HUMAN HISTOKY 115 



There remains a third early form to be mentioned — Eoan- 

 thropus dawsoni from Piltdown near Lewis.^ The gravel in which 

 Eoanthropus was found was certainly deposited in a warm period. 

 It probably dates from either the second or the third genial 

 epoch, but great uncertainty attaches to the correlation of these 

 gravels with the phases of the glacial period. Some implements 

 found near the bones have been referred to the pre-Chellean 

 culture period, which would indicate the third genial epoch. The 

 mammalian fauna seems also to favour the reference of these 

 strata to the same period. 



The remains of Eoanthropus consist of the greater part of the 

 brain case and part of the right mandible with the first and second 

 molars in situ. The canine tooth was found later. The skull has 

 been reconstructed from several fragments. There has been much 

 controversy as to the correct method of performing this recon- 

 struction. The first estimate of the cranial capacity put it at 

 about 1,100 c.c. Woodward has later revised his estimate, and 

 arrived at a figure approaching 1,300 c.c. Keith has suggested 

 a higher figure. The bones of the skull are very thick, brow 

 ridges are almost absent, and the forehead is very steep. The 

 jaw, on the other hand, is even more ape-like than the jaw of 

 Heidelberg man ; it slopes away with scarcely any vestige of 

 a chin, the pre-molar series of teeth is parallel, and the molars 

 do not decrease in size backwards. It is owing to the simian 

 features of the jaw that the authors felt justified in creating 

 a new species for these remains. Although the absence of brow 

 ridges and the presence of a steep forehead are characters which 

 mark the higher human types, they are also found among all 

 young apes. It is thus possible that Eoanthropus may represent 

 in the general form of the skull the missing Miocene and Pliocene 

 ancestor more nearly than Pithecanthropus. The brain, though 

 very primitive, was decidedly human ; there was a moderate 

 development of those areas connected with speech. 



6. It is a matter of doubt to what subdivisions of the Pleistocene 

 the types hitherto mentioned should be assigned and with what 

 cultures, if any, they should be connected. At this point we come 

 to a region of less uncertainty. Associated with Mousterian 

 implements and with the deposits of the fourth glacial period we 

 find a distinct type of man whom we may call Mousterian or 



' Dawson and Woodward, Quart. Jour. Geol. Soc., vol. Ixix, 1913, p. 117. 



H2 



