26 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 65 



459). The molar teeth leave us in no doubt; they are human. If the 



question is asked : What are the characters of these teeth which are so 



essentially human ? it must be confessed that a direct and explicit answer 



is not easily returned .... However we may waver about the Pilt- 



down mandible, the clear direct evidence of the molar teeth comes ever 



to our aid" (pp. 469-470). _ Places Eoanthropus on a line distinct from 



those leading to Homo heidelbergensis and H. neanderthalensis on the 



one hand and to modern man on the other (p. 501). (See Pilgrim and 



Sutcliffe.) "That we should discover such a race [human, with canine 



teeth pointed, projecting, and shaped as in anthropoid apes], has been 



an article of faith in the anthropologist's creed ever since Darwin's 



time" (p. 459). Received too late for notice in body of text. 



Lankester, Ray. [Discussion of the Piltdown skull.] Abstr. Proc. Geol. 



Soc. London, session 1912-13, pp. 22-23. December 28, 1912. (See also 



Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. London, vol. 69, pp. 147-148. March, 1913. 



Issued April 25, 1913.) 



"He did not consider it certain that the lower jaw and the skull 

 belonged to the same individual." 

 Maccurdy, G. G. Ancestor Hunting : the Significance of the Piltdown Skull. 



Amer. Anthrop. n. s. vol. 15, pp. 248-256. April-June, 1913. 

 Moir, J. Reid. The Piltdown Skull. The Times, London, December 25, 1912, 

 p. 8. 



"In my opinion, then, Mr. Dawson is to be congratulated on having 

 made the immensely important discovery of the remains of one of the 

 beings who made the eolithic flint implements." (See Sutcliffe.) 

 Munro, Robert. Prehistoric Britain (Home University of Modern Knowl- 

 edge), pp. I-VI, 1-256, figs. 1-24. 1913. 



Eoanthropus, pp. 25, 52-55, 70-74, figs. 8-9. Accepts association of 

 skull with jaw. 

 Nehring, A. Ueber einen menschlichen Molar aus dem Diluvium von 

 Taubach bei Weimar. Zeitschr. fur Ethnologie, vol. 27, pp. 573-577, figs. 

 1-4. October, 1895. 



The author regards this tooth as human, but is unable to compare 

 it with anything except the first lower molar of a chimpanzee. Accord- 

 ing to the figures it almost exactly resembles the corresponding tooth 

 of Pan vetus. Size not so great: 11.7 x 9.9 mm. In the actual speci- 

 men the similarity to mi of Pan is said to be still greater than in the 

 drawing. 

 Pilgrim, Guy E. New Siwalik primates and their bearing on the evolution 

 of man and the Anthropoidea. Rec. Geol. Surv. India, vol. 45, pp. 1-74, 

 pis. 1-4, figs. 1-2. 



Accepts association of skull with jaw and places Eoanthropus on line 

 leading to Homo neanderthalensis. (See Keith, 1915, and Sutcliffe.) 

 Puccioni, Nello. Appunti intorno al frammento mandibolare fossile di Pilt- 

 down (Sussex). Archivio per l'Antropologia e la Etnologia, vol. 43, 

 pp. 167-175. 1913- 



Jaw and skull not from one individual. Jaw more like Neanderthal 

 man than like chimpanzee. " Mi sembra pertanto indubitabile che la 

 mandibola in questione appartenga ad un tipo rozzo, a mio parere piu 

 simile al tipo di Neanderthal che non al Troglodites e mi sembra 

 altresi che non si possa considerare probabile che i caratteri grossolani 

 di questa mandibola si accompagnassero ai caratteri relativamente fini 

 (assenza dell arcate sopraorbitarie, fronte alta e dritta ecc.) dei fram- 

 menti cranici che le f urono rinvenuti accanto : ond'e, che concordemente 

 a quanto pensano due eminenti scienziati inglesi (il Lankester e il 

 Waterston), io sono di opinione che la mandibola ed il cranio abbiano 

 probabilmente appartenuto a due individui distinti " (p. 175). 



