[hill-tout] PHYLOGENY OF MAN 73 



primitive unless it is unusually thick in the vault. Time, too, is wholly 

 on his side, and the future may see his judgment verified as it has 

 the judgment of those who claimed a pre-Mousterian antiquity for 

 the Galley Hill type of man. At any rate, nothing^ seems more 

 certain than that the antiquity of man will be further augmented 

 rather than diminished as time proceeds and new discoveries are 

 made. As Keith has very pertinently remarked in this connection 

 there is not a single fact known to us which makes the existence of 

 a human form in the Miocene period an impossibility. The latest 

 palaeontological evidence bearing upon the development of the 

 anthropoids and man is wholly in harmony with this view and seems 

 to point to the Middle Miocene as the period when man and the 

 anthropoids first started on their divergent careers. 



The type of man we have next to consider is that represented by 

 the Mauer jaw. Homo heidelbergensis precedes in time the High- 

 terrace men as they preceded Homo neanderthalensis. The unique 

 characters of the Mauer mandible, if we disregard for the moment 

 the pronounced canines of Eoanthropus, make it more difticult to 

 relate pre-Mousterian man to Homo heidelbergenesis than to Eoan- 

 thropus dawsoni. Evidence of affinity between the two races seems 

 to be wholly wanting. The antiquity of the Mauer jaw is unquestion- 

 able. The race of men represented by this jaw lived in Europe in 

 the early part of the Pleistocene. All the characters of the jaw suggest 

 a type of man resembling in general facial and cranial features. 

 Homo neanderthalensis. Indeed the Mauer jaw has been fitted into 

 a Neanderthal skull without doing violence to the characters of either. 

 This type differs so fundamentally from the High-terrace type 

 and also from Eoanthropus that we are practically forced to see in 

 Homo heidelbergensis a race entirely distinct from the other two, a 

 different enus, it may be; and if we may not derive the High-terrace 

 men from Eoanthropus, then there is no escape from the conclusion 

 that there were three distinct types or genera of men in existence in 

 Europe in the earlier part of the Pleistocene. 



As we have already seen, the parallel differentiation of the anthro- 

 poids into distinct species and genera makes this quite probable; 

 and perhaps to these three types we may yet have to add several 

 others and among them the more advanced type represented by the 

 Castenedolo skull. 



With this brief consideration of Homo heidelbergensis, whose 

 chief interest for the present, seems to lie in his absolute isolation — • 

 for, like another shadowy character who flashed briefly across the 

 pages of human history, he has neither beginning nor end — we may 



