The order includes the femurs, a large and primitive family with
ape-like features--the Germans call them "half-apes"--the monkeys,
the man-like apes, and man. This classification according to structure
corresponds with the successive appearance of the various families in
the geological record. The femurs appear in the Eocene; the monkeys, and
afterwards the apes, in the Miocene, the first semi-human forms in the
Pleistocene, though they must have been developed before this. It is
hardly necessary to say that science does not regard man as a descendant
of the known anthropoid apes, or these as descended from the monkeys.
They are successive types or phases of development, diverging early from
each other. Just as the succeeding horse-types of the record are not
necessarily related to each other in a direct line, yet illustrate the
evolution of a type which culminates in the horse, so the spreading and
branching members of the Primate group illustrate the evolution of a
type of organism which culminates in man. The particular relationship of
the various families, living and dead, will need careful study.
That there is a general blood-relationship, and that man is much
more closely related to the anthropoid apes than to any of the lower
Primates, is no longer a matter of controversy. In Rudolph Virchow there
died, a few years ago, the last authoritative man of science to express
any doubt about it. There are, however, non-scientific writers who, by
repeating the ambiguous phrase that it is "only a theory," convey the
impression to inexpert readers that it is still more or less an open
question. We will therefore indicate a few of the lines of evidence
which have overcome the last hesitations of scientific men, and closed
the discussion as to the fact.
The very close analogy of structure between man and the ape at once
suggests that they had a common ancestor. There are cases in which two
widely removed animals may develop a similar organ independently, but
there is assuredly no possibility of their being alike in all organs,
unless by common inheritance. Yet the essential identity of structure in
man and the ape is only confirmed by every advance of science, and would
of itself prove the common parentage. Such minor differences as there
are between man and the higher ape--in the development of the cerebrum,
the number of the teeth or ribs, the distribution of the hair, and so
on--are quite explicable when we reflect that the two groups must have
diverged from each other more than a million years ago.
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