From the foregoing descriptions, it follows that of the most ancient remains considered, at least three divisions can be recognised. In the first place, come the examples described as Pithecanthropus and _Homo heidelbergensis_ (Mauer). In the second category come instances as to which no reasonable doubt as to their definitely human characters now exists (save possibly in the case of the Taubach tooth and the Hermoso atlas). Of the members of this second series, two sub-divisions here designated (_A_) and (_B_) can be demonstrated; these with the first examples complete the threefold grouping set out in the table following, with which Table A, p. 85, should be compared. GROUP I. Early ancestral forms. _Ex. gr. H. heidelbergensis._ GROUP II. _Subdivision A. Homo primigenius. Ex. gr. La Chapelle._ {H. fossilis. _Ex. _Subdivision B. H. recens_; with varieties {gr. Galley Hill._ {H. sapiens. Taking the first group (Pithecanthropus and _Homo heidelbergensis_) it is to be noticed that close correlation is quite possible. Besides this, evidence exists in each case to the effect that far-distant human ancestors are hereby revealed to their modern representatives. Of their physical characters, distinct indications are given of the possession of a small brain in a flattened brain-case associated with powerful jaws; the lower part of the face being distinguished by the absence of any projection of the chin. The teeth indicate with some degree of probability that their diet was of a mixed nature, resembling in this respect the condition of many modern savage tribes. Beyond this, the evidence is weak and indefinite. It is highly probable that these men were not arboreal: though whether they habitually assumed the distinctive erect attitude is a point still in doubt. And yet again, while the indications are not clear, it is probable that in stature they were comparable, if not superior, to the average man of to-day. Passing from this division to the second, a region of much greater certainty is entered. Of the second group, one subdivision (_A_) retains certain characters of the earlier forms. Thus the massive continuous brow-ridge persists, as do also the flattened brain-case with a large mass of jaw-muscle, and a ponderous chinless lower jaw. For the rest, the points of contrast are much more prominent than those of similarity. The brain has increased in size. This increase is very considerable in absolute amount. But relatively also to the size of the possessor, the increase in brain-material is even more striking, for the stature and consequently bulk and weight are less. The thigh-bone offers important points of difference, the earlier long slender form (in _P. erectus_) being now replaced by a shorter, curved, thick substitute. If there has been inheritance here, marked and aberrant variation is also observed.