39o SCIENCE PROGRESS 



existing families (Hominidae and Pongidse). ... In order to 

 believe that all the fragments came from a single individual 

 it is necessary to assume the existence of a primate differing 

 from all other known members of the order by combining a 

 brain-case and nasal bones possessing the exact characters 

 of a genus belonging to one family, with a mandible, two 

 lower molars, and an upper canine possessing the exact char- 

 acters of a genus belonging to another. Thus must be associated 

 in a single skull : (a) one type of jaw with another type of 

 glenoid region, (b) one type of temporal muscle origin with 

 another type of temporal muscle insertion, (c) a high degree of 

 basicranial adjustment to the upright position with absence 

 of that corresponding modification in the lower jaw called for 

 by all that is now actually known of the structure of the 

 brain-case and mandible in primates, and (d) a protruding 

 lower jaw with a form of nasal bone not elsewhere known 

 except in connection with a contracted upper dental arch. In 

 each instance the opposed characters are sharply defined and 

 easily recognisable in the fossils. ..." 



It is difficult to reconcile these very dogmatic statements, 

 which have a semblance of statements of fact, with Mr. 

 Miller's remarks in the opening passages of this summary : 

 " The fossils are so fragmentary that their zoological meaning 

 will probably remain a subject of controversy." 



There does not seem to be much room for doubt about the 

 " zoological meaning " of these remains ; indeed Mr. Miller, in 

 his main thesis, is very emphatic in every statement he makes 

 thereon. He creates an impression indeed of having gone 

 very thoroughly into the matter, with a wealth of material at 

 his disposal enabling him to demolish completely the now 

 generally accepted views as to the character of the skull of 

 the Piltdown man. A very brief study of his arguments will 

 show, however, that they are based on assumptions such as! 

 would never have been made had he not committed the initial 

 mistake of overlooking the fact that these remains — which, 

 by the way, he has never seen — are of extreme antiquity, and 

 hence are to be measured by the standards of the palaeonto- 

 logist rather than of the anthropologist. This unfortunate 

 lack of the right perspective has caused him to overlook some 

 of the most significant features of these remains, and has 

 absolutely warped his judgment in regard to the relative values 





