Page:Smithsonian Report (1898).djvu/542

456 the occiput, has the greatest likeness—only being double the size—to the highly vaulted skull of a gibbon. It is not strange, therefore, that I have made the facial portion of the skull not very different from that of the gibbon.

The teeth, a left second upper molar and a third right upper molar, belong, if we may judge from the circumstances of their discovery, to each other and to the skullcap. They are also modeled in a very similar manner and are in the same state of preservation and of petrifaction. The unequal wear of their crowns and the considerable difference in their size are appearances that can often be seen both in the skulls of men and of apes. Both have very strongly diverging roots, such as others as well as myself acknowledge never to have seen in human molars. Only exceptionally are there found in man upper molars with a crown of such great size. I measured on a skull from New South Wales, in Virchow's laboratory, the transverse and sagittal diameters of a left second upper molar, finding it 15.5 by 12.5 mm., and those of a third left upper molar, finding it 15 to 10.5 mm. The same dimensions of the fossil molars from Java are 11 by 12 mm. for the second upper molar, and 15.3 by 11.3 mm. for the third upper molar. A second upper molar from the cave of Spy I found to be of exactly the same dimensions as the molar from Java.

In the form of the crown the Javanese molars show a marked ape-like type; that is to say, in the relative development of their cusps. As in anthropoid apes, the posterior buccal cusp is in both teeth the smallest, so that the cusps of both are smallest on the outer side. In man the reverse is the case. Only in the third molar is an exception to this rule rarely found.

An exhaustive comparison has, however, convinced me that the teeth are in no closer relation to those of any of the living anthropoids.

In spite of all their simian characters, both, especially in the third molar, show a strong retrogression of the crown, such as is more frequently found in man than in the anthropoid apes. According to this the general arrangement of the dental arch must have been widely different from that which obtains with the great anthropoid apes. Comparing the size of the teeth with that of the skull, the proportion is found to be the same as that in the gibbon, but somewhat less than that which prevails with the anthropoid apes. They therefore agree very well with the smooth, crestless skullcap.

The femur was quite generally declared to be human by authors who had closely examined either the actual specimen or drawings of it. It has, as before mentioned, a very deceptive resemblance to the human femur. It differs from the latter, however, and that difference is as