Abstract
Table of Contents
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
Part VI
Part VII
|
Part IV: The Supposed Evolution of
the Human Skull
Chapter 2
Factors Influencing the Shape of
a Skull
For many years it has been observed
that food and environment may have a profound influence in modifying
bone structure. Recently it has been recognized that the human
skull is particularly sensitive in this respect. Many of the
more remarkable aspects of the skeletal remains of fossil man
may indeed be accounted for by such means, so that any series
arranged morphologically, without respect to age levels, is really
meaningless. Seen in this light it is often possible to view
a particular skull as owing its peculiarities not to any genetic
relationship with the lower anthropoid forms, but to a certain
community of habit and environment causing convergence and having
absolutely nothing whatever to do with derivation. The form may
be due to historical processes and have no palaeontological significance
whatever. This was Portmann's contention.
C. S. Coon also attributed Neanderthal's
form entirely to disease and to cold adaptation, with long trunk,
short limbs and arms, deep chest, etc., exactly like the Eskimo.
(13) Even man's
teeth can be profoundly modified by conditions of life. Singh
and Zingg noted that two of the more recent feral children found
in India (both of whom are now dead) had developed longer and
more pointed canines, presumably as a result of the eating of
raw meat without the use of any cutting utensils. (14) Another feral child, Clement
of Overdyke, had noticeably projecting teeth due to an uncooked
vegetarian diet. The "Wild Boy of Aveyron" had developed
canines conical in shape and very sharp, besides their being
longer than normal. Finally, Kaspar Hauser, kept captive in a
small dungeon for perhaps 12 or 14 years, had, in spite of being
given cooked food, developed a markedly depressed frontal region
as though "pressed down from above."
13. Coon, C. S., The Story of Man,
Knopf, New York, 1962, pp.40, 41.
14. Singh, J. A. L, and Zingg, Robert M., Wolf-Children and
Feral Man, Archon Books, Shoe String Press, Hamden, Connecticut,
1966, p.18.
pg
1 of 25
Of
the Australopithecines there are believed to have been two types,
A. africanus, and A. robustus. Robustus
is considered to be a later type, but less human. Africanus
had no saggital crest, or "keel," robustus had.
J. T. Robinson sees this, and stresses it is the result of diet,
and robustus was a plant eater. (15) The gorilla is also a plant eater, in whom the saggital
crest is enormous. Plant fibers can clearly be a tougher diet
than meat.
Robert B. Eckhardt, in an article
entitled "Population Genetics and Human Origins," observed
wisely: (16)
Indeed, are there any grounds
for assuming that morphological evidence alone makes it possible
to draw a valid distinction between the majority of these early
hominids and some ancestral hominid that may be concealed among
them? In view of the morphological variability among living hominoids,
I think not.
So neither stratigraphical
position nor morphological form is a safe base on which to establish
either age or relationship. With no possibility of applying the
test of actual breeding for assessment of relatedness, what really
is left but pure guesswork?
Although it seems little attention
was paid to his remarks at the time, Wilson D. Wallis some years
ago pointed out: (17)
The evidence of prehistoric
human remains does not in itself justify the inference of a common
ancestry with the apes. We base this conclusion on the fact,
if fact it be, that practically all the changes in man's structure
traceable through prehistoric remains are the result of changes
in food and habit.
The most notable changes are found
in the skull. Briefly the story of changes is to: a higher frontal
region, increased bregmatic height, smaller supercilliary ridges,
increased head width, less facial projection, decreased height
of orbits and a shifting of the transverse diameter downward
laterally, a more ovoid palate, smaller teeth, diminished relative
size of the third molar, shorter, wider and more ovoid mandible,
decrease in size of condyles, decrease in distance between condylar
and coronoid processes, and in general greater smoothness, less
prominent bony protuberances, less of the angularity and "savageness"
of appearance which characterizes the apes. This is evolution
in type, but the evolution is result rather than cause. . . .
Practically all of these features
of the skull are intimately linked together so that scarcely
can one change without the change being reflected in the others.
. . . Change is most marked in the region in which chewing
muscles function. . . . The adjacent walls of the skull
are flattened and forced inward as well as downward, producing
the elongation of the skull. The temporal muscles reach far up
on the skull,
15. Robinson, J. T., "The Origin and
Adaptive Radiation of the Australopithecines," in Evolution
and Hominization, edited by G. Kurth, Fischer, Stuttgart,
1962, pp.123-127.
16. Eckhardt, Robert B., "Population Genetics and Human
Origins," Scientific American, Jan., 1972, p.96.
17. Wallis, Wilson D., "The Structure of Prehistoric Man,"
in The Making of Man, Modern Library, New Yok, 1931, pp.69ff.
pg.2
of 25
giving rise to a high temporal ridge:
they extend forward as well as backward, giving a more prominent
occipital region, and a more constricted forward region, resulting
on the forehead region of the skull in the elevation of the supercilliary
ridges and intervening glabellar region. Projecting brow ridges
are associated with stout temporal and masseter muscles and large
canines. . . . Constriction of outer margins of orbits
produces the high orbits which we find in apes, and to a less
marked degree in prehistoric human remains.
Even the nature
of the soil can have its effect in modifying bone structure.
Coon observed: "In my North Albanian series, I found that
the tribes of man living on food raised on granitic soil were
significantly smaller than those who walked over limestone."
(18) We really
have no idea at present, how extensively our conditions of life
modify our bone structure, nor the exact mechanisms involved.
So we simply do not know precisely why the typical fossil remains
of early man were so brutalized. Certainly it need have had absolutely
nothing to do with an animal ancestry.
With respect to the Eskimos, there
is some question as to whether their diet of frozen meat, cooked
or otherwise, is really as tough as might be supposed. Some authorities
claim that frozen meat has a consistency little tougher than
deeply frozen canned salmon, the freezing process having a kind
of tenderizing effect. It is also argued that the Eskimo habit
of chewing skins very thoroughly to soften them for clothing
is limited to the womenfolk, whose facial modification is less
pronounced than in the male population. (19)
Fig. 4, however, shows a characteristic
Eskimo male face, with the skull form outlined to indicate that
the greatest width is at the jowls and not in the temple region.
The head of Gainsborough's Blue Boy, in Fig. 5 however,
shows how a refined diet tends to produce a head form of another
kind with the greatest width in the temporal region. The drawing
of the Eskimo is taken from a magnificent photograph reproduced
on the front cover of Ciba Symposia of July, 1948. This
particular issue was devoted to aspects of Eskimo life, and the
articles were all contributed by Edwin H. Ackerknecht, who pointed
out that: (20)
The cheek bones and jaws of
the Eskimo are very massive, possibly under the influence of
the intense chewing he has to practice, which also results in
a tremendous development of the chewing muscles. Eskimo teeth
are often worn down to the gums, like animal teeth, from excessive
use.
18. Coon, C. S., ref.13, p.286.
19. Hooton, E. A., Up from the Ape, Macmillan, New York,
1935, p.405. He nevertheless admits that "there is something
to be said for the functional theory" (p.406).
20. Ackerknecht, Erwin H., "Eskimo History," Ciba
Symposia, vol.10, July, 1948, p.912.
pg.3
of 25
pg.4
of 25
It
has also been pointed out that the Eskimo skull occasionally
shows a "keel" along the top, which results directly
from the need for a stronger attachment or anchorage for the
jaw muscles which are used much more extensively. This will be
noted in Fig. 4 (b), and should be compared with the keel indicated
in the skulls of three supposedly human fossils in Fig. 6 (c,
d, e). It is very clearly marked in the case of the gorilla skull
in Fig. 6 (a). William Howells pointed out: (21)
Gorillas have a heavy and very
powerful lower jaw, and the muscles which shut it (which in man
make a thin layer on and above the temple, where you can feel
them when you chew) are so large that they lie thick on the top
of the head, about two inches deep, practically obscuring the
heavy brow ridge over the eyes which is so prominent on the skull,
and giving rise to a bony crest in the middle merely to separate
and afford attachment to the muscles of the two sides.
In the Eskimo
skull and in the gorilla skull, there is therefore sometimes
a certain parallelism which is in no way any indication of genetic
relationship. The explanation of the Eskimo keel is an historical
(i.e., cultural) one, and it is in this sense that Portmann refers
to historical action as being the explanation of those aspects
of fossil remains which have tended hitherto to be interpreted
as evidence of biological relationship with the anthropoids.
Again, Howells may be quoted: (22)
The powerful jaw of these animals
in chewing, gives rise to a terrific pressure upward against
the face, and the brow ridges make a strong upper border which
absorbs it.
If man is subjected
to uncooked food and forced in the absence of knives to tear
it from the bone, the developing muscles will find a way of strengthening
their anchorage along these bony ridges. Moreover, if there is
not in the diet that which will harden the bone in the earlier
years of life when such strains are first encountered, it is
inevitable that the skull will be depressed while still in a
comparatively plastic state, and the forepart of the brain case
will be low and sloping so that it lacks the high vault we tend
to associate with cultured man. Thus the massive brow ridges
of Sinanthropus, so similar to those of Pithecanthropus, are,
as Ales Hrdlicka pointed out some years ago, "a feature
to be correlated with a powerful jaw mechanism." (23)
It is obvious now that such a circumstance
could tend to reduce
21. Howells, William, Mankind So Far,
Doubleday Doran, New York, 1945, p.68.
22. Ibid., p.131.
23. Hrdlicka, Ales, "Skeletal Remains of Early Man,"
Smithsonian Institute, Miscellaneous Collection, vol.83,
1930, p.367.
pg.5
of 25
Fig. 6. (A) Gorilla, showing marked keel and wide zygomatic
arch. (B) Modern Man with high vault and widest dimension at
the temples. {C) Pithecanthropus. (D} Rhodesian Man. (E) Sinanthropus.
the high vault of the human skull which we
usually associate with man's superior mental capacity. One of
Weidenreich's last papers was intended to show that there is
no real correlation between intelligence and cranial capacity.
(24) Anyone who
reads this paper will be convinced that he was perfectly right.
Yet he still argued that it was man's greatly enlarged cranial
capacity which gave to him his superiority
24. Weidenreich, Franz, "The Human Brain
in the Light of its Phylogenetic Development," Scientific
Monthly, Aug. 1948, pp.103f.
pg.6
of 25
over the other primates.
Weidenreich was of the opinion that for some unknown reason,
man's brain suddenly began to increase in size. This had the
effect of "ballooning" the skull on an arc centred
approximately at the junction of the lower jaw and the skull
proper, as illustrated in Fig. 7 (c) . Not everyone has taken
this theory too seriously. Howells referred to it rather contemptuously
as "a feeble argument with no proof behind it." (25) He offered no alternative.
But Weidenreich's argument is based
essentially on the fact that if we rather arbitrarily draft a
series of skulls, in this case the gorilla, Pithecanthropus,
and modern man, and in a side view impose upon them as indicated
in Fig. 7 a series of arcs centred approximately at the ear,
we have a series of forms with increased ballooning from the
true animal to the true man. As indicated in Fig. 4 however,
Weidenreich's original drawing was hardly fair, since he exaggerated
the effect by using a different scale for the various skulls.
(26) Moreover,
the gorilla and modern man are contemporaries, and the series
does not therefore represent anything historically factual as
a series.
There is another explanation of
such a series however, in which we merely assume that the first
true man had a high vault, but that the circumstances of his
early history were such as to deprive him of some of the essentials
of culture thus forcing him to adopt the use of raw meat, which
in time greatly developed the jaw muscles and thus "deflated"
the high vault with which his ancestors had been endowed. This
is exactly the reverse of Weidenreich's theory, but it has this
at least in its favour, that there is historical evidence to
support it. The evidence of history, as observed in the actual
time sequence of many of the fossils which Weidenreich was forced
to arrange out of order, is manifestly against his theory. The
objection to our alternative, of course, is that we must assume
that man was equipped with a high vault and presumably a large
brain to go with it, from the very first.
It could also be argued that if
at first, man's genetic heritage provided him with the means
to grow a high vault, then when this could not develop, the mechanism
compensated itself by building a much thicker vault instead.
It might happen therefore that the high vault with normal bone
thickness is more or less exactly represented by a low vault
with a much thicker bone shell. The weight of both forms of skull
would presumably be quite similar. Some of the early skulls show
this thickening.
25. Howells, William, ref.31, p.76.
26. Weidenreich, Franz, Apes, Giants and Man, University
of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1946, fig.36.
pg.7
of 25
Weidenreich
elaborated his ballooning theory in his book Apes, Giants
and Man. He assumed that man started with a powerful jaw
mechanism. Then he explains what he thinks must have happened:
(27)
The reduction of the jaws went
hand in hand with a reduction of the chewing and cervical muscles.
The space required for the attachment of these muscles to the
skull surface consequently became smaller, and so did the power
of the whole chewing apparatus. The superstructures which reinforce
a primitive skull in the forms of crests and ridges diminished
accordingly. . . .
Exaggeratedly expressed, the evolution
of the human brain case proceeds like the inflation of a balloon;
and it looks as though the enlargement of its content the brain,
was the driving factor. . . . The transverse axis around
which the skull is bent runs approximately through the jaw points.
. . . All the smaller structural alterations of the human
skull are correlated with and dependent upon each other and the
extent to which they are governed by the trend of the skull transformation
as a whole. All fossil human forms, from the more ancient morphological
stage to the most advanced ones, show that the state of the minutest
structure of the cranial bones corresponds in some way to that
of the entire skull form and thereby proves that all forms must
once have passed through the same principal phases. . . ,
Now reversing
the pattern we can view the process quite differently. Let us
assume, for the sake of argument, that early man was subsequently
forced to eat tough food, after the initial family had multiplied
and wandered apart; and that this food lacked that which would
harden the skull in its formative period of development: then
the strengthening of the chewing and cervical muscles would go
hand in hand with the building of a superstructure of bone to
provide the necessary anchorage in the form of crests as well
as ridges in the front, at the rear, and on the top of the skull,
but the skull itself would remain pliable enough that it would
undergo considerable distortion.
The "keel" which is so
noticeable in the case of the gorilla, naturally tended to appear
in early man because the muscles pulled the sides of the skull
in, under the increased tension. This is indicated in Fig. 8.
When the jaw was used for cracking
bones, etc., the chief point of stress would regularly occur
at the chin, since the clamping action between the teeth would
normally be one-sided. This again led to a certain degree of
compensatory thickening. But unlike the apes, man is a talking
creature and makes much more use of his tongue. There is reason
to believe that the reinforcement of man's chin takes the form
of a bony ridge outwards rather than inwards, on this account,
and this gives the prominence which is characteristic of the
human jaw. The apes and other anthropoids on the other hand have
the
27. Ibid, ref.26, p.33.
pg.8
of 25
reinforcement in the
form of a ledge which reaches inward instead, and this is known
as the simian shelf. In some fossils of early man there is some
evidence of a simian shelf, and presumably this is a reinforcement
in addition to that which is normal for man's chin, by way of
compensation for the added load placed upon the structure at
this point. Tugging at flesh in the absence of satisfactory "cutlery,"
or maybe just bad table manners, contributed quite possibly to
the alveolar prognathism which is often found in these early
remains. The increasing muscle development which rose up under
the zygomatic arch naturally forced the latter outwards and required
a stronger form.
It is quite likely therefore that
the functioning of the jaw mechanism determines whether the skull
will be depressed or not. The fossil human forms then show clearly
that the entire series has been affected to a large degree by
the same depressive and compressive forces. Thus if early man
were to have been utterly deprived of culture it seems quite
certain his fossil remains would have revealed an extreme primitiveness
which might easily be misinterpreted as evidence of a recent
emergence from some anthropoid stock. Yet in point of fact it
could happen that individuals might become degenerate at any
period in history and leave behind them a cemetery of the most
deceptive fossil remains. Humphrey Johnson remarked in this direction
(28)
It seems likely that in very
early times the human form possessed a high degree of plasticity
which it has since lost, and that from time to time such exaggerations
of certain racial characters, probably brought about by an unfavorable
environment, have occurred. In the Pekin-Java branch of the human
family, the exaggeration of the ape-like traits has occurred
to a very high degree: it later took place, so it would seem,
though not quite so pronounced in Neanderthal Man, and has occurred
again though to a far lesser extent in the aborigines of Australia.
Some of the low features of the
Australians may, as Prof. Haddon thinks, be due to racial senility
and thus the resemblance to Neanderthal man may be regarded as
secondary or convergent. By a wider application of this principle
we may consider that "convergence" has played a part
in bringing about the resemblances of paleoanthropic men to the
anthropoid apes.
And quoting
Wallis once more: (29)
If the above interpretations
are correct it follows that a return to the conditions of diet
and of life which characterized prehistoric man would be followed
by a return to his physical type. Yet if there were this transition
to a type more simian we could not say that we were
28. Johnson, Humphrey, The Bible and the
Early History of Mankind, Burns and Oates, London, 1947,
p.89.
29. Wallis, Wilson D., ref. 17, pp.72ff.
pg.9
of 25
pg.10
of 25
approaching a common ancestor. The similarity
would not be due to the transmission of qualities from a common
ancestor of a remote past. If this be true it is equally true
that an increase in similarities as we push back the time period
does not imply common ancestry if the changes are due to changes
in function, following changes in diet. . . . It seems
clear that mere resemblance cannot constitute an argument for
phylogentic descent.
Wallis then
points out with great pertinence that in any given group of human
beings, the male is likely to resemble the anthropoid ape more
nearly in bone structure than the female; and yet it is obvious
that the male cannot be more closely related than the female.
So he concludes that the more muscular male converges towards
the ape which is more muscular than man simply because he is
more muscular. He attributes the comparative inattention of physical
anthropologists to this whole subject to the fact that "an
age with its mind made up to evolution of a unilinear type has
seen what it looked for."
Moreover, it is not necessary to
assume that such functional changes take a very long time to
leave their mark. In fact, C. S. Coon pointed out that the case
is quite otherwise: (30)
Head form, although it changes
with much less speed than stature, for it is not directly concerned
with gross size, nevertheless responds to the stimuli which control
it and we must not be surprised if long heads have in some instances
become round heads during the course of hundreds of generation.
The evidence
today is making it very clear that there is less and less justification
for the tendency to demand great lengths of time for "evolutionary"
change. The truth is that the living body is amazingly plastic
and highly responsive to environmental pressures, though precisely
what the mechanism is, has so far eluded us.
We have already noted how feral
children may develop canine teeth of quite exceptional form.
If by chance their skulls were excavated some centuries later,
physical anthropologists would be quite wrong were they to make
the assumption that this particular tooth structure had taken
centuries to form. We know, in fact, that it probably took less
than ten years. And the researches of Boas and others into the
change of head-form among the successive siblings of the United
States from an area of longheadedness, shows that such changes
can occur with remarkable rapidity -- again, within a matter
of a score of years or less. The earliest born children resemble
the parents. Later born children begin to vary in the direction
of the new home-country, until the last born children have head-forms
quite different from their parents. Thus
30. Coon, C. S., The Races of Europe,
Macmillan, New York, 1939, pp.28f.
pg.11
of 25
Boas (31) showed that the influence of environment makes itself
felt with increasing intensity according to the time elapsed
between the arrival of the parents and the birth of the child.
The curious thing is that those children who were born in the
old homeland still maintain the head-form of the parents, even
though they grow up in the new land. Evidently the head shape
is determined during prenatal development so that if prenatal
development occurs in the old country the influence of the new
country is not felt. Boas' work has since been confirmed by H.
L. Shapiro (32)
Coon also mentions that modifications
in the skull form resulting from dietary habits, particularly
the eating of raw meat and the absence of bone hardening substances
in childhood, may occur, under sub-Arctic conditions, with remarkable
rapidity. He notes that these changes are functional changes
and he concluded: (33)
Metrical and morphological differences
in physical type which appear during the course of the millennia
may imply, in some instances, a response to environment rather
than a diversity of origin.
We have, then,
a mechanism that might account for all the variant forms of fossil
man without recourse to hundreds of thousands of years of evolutionary
history. Such changes appear to persist so long as the environmental
conditions which provoked them persist. And there is evidence
that even when the environmental conditions change somewhat,
reversion to the original type may be delayed a little. It is
generally thought that this kind of inheritance of an acquired
character is effected through the cytoplasm, through so-called
plasmagenes as opposed to nuclear genes.
The significance of such facts
here is that there may be a measure of persistence or carry-over
in facial forms which have been developed in response to certain
environmental pressures, which thus provides us with racial characteristics
which are then traceable not to a diversity of stocks, but to
an historical circumstance. It does not require any great feat
of imagination to see that as man began to multiply and spread
into new areas where new types of food became available and new
environments led to modified living habits, changes might take
place in his physical form. Wood Jones (34) pointed out the needs created by any well-defined
ecological situation are likely to be met
31. Boas, Franz, Changes in Bodily Form
of Descendants of Immigrants, Government Printing Office,
Washington, 1911; reprint, Columbia University Press New York,
1912.
32. Shapiro, H. L., Migration and Environment, Oxford
University Press, 1939.
33. Coon, C. S., ref.30, p.29.
34. Jones, Wood, Trends of Life, Arnold, London, 1953,
p.76.
pg.12
of 25
by all living things
subjected to them by directive responses of a similar kind. The
pliability of living forms is great. Ralph Linton put it this
way: (35)
If we are correct in our belief
that all existing men belong to a single species, early man must
have been a generalized form with potentialities for evolving
into all the varieties which we know at present. It further seems
probable that this generalized form spread widely and rapidly
and that within a few thousand years of its appearance small
bands of individuals of this type were scattered over most of
the Old World. These bands would find themselves in many different
environments, and the physical peculiarities which were advantageous
in one of these might be of no importance or actually deleterious
in another. Moreover, due to the relative isolation of these
bands and their habit of inbreeding, any mutation which was favorable
or at least not injurious under the particular circumstances
would have the best possible chance of spreading to all the members
of the group. It seems quite possible to account for the known
variations in our species on this basis without invoking the
theory of a small number of originally distinct varieties.
Or we may quote
Franz Boas in the same connection: (36)
If we bring two organically
different individuals into the same environment they may, therefore,
become alike in their functional responses and we may gain the
impression of a functional likeness of distinct anatomical forms
that is due to environment, not to heredity.
It is abundantly
clear by now, therefore, that we are dealing here with a fact
which is very widely recognized. Yet, in spite of this, it is
seldom referred to when the search for the missing link seems
to be getting warm.
When Broom found a number of items,
teeth, parts of the jaw, and parts of the cranium, etc., of the
specimen subsequently named Australopithecus transvaalensis,
the matter was reported in the Illustrated London News
with pictures of the then most recent additions to the finds,
and a reconstruction of the "head." The significant
factors in this find, according to Broom, lie in the presence
of a clearly ape-like form of the head and the obviously humanoid
aspect of certain of the teeth. No one would doubt, we are told,
seeing the skull, that it was the skull of a variety of chimpanzee
or an anthropoid ape. But looking at the teeth apart from the
rest of the skull he said: (37)
If casts of these teeth had
been sent to all the anatomists of the world, probably 95% would
have certified that they are human. The size, the arrangement
and the wearing are all human characters. . . .
We need not at present discuss
the exact position of Australopithecus, but we can without hesitation
state that here we have an anthropoid ape with a brain capacity
probably between 450 and 650 cc., and
35. Linton, Ralph, The Study of Man,
Appleton Century, New York, 1936, p.26.
36. Boas, Franz, ref.31, p.133.
37. Broom, Illustrated London News, May 14,1938.
pg.13
of 25
thus definitely an ape, but which has
teeth which are almost typically human. The incisors, canines,
premolars, and first molars are hardly to be distinguished from
human teeth. The second and third molar are considerably larger
than in man, but very similar to human teeth in structure.
It seems to me that these human
characters are much more likely to indicate affinity with man,
than that such characters have been twice independently evolved.
But in the same
paper there had already been reported by W. P. Pycraft (38) some three years earlier,
a remarkable series of finds in South America of three skulls
belonging to quite unrelated animals in which a particular bone
structure on the lower jaw had assumed substantially the same
striking form entirely in response to diet and having nothing
to do with common descent. These three skulls belonged to marsupials
and at the time were described by Sir Arthur Smith Woodward as
perhaps the most remarkable "mimics" (as he called
them) hither discovered.
The famous saber-toothed tiger
had an extraordinary long upper canine which projected far below
the lower jaw when the mouth was closed. This necessitated the
hinging of the lower jaw in a special way so that it would clear
the upper canines and allow the animal to seize its prey. In
Fig. 9 first the jaw of a typical cat is shown, opened to its
maximum extent. This may then be compared with the jaw of the
saber-toothed tiger which must be dropped much further to clear
the saber teeth. The surprising thing about these newly discovered
skulls is that in all three the very long saber teeth are protected,
when the mouth is closed, by bone flanges on the lower jaw along
which the upper canines lie. In Fig. 9 this structure can be
clearly seen. The other two skulls show a parallel development,
although the photographs of them available to the public do not
show quite as clearly the precise form of the protective flange;
but there is no doubt about the parallelism in structure. The
important thing is, as Pycraft observed, that these flanges illustrate
"the molding effects of particular modes of life which more
commonly than is generally realized, start with the choice
of food" [emphasis mine].
Perhaps it is not so remarkable
after all to find Australopithecine with teeth so strikingly
like human teeth.
We may quote Wood Jones once more: (39)
All these needs are met by the
development of structures directed towards their satisfaction.
It seems therefore certain that structures developed for the
satisfaction of these common needs may bear a considerable likeness
to each other, although the animals manifesting them
38. Pycraft, W. P., Illustrated London
News, Feb.16, 1935.
39. Jones, Wood, ref.34, p.71.
pg.14
of 25
may be utterly unrelated by kinship
or descent. Since so many basic needs are common to all animals
and these functional needs are satisfied by the development of
appropriate structures, it is to be expected that a common ground
plan of parts and organs might be detected as underlying the
very varied superstructures of large groups of animals.
Yet the slightest
resemblance between an early human fossil and the skull or other
parts of some lower primate is at once taken to mean genetic
affinity, and it is seized upon as proof in part of the general
theory that man has been derived by some such steps from an animal
ancestor. Against such hasty assumptions we must now be much
more ready to examine the parallelisms to see whether they may
not be explained satisfactorily on other grounds. In this connection
it is well to underscore the words of LeGros Clark, who over
twenty years ago pointed out: (40)
In the evaluation of genetic
affinities anatomical differences are more important as negative
evidence than anatomical resemblances are as positive evidence.
It becomes apparent that if this thesis is carried
40. Clark, LeGros, Early Forerunners of
Man, 1934, as quoted by Rendle Short in Transactions of
the Victoria Institute, London, vol.67, 1935, p.255.
pg.15
of 25
to a logical conclusion it will necessarily
demand a much greater scope for the phenomenon of parallelism
or convergence in evolution, than has usually been conceded by
evolutionists. The fact is that the minute and detailed researches
which have been carried out by comparative anatomists in recent
years have made certain that parallelisms in evolutionary development
have been proceeding on a large scale and it is no longer to
be regarded as an incidental curiosity which has occurred sporadically
in the course of evolution. Indeed, it is hardly possible for
those who are not comparative anatomists to realize the fundamental
part which this phenomenon has played in the evolutionary process.
The influence
of environmental pressures in modifying the structure of an organism
is so common in fact, that it would almost seem as though convergence
of unlike forms until they are alike is more frequent in nature
than the reverse -- divergence of like forms until they are unlike.
And yet the latter is the fundamental requirement of evolution.
Although too little attention seems
to have been paid to his work, Leo S. Berg, in a book devoted
to this question, argued: (41)
Convergence and not divergence
is the rule, not the exception. This appears to be all pervasive,
both among plants and animals, both present, recent, and extinct.
We do not find a few simple forms giving rise to a great variety;
we find a great variety assuming similarities that have in the
past led, or misled all naturalists into thinking that the opposite
was taking place. . . .
In studying extinct forms of life,
it is most unusual to find a common ancestor for any series of
living animals or plants living today. The common ancestor almost
invariably turns out to be in some respect or other more complicated
than its alleged descendants.
It ought not
to surprise us therefore to find anthropoid forms appearing in
varying degree among true Homo sapiens.
With respect to the influences
of temperature on body form and colour, a remarkable case is
given by A. F. Shull who reported some experiments in which pupae
of certain butterflies were subjected to abnormally low temperatures.
(42) There emerged
from them insects having a pattern and colours resembling a more
northerly variety of the same species, and there was reason to
believe that the two varieties were genetically similar but in
the different environments in which they occurred naturally,
they had appeared as different varieties. When transported into
a similar environment, the variation was reduced markedly. In
a lesser degree there is some evidence that human beings may
respond to environmental pressures to become alike in certain
respects. Cold climates tend to stimulate a lengthening of the
41. Berg, Leo S., Nomogenesis, or Evolution
Determined by Law, English translation, Constable, London,
1926, p.174.
42. Shull, A. F., Evolution, McGraw Hill, New York, 1936,
p.249.
pg.16
of 25
nose, perhaps to create
a longer passage of warming for the air inhaled, before it reaches
the lungs. Limbs may be shortened slightly, for the same reason,
to reduce radiation of heat from the body. In very hot climates
the air passage to the lungs may be shortened by a corresponding
shortening or flattening of the nasal passages. (43) And there are other even
more striking bodily modifications in response to heat and high
humidity that lead to the Nilotic Negro type and the Pygmy type,
in both of which the body has increased its surface area (for
radiation purposes) relative to the body mass, in one instance
by assuming a very long thin form, and in the other by reducing
the total size. Both the Nilotic Negroes and the Pygmies of the
Ituri forest in Africa, share a similar environment of high temperature
and high humidity. (44)
Thomas Gladwin points out that
animals are modified in the same way as human beings in environments
of this extreme kind. When F. B. Sumner reared white mice at
20 degrees and 30 degrees C., he found that at the higher temperatures
they developed longer bodies, tails, ears, and hind feet. (45) Yet, surely it has nothing
to do with genetic relationships.
We must also consider the possibility
in some particular instances that some fossils may occasionally
represent diseased types. Disease will produce some striking
changes in the human form, and often these changes are not merely
in the general direction of what must be termed "ugliness,"
but specifically they tend towards the anthropoid character.
Thus Jesse Williams pointed out: (46)
Degenerate types show characteristic
markings that are known as stigmata of degeneration. Common stigmata
are: (1) receding forehead, indicating incomplete development
of frontal lobes of the brain; (2) prognathism, a prominence
of the maxillae. (3) the canine ear; (4) prominent supercilliary
ridges; (5) nipples placed too high and supernumerary nipples.
Among the disorders
which commonly operate to effect a modification of bone structure,
those which are related to glandular disturbances are the most
common. In fact a few years ago there was a remarkable
43. On these points see further: "Stature
and Geography," Scientific American, Apr. 1954, p.46.
Montagu, Ashley, "A Consideration of the Concept of Race,"
in Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Physiology,
vol.15, 1950, p.325ff., and "Physical Characteristics
of the American Negro, Scientific Monthly, July, 1943,
pp.58ff.
44. Gladwin, Thomas, "Climate and Anthropology," American
Anthropological Institute, vol.49, Oct.-Dec., 1947, p.607ff.
45. Klotz, J. W., Genes, Genesis and Evolution, Concordia,
St. Louis, 1955, p.28.
46. Williams, Jesse, Textbook of Anatomy and Physiology, 5th
edition, Saunders, Philadelphia, 1935, fn. p.49.
pg.17
of 25
man by the name of Maurice
Tillet, a wrestler better known in some circles as "the
Angel," who was so Neanderthal in aspect that Henry Field
who knew him very well, induced him to pose appropriately dressed
as a caveman, with ax and loin cloth, among a group of reconstructed
Neanderthal men in the Field Museum of Natural History. It appears
that he was so readily lost among the wax figures that surrounded
him, that he could not be singled out until at a given signal
he plunged forward with an unearthly howl while Pathe Cameras
ground away! The sudden coming to life of this apparently prehistoric
figure was quite a shock to all who subsequently viewed the film.
(47)
Henry Field says of this man, however,
that he was highly intelligent, a graduate of the University
of Toulouse, and spoke in addition to his mother tongue, Spanish,
English, and a little Russian, for his father, a French geologist,
had once worked in the Urals. The secret of his extraordinary
Neanderthal appearance was in the most unusual enlargement of
his pituitary gland. He was examined by a number of experts and
it was unanimously agreed that this was a clear case of acromegaly
caused by hyperpituitarism for which, fortunately in his case,
nature had made some special provision, so that he had survived
into adulthood. So enlarged was the gland that he would certainly
have died long before but for the fact that a space of unusual
development had been left for the growth of this ductless gland.
He died in September, 1954. Field considered him a true Neanderthal
type.
Speaking of the operation of these
glands, A. C. Haddon remarked: (48)
During recent years it has been
recognized that certain glands discharge internal secretions,
or hormones, which alter stature, length of limb, size of jaw,
shape of nose, growth of hair, texture of skin, and other characters
which are in the main those wherein one race of mankind differs
from another. Sir Arthur Keith suggests that racial characters
are determined largely by the activity of the hormones and that
the inherited condition of the glands provides a mechanism for
the fixation of racial types. It must not be supposed that the
facts adduced by Keith imply that such groups as Mongols or Negroes
are in any sense pathological, but merely that for some reason
or another certain ductless glands function in some respects
more actively, or less so, in these than in other groups. It
remains to be shown what conditions of life or nutrition induced
the supposed increased or decreased production of the hormones
in question, or whether the conditions were "sports"
which have been fixed by heredity. It has yet to be proved that
these hormones are alone responsible for all racial differentiation,
though they may well be contributing factors.
47. Field, Henry, In the Track of Man,
Doubleday, New York, 1953 pp.230f.
48. Haddon, A. C., History of Anthropology, Thinker's
Library Watts, London, 1949, pp.34f.
pg.18
of 25
pg.19
of 25
Since Neanderthal Man is usually considered as a "race,"
the possibility that racial characteristics of this kind could
in fact be the result of pituitary or other glandular disturbance,
is greatly strengthened by the case of Maurice Tillet. We thus
have, in addition to the influences of diet and eating habits,
the possible influences of glandular abnormality. It is conceivable
that the giantism which has been found to characterize some early
fossils of man, could be traced to the same factor. In this case
history as opposed to genetics, in Portmann's sense of the terms,
would possibly explain Gigantopithecus and Meganthropus, and
so forth, as well as the grossness of some European forms; and
any attempt to fit them into a genetic series would be a waste
of time.
But it is not only the pituitary
gland which can so modify the human form. Sir Arthur Keith, in
another work on this subject, pointed out that the characteristics
used as physical criteria by etymologists for distinguishing
different racial stocks are affected by several glands in the
body. Of these the chief are the pituitary and pineal glands,
but the thyroid gland in the throat and the adrenal glands in
the kidneys are also of importance. Abnormal growth of the pituitary
leads as we have seen to enlargement of the chin, nose, and brow.
These features to some extent are common to almost all so-called
cavemen. Keith put it this way: (49)
We are justified in regarding
the pituitary as one of the principal pinions in the machinery
which regulates the growth of the human body and is directly
concerned in determining . . . the tendency to strong eyebrow
ridges.
Such brow ridges
are among the features of fossil man which have tended, in the
public mind, to give the most ape-like cast to the face. It is
curious that such ridges are more marked among Europeans, i.e.,
the White Man, than among some of the other races. In fact Charles
Darwin and Thomas Huxley showed quite marked brow-ridge formation,
and it has been suggested by some physiologists that such prominences
are evidence of great energy. (50) This could speak well for men of prehistoric times.
Speaking of the thyroid gland,
Robert Speer pointed out: (51)
Many characteristics which have
hitherto been regarded as hereditary
49. Quoted by Sir John A. Thompson, in The
Outline of Science, vol.4, Putnam, New York, 1922, p.1097.
50. Mottram, V. H., The Physical Basis of Personality, Penguin
Books, Hammondsworth, Middlesex, England, 1949, p.79.
51. Speer, Robert, Of One Blood, Friendship House, New
York, 1924, p.11.
pg.20
of 25
or racial, may be due to environmental
causes, it is probable, for example, that stature and longheadedness
may be caused by higher or lower activity of the thyroid gland,
and that this may in turn be influenced by food, particularly
iodine.
Among animals,
the changes due to food, temperature, etc., can be quite remarkable.
George Dorsey has given an interesting list of some of the changes
which can be induced. He wrote, (52)
For example, tadpoles fed on
thymus gland become big dark tadpoles -- but never develop into
frogs; if fed adrenal gland, they become very light in color.
Larvae of bees fed royal jelly become queens; on bee bread, non-fertile
females or workers. Canaries fed on sweet red pepper become red
in color. The germ as the "bearer of heredity" is meaningless
or monstrous apart from its usual environment. . . .
The hormones actually known are
definite and specifically acting indispensable chemical products
which modify development and growth of other organs, especially
during embryonic life, and the entire metabolism, including that
of the nervous system, during adult life. Then, too, there is
a collective operation of the endocrines as yet not definitely
known, but summarized by Barker as follows:
"More and more we are forced
to realize that the general form and the external appearance
of the human body depends to a large extent upon their functioning.
Our stature, the kinds of faces we have, the length of our arms
and legs, the shape of the pelvis, the color and consistency
of our integument, the quantity and regional location of our
fat, the amount and distribution of hair on our bodies, the tonicity
of our muscles, the sound of the voice, and size of the larynx,
the emotions to which our 'exterieur' gives expressio n --all
are to a certain extent conditioned by the productivity of our
hormonopoietic glands. We are, in a sense, the beneficiaries
and the victims of the chemical correlations of our endocrine
organs."
Keith pointed
out that a poorly developed thyroid leads to stunted growth,
to undeveloped nose and hair, and to a flat face. These are characteristic
of some of the so-called Mongolian peoples, and it is possible
that decrease in thyroid has affected the people of East Asia
as a whole. So also the Hottentot and the Bushman differ according
to his theory, from the Negro, along lines which might be explained
in part by deficiency in thyroid. The adrenal further controls
sex characters such as hairiness of the face and body. These
are characteristic of European and Australian people, whereas
the Negro and Mongolian are perhaps immature in this respect.
At any rate, such was Keith's thesis.
(53) We may point out what Samuel Brody
observed: (54)
52. Dorsey, George, Why We Behave Like
Human Beings, Blue Ribbon Books, New York, 1925, pp.108,
203.
53. Keith, Sir Arthur, "Evolution of Human Races in the
Light of the Hormone Theory," Johns Hopkins Bulletin,
1922.
54. Brody, Samuel, "Science and Dietary Wisdom," Scientific
Monthly, Sept. 1945, p 216.
pg.21
of 25
Congenital
blindness, missing kidneys, missing limbs (hardly likely to be
inherited), cleft palate, harelip, and other abnormalities were
apparently produced in calves, pigs, and rats by withholding
vitamin A (and also vitamin B2 in rats) from the pregnant mother's
diet. Richardson and Hogan observed about a dozen cases of hydrocephalus
-- characterized by a great skull with little brain -- in newborn
rats from mothers fed a 'synthetic diet' complete in all the
known dietary constituents. Deficiency of some unknown essential
dietary factor may account for this abnormality.
It might be
argued that such observations are not really relevant since it
is in the skull form and in the limb proportions that fossil
man shows the closest resemblance to anthropoid apes, etc. However,
it would not do to overlook the possibility that all these factors
may operate in varying degree, each making its impress upon the
skeletal remains in its own way and to a different extent when
in concert with other influences. Some of the groups of fossils,
particularly Neanderthal specimens, seem so much alike as a whole,
and so uniformly different from modern man, that it has been
customary to assume they represent a true and independent race.
The same was thought of the Anthropus series (Pithecanthropus
and Sinanthropus, which some authorities now classify simply
as Homo sapiens). (55)
But we now have instances in which Neanderthal types are found
intermixed with, and quite clearly contemporaneous with, men
of completely modern type. This is true of the discoveries on
Mount Carmel in Palestine, which revealed a mixed population
that made any clear distinction between the two types impossible
in this instance. (56)
There is a further consideration.
As men multiplied on the earth and began to crowd out the original
settlements, weaker elements in the population would be driven
out. Such people might become waifs and strays, and could well
perish in isolation because of the hardships encountered in a
new and unfamiliar environment. Possibly it is such people whose
remains we find, for as a rule the fossils represent only a very
small group, and often only a single individual. That these remains
should show varying degrees of primitiveness is not surprising.
The extent to which a whole community may suffer in such a manner
was unhappily illustrated some 300 years ago in Ireland. Robert
Chambers has given the story: (57)
The style of living is ascertained
to have a powerful effect in
55. "The Names of Fossil Man," note
in Science, vol.102, July, 1945, p.16.
56. Howells, William, ref.21, p.202. Howells refers to the skull
finds in the following terms: "It is an extraordinary variation.
There seems to have been a single tribe ranging in type from
almost Neanderthal to almost sapiens."
57. Chambers, Robert, Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation,
Churchill, London, 1844.
pg.22
of 25
modifying the human figure in the course
of generations, and this even in its osseous structure. About
200 years ago, a number of people were driven by a barbarous
policy from the counties of Antrim and Down in Ireland, towards
the seacoast: there they have ever since been settled, but in
unusually miserable circumstances.
And the consequence is that they
now exhibit peculiar features of the most repulsive kind, projecting
jaws with large open mouths, depressed noses, high cheek bones,
and bow legs, together with an extremely diminutive stature.
These, with an abnormal slenderness of limbs, are the marks of
a low and barbarous condition all over the world. It is peculiarly
seen in the Australian aborigines.
This is not
an isolated instance. Here is a case in which the "primitive"
appearance of a whole group of people is entirely the result
of historical factors. Undoubtedly these people, given the proper
opportunity, were quite capable of proving themselves in every
sense completely human and probably quite as intelligent as any
so-called "modern" man. Yet if it ever happened that
without any knowledge of the circumstances, their remains were
exhumed by some archaeologist, they might well lead the finder
to suppose he had run across a mass burial of prehistoric men.
Moreover, small isolated populations
whether of animals, insects, or people, tend to vary more widely
than large populations. Viktor Lebzelter formulated the principle
that where the population is large, the culture will be heterogeneous
and the physical type homogeneous, but where the population is
small, the physical types will be heterogeneous but the culture
homogeneous. (58)
The reasons for this are fairly obvious. A small community will
be closely knit in its behaviour patterns and problem solutions
and decorative motifs, etc. But at the same time there will be
a measure of inbreeding that will tend to bring mutant genes
together in a state of homozygosity so they will then manifest
themselves in varieties of new kinds. This is less likely to
happen where the population is large.
But it is also found that when
a single species is introduced into a new environment there is
a tendency for a large number of new varieties to arise almost
immediately. This was first noticed by geologists in studying
the sudden appearance of many new varieties of a species once
they appeared at a certain level in the rocks for the first time.
Sir William Dawson referred to it many years ago. (59) Ralph Linton confirmed
it for man. (60)
Charles Brues illustrated it from entomology. (61) Adolph Schultz, in the Cold Spring Harbor Symposia
58. Lebzelter, Viktor, Rassengeschichte
de Menscheit, Salzburg, 1932, p.27.
59. Dawson, Sir William, The Story of the Earth and Man,
Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1903, p.360.
60. Linton, Ralph, ref.35, pp.26f.
61. Brues, Charles, "Contributions of Entomology to Theoretical
Biology," Scientific Monthly, Feb., 1947, p.130.
pg.23
of 25
for 1950 referred to
it in connection with all primates (68). Colin Selby discussed the mechanism in a paper entitled
"Modern Views of the Origin of Specis". (63) The fact is well known.
Yet, once again, it is not too often that one hears of its relevance
to the present issue. But it is entirely relevant, for one of
the most remarkable aspects of many of the major finds of fossil
man is the variability of types found in a single deposit.
This is true of the fossils from
the Upper Cave at Choukoutien, (64) of the discoveries at Obercassel, (65), and of the group discovered in the Tbun and Skuhl
caves on Mount Carmel in Palestine. (66)
In conclusion we could not do better
than to end with a quotation once more from Wilson Wallis, himself
a veteran anthropologist and one who in spite of his views in
the matter, would still derive man from some lower form of animal
life. His honesty in facing the facts and his courage in stating
his convictions so forthrightly are therefore all the more commendable:
(67)
As regards prehistoric human
remains we cannot conclude that the increasing resemblance to
apes as we go back in time implies simian ancestry, seeing that
these changes may be due to changes in food and posture, representing
the acquisition of form growing out of function or closely correlated
with function. In that case prehistoric man's increasing resemblance
to apes has some other explanation than descent from a common
ancestor, beng, if our interpretation is correct, a case of convergence,
the response of similar form to similar function. . . .
We cannot afford to close our eyes
to facts because we shy away from their implications. A good
case is not strnethened by adducing poor reasons in support of
it, and no fear of giving comfort to the enemy should lead us
to suppose that a partial concelament of truth, which arises
from a concealment of part of the truth, can compensate for the
loss of unprejudiced consideration of the facts of life whether
they seem to fit ino our schemes of evolution or fail to fit.
Since the day of Darwin the evolutionary
idea has largely dominated the ambitions and determined the findings
of physical anthropology, sometimes to the detriment of the truth.
62. Schultz, Adolph, "Man and the Cararrhine
Primates," Cold Spring Harbor Symposia, vol.15, 1950,
p.50.
63. Selby, Colin, "Modern Views of the Origin of Species,"
Christian Graduate, Inter-Varsity Fellowship, London,
June, 1956, p.99.
64. "Homo sapiens at Choukoutien," Antiquity
(England), vol.13, June, 1939, p.243.
65. Weidenreich, Franz, ref.26, p.86.
66. Romer, Alfred, ref.8, p.220.
67. Wallis, Wilson D., ref.17, p.75.
pg.24
of 25
Appendix
Note on S. L. Washburn's Experiment
For those who
may happen to be familiar with the experiments carried out by
S. L. Washburn, Department of Anatomy, College of Physicians
and Surgeons, at Columbia University, and reported in the Anatomical
Record (vol.99, 1947, pp.239-248), in which he tried to demonstrate
experimentally the theory of ballooning as propounded by Weidenreich,
the following observations are written.
By severing the chewing muscles
of rats, no alteration was found to occur in the skull form.
It was evidently not possible by such a means to obtain a higher
vault. Washburn's conclusion was therefore that Weidenreich's
theory was without foundation. He went even further when he summed
up his convictions as follows:
Constriction
of the brain case by the temporal muscles could not be demonstrated
in the rat, nor does it seem probable that it occurs in man.
However, this
is going considerably beyond the evidence. There is no reason
to suppose that the rat's gene complement has the capability
of supplying the material necessary to provide a higher vault,
if diet permitted. With man the case is quite otherwise.
Had Washburn added to the
muscular tension instead of reducing it, he might well have obtained
some reduction in what vault there is, and this would
then have supported the thesis we have been proposing in place
of Weidenreich's. (See Fig. 11.)
pg.25
of 25
Copyright © 1988 Evelyn White. All rights
reserved
Previous Chapter *
End of Part IV * Next
Chapter (Part V)
|