With respect to the ethnological value of the platycnemic _tibia_, I conceive we are as yet very much in the dark. That it is a race-character would seem to me in the highest degree improbable, seeing that it would be difficult to find any other points of resemblance between the Cro-magnon platycnemic men and those whose remains were met with in the Gibraltar caves, although the platycnemism is of the same kind in each; and still less could the former gigantic race be identified with the occupants of the Perthi-Chwareu sepulchre, from whom they differ not only in stature, but even more remarkably in cranial conformation. If, then, platycnemism cannot be regarded as of any value as a race-character, it can _a fortiori_ be still less looked upon as indicative of simian tendencies, a notion that M. Broca seems somewhat inclined to favour. It is quite true that the _tibiæ_ of the gorilla and of the chimpanzee are, to a certain extent, platycnemic; but it is by no means so much so as the human platycnemic bone. The _tibia_ of a male gorilla in the College of Surgeons has a latitudinal index of ·681, and that of a female of ·650, whilst that of the chimpanzee is ·611, or exactly the mean of the Perthi-Chwareu bones. It is needless to insist upon the other marked distinctions between the simian and the human _tibia_; but as regards platycnemism it will be obvious, if we are disposed to trace it to any genetic descent, that the descendant has, in this respect, at one time far out-simianized the Simiæ. But this comparison with the anthropoid apes may, perhaps, afford ground for a suggestion respecting some possible connection between this peculiar form of the _tibia_ and the habits of the people amongst whom it has been observed. One great distinction between the human and the simian foot consists in their respective adaptations to totally distinct functions. In the one case it is simply an organ of support and progression; in the other, for the most part, of prehension. This necessarily involves a considerable difference in the proportions, &c., of the muscles by which the greater mobility and adaptability of the foot, and more particularly of the digits, are ensured. Would it not, then, be admissible to inquire how far, at any rate, posterior platycnemism may be connected with the greater freedom of motion and general adaptability of the toes enjoyed by those peoples whose feet have not been subjected to the confinement of shoes or other coverings, and who at the same time have been compelled to lead an active existence in a rude and rugged or mountainous and wooded country, where the exigencies of the chase would demand the utmost agility in climbing and otherwise?