348 THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN 
marking of the occipital fragment there is also a graze of 
the pick. That this graze is the opposite side of the 
same unfortunate blow there can be no doubt, for when 
the occipital fragment is brought opposite to the margin 
of the parietal, so as to complete the perforation made by 
the pick, it is clear from the agreement in thickness and 
in texture of the parts brought into contact that we have 
found a true relationship. Indeed we can surmise the 
disaster wrought by the workman's unfortunate blow. 
The skull was evidently embedded In the gravel so as to 
expose its right hinder aspect to the blow. 
By the same blow the hinder part of the right parietal 
was broken Into two fragments — the splintering line 
starting from the point at which the pick perforated 
(fig. 1 1 8, B). I found, further, that when the occipital 
and parietal bones were articulated as in the original 
model that the lower border of the right parietal always 
became half an Inch too high. Detaching the occipital 
fragment, and giving it what was apparently Its true 
articulation with the adjacent margin of the parietal, I 
found that all the parts, previously out of place, slid into 
position. As I had suspected, there is a fragment miss- 
ing at Dr Smith Woodward's line of junction, the true 
relationship of the fragment being that given in fig. io2. 
The failure to recognise the true position of the occipital 
fragment has given rise to some of the difficulties of 
those who have tried to discover the true nature of the 
Piltdown skull. 
I have probably wearied my readers with the details 
concerning the reconstruction of the hinder aspect of the 
Piltdown head. It is not the skull Itself which Is the 
aim of our search ; It Is rather the brain which lay within 
it — the organ with which this early representative of 
mankind measured and registered the world in which he 
lived. To know the brain we must rightly reconstruct 
the brain case. We are already In a position to form a 
rough estimate of its size. When the reconstruction In 
fig. 1 02 is compared with that of a modern man (fig. 1 17) 
it Is seen that the head of the ancient man is the more 
