abundant as they are rare, we no longer have the perfect individual, and cannot attempt to apply the natural method; we are forced to be content with a systematic classification. This is what M. Hamy and I have been obliged to do; and without sharing the absolute opinions which were once advanced by Retzius, we took the general form of the skull as the starting point for our classification. In so doing we have, morever, only imitated paleontologists in their studies upon fossil animals.

We have already seen that considerations drawn from this method lead to a division of fossil man into two groups, the one dolichocephalic, and the other brachycephalic. The Lagoa Santa skull, which must from all appearance be the type of a distinct race, is evidently connected with the former. The accounts of this fossil are, however, at present so incomplete, that I cannot stop to consider it in such a rapid sketch as this.

In these two fundamental groups differences exist side by side with the common character. In the former these differences are very great and strongly marked; they are generally less so in the latter. Thus we have clearly distinguished the two dolichocephalic types, while we have placed in the same chapter, and as it were in a kind of family, part at least of the brachycephalic races.

Several objections may be raised against this nomenclature, of which we are well aware. We understood perfectly that the skull of La Truchère is as distinct from those of Furfooz as the Neanderthal skull is from that of CroMagnon. On the one hand, however, this skull is the extreme limit of a graduated series, from which it seemed to us difficult to detach it; on the other, this fossil, at the time when we were writing, was perfectly unique. Even at the present time it has only again been met with in the neolithic period. Thus, in giving it a place in our table, we did not wish to separate in an absolute manner an individual case.

As to the other types which we have placed in the same chapter, they form a true natural group, each at the same

time having its special characters, which by careful study we are able to recognise. The races may, therefore, be clearly defined. The Grenelle race, especially, will always be very distinct from the two Furfooz races. Nevertheless, we here no longer meet with decisive characters which strike us at the first glance, and the ethnical affinities are evidently closer. It will, perhaps, at some future time be possible to trace these three branches to the common source from which they have all sprung. In short, we must represent the present state of our knowledge without interfering with the rights of the future. Our nomenclature satisfies, we believe, this condition.

We admit then two dolichocephalic races, those of Canstadt and of Cro-Magnon. The more or less brachycephalic races are four in number. Under the title of Furfooz races we have included two races discovered in that famous locality. The Grenelle race and that of La Truchère also take their names from that of the localities where they were found.

Let us rapidly review all these races.

CHAPTER XXVI.

THE CANSTADT RACE,

I. THE name of this race is that of the village near which the first human fossil was found. In 1700, Duke Eberhard Ludwig of Wurtemberg excavated a Roman oppidum in the neighbourhood of Stuttgard. A portion of the cranial vault of a man was discovered in the midst of a number of animal bones. Geology and paleontology were, however, still in their infancy; and the nature of this precious fragment was unknown till Jaeger, in 1835, recognised its value as an argument in favour of the coexistence of man with the great extinct mammals. After close study, thanks to the kindness of M. Fraas, M. Hamy and I have been able, without any difficulty, to connect it with the famous Neanderthal skull.

II. The latter was discovered in 1857 in a small cavern near Düsseldorf. The skeleton was perfect. Unfortunately, the workmen who discovered it, broke and dispersed the bones, of which part only were saved by Dr. Fuhlrott. When exhibited the same year at the Congress of Bonn, they became the subject of long continued study and discussion. M. Schaaffhausen, although himself sometimes going beyond the truth, took his position from the first upon the right ground. Some anatomists wished, however, to consider this specimen as a special species, and even a fresh genus. It was especially considered as intermediate between man and apes, and here and there traces may still be found of these opinions.

The only cause of these exaggerations is a feature, striking it is true, which is presented by this cranial vault. In the Neanderthal man the frontal sinuses have an exceptional

development, and the superciliary ridges, almost lost in the middle of the glabella, form a most strange protuberance above the orbit. This conformation has not failed to be compared to the bony ridges which the anthropomorphous apes possess in the same place. Then, starting from this fact, it has been thought necessary to find in the rest of the cranium characters in harmony with this simian feature. Stress has been laid upon its slight elevation, the lengthened form, the projection of the occipital region, etc.

With a little partiality, and by only comparing it with modern skulls, which are considered as normal, a separate species of being has been made of the Neanderthal man. By degrees, however, other crania equally fossil have been connected with this type. Indeed, in several parts of Europe those characters which were too hastily declared to be unique have been observed in dolmens in less ancient burial places, in historical persons, and even in individuals living at the present time. There was, then, no alternative but to conclude that the Neanderthal man belonged to a formation which was unquestionably human, to a race, certain features of which were merely exaggerated in his case.

This race is none the less remarkable and perfectly characterized. In all individuals of the male sex we find a greater or less development of the superciliary prominences, which were so striking in the Neanderthal man. The low and narrow forehead appears still more receding in consequence of this contrast. The cranial vault is much flattened. Tolerably regular in its two anterior thirds, it rises towards the upper portion of the occiput, and is prolonged backwards. The entire skull is relatively narrow, and we have already seen that the cephalic index descends as low as 72. These bones are also remarkable for their thickness, which in the Eguisheim cranium reaches 11 millimetres (0.43 in.). Some of these features are modified in the female skull. The superciliary ridges disappear almost entirely. The occipital protuberance, and especially the prominence of its upper portion, are much less marked. The cephalic index

rises one or two units, but the flattening of the vault and the other characters are persistent.

The Neanderthal cranium, and all those which may also be connected with the Canstadt type, are incomplete and without the face. One skull alone, the age of which unfortunately is not determined with certainty, enables us to fill up this gap. It is that from Forbes Quarry near Gibraltar. In this case the cranium, and particularly the forehead, exactly coincide with the description given above of the Neanderthal cranium. Immense and almost circular orbits, the index of which rises almost to 68.83, well agree with the vestiges in the Neanderthal cranium, and hide by their external border the temporal region. Below, the malar bones descend almost vertically; the nasal bones are prominent; the nasal orifices very broad. The superior maxillary bone is sensibly prognathous, and lastly the dental arch is of a horse-shoe shape narrowing backwards. The whole is rude and massive. A face recently discovered by M. Piette in the Gourdan grotto, and which will shortly be described by M. Hamy, confirms the connection which we have established between the Forbes Quarry skull and the remains of the Canstadt race. Found in the inferior beds of the cave, among flints of the Moustier type, this specimen reproduces with some modifications the characters which we have just described. The inferior maxillary bone recalls that of Arcy.

If these characters are united to those presented by the celebrated maxillary bone of Naulette, we must add that the chin in the Canstadt man is but slightly prominent, and that the lower part of the face was sometimes more peculiar, in this respect, than the greater number of the skulls of Negroes from Guinea. The researches of M. Hamy have, however, shown that the singular maxillary bone discovered by M. Dupont, was again only the exaggerated realization of a type which is met with elsewhere under considerable modifications.

In short, the cranium and face of the Canstadt man must, as a rule, have presented a strangely savage aspect.