244 THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN 
Yet, in spite of this ape-like feature, we must grant, I 
think, the possibility of speech to the Heidelberg man. 
We cannot withhold such a faculty from Neanderthal 
man, such as the one found at La Chapelle-aux-Saints, 
who had a brain above that possessed by the average 
modern man. In the Heidelberg mandible we find the 
usual Neanderthal features of the chin, only they are 
more primitive — more simian in their development. If 
we allow full speech to the Mousterian man, we must, 
at least, assume the beginnings of such a faculty for 
Heidelberg man. 
A suQ:^estion made by Professor Elliot Smith ^ has a 
direct bearing on the problem we are now considering. 
He is of opinion that the human brain must have 
reached almost its full development, and that speech was 
probably in full process of evolution, before the mandible, 
tongue, and other parts which subserve the purposes of 
speech had become finally and fully adapted to their new 
functions. That is very likely to have been the case. 
At least, we find in men of the Mousterian period a 
dentition very similar to that seen in the Heidelberg 
individual, and with mandibles, perhaps not so robust or 
so primitive, but yet in essential characters like the 
Heidelberg. In Neanderthal man these characters of 
teeth and" jaw are associated with a large brain — one 
which was capable of subserving the faculty of speech. 
We have every reason to suppose, then, that the 
Heidelberg man, with similar characters of jaw and teeth, 
had also reached a high development of brain. If 
Professor Elliot Smith's suggestion holds true, namely, 
that in the process of human evolution the brain leads 
the way, it is possible that the brain of the Heidelberg 
man may prove as large as that of Neanderthal man. 
' See his address as President of the Anthropological Section of the 
British Association at Dundee, 1912. 
