Pithecus

Jupiter transforms the Cercopes into apes; and the islands which they inhabit are afterwards called ‘Pithecusæ,’ from the Greek word signifying ‘an ape.’

The Metamorphoses of Ovid Literally Translated into English Prose, with Copious Notes and Explanations 43 BC-18? Ovid 1847

Catch a Pithecus by the Toe function Go () {return}

Catch a Pithecus by the Toe 2010

Borneo, is consequently not the Pithecus, or tailless Ape, which the Greeks, and especially Galen, have described.

Essays 2007

[Footnote 2: "Oseteological Contributions to the Natural History of the Orangs (_Pithecus_) and Chimpanzees (_Troglodites niger_ and _Trog. gorilla_)."]

Scientific American Supplement, No. 365, December 30, 1882 Various

Pithecus, or tailless Ape, which the Greeks, and especially Galen, have described.

Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature Thomas Henry Huxley 1860

And if, instead of putting Hapale out of its natural place, as Professor Bischoff most unaccountably does, we write the series of animals he has chosen to mention as follows: Homo, Pithecus, Troglodytes, Hylobates,

Note on the Resemblances and Differences in the Structure and the Development of the Brain in Man and Apes Charles Darwin 1845

In spite of the fact that men and apes are placed in distinct Sub-Classes, Owen speaks (in the foot-note of which Huxley made such telling effect) of the determination of the difference between Homo and Pithecus as the anatomist's difficulty.

More Letters of Charles Darwin — Volume 1 Charles Darwin 1845

Eminent anatomists have shown that in the average proportions of some of the bones the Negro differs from the European, and that in most of these characters, he makes a slightly nearer approach to the anthropoid quadrumana; * but Professor Schaaffhausen has pointed out that in these proportions the Neanderthal skeleton does not differ from the ordinary standard, so that the skeleton by no means indicates a transition between Homo and Pithecus.

The Antiquity of Man Charles Lyell 1836

‘difficult’ to ‘determine the difference’ between ‘Homo’ and ‘Pithecus’, should yet range them on anatomical grounds, in distinct sub-classes!

Essays 2007

Aztec, with arrested brain growth, as being of a nature so essential as to preclude a comparison between them, or as being other than a difference of degree, I cannot shut my eyes to the significance of that all-pervading similitude of structure — every tooth, every bone, strictly homologous — which makes the determination of the difference between ‘Homo’ and ‘Pithecus’ the anatomist’s difficulty.”

Essays 2007