Evolution (Biology); Glacial epoch; Human beings -- Origin; Human evolution
The cranium, which Dr. Fuhlrott showed me, was covered both on its outer
and inner surface, and especially on the latter, with a profusion of
dendritical crystallisations, and some other bones of the skeleton were
ornamented in the same way. These markings, as Dr. Hermann von Meyer
observes, afford no sure criterion of antiquity, for they have been
observed on Roman bones. Nevertheless, they are more common in bones
that have been long embedded in the earth. The skull and bones,
moreover, of the Neanderthal skeleton had lost so much of their animal
matter as to adhere strongly to the tongue, agreeing in this respect
with the ordinary condition of fossil remains of the Pleistocene period.
On the whole, I think it probable that this fossil may be of about the
same age as those found by Schmerling in the Liege caverns; but, as no
other animal remains were found with it, there is no proof that it
may not be newer. Its position lends no countenance whatever to the
supposition of its being more ancient.
When the skull and other parts of the skeleton were first exhibited at
a German scientific meeting at Bonn, in 1857, some doubts were
expressed by several naturalists, whether it was truly human. Professor
Schaaffhausen, who, with the other experienced zoologists, did not share
these doubts, observed that the cranium, which included the frontal
bone, both parietals, part of the squamous, and the upper third of the
occipital, was of unusual size and thickness, the forehead narrow and
very low, and the projection of the supra-orbital ridges enormously
great. He also stated that the absolute and relative length of the thigh
bone, humerus, radius, and ulna, agreed well with the dimensions of a
European individual of like stature at the present day; but that the
thickness of the bones was very extraordinary, and the elevations and
depressions for the attachment of muscles were developed in an unusual
degree. Some of the ribs, also, were of a singularly rounded shape and
abrupt curvature, which was supposed to indicate great power in the
thoracic muscles.*
(* Professor Schaaffhausen's "Memoir" translated "Natural
History Review" April 1861.)
In the same memoir, the Prussian anatomist remarks that the depression
of the forehead (See Figure 3.), is not due to any artificial
flattening, such as is practised in various modes by barbarous nations
in the Old and New World, the skull being quite symmetrical, and showing
no indication of counter-pressure at the occiput; whereas, according
to Morton, in the Flat-heads of the Columbia, the frontal and parietal
bones are always unsymmetrical.*
(* "Natural History Review" Number 2 page 160.)
On the whole, Professor Schaaffhausen concluded that the individual
to whom the Neanderthal skull belonged must have been distinguished by
small cerebral development, and uncommon strength of corporeal frame.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account