Abstract: In approaching the taxonomy of Neolithic Man and its phylogenetic relationship to Late Paleolithic Man and Modern Man in China, the statistical methods used here are Penrose's shape distance and PCA (Principal Component Analysis) ; the physieal osteometrie data collected consist of Neolithic Man (15 groups male, 12 groups female) and Later Paleolithic Man (2 groups male, 1 group female) . Eleven characteristics are compared: the Maximum eranial length (g—op) ; Maximum eranial breadth (eu—eu) ; Basi—bregmatic height (ba—b) ; Minimum frontal breadth (ft—ft) : Maximum bizy- gomatic breadth (zy—zy) ; Upper facial height (n—pr) ; Orbital height; Orbital breadth (mf—ek) ; Nasal breadth; Nasal height (n—ns) and Total prognathism (n—nr The results obtained from analyses are as follows:
Firstly, according to the scattergram based on the principal component scores, combining the dendrogram based on Penrose's shape distance, and also taking the male taxonomy into main consideration, while taking the female for reference (because the differentiations in physical characteristics among male groups, generally speaking, are rather larger than those among females) , the Neolithie Man in China can be divided into two large groups: Northern China group and Southern China group. The Southern China group is composed of Tanshishan, Hedang, Zengpiyan and Hemudu. The Northern China group can be redivided into 3 subgroups: a, Xiawanggang, Miaodigo and Yedian; b, Shigu, Dawenkou and Xixiahou; c. Baoji, Huaxian, Banpo, Hongshanhou and Hengzhen.
Secondly, Hengzhen is a special group in taxonomy. It is located at the middle position between the Southern group and the third subgroup of the Northern group in the scattergram based on the principal component scores. It is theorized that there exist some blood admixtures in Hengzhen. Moreover, in the wide plane of Northern China (the valley of the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River) , the valley of Han River and Inner Mongolia during the Neolithic period some exchange of genetic materials may have occured among the neolithie populations.
Thirdly, in Neolithic Man of China, both in the Northern group and in the Southern group there exist so-called Negro-Australoid racial traits. The comparison of Neolithie Man with Later Paleolithie Man, based on the main index values and total prognathism of skull, makes it no doubt that these traits can be traced back to Later Paleothic Man of China—Liujiang Man and Upper-cave Man, who can be distinguish- ed clearly from Neolithic Man of China in physical characteristics in the scattergram, and can be considered as two different loeal types of Later Paleolithic Man. The fur ther comparison of Neolithic Man with Modern Man in China (including inhabitants of Northern China, Fujian province and Hainan island) is made, also based on the main index values and total prognathism of skull, showing that the development of the physi- cal characteristies of Chinese is a genetic and successive course from Later Paleolithic Man to Modern Man via Neolithic Man. Thus, so-called Negro-Australoid racial traits, such as the narrow and long cranial pattern, heigh vaulted crania, lower orbit, wide nose and some projective prognathism (from the morphological observations) , themsel- ves are intrinsic characteristies of Neolithic Man in China, only there is a little diffe- rentia in the degrees of display of these traits among groups.
I am very grateful to Professor Kazuro Hanihara of the Department of Anthropology of University of Tokyo for his help with sending the data to the Computer Centre of the University of Tokyo and his very kind direction.

Key words: Neolithic man; Later paleolithic man; Penrose's shape distance; Principal component scores; China