IHAVEendeavouredtoshow，intheprecedingEssay，thattheANTHROPINI，orManFamily，formaverywelldefinedgroupofthePrimates，betweenwhichandtheimmediatelyfollowingFamily，theCATARHINI，thereis，intheexistingworld，thesameentireabsenceofanytransitionalformorconnectinglink，asbetweentheCATARHINIandPLATYRHINI。
Itisacommonlyreceiveddoctrine，however，thatthestructuralintervalsbetweenthevariousexistingmodificationsoforganicbeingsmaybediminished，orevenobliterated，ifwetakeintoaccountthelongandvariedsuccessionofanimalsandplantswhichhaveprecededthosenowlivingandwhichareknowntousonlybytheirfossilizedremains。Howfarthisdoctrineiswellbased，howfar，ontheotherhand，asourknowledgeatpresentstands，itisanoverstatementoftherealfactsofthecase，andanexaggerationoftheconclusionsfairlydeduciblefromthem，arepointsofgraveimportance，butintothediscussionofwhichIdonot，atpresent，proposetoenter。Itisenoughthatsuchaviewoftherelationsofextincttolivingbeingshasbeenpropounded，toleadustoinquire，withanxiety，howfartherecentdiscoveriesofhumanremainsinafossilstatebearout，oroppose，thatview。
Ishallconfinemyself，indiscussingthisquestion，tothosefragmentaryHumanskullsfromthecavesofEngisinthevalleyoftheMeuse，inBelgium，andoftheNeanderthalnearDusseldorf，thegeologicalrelationsofwhichhavebeenexaminedwithsomuchcarebySirCharlesLyell；uponwhosehighauthorityIshalltakeitforgranted，thattheEngisskullbelongedtoacontemporaryoftheMammoth（’Elephasprimigenius’）andofthewoollyRhinoceros（’Rhinocerostichorhinus’），withthebonesofwhichitwasfoundassociated；andthattheNeanderthalskullisofgreat，thoughuncertain，antiquity。
Whateverbethegeologicalageofthelatterskull，Iconceiveitisquitesafe（ontheordinaryprinciplesofpaleontologicalreasoning）toassumethattheformertakesusto，atleast，thefurthersideofthevaguebiologicallimit，whichseparatesthepresentgeologicalepochfromthatwhichimmediatelyprecededit。AndtherecanbenodoubtthatthephysicalgeographyofEuropehaschangedwonderfully，sincethebonesofMenandMammoths，HyaenasandRhinoceroseswerewashedpell—mellintothecaveofEngis。
TheskullfromthecaveofEngiswasoriginallydiscoveredbyProfessorSchmerling，andwasdescribedbyhim，togetherwithotherhumanremainsdisinterredatthesametime，inhisvaluablework，’RecherchessurlesossemensfossilesdecouvertsdanslescavernesdelaProvincedeLiege’，publishedin1833（p。59，’etseq。’），fromwhichthefollowingparagraphsareextracted，thepreciseexpressionsoftheauthorbeing，asfaraspossible，preserved。
\"Inthefirstplace，Imustremarkthatthesehumanremains，whichareinmypossession，arecharacterizedlikethousandsofboneswhichI
havelatelybeendisinterring，bytheextentofthedecompositionwhichtheyhaveundergone，whichispreciselythesameasthatoftheextinctspecies：all，withafewexceptions，arebroken；somefewarerounded，asisfrequentlyfoundtobethecaseinfossilremainsofotherspecies。Thefracturesareverticaloroblique；noneofthemareeroded；theircolourdoesnotdifferfromthatofotherfossilbones，andvariesfromwhitishyellowtoblackish。Allarelighterthanrecentbones，withtheexceptionofthosewhichhaveacalcareousincrustation，andthecavitiesofwhicharefilledwithsuchmatter。
\"ThecraniumwhichIhavecausedtobefigured，PlateI。，Figs。1，2，isthatofanoldperson。Thesuturesarebeginningtobeeffaced：allthefacialbonesarewanting，andofthetemporalbonesonlyafragmentofthatoftherightsideispreserved。
\"Thefaceandthebaseofthecraniumhadbeendetachedbeforetheskullwasdepositedinthecave，forwewereunabletofindthoseparts，thoughthewholecavernwasregularlysearched。Thecraniumwasmetwithatadepthofametreandahalf[fivefeetnearly]，hiddenunderanosseousbreccia，composedoftheremainsofsmallanimals，andcontainingonerhinocerostusk，withseveralteethofhorsesandofruminants。Thisbreccia，whichhasbeenspokenofabove（p。30），wasametre[31/4feetabout]wide，androsetotheheightofametreandahalfabovethefloorofthecavern，tothewallsofwhichitadheredstrongly。
\"Theearthwhichcontainedthishumanskullexhibitednotraceofdisturbance：teethofrhinoceros，horse，hyaena，andbear，surroundeditonallsides。
FIG。22。——TheskullfromthecaveofEngis——viewedfromtherightside。
’a’glabella，’b’occipitalprotuberance，（’a’to’b’
glabello—occipitalline），’c’auditoryforamen。
\"ThefamousBlumenbach*hasdirectedattentiontothedifferencespresentedbytheformandthedimensionsofhumancraniaofdifferentraces。Thisimportantworkwouldhaveassistedusgreatly，iftheface，apartessentialforthedeterminationofrace，withmoreorlessaccuracy，hadnotbeenwantinginourfossilcranium。
[footnote]*DecasCollectionissuaecraniorumdiversarumgentiumillustrata。Gottingae，1790—1820。
\"Weareconvincedthateveniftheskullhadbeencomplete，itwouldnothavebeenpossibletopronounce，withcertainty，uponasinglespecimen；forindividualvariationsaresonumerousinthecraniaofoneandthesamerace，thatonecannot，withoutlayingoneselfopentolargechancesoferror，drawanyinferencefromasinglefragmentofacraniumtothegeneralformoftheheadtowhichitbelonged。
\"Nevertheless，inordertoneglectnopointrespectingtheformofthisfossilskull，wemayobservethat，fromthefirst，theelongatedandnarrowformoftheforeheadattractedourattention。
\"Infact，theslightelevationofthefrontal，itsnarrowness，andtheformoftheorbit，approximateitmorenearlytothecraniumofanEthiopianthantothatofanEuropean：theelongatedformandtheproducedocciputarealsocharacterswhichwebelievetobeobservableinourfossilcranium；buttoremovealldoubtuponthatsubjectIhavecausedthecontoursofthecraniumofanEuropeanandofanEthiopiantobedrawnandtheforeheadsrepresented。PlateII。，Figs。1and2，and，inthesameplate，Figs。3and4，willrenderthedifferenceseasilydistinguishable；andasingleglanceatthefigureswillbemoreinstructivethanalongandwearisomedescription。
\"Atwhateverconclusionwemayarriveastotheoriginofthemanfromwhencethisfossilskullproceeded，wemayexpressanopinionwithoutexposingourselvestoafruitlesscontroversy。Eachmayadoptthehypothesiswhichseemstohimmostprobable：formyownpart，Iholdittobedemonstratedthatthiscraniumhasbelongedtoapersonoflimitedintellectualfaculties，andweconcludethencethatitbelongedtoamanofalowdegreeofcivilization：adeductionwhichisborneoutbycontrastingthecapacityofthefrontalwiththatoftheoccipitalregion。
\"Anothercraniumofayoungindividualwasdiscoveredinthefloorofthecavernbesidethetoothofanelephant；theskullwasentirewhenfound，butthemomentitwaslifteditfellintopieces，whichIhavenot，asyet，beenabletoputtogetheragain。ButIhaverepresentedthebonesoftheupperjaw，PlateI。，Fig。5。Thestateofthealveoliandtheteeth，showsthatthemolarshadnotyetpiercedthegum。
Detachedmilkmolarsandsomefragmentsofahumanskullproceedfromthissameplace。TheFigure3representsahumansuperiorincisortooth，thesizeofwhichistrulyremarkable。*
[footnote]*Inasubsequentpassage，Schmerlingremarksupontheoccurrenceofanincisortooth’ofenormoussize’fromthecavernsofEngihoul。Thetoothfiguredissomewhatlong，butitsdimensionsdonotappeartometobeotherwiseremarkable。
\"Figure4isafragmentofasuperiormaxillarybone，themolarteethofwhichareworndowntotheroots。
\"Ipossesstwovertebrae，afirstandlastdorsal。
\"Aclavicleoftheleftside（seePlateIII。，Fig。1）；althoughitbelongedtoayoungindividual，thisboneshowsthathemusthavebeenofgreatstature。*
[footnote]*Thefigureofthisclaviclemeasures5inchesfromendtoendinastraightline——sothattheboneisratherasmallthanalargeone。
\"Twofragmentsoftheradius，badlypreserved，donotindicatethattheheightoftheman，towhomtheybelonged，exceededfivefeetandahalf。
\"Astotheremainsoftheupperextremities，thosewhichareinmypossessionconsistmerelyofafragmentofanulnaandofaradius（PlateIII。，Figs。5and6）。
\"Figure2，PlateIV。，representsametacarpalbone，containedinthebreccia，ofwhichwehavespoken；itwasfoundinthelowerpartabovethecranium：addtothissomemetacarpalbones，foundatverydifferentdistances，half—a—dozenmetatarsals，threephalangesofthehand，andoneofthefoot。
\"ThisisabriefenumerationoftheremainsofhumanbonescollectedinthecavernofEngis，whichhaspreservedforustheremainsofthreeindividuals，surroundedbythoseoftheElephant，oftheRhinoceros，andofCarnivoraofspeciesunknowninthepresentcreation。\"
FromthecaveofEngihoul，oppositethatofEngis，ontherightbankoftheMeuse，SchmerlingobtainedtheremainsofthreeotherindividualsofMan，amongwhichwereonlytwofragmentsofparietalbones，butmanybonesoftheextremities。Inonecaseabrokenfragmentofanulnawassolderedtoalikefragmentofaradiusbystalagmite，aconditionfrequentlyobservedamongthebonesoftheCaveBear（’Ursusspelaeus’），foundintheBelgiancaverns。
ItwasinthecavernofEngisthatProfessorSchmerlingfound，incrustedwithstalagmiteandjoinedtoastone，thepointedboneimplement，whichhehasfiguredinFig。7ofhisPlateXXXVI。，andworkedflintswerefoundbyhiminallthoseBelgiancaves，whichcontainedanabundanceoffossilbones。
AshortletterfromM。GeoffroySt。Hilaire，publishedinthe’ComptesRendus’oftheAcademyofSciencesofParis，forJuly2nd，1838，speaksofavisit（andapparentlyaveryhastyone）paidtothecollectionofProfessor’Schermidt’（whichispresumablyamisprintforSchmerling）
atLiege。ThewriterbrieflycriticisesthedrawingswhichillustrateSchmerling’swork，andaffirmsthatthe\"humancraniumisalittlelongerthanitisrepresented\"inSchmerling’sfigure。Theonlyotherremarkworthquotingisthis：——\"Theaspectofthehumanbonesdifferslittlefromthatofthecavebones，withwhichwearefamiliar，andofwhichthereisaconsiderablecollectioninthesameplace。Withrespecttotheirspecialforms，comparedwiththoseofthevarietiesofrecenthumancrania，few’certain’conclusionscanbeputforward；formuchgreaterdifferencesexistbetweenthedifferentspecimensofwell—characterizedvarieties，thanbetweenthefossilcraniumofLiegeandthatofoneofthosevarietiesselectedasatermofcomparison。\"
GeoffroySt。Hilaire’sremarksare，itwillbeobserved，littlebutanechoofthephilosophicdoubtsofthedescriberanddiscovereroftheremains。AstothecritiqueuponSchmerling’sfigures，Ifindthatthesideviewgivenbythelatterisreallyabout3/10thsofaninchshorterthantheoriginal，andthatthefrontviewisdiminishedtoaboutthesameextent。Otherwisetherepresentationisnot，inanyway，inaccurate，butcorrespondsverywellwiththecastwhichisinmypossession。
Apieceoftheoccipitalbone，whichSchmerlingseemstohavemissed，hassincebeenfittedontotherestofthecraniumbyanaccomplishedanatomist，Dr。Spring，ofLiege，underwhosedirectionanexcellentplastercastwasmadeforSirCharlesLyell。Itisuponandfromaduplicateofthatcastthatmyownobservationsandtheaccompanyingfigures，theoutlinesofwhicharecopiedfromveryaccurateCameralucidadrawings，bymyfriendMr。Busk，reducedtoone—halfofthenaturalsize，aremade。
AsProfessorSchmerlingobserves，thebaseoftheskullisdestroyed，andthefacialbonesareentirelyabsent；buttheroofofthecranium，consistingofthefrontal，parietal，andthegreaterpartoftheoccipitalbones，asfarasthemiddleoftheoccipitalforamen，isentireornearlyso。Thelefttemporalboneiswanting。Oftherighttemporal，thepartsintheimmediateneighbourhoodoftheauditoryforamen，themastoidprocess，andaconsiderableportionofthesquamouselementofthetemporalarewellpreserved（Fig。22）。
Thelinesoffracturewhichremainbetweenthecoadjustedpiecesoftheskull，andarefaithfullydisplayedinSchmerling’sfigure，arereadilytraceableinthecast。Thesuturesarealsodiscernible，butthecomplexdispositionoftheirserrations，showninthefigure，isnotobviousinthecast。Thoughtheridgeswhichgiveattachmenttomusclesarenotexcessivelyprominent，theyarewellmarked，andtakentogetherwiththeapparentlywelldevelopedfrontalsinuses，andtheconditionofthesutures，leavenodoubtonmymindthattheskullisthatofanadult，ifnotmiddle—agedman。
Theextremelengthoftheskullis7。7inches。Itsextremebreadth，whichcorrespondsverynearlywiththeintervalbetweentheparietalprotuberances，isnotmorethan5。4inches。Theproportionofthelengthtothebreadthisthereforeverynearlyas100to70。Ifalinebedrawnfromthepointatwhichthebrowcurvesintowardstherootofthenose，andwhichiscalledthe’glabella’（’a’）（Fig。22），totheoccipitalprotuberance（’b’），andthedistancetothehighestpointofthearchoftheskullbemeasuredperpendicularlyfromthisline，itwillbefoundtobe4。75inches。Viewedfromabove，Fig。23，A，theforeheadpresentsanevenlyroundedcurve，andpassesintothecontourofthesidesandbackoftheskull，whichdescribesatolerablyregularellipticalcurve。
Thefrontview（Fig。23，B）showsthattheroofoftheskullwasveryregularlyandelegantlyarchedinthetransversedirection，andthatthetransversediameterwasalittlelessbelowtheparietalprotuberances，thanabovethem。Theforeheadcannotbecallednarrowinrelationtotherestoftheskull，norcanitbecalledaretreatingforehead；onthecontrary，theantero—posteriorcontouroftheskulliswellarched，sothatthedistancealongthatcontour，fromthenasaldepressiontotheoccipitalprotuberance，measuresabout13。75inches。
Thetransversearcoftheskull，measuredfromoneauditoryforamentotheother，acrossthemiddleofthesagittalsuture，isabout13
inches。Thesagittalsutureitselfis5。5incheslong。
Thesupraciliaryprominencesorbrow—ridges（oneachsideof’a’，Fig。
22）arewell，butnotexcessively，developed，andareseparatedbyamediandepression。TheirprincipalelevationisdisposedsoobliquelythatIjudgethemtobeduetolargefrontalsinuses。
Ifalinejoiningtheglabellaandtheoccipitalprotuberance（’a’，’b’，Fig。22）bemadehorizontal，nopartoftheoccipitalregionprojectsmorethan1/10thofaninchbehindtheposteriorextremityofthatline，andtheupperedgeoftheauditoryforamen（’c’）isalmostincontactwithalinedrawnparallelwiththisupontheoutersurfaceoftheskull。
Atransverselinedrawnfromoneauditoryforamentotheothertraverses，asusual，theforepartoftheoccipitalforamen。Thecapacityoftheinteriorofthisfragmentaryskullhasnotbeenascertained。
ThehistoryoftheHumanremainsfromthecavernintheNeanderthalmaybestbegiveninthewordsoftheiroriginaldescriber，DrSchaaffhausen*，astranslatedbyMr。Busk。
[footnote]*ONTHECRANIAOFTHEMOSTANCIENTRACESOFMAN。
ByProfessorD。Schaaffhausen，ofBonn。（FromMuller’s’Archiv’。，1858，pp。453。）WithRemarks，andoriginalFigures，takenfromaCastoftheNeanderthalCranium。ByGeorgeBusk，F。R。S。，etc。’NaturalHistoryReview’。April，1861。
\"Intheearlypartoftheyear1857，ahumanskeletonwasdiscoveredinalimestonecaveintheNeanderthal，nearHochdal，betweenDusseldorfandElberfeld。Ofthis，however，Iwasunabletoprocuremorethanaplastercastofthecranium，takenatElberfeld，fromwhichIdrewupanaccountofitsremarkableconformation，whichwas，inthefirstinstance，readonthe4thofFebruary，1857，atthemeetingoftheLowerRhineMedicalandNaturalHistorySociety，atBonn。*
[footnote]*’Verhandl。d。Naturhist。’Vereinsderpreuss。
RheinlandeundWestphalens。，xiv。Bonn，1857。
SubsequentlyDr。Fuhlrott，towhomscienceisindebtedforthepreservationofthesebones，whichwerenotatfirstregardedashuman，andintowhosepossessiontheyafterwardscame，broughtthecraniumfromElberfeldtoBonn，andentrustedittomeformoreaccurateanatomicalexamination。AttheGeneralMeetingoftheNaturalHistorySocietyofPrussianRhinelandandWestphalia，atBonn，onthe2ndofJune，1857，*DrFuhlrotthimselfgaveafullaccountofthelocality，andofthecircumstancesunderwhichthediscoverywasmade。
[footnote]*’Ib。Correspondenzblatt。No。2。
Hewasofopinionthatthebonesmightberegardedasfossil；andincomingtothisconclusion，helaidespecialstressupontheexistenceofdendriticdeposits，withwhichtheirsurfacewascovered，andwhichwerefirstnoticeduponthembyProfessorMeyer。TothiscommunicationIappendedabriefreportontheresultsofmyanatomicalexaminationofthebones。TheconclusionsatwhichIarrivedwere：——1st。Thattheextraordinaryformoftheskullwasduetoanaturalconformationhithertonotknowntoexist，eveninthemostbarbarousraces。2nd。
ThattheseremarkablehumanremainsbelongedtoaperiodantecedenttothetimeoftheCeltsandGermans，andwereinallprobabilityderivedfromoneofthewildracesofNorth—westernEurope，spokenofbyLatinwriters；andwhichwereencounteredasautochthonesbytheGermanimmigrants。And3rdly。Thatitwasbeyonddoubtthatthesehumanrelicsweretraceabletoaperiodatwhichthelatestanimalsofthediluviumstillexisted；butthatnoproofofthisassumption，norconsequentlyoftheirso—termed’fossil’condition，wasaffordedbythecircumstancesunderwhichtheboneswerediscovered。
FIG。23。——TheEngisskullviewedfromabove（A）andinfront（B）。
\"AsDr。Fuhlrotthasnotyetpublishedhisdescriptionofthesecircumstances，Iborrowthefollowingaccountofthemfromoneofhisletters。’Asmallcaveorgrotto，highenoughtoadmitaman，andabout15feetdeepfromtheentrance，whichis7or8feetwide，existsinthesouthernwallofthegorgeoftheNeanderthal，asitistermed，atadistanceofabout100feetfromtheDussel，andabout60feetabovethebottomofthevalley。Initsearlieranduninjuredcondition，thiscavernopeneduponanarrowplateaulyinginfrontofit，andfromwhichtherockywalldescendedalmostperpendicularlyintotheriver。Itcouldbereached，thoughwithdifficulty，fromabove。
Theunevenfloorwascoveredtoathicknessof4or5feetwithadepositofmud，sparinglyintermixedwithroundedfragmentsofchert。
Intheremovingofthisdeposit，theboneswerediscovered。Theskullwasfirstnoticed，placednearesttotheentranceofthecavern；andfurtherin，theotherbones，lyinginthesamehorizontalplane。OfthisIwasassured，inthemostpositiveterms，bytwolabourerswhowereemployedtoclearoutthegrotto，andwhowerequestionedbymeonthespot。Atfirstnoideawasentertainedofthebonesbeinghuman；
anditwasnottillseveralweeksaftertheirdiscoverythattheywererecognisedassuchbyme，andplacedinsecurity。But，astheimportanceofthediscoverywasnotatthetimeperceived，thelabourerswereverycarelessinthecollecting，andsecuredchieflyonlythelargerbones；andtothiscircumstanceitmaybeattributedthatfragmentsmerelyoftheprobablyperfectskeletoncameintomypossession’
\"Myanatomicalexaminationofthesebonesaffordedthefollowingresults：——
\"Thecraniumisofunusualsize，andofalongellipticalform。Amostremarkablepeculiarityisatonceobviousintheextraordinarydevelopmentofthefrontalsinuses，owingtowhichthesuperciliaryridges，whichcoalescecompletelyinthemiddle，arerenderedsoprominent，thatthefrontalboneexhibitsaconsiderablehollowordepressionabove，orratherbehindthem，whilstadeepdepressionisalsoformedinthesituationoftherootofthenose。Theforeheadisnarrowandlow，thoughthemiddleandhinderportionsofthecranialarcharewelldeveloped。Unfortunately，thefragmentoftheskullthathasbeenpreservedconsistsonlyoftheportionsituatedabovetheroofoftheorbitsandthesuperioroccipitalridges，whicharegreatlydeveloped，andalmostconjoinedsoastoformahorizontaleminence。Itincludesalmostthewholeofthefrontalbone，bothparietals，asmallpartofthesquamousandtheupper—thirdoftheoccipital。Therecentlyfracturedsurfacesshowthattheskullwasbrokenatthetimeofitsdisinterment。Thecavityholds16，876grainsofwater，whenceitscubicalcontentsmaybeestimatedat57。64inches，or1033。24cubiccentimetres。Inmakingthisestimation，thewaterissupposedtostandonalevelwiththeorbitalplateofthefrontal，withthedeepestnotchinthesquamousmarginoftheparietal，andwiththesuperiorsemicircularridgesoftheoccipital。Estimatedindriedmillet—seed，thecontentsequalled31ounces，PrussianApothecaries’weight。Thesemicircularlineindicatingtheupperboundaryoftheattachmentofthetemporalmuscle，thoughnotverystronglymarked，ascendsneverthelesstomorethanhalftheheightoftheparietalbone。Ontherightsuperciliaryridgeisobservableanobliquefurrowordepression，indicativeofaninjuryreceivedduringlife。*
[footnote]*This，Mr。Buskhaspointedout，isprobablythenotchforthefrontalnerve。Thecoronalandsagittalsuturesareontheexteriornearlyclosed，andontheinsidesocompletelyossifiedastohaveleftnotraceswhatever，whilstthelambdoidalremainsquiteopen。ThedepressionsforthePacchionianglandsaredeepandnumerous；andthereisanunusuallydeepvasculargrooveimmediatelybehindthecoronalsuture，which，asitterminatesintheforamen，nodoubttransmitteda’venaemissaria’。Thecourseofthefrontalsutureisindicatedexternallybyaslightridge；andwhereitjoinsthecoronal，thisridgerisesintoasmallprotuberance。Thecourseofthesagittalsutureisgrooved，andabovetheangleoftheoccipitalbonetheparietalsaredepressed。
mm。*
[footnote]*ThenumbersinbracketsarethosewhichIshouldassigntothedifferentmeasures，astakenfromtheplastercast。——G。B。
Thelengthoftheskullfromthenasalprocessofthefrontaloverthevertextothesuperiorsemicircularlinesoftheoccipitalmeasures……303（300）=12。0\"。
Circumferenceovertheorbitalridgesandthesuperiorsemicircularlinesoftheoccipital……590（590）=23。37\"or23\"。
Widthofthefrontalfromthemiddleofthetemporallineononesidetothesamepointontheopposite……104（114）=4。1\"——4。5\"。
Lengthofthefrontalfromthenasal。
processtothecoronalsuture……133（125）=5。25\"——5\"。
Extremewidthofthefrontalsinuses……25（23）=1。0\"——0。9\"。
Verticalheightabovealinejoiningthedeepestnotchesinthesquamousborderoftheparietals……70=2。75\"。
Widthofhinderpartofskullfromoneparietalprotuberancetotheother……138（150）=5。4\"——5。9\"
Distancefromtheupperangleoftheoccipitaltothesuperiorsemicircularlines……51（60）=1。9\"——2。4\"。
Thicknessoftheboneattheparietalprotuberance……8。
——attheangleoftheoccipital……9。
——atthesuperiorsemicircularlineoftheoccipital……10=0。3\"
\"Besidesthecranium，thefollowingboneshavebeensecured：——
\"1。Boththigh—bones，perfect。These，liketheskull，andalltheotherbones，arecharacterizedbytheirunusualthickness，andthegreatdevelopmentofalltheelevationsanddepressionsfortheattachmentofmuscles。IntheAnatomicalMuseumatBonn，underthedesignationof’Giant’s—bones，’aresomerecentthigh—bones，withwhichinthicknesstheforegoingprettynearlycorrespond，althoughtheyareshorter。
Giant’sbones。Fossilbones。
mm。mm。
Length……542=21。4\"……438=17。4\"
Diameterofheadoffemur……54=2。14\"……53=2。0\"
\"oflowerarticularend，fromonecondyletotheother……89=3。5\"……87=3。4\"
Diameteroffemurinthemiddle……33=1。2\"……30=1。1\"
\"2。Aperfectrighthumerus，whosesizeshowsthatitbelongstothethigh—bones。
mm。
Length……312=12。3\"
Thicknessinthemiddle……26=1。0\"
Diameterofhead……49=1。9\"
\"Alsoaperfectrightradiusofcorrespondingdimensions，andtheupper—thirdofarightulnacorrespondingtothehumerusandradius。
\"3。Alefthumerusofwhichtheupper—thirdiswanting，andwhichissomuchslendererthantherightasapparentlytobelongtoadistinctindividual；aleft’ulna’，which，thoughcomplete，ispathologicallydeformed，thecoronoidprocessbeingsomuchenlargedbybonygrowth，thatflexureoftheelbowbeyondarightanglemusthavebeenimpossible；theanteriorfossaofthehumerusforthereceptionofthecoronoidprocessbeingalsofilledupwithasimilarbonygrowth。Atthesametime，theolecranoniscurvedstronglydownwards。Asthebonepresentsnosignofrachiticdegeneration，itmaybesupposedthataninjurysustainedduringlifewasthecauseoftheanchylosis。Whentheleftulnaiscomparedwiththerightradius，itmightatfirstsightbeconcludedthatthebonesrespectivelybelongedtodifferentindividuals，theulnabeingmorethanhalfaninchtooshortforarticulationwithacorrespondingradius。Butitisclearthatthisshortening，aswellastheattenuationofthelefthumerus，arebothconsequentuponthepathologicalconditionabovedescribed。
\"4。Aleft’ilium’，almostperfect，andbelongingtothefemur：afragmentoftheright’scapula’；theanteriorextremityofariboftherightside；andthesamepartofariboftheleftside；thehinderpartofariboftherightside；andlastly，twohinderportionsandonemiddleportionofribs，whichfromtheirunusuallyroundedshape，andabruptcurvature，moreresembletheribsofacarnivorousanimalthanthoseofaman。Dr。H。v。Meyer，however，towhosejudgmentIdefer，willnotventuretodeclarethemtoberibsofanyanimal；anditonlyremainstosupposethatthisabnormalconditionhasarisenfromanunusuallypowerfuldevelopmentofthethoracicmuscles。
\"Thebonesadherestronglytothetongue，although，asprovedbytheuseofhydrochloricacid，thegreaterpartofthecartilageisstillretainedinthem，whichappears，however，tohaveundergonethattransformationintogelatinewhichhasbeenobservedbyv。Bibrainfossilbones。Thesurfaceofallthebonesisinmanyspotscoveredwithminuteblackspecks，which，moreespeciallyunderalens，areseentobeformedofverydelicate’dendrites’。Thesedeposits，whichwerefirstobservedonthebonesbyDr。Meyer，aremostdistinctontheinnersurfaceofthecranialbones。Theyconsistofaferruginouscompound，and，fromtheirblackcolour，maybesupposedtocontainmanganese。Similardendriticformationsalsooccur，notunfrequently，onlaminatedrocks，andareusuallyfoundinminutefissuresandcracks。
AtthemeetingoftheLowerRhineSocietyatBonn，onthe1stApril，1857，Prof。MeyerstatedthathehadnoticedinthemuseumofPoppelsdorfsimilardendriticcrystallizationsonseveralfossilbonesofanimals，andparticularlyonthoseof’Ursusspelaeus’，butstillmoreabundantlyandbeautifullydisplayedonthefossilbonesandteethof’Equusadamiticus’，’Elephasprimigenius’，etc。，fromthecavesofBolveandSundwig。Faintindicationsofsimilar’dendrites’werevisibleinaRomanskullfromSiegburg；whilstotherancientskulls，whichhadlainforcenturiesintheearth，presentednotraceofthem。*
[footnote]*’Verh。desNaturhist’。VereinsinBonn，xiv。
1857。IamindebtedtoH。v。Meyerforthefollowingremarksonthissubject：——
’Theincipientformationofdendriticdeposits，whichwereformerlyregardedasasignofatrulyfossilcondition，isinteresting。Ithasevenbeensupposedthatindiluvialdepositsthepresenceof’dendrites’mightberegardedasaffordingacertainmarkofdistinctionbetweenbonesmixedwiththediluviumatasomewhatlaterperiodandthetruediluvialrelics，towhichaloneitwassupposedthatthesedepositswereconfined。ButIhavelongbeenconvincedthatneithercantheabsenceof’dendrites’beregardedasindicativeofrecentage，northeirpresenceassufficienttoestablishthegreatantiquityoftheobjectsuponwhichtheyoccur。Ihavemyselfnoticeduponpaper，whichcouldscarcelybemorethanayearold，dendriticdeposits，whichcouldnotbedistinguishedfromthoseonfossilbones。ThusIpossessadog’sskullfromtheRomancolonyoftheneighbouringHeddersheim，’CastrumHadrianum’，whichisinnowaydistinguishablefromthefossilbonesfromtheFrankishcaves；itpresentsthesamecolour，andadherestothetonguejustastheydo；sothatthischaracteralso，which，ataformermeetingofGermannaturalistsatBonn，gaverisetoamusingscenesbetweenBucklandandSchmerling，isnolongerofanyvalue。Indisputedcases，therefore，theconditionofthebonecanscarcelyaffordthemeansfordeterminingwithcertaintywhetheritbefossil，thatistosay，whetheritbelongtogeologicalantiquityortothehistoricalperiod。’