28 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 65 



growth in intelligence and in the powers of discrimination no doubt 

 led to a definite cultivation of the aesthetic sense, which, operating 

 through sexual selection, brought about a gradual refinement of the 

 features." 

 Smith, G. Elliot. The Piltdown Skull and Brain Cast. Nature, vol. 92, pp. 



267-268. October 30, 1913. 

 Smith, G. Elliot. The Piltdown Skull and Brain Cast. Nature, vol. 92, pp. 



318-319. November 13, 1913. 

 Smith, G. Elliot. The controversies concerning the interpretation and 

 meaning of the remains of the dawn-man found near Piltdown. Nature, 

 vol. 92, pp. 468-469. December 18, 1913. 



" There is definite internal evidence that the jaw is not really an ape's ; 

 the teeth it bears are human . . . ." 



Smith, G. Elliot. On the exact determination of the median plane of the 

 Piltdown skull. Abstr. Proc. Geol. Soc. London, session 1913-14, p. 29, 

 December 31, 1913. (See also Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. London, vol. 70, 

 PP- 93-97, figs. 4-6, April 25, 1914.) 

 Smith, G. Elliot. The controversies concerning the interpretation and mean- 

 ing of the remains of the dawn-man found near Piltdown. Mem. and 

 Proc. Manchester Lit. and Philos. Soc, vol. 58, pp. VII-IX. March 31, 

 1914. 



" That the jaw and cranial fragments .... belonged to the same 

 creature there had never been any doubt on the part of those who have 

 seriously studied the matter" (p. VIII). The author believes that: 

 " When man was first evolved the pace of evolution must have been 

 phenomenally rapid." He alludes to " the turmoil incident to the 

 inauguration of the Pleistocene Period" (p. IX). 



Smith, G. Elliot. The Significance of the Discovery at Piltdown. Bedrock, 

 vol. 3, pp. 1-17. April, 1914. 



A detailed criticism of Professor Keith's views. 

 Sollas, W. J. Ancient Hunters and their Modern Representatives. Ed. 2, 

 London, 1915, pp. I-XIV, 1-591, 314 figs. 



Piltdown man, pp. 49-56. " Some have regarded such a being as an 

 improbable monster and have suggested that the jaw may not have 

 belonged to the skull, but to a true ape. The chances against this are, 

 however, so overwhelming that the conjecture may be dismissed as 

 unworthy of serious consideration. Nor on reflection need the com- 

 bination of characters presented by Eoanthropus occasion surprise. It 

 had, indeed, been long previously anticipated as an almost necessary 

 stage in the course of human development" (p. 54). 



Sutcliffe, W. H. A criticism of some modern tendencies in prehistoric 

 anthropology. Mem. & Proc. Manchester Lit. and Philos. Soc, vol. 57, 

 no. 7, pp. 1-25, pis. 1-2. June 24, 1914. 



Skull and jaw "undoubtedly belonging to the same individual." 

 Eoanthropus placed on line leading to Homo sapiens, pi. 1. (See Keith, 

 1915, and Pilgrim.) Eoliths produced by natural agencies. (See Moir.) 



Thacker, A. G. The Significance of the Piltdown Discovery. Science Prog- 

 ress, vol. 8, pp. 275-290. October, 1913. 

 Accepts association of skull with jaw. 

 Tyrell, G. W. The Sussex Skull. Knowledge, vol. 36, p. 61, February, 1913. 

 Account of paper by Dawson and Woodward. Name Eoanthropus 

 not printed. 



