Page:The American Journal of Science, series 4, volume 4.djvu/238

214 the inscription to be deciphered is far from being perfect; the letters remaining are few. But these are the initials, and in the connection in which they are found, chance has served science almost as well as a judicious choice among all the parts of the skeleton could have done.

The two molars represent, in reality, in addition to the maxillary bones and the face, the vegetative function; the femur represents the function of locomotion; what is left of the skull suffices to give important indications as to the cerebral and intellectual development.

Although these different pieces were found separated a certain distance one from the other, the conditions of the deposit and the circumstances of the excavations have convinced Mr. Dubois that they belonged to one and the same individual. He has made a thorough and very careful study of them, of which the conclusion is that they attest the existence, in the Pleistocene epoch, of an anthropoid species of biped intermediate between the known anthropoids and the human species, precursor of the latter and probably descended from the genus Hylobates (Gibbon). In consequence, the new species received the name of Pithecanthropus erectus.

Strongly supported as they were, these conclusions were destined to move more or less, not only the specialists in zoology, anthropology, and paleontology, but also the entire thinking world. Appearing toward the end of the year 1894, Mr. Dubois' memoir was not slow in provoking criticisms and discussions, the history of which is not without some interest.

January 3, 1895, I communicated to the Paris Society of Anthropology a detailed estimate, based upon the study of the drawings, photogravures and tables, contained in Mr. Dubois' paper, and which, in part favorable to the conclusions of the author, may be summed up as follows:

It is not certain that the specimens in question belonged to the same individual nor even to a single species, but it is possible, for there is no lack of anatomical correlation among the different pieces.

The femur, for the human species and according to my tables for the reconstitution of the stature would correspond to a height of about l⋅657m. This femur, by its pilastric index or index of a transverse section at the middle point of the