On Some Fossil Remains of Man
T >>
Thomas H. Huxley >> On Some Fossil Remains of Man
This etext was prepared by Amy E. Zelmer.
ON SOME FOSSIL REMAINS OF MAN
by Thomas H. Huxley
I HAVE endeavoured to show, in the preceding Essay, that the ANTHROPINI,
or Man Family, form a very well defined group of the Primates, between
which and the immediately following Family, the CATARHINI, there is, in
the existing world, the same entire absence of any transitional form or
connecting link, as between the CATARHINI and PLATYRHINI.
It is a commonly received doctrine, however, that the structural
intervals between the various existing modifications of organic beings
may be diminished, or even obliterated, if we take into account the
long and varied succession of animals and plants which have preceded
those now living and which are known to us only by their fossilized
remains. How far this doctrine is well based, how far, on the other
hand, as our knowledge at present stands, it is an overstatement of the
real facts of the case, and an exaggeration of the conclusions fairly
deducible from them, are points of grave importance, but into the
discussion of which I do not, at present, propose to enter. It is
enough that such a view of the relations of extinct to living beings
has been propounded, to lead us to inquire, with anxiety, how far the
recent discoveries of human remains in a fossil state bear out, or
oppose, that view.
I shall confine myself, in discussing this question, to those
fragmentary Human skulls from the caves of Engis in the valley of the
Meuse, in Belgium, and of the Neanderthal near Dusseldorf, the
geological relations of which have been examined with so much care by
Sir Charles Lyell; upon whose high authority I shall take it for
granted, that the Engis skull belonged to a contemporary of the Mammoth
('Elephas primigenius') and of the woolly Rhinoceros ('Rhinoceros
tichorhinus'), with the bones of which it was found associated; and that
the Neanderthal skull is of great, though uncertain, antiquity.
Whatever be the geological age of the latter skull, I conceive it is
quite safe (on the ordinary principles of paleontological reasoning) to
assume that the former takes us to, at least, the further side of the
vague biological limit, which separates the present geological epoch
from that which immediately preceded it. And there can be no doubt
that the physical geography of Europe has changed wonderfully, since
the bones of Men and Mammoths, Hyaenas and Rhinoceroses were washed
pell-mell into the cave of Engis.
The skull from the cave of Engis was originally discovered by Professor
Schmerling, and was described by him, together with other human remains
disinterred at the same time, in his valuable work, 'Recherches sur les
ossemens fossiles decouverts dans les cavernes de la Province de
Liege', published in 1833 (p. 59, 'et seq.'), from which the following
paragraphs are extracted, the precise expressions of the author being,
as far as possible, preserved.
"In the first place, I must remark that these human remains, which are
in my possession, are characterized like thousands of bones which I
have lately been disinterring, by the extent of the decomposition which
they have undergone, which is precisely the same as that of the extinct
species: all, with a few exceptions, are broken; some few are rounded,
as is frequently found to be the case in fossil remains of other
species. The fractures are vertical or oblique; none of them are
eroded; their colour does not differ from that of other fossil bones,
and varies from whitish yellow to blackish. All are lighter than
recent bones, with the exception of those which have a calcareous
incrustation, and the cavities of which are filled with such matter.
"The cranium which I have caused to be figured, Plate I., Figs. 1, 2, is
that of an old person. The sutures are beginning to be effaced: all the
facial bones are wanting, and of the temporal bones only a fragment of
that of the right side is preserved.
"The face and the base of the cranium had been detached before the skull
was deposited in the cave, for we were unable to find those parts,
though the whole cavern was regularly searched. The cranium was met
with at a depth of a metre and a half [five feet nearly], hidden under
an osseous breccia, composed of the remains of small animals, and
containing one rhinoceros tusk, with several teeth of horses and of
ruminants. This breccia, which has been spoken of above (p. 30), was a
metre [3 1/4 feet about] wide, and rose to the height of a metre and a
half above the floor of the cavern, to the walls of which it adhered
strongly.
"The earth which contained this human skull exhibited no trace of
disturbance: teeth of rhinoceros, horse, hyaena, and bear, surrounded
it on all sides.
FIG. 22.--The skull from the cave of Engis--viewed from the right side.
'a' glabella, 'b' occipital protuberance, ('a' to 'b'
glabello-occipital line), 'c' auditory foramen.
"The famous Blumenbach* has directed attention to the differences
presented by the form and the dimensions of human crania of different
races. This important work would have assisted us greatly, if the
face, a part essential for the determination of race, with more or less
accuracy, had not been wanting in our fossil cranium.
[footnote] *Decas Collectionis suae craniorum diversarum
gentium illustrata. Gottingae, 1790-1820.
"We are convinced that even if the skull had been complete, it would not
have been possible to pronounce, with certainty, upon a single
specimen; for individual variations are so numerous in the crania of
one and the same race, that one cannot, without laying oneself open to
large chances of error, draw any inference from a single fragment of a
cranium to the general form of the head to which it belonged.
"Nevertheless, in order to neglect no point respecting the form of this
fossil skull, we may observe that, from the first, the elongated and
narrow form of the forehead attracted our attention.
"In fact, the slight elevation of the frontal, its narrowness, and the
form of the orbit, approximate it more nearly to the cranium of an
Ethiopian than to that of an European: the elongated form and the
produced occiput are also characters which we believe to be observable
in our fossil cranium; but to remove all doubt upon that subject I have
caused the contours of the cranium of an European and of an Ethiopian
to be drawn and the foreheads represented. Plate II., Figs. 1 and 2,
and, in the same plate, Figs. 3 and 4, will render the differences
easily distinguishable; and a single glance at the figures will be more
instructive than a long and wearisome description.
"At whatever conclusion we may arrive as to the origin of the man from
whence this fossil skull proceeded, we may express an opinion without
exposing ourselves to a fruitless controversy. Each may adopt the
hypothesis which seems to him most probable: for my own part, I hold it
to be demonstrated that this cranium has belonged to a person of
limited intellectual faculties, and we conclude thence that it belonged
to a man of a low degree of civilization: a deduction which is borne
out by contrasting the capacity of the frontal with that of the
occipital region.
"Another cranium of a young individual was discovered in the floor of
the cavern beside the tooth of an elephant; the skull was entire when
found, but the moment it was lifted it fell into pieces, which I have
not, as yet, been able to put together again. But I have represented
the bones of the upper jaw, Plate I., Fig. 5. The state of the alveoli
and the teeth, shows that the molars had not yet pierced the gum.
Detached milk molars and some fragments of a human skull proceed from
this same place. The Figure 3 represents a human superior incisor
tooth, the size of which is truly remarkable.*
[footnote] *In a subsequent passage, Schmerling remarks upon
the occurrence of an incisor tooth 'of enormous size' from
the caverns of Engihoul. The tooth figured is somewhat
long, but its dimensions do not appear to me to be
otherwise remarkable.
"Figure 4 is a fragment of a superior maxillary bone, the molar teeth of
which are worn down to the roots.
"I possess two vertebrae, a first and last dorsal.
"A clavicle of the left side (see Plate III., Fig. 1); although it
belonged to a young individual, this bone shows that he must have been
of great stature.*
[footnote] *The figure of this clavicle measures 5 inches
from end to end in a straight line--so that the bone is
rather a small than a large one.
"Two fragments of the radius, badly preserved, do not indicate that the
height of the man, to whom they belonged, exceeded five feet and a
half.
"As to the remains of the upper extremities, those which are in my
possession consist merely of a fragment of an ulna and of a radius
(Plate III., Figs. 5 and 6).
"Figure 2, Plate IV., represents a metacarpal bone, contained in the
breccia, of which we have spoken; it was found in the lower part above
the cranium: add to this some metacarpal bones, found at very different
distances, half-a-dozen metatarsals, three phalanges of the hand, and
one of the foot.
"This is a brief enumeration of the remains of human bones collected in
the cavern of Engis, which has preserved for us the remains of three
individuals, surrounded by those of the Elephant, of the Rhinoceros,
and of Carnivora of species unknown in the present creation."
From the cave of Engihoul, opposite that of Engis, on the right bank of
the Meuse, Schmerling obtained the remains of three other individuals
of Man, among which were only two fragments of parietal bones, but many
bones of the extremities. In one case a broken fragment of an ulna was
soldered to a like fragment of a radius by stalagmite, a condition
frequently observed among the bones of the Cave Bear ('Ursus
spelaeus'), found in the Belgian caverns.
It was in the cavern of Engis that Professor Schmerling found, incrusted
with stalagmite and joined to a stone, the pointed bone implement,
which he has figured in Fig. 7 of his Plate XXXVI., and worked flints
were found by him in all those Belgian caves, which contained an
abundance of fossil bones.
A short letter from M. Geoffroy St. Hilaire, published in the 'Comptes
Rendus' of the Academy of Sciences of Paris, for July 2nd, 1838, speaks
of a visit (and apparently a very hasty one) paid to the collection of
Professor 'Schermidt' (which is presumably a misprint for Schmerling)
at Liege. The writer briefly criticises the drawings which illustrate
Schmerling's work, and affirms that the "human cranium is a little
longer than it is represented" in Schmerling's figure. The only other
remark worth quoting is this:--"The aspect of the human bones differs
little from that of the cave bones, with which we are familiar, and of
which there is a considerable collection in the same place. With
respect to their special forms, compared with those of the varieties of
recent human crania, few 'certain' conclusions can be put forward; for
much greater differences exist between the different specimens of
well-characterized varieties, than between the fossil cranium of Liege
and that of one of those varieties selected as a term of comparison."
Geoffroy St. Hilaire's remarks are, it will be observed, little but an
echo of the philosophic doubts of the describer and discoverer of the
remains. As to the critique upon Schmerling's figures, I find that the
side view given by the latter is really about 3/10ths of an inch
shorter than the original, and that the front view is diminished to
about the same extent. Otherwise the representation is not, in any
way, inaccurate, but corresponds very well with the cast which is in my
possession.
A piece of the occipital bone, which Schmerling seems to have missed,
has since been fitted on to the rest of the cranium by an accomplished
anatomist, Dr. Spring, of Liege, under whose direction an excellent
plaster cast was made for Sir Charles Lyell. It is upon and from a
duplicate of that cast that my own observations and the accompanying
figures, the outlines of which are copied from very accurate Camera
lucida drawings, by my friend Mr. Busk, reduced to one-half of the
natural size, are made.
As Professor Schmerling observes, the base of the skull is destroyed,
and the facial bones are entirely absent; but the roof of the cranium,
consisting of the frontal, parietal, and the greater part of the
occipital bones, as far as the middle of the occipital foramen, is
entire or nearly so. The left temporal bone is wanting. Of the right
temporal, the parts in the immediate neighbourhood of the auditory
foramen, the mastoid process, and a considerable portion of the
squamous element of the temporal are well preserved (Fig. 22).
The lines of fracture which remain between the coadjusted pieces of the
skull, and are faithfully displayed in Schmerling's figure, are readily
traceable in the cast. The sutures are also discernible, but the
complex disposition of their serrations, shown in the figure, is not
obvious in the cast. Though the ridges which give attachment to muscles
are not excessively prominent, they are well marked, and taken together
with the apparently well developed frontal sinuses, and the condition
of the sutures, leave no doubt on my mind that the skull is that of an
adult, if not middle-aged man.
The extreme length of the skull is 7.7 inches. Its extreme breadth,
which corresponds very nearly with the interval between the parietal
protuberances, is not more than 5.4 inches. The proportion of the
length to the breadth is therefore very nearly as 100 to 70. If a line
be drawn from the point at which the brow curves in towards the root of
the nose, and which is called the 'glabella' ('a') (Fig. 22), to the
occipital protuberance ('b'), and the distance to the highest point of
the arch of the skull be measured perpendicularly from this line, it
will be found to be 4.75 inches. Viewed from above, Fig. 23, A, the
forehead presents an evenly rounded curve, and passes into the contour
of the sides and back of the skull, which describes a tolerably regular
elliptical curve.
The front view (Fig. 23, B) shows that the roof of the skull was very
regularly and elegantly arched in the transverse direction, and that
the transverse diameter was a little less below the parietal
protuberances, than above them. The forehead cannot be called narrow in
relation to the rest of the skull, nor can it be called a retreating
forehead; on the contrary, the antero-posterior contour of the skull is
well arched, so that the distance along that contour, from the nasal
depression to the occipital protuberance, measures about 13.75 inches.
The transverse arc of the skull, measured from one auditory foramen to
the other, across the middle of the sagittal suture, is about 13
inches. The sagittal suture itself is 5.5 inches long.
The supraciliary prominences or brow-ridges (on each side of 'a', Fig.
22) are well, but not excessively, developed, and are separated by a
median depression. Their principal elevation is disposed so obliquely
that I judge them to be due to large frontal sinuses.
If a line joining the glabella and the occipital protuberance ('a', 'b',
Fig. 22) be made horizontal, no part of the occipital region projects
more than 1/10th of an inch behind the posterior extremity of that
line, and the upper edge of the auditory foramen ('c') is almost in
contact with a line drawn parallel with this upon the outer surface of
the skull.
A transverse line drawn from one auditory foramen to the other
traverses, as usual, the forepart of the occipital foramen. The
capacity of the interior of this fragmentary skull has not been
ascertained.
The history of the Human remains from the cavern in the Neanderthal may
best be given in the words of their original describer, Dr
Schaaffhausen*, as translated by Mr. Busk.
[footnote] *ON THE CRANIA OF THE MOST ANCIENT RACES OF MAN.
By Professor D. Schaaffhausen, of Bonn. (From Muller's
'Archiv'., 1858, pp. 453.) With Remarks, and original
Figures, taken from a Cast of the Neanderthal Cranium. By
George Busk, F.R.S., etc. 'Natural History Review'. April,
1861.
"In the early part of the year 1857, a human skeleton was discovered in
a limestone cave in the Neanderthal, near Hochdal, between Dusseldorf
and Elberfeld. Of this, however, I was unable to procure more than a
plaster cast of the cranium, taken at Elberfeld, from which I drew up
an account of its remarkable conformation, which was, in the first
instance, read on the 4th of February, 1857, at the meeting of the
Lower Rhine Medical and Natural History Society, at Bonn.*
[footnote] *'Verhandl. d. Naturhist.' Vereins der preuss.
Rheinlande und Westphalens., xiv. Bonn, 1857.
Subsequently Dr. Fuhlrott, to whom science is indebted for the
preservation of these bones, which were not at first regarded as human,
and into whose possession they afterwards came, brought the cranium
from Elberfeld to Bonn, and entrusted it to me for more accurate
anatomical examination. At the General Meeting of the Natural History
Society of Prussian Rhineland and Westphalia, at Bonn, on the 2nd of
June, 1857,* Dr Fuhlrott himself gave a full account of the locality,
and of the circumstances under which the discovery was made.
[footnote] *'Ib. Correspondenzblatt. No. 2.
He was of opinion that the bones might be regarded as fossil; and in
coming to this conclusion, he laid especial stress upon the existence
of dendritic deposits, with which their surface was covered, and which
were first noticed upon them by Professor Meyer. To this communication
I appended a brief report on the results of my anatomical examination of
the bones. The conclusions at which I arrived were:--1st. That the
extraordinary form of the skull was due to a natural conformation
hitherto not known to exist, even in the most barbarous races. 2nd.
That these remarkable human remains belonged to a period antecedent to
the time of the Celts and Germans, and were in all probability derived
from one of the wild races of North-western Europe, spoken of by Latin
writers; and which were encountered as autochthones by the German
immigrants. And 3rdly. That it was beyond doubt that these human
relics were traceable to a period at which the latest animals of the
diluvium still existed; but that no proof of this assumption, nor
consequently of their so-termed 'fossil' condition, was afforded by the
circumstances under which the bones were discovered.
FIG. 23.--The Engis skull viewed from above (A) and in front (B).
"As Dr. Fuhlrott has not yet published his description of these
circumstances, I borrow the following account of them from one of his
letters. 'A small cave or grotto, high enough to admit a man, and
about 15 feet deep from the entrance, which is 7 or 8 feet wide, exists
in the southern wall of the gorge of the Neanderthal, as it is termed,
at a distance of about 100 feet from the Dussel, and about 60 feet
above the bottom of the valley. In its earlier and uninjured
condition, this cavern opened upon a narrow plateau lying in front of
it, and from which the rocky wall descended almost perpendicularly into
the river. It could be reached, though with difficulty, from above.
The uneven floor was covered to a thickness of 4 or 5 feet with a
deposit of mud, sparingly intermixed with rounded fragments of chert.
In the removing of this deposit, the bones were discovered. The skull
was first noticed, placed nearest to the entrance of the cavern; and
further in, the other bones, lying in the same horizontal plane. Of
this I was assured, in the most positive terms, by two labourers who
were employed to clear out the grotto, and who were questioned by me on
the spot. At first no idea was entertained of the bones being human;
and it was not till several weeks after their discovery that they were
recognised as such by me, and placed in security. But, as the
importance of the discovery was not at the time perceived, the
labourers were very careless in the collecting, and secured chiefly
only the larger bones; and to this circumstance it may be attributed
that fragments merely of the probably perfect skeleton came into my
possession'
"My anatomical examination of these bones afforded the following
results:--
"The cranium is of unusual size, and of a long elliptical form. A most
remarkable peculiarity is at once obvious in the extraordinary
development of the frontal sinuses, owing to which the superciliary
ridges, which coalesce completely in the middle, are rendered so
prominent, that the frontal bone exhibits a considerable hollow or
depression above, or rather behind them, whilst a deep depression is
also formed in the situation of the root of the nose. The forehead is
narrow and low, though the middle and hinder portions of the cranial
arch are well developed. Unfortunately, the fragment of the skull that
has been preserved consists only of the portion situated above the roof
of the orbits and the superior occipital ridges, which are greatly
developed, and almost conjoined so as to form a horizontal eminence. It
includes almost the whole of the frontal bone, both parietals, a small
part of the squamous and the upper-third of the occipital. The
recently fractured surfaces show that the skull was broken at the time
of its disinterment. The cavity holds 16,876 grains of water, whence
its cubical contents may be estimated at 57.64 inches, or 1033.24 cubic
centimetres. In making this estimation, the water is supposed to stand
on a level with the orbital plate of the frontal, with the deepest
notch in the squamous margin of the parietal, and with the superior
semicircular ridges of the occipital. Estimated in dried millet-seed,
the contents equalled 31 ounces, Prussian Apothecaries' weight. The
semicircular line indicating the upper boundary of the attachment of
the temporal muscle, though not very strongly marked, ascends
nevertheless to more than half the height of the parietal bone. On the
right superciliary ridge is observable an oblique furrow or depression,
indicative of an injury received during life.*
[footnote] *This, Mr. Busk has pointed out, is probably
the notch for the frontal nerve. The coronal and sagittal
sutures are on the exterior nearly closed, and on the
inside so completely ossified as to have left no traces
whatever, whilst the lambdoidal remains quite open. The
depressions for the Pacchionian glands are deep and
numerous; and there is an unusually deep vascular groove
immediately behind the coronal suture, which, as it
terminates in the foramen, no doubt transmitted a 'vena
emissaria'. The course of the frontal suture is indicated
externally by a slight ridge; and where it joins the
coronal, this ridge rises into a small protuberance. The
course of the sagittal suture is grooved, and above the
angle of the occipital bone the parietals are depressed.
mm.*
[footnote] *The numbers in brackets are those which I should
assign to the different measures, as taken from the plaster
cast.--G. B.
The length of the skull from the nasal
process of the frontal over the vertex
to the superior semicircular lines of the
occipital measures.............................303 (300) = 12.0".
Circumference over the orbital ridges and
the superior semicircular lines of the
occipital......................................590 (590) = 23.37" or 23".
Width of the frontal from the middle of
the temporal line on one side to the
same point on the opposite.....................104 (114) = 4.1"--4.5".
Length of the frontal from the nasal.
process to the coronal suture..................133 (125) = 5.25"--5".
Extreme width of the frontal sinuses...........25 (23) = 1.0"--0.9".
Vertical height above a line joining the
deepest notches in the squamous border
of the parietals...............................70 = 2.75".
Width of hinder part of skull from one
parietal protuberance to the other.............138 (150) = 5.4"--5.9"
Distance from the upper angle of the
occipital to the superior semicircular
lines..........................................51 (60) = 1.9"--2.4".
Thickness of the bone at the parietal
protuberance...................................8.
--at the angle of the occipital................9.
--at the superior semicircular line of
the occipital..................................10 = 0.3"
"Besides the cranium, the following bones have been secured:--
"1. Both thigh-bones, perfect. These, like the skull, and all the
other bones, are characterized by their unusual thickness, and the
great development of all the elevations and depressions for the
attachment of muscles. In the Anatomical Museum at Bonn, under the
designation of 'Giant's-bones,' are some recent thigh-bones, with which
in thickness the foregoing pretty nearly correspond, although they are
shorter.