Primitive Man

by Louis Figuier

Thus Hippocrates-Huxley says yes, Galen-Vogt says no, and Celsus-Lyell says neither yes nor no. This causes us but little surprise, but it induces us not to waste more time in discussing a question altogether in the dark, that is, upon altogether incomplete data.

Fig. 38.—Portion of the so-called Neanderthal Skull.

We will now turn our attention to another skull, equally celebrated, which was found in 1857 by Dr. Fuhlrott, near Dusseldorf, in a deep ravine known by the name of Neanderthal. This skull (fig. 38) was discovered in the midst of a small cave under a layer of mud about 5 feet in thickness. The entire skeleton was doubtless buried on the same spot, but the workmen engaged in clearing out the cave must have inadvertently scattered a great portion of the bones, for the largest only could be collected.

It is well to call attention to the fact that no animal remains were found near these bones; there is, therefore, no certain proof that the latter can be assigned to the epoch of the great bear: they might, in fact, be either more recent or more modern. Most geologists are, however, of opinion that they ought to be referred to the above-named early date.

The Neanderthal skull, of which we possess even a smaller portion than of the preceding, differs from the Engis skull. It is characterised by an extraordinary development of the frontal sinuses; that is, by an enormous projection of the superciliary ridges, behind which the frontal bone presents a considerable depression. The cranium is very thick, and of an elongated elliptical shape; the forehead is narrow and low.

These remarks were made by Professor Schaaffhausen, who also established the fact of the identity in length of the femur, the humerus, the radius, and the ulna, with the same bones of a modern European of equal size. But the Prussian savant was surprised at the really remarkable thickness of these bones, and also at the large development of the projections and depressions which served for the insertion of the muscles.

Fig. 38 represents this skull, which is drawn from the cast in the Museum of St. Germain.

Professor Schaaffhausen's opinion with regard to this skull is, that it manifests a degree of intelligence more limited than that of the races of negroes who are least favoured by nature, in other words, it approaches the nature of the beast more nearly than any other known human skull. But, on the other hand, Mr. Busk and Dr. Barnard Davis look upon this skull as very closely allied to the present race of men; and Professor Gratiolet produced before the Anthropological Society of Paris an idiot's head of the present day, which showed all the osteological characteristics peculiar to the Neanderthal skull. Lastly, an anthropologist of great authority, Dr. Pruner-Bey, has brought forward all requisite evidence to prove that the Neanderthal skull is identical, in all its parts, with the cranium of the Celt.