570 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



prising feature in a primitive skull. The canines, unlike those 

 of the Piltdown skull, are not proportionately large. The 

 lower jaw was not found. One of the most important charac- 

 ters is that mentioned by Dr. Woodward in the quotation given 

 above, namely, the forward position — what seems to us the 

 normal position — of the foramen magnum. This is a most 

 important difference from Homo neandertalensis , and an equally 

 important resemblance to Homo sapiens. Parts of a femur 

 and a tibia were also found, and these relics are said to give 

 confirmatory evidence to the view that the individual walked 

 erect ; but there is necessarily some doubt as to whether these 

 bones belonged to the same skeleton, for there were masses of 

 mammalian bones in the same cave, and, in addition to the 

 fragments already mentioned, part of a human sacrum, and 

 part of another upper jaw were unearthed. 



The skull was found at about 80 feet below the surface, but 

 this depth has little or no definite significance, since it is more 

 than likely that the skull had fallen down a crevice, near the 

 bottom of which it lay. The great accumulation of mammalian 

 bones was obviously due, in the main, to the action of man ; 

 and in the heaps a few scattered stone implements, resembling 

 those of Bushmen, were found. The mammalian bones are 

 those of Recent species, most of them actually still living in 

 Rhodesia. 



The human skull is extrem.ely well preserved, and most 

 fresh in appearance. This is, indeed, the first thing which 

 strikes the observer. It is misleading to speak of it as a " fossil 

 skull." It is sub-fossil. The suggestion was, indeed, made 

 in some quarters that it was Pliocene, but it is difficult to under- 

 stand on what grounds. It seems to me unlikely that it is even 

 as old as the end of the Pleistocene. 



It is, of course, impossible to give a final opinion on the skull 

 until we have more minute details, relating to such matters 

 as the pulp-cavities of the teeth, the inner markings of the 

 brain-case, and so forth. Dr. Woodward is, however, clearly 

 justified in making it the type of a new species. But it seems 

 to me to be indicated that the nearest known allies of the new 

 H. rhodesiensis are to be found, not in any of the extinct species 

 of mankind, but among the lowest and most platycephalic races 

 of the surviving species. 



The chief interest of the specimen is perhaps to be found 

 in the fact that it is almost certainly of quite recent date. We 

 are thus faced with the probability that only a few thousand 

 years ago a species of mankind other than our own was living 

 in South Africa — long after Neandertal Man had become 

 extinct in Europe. In this connection it is interesting to record 

 that the Bantu is a recent arrival in Southern Africa — he 



