This volume derives from the symposium held at the annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, 2000, to honor Charles Oxnard for his contributions to primatology. Like the interests of the honoree, this book is broad in scope, ranging from studies on muscular cytology to continental ecology. It also reflects some of the qualities of Charles Oxnard's approach to science and scientists. It is rooted in precise and detailed empirical studies of form and function, it is eclectic, and it is generous of spirit.
Oxnard's generosity is manifested most obviously in his enthusiastic support of students and colleagues. Many of the contributors to this collection tell of their deeply felt appreciation for his intellectual inspiration and his warmth. He profoundly helped this reviewer's early career and has served as an inspiration for over three decades.
The first chapter, by Cartmill, reviews the context of Oxnard's contributions to primatology. He is a product of the Birmingham group headed by Solly Zuckerman, whose views in primatology were both influential and controversial. In the context of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, Lord Zuckerman's views are heretical, especially in his opposition to regarding Australopithecus as part of the human family tree. When Oxnard and his colleagues carefully analyzed the shoulder, pelvis, and other parts of this genus, it was difficult for many to accept the results objectively. Many were loyalists of LeGros Clark and his conversion from skeptic to believer in the hominid status of Australopithecus. This obscured the acceptance of the view that Oxnard and his Birmingham colleagues were proposing: Australopithecus had an ape-like shoulder and a pelvic girdle that was substantially modified for bipedality but possessed features quite unlike those of the human pelvis. This view is now quite in vogue.
This collection is divided into five sections. The first concerns craniofacial form and variation. As do all of the sections, it begins with an introductory essay by Oxnard, providing the context of his own interest in the subject. German follows with an analysis of the ontogeny of sexual dimorphism. She makes very clear the difference between longitudinal and cross-sectional approaches to the study of this subject. She confirms Oxnard's observation that sexual dimorphism is multifactorial. It is through the study of heterochrony that one can come to understand differences in growth among taxa, and the diversity of multiple