Abstract: The author has calculated the coefficients of divergence among skulls from upper Paleo-lithic China and Niah cave. The results are as follows.
Niah-Liujiang 0. 033
Niah-Upper Cave 101 0. 078
Niah-Upper Cave 102 0. 050
Niah-Upper Cave 103 0. 048
Upper Cave 102-Upper Cave 103 0. 030
Liujiang-Upper Cave 101 0. 056
Based on these figures and referred to the figures provided by D. Brothwell in his paper on Niah Cave Man (1960, Niah-Talgai 0. 057; Niah-keilor 0. 061) , we can find that Niah and Liujiang are very close. If the figure between UCI02 and UCI03 can be considered as representing the normal intrapopulation divergence for the same sex, the degree of difference between Niah and Liujiang is probably even as close as that of intrapopulation one. The affinity between Liujiang and Upper Cave is less than that between the former and Niah.
There are morphological features worthy of mentioning. The cranial index of Niah skull (77. 8) is very different from those in Australian and Indonesian late Pleistocene skulls (Talgai 73. 4, Keilor 72. 6, wad jak I 74. 5) . On the contrary it is closer to those of Liujiang skull (75. 1) and Ziyang (77. 8) . The shape of the upper dental arch of Niah is similar to that of Liujiang and different from that in Australia. The palatal index of Niah (78. 9) is much higher than that of Talgai (64. 5) . Although it is close to that of Keilor (83. 5) but the absolute length of palate of Niah (47. 5 mm) and Keilor (56. 5 mm) are very different. So does the breadth of palate (37. 5 mm for Niah, 47. 2 mm for Keilor) , while the Niah palate is similar to that of Liujiang in absolute measurements and index (45 mm in length, 36 mm in breadth, 80. 0 in imdex) .
Indeed, the coefficient of divergence between Niah and Tasmanians is slightly lower than that between Niah and Liujiang.
The author considers that the results gained from comparing upper paleolithic Niah man with upper paleolithic man in both China and Australia are more valuable and reasonable than that gained from comparing Niah man with modern man. The affinity between Niah and Liujiang is closer than that between Niah and Australian Pleistocene ones. Niah man was probably the product of gene exchange between the Asian and Australian continents. Another possibility is that Kalimantan might have acted as a transfer station on the way of human migration from Asian continent to Australia. Considering the early date of Niah man the latter possibility seems more probable.
The agenesis of lower third molar is more frequent in Mongoloids (Eskimo 36. 6%, modern Chinese 5. 14%—40. 6% according to different authors) than in Australoids (1. 5%) and can be traced as early as Lantian mandible dated more than half million years ago.
There is a longitudinal thin ridge along the median part of the nasal bone from Tabon. Similar structure can be seen in Homo sapiens fossils in China (Dali, Maba and Upper Cave101).
The above mentioned two phenomena in the Tabon specimens may probably imply the influence from Asian continent than that from the South. Tabon man might be a represent ative of the product of interbreeding between early man of Australian and Asian continents.

Key words: Paleolithic man; Liujiang; Upper Cave; Niah; Tabon