man?

Peter, the wild man, scarcely presented any resemblance to man, except in mere form; and is it not possible to believe, that as Baker predicated of the Porcupine man, Peter might have begotten a race of men in no way superior to himself in

mental endowments, and without voice ;* and that, in the course of centuries, " a permanent variety," differing not very greatly, in cerebral or corporal development, from the troglodyte and the chimpanzee, might have been established.† It is admitted by some African travellers, that communication has occurred between the male orang, and the female African; and indeed, we have ourselves conversed with an African woman, who informed us, that in the part of the country where she was born, the orangs were so impetuous, that no woman could venture far from her hut, without being protected by males armed with clubs. But another proof that commerce does sometimes occur between the male of the simiæ, and the human female, is the fact, that an act was passed in the 25th of Henry VIII., making it penal for a woman to cohabit with the male of any of the simiæ; because a case had then recently occurred. still further, as if to corroborate our argument, a singular circumstance has just taken place. A large monkey, the property of Captain B-t, of the 17th Lancers, recently stationed at Hounslow, made two assaults upon a woman iu the vicinity of the Captain's residence; and in the second instance nearly succeeded. The woman escaped however, from him, but not until he had inflicted several severe wounds, both on her face and legs. Now, supposing consent on the part of the woman, would a new race of homo-cercopithecans have originated? Or would issue have followed the congress? These questions have

And

* Peter never spoke, though he lived in the midst of civilized men thirty years after he was taken from the woods. Some writers, the most conspicuous of which is Sweedenborg, held that the primary office of the tongue was not speech, but taste, and the arguments by which this position is attempted to be established, are such as carry plausibility with them. Jackdaws, starlings, cockatoos, and parrots, are often made to utter not only words, but sentences; and Pliny tells us of some nightingales, that overheard and related an entire conversation; yet it has never been contended that the primary office of their tongues was speech. It would seem, supposing we confine ourself to the "physical" inquiry on man, without keeping in view his phychological relation, that speech is not a natural, but an acquired faculty.

†There is an opinion recently broached, ("Vestiges of Creation,") which is entirely opposed to our hypothesis, namely, that the Simiæ are arrested or advancing developments of man; but the arguments by which this hypothesis is supported are, in common with many other hazardous assumptions of that popular romance of science, not very philosophical, and will not bear close investigation. Mon boddo's opinion, though formed on very different data, may be placed under the same category of a presumptuous conclusion on slender analogies.

Long (Hist. of Jam. vol. ii, p. 382) says that the woman in the reign of Henry VIII., alluded to above, "conceived by her paramour." The same author has given some very striking, and indeed forcible arguments, in favour of the supposed indentity of the negro and orang. It does not seem to have occured to him, that the orang might have been a vitiated variety of the negro, and not the negro, a civilized (or partly civilized) derivative of the monkey. His remarks upon this question are worthy of perusal, and we are surprised that an author of Dr. Prichard's industry should have overlooked them.

not been treated by Dr. Prichard with that extensive view of creation, which we think they demand. We cannot agree with Long, that the monkey race, or simiæ, are identical with the negro; and this is the view taken by a recent author ;* but, as remarked in our note, we do not think that it is quite contrary to sound physiology to say, that it is possible that the simiæ, at least the higher orders, may be the vitiated descendants of Bushmen, Hottentots, Piutes, or any other race of man, which barely rises above the instincts of nature.

In speaking of the "pyramidal skulls," which are found among the Esquimaux and other races, our author says, that neither the facial line of Camper, nor the norma verticalis of Blumenbach," affords a satisfactory display of the characteristics of the pyramidal, or lozenge-faced skull" (p. 119); and subsequently

The greater relative development of the jaws, and zy-gomatic bones, and of the bones of the face altogether, in comparison with the size of the brain, indicates, in the pyramidal and prognathous skull, a more ample extension of the organs subservient to sensation and the animal faculties. Such a configuration is adapted, by its results, to the condition of human tribes, in the nomadic state, and in that of savage hunters. Were either of these the original condition of mankind? then werethe first men probably in form like the Esquimaux and negro.-(P. 121).

But we have no mention at all of the application of Professor Owen's method of admeasurement of the skull. This is, at least, an oversight. It must be seen by this, that we do not attach any weight whatever, either to the facial or vertical line, or the basal view of Owen. They are all fanciful, and convey to us as much real knowledge of the measure of the intellectual faculties of different races, or their relation to man or brutes, as lines drawn through a potato, from above or below, would indicate whether it were an early shaw or a late kidney. These lines and views are philosophical, or rather anatomical follies, which, like the sexual system of plants, may amuse, but can never instruct. The phrenologists are here more at home, for they do not pronounce on the intellectual powers of an individual from the "shape" of his skull, but from the proportions which the several parts of the contents of the cranium bear one to another. Here there is something tangible; but certainly nothing of the kind is to be found either in Campers, or in Blumenbach's, or Owen's method. Of the three we prefer Campers, as being most poetical and positive; besides, it is more ingenious.

We arrive now at the 14th Section, in which the variety in structure, and the proportions of the bones discovered in different races, are discussed and examined. Much learned nonsense has been perpetrated on this subject, and attempts have been

* Vide Prodrumas towards a Philosophical inquiry into the Intellectual Powers of the Negro. By Edward Binns, M.D. London, 1844.