NO. 12 JAW OF PILTDOWN MAN — MILLER IO, 



pits, and (b) that of the supposed absence of chimpanzees from the 

 European pleistocene faunas. Concerning- the first nothing can be 

 said, except that those local conditions which caused the deposition 

 of one specimen near a given spot might be expected to act in about 

 the same way with another. The second is at least partly met by the 

 fact that a tooth described and figured as not certainly distinguishable 

 from the first lower molar of a chimpanzee has been found in the 

 pleistocene of Germany. Until the discovery of further material it 

 seems proper to treat the case as a purely zoological problem by 

 referring each set of fragments to the genus which its characters 

 demand. 



The British Pleistocene Chimpanzee 



Accepting the. conclusions (a) that each set of the Piltdown frag- 

 ments shall be treated according to the existing characters, and (b) 

 that the characters of the lower jaw are those of a member of the 

 genus Pan, it becomes necessary to distinguish the British pleistocene 

 chimpanzee from the living African species. No special fragment 

 was designated by Dr. Woodward as the type specimen of Eoan- 

 thropus dawsoni. As the species was referred to the family Hominidcz 

 I now restrict the name to the human elements of the composite, 

 selecting as type the temporal bone (Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. London, 

 vol. 69, pi. 19, fig. 2). For the chimpanzee represented by the mandi- 

 ble with its first and second molar teeth I propose the name : 



PAN VETUS, sp. nov. 

 (PI. I, fig. 2, pi. 2, fig. 2) 



Diagnosis. — General characters of mandible and of first and second 

 lower molars as in living species of Pan from French Congo and 

 southern Kameroon, but horizontal ramus more robust and teeth 

 larger. 



Measurements. — In the table (page 20) the measurements of the 

 type (from cast) are compared with those of seven mandibles of Pan 

 from French Congo and Kameroon, among which are represented the 

 maximum and minimum dimensions for the entire National Museum 

 series of adults. Only one of these individuals contrasts noticeably 

 with the type in the worn condition of the molar crowns. For con- 

 venience of further comparisons I have added the measurements of 

 Homo heidelbergensis (from cast) and of three specimens of modern 

 Homo, one extremely large, another medium in size and the third 

 rather small. 



