490 
THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN 
nearer to the CD line — in the anthropoid than in the 
human skull. That is an anthropoid character. It is 
plain that if we were given those parts of the orang's 
skull which correspond to the Piltdown fragments and 
asked to reproduce the original, we could not do otherwise 
than construct an outline similar to that shown in fig. 183. 
Let us apply the same method to the reconstruction 
of the face of a Neanderthal skull, such as that found at 
La Chapelle. The forehead in this case reaches forwards 
LiiU" 
Fig. 
36 
.:/ >;-- 
fc—^'^l 
/ 
'/ 100 \ \ 60 
v^ . / . yt 
k. 
'X^m^ 
% :. ' '. 
r--v 
•fe^^:?S£^ 
\ 
,.>^ 
[83.— Profile 
stipplet 
of the skull of an orang. The parts which are shown by 
lines are those missing in the Piltdown skull. 
to a point which is 120 mm. in front of the ear, compared 
with 100 mm. in the Tasmanian and 80 mm. in the orang. 
When, however, the position of parts on the line C-D 
is examined, it is seen that the jaws project less than in 
the Tasmanian. The ancient extinct Neanderthal type is 
less prognathous — is less simian than the Tasmanian. And 
yet the jaws and teeth are more massive. It will be seen, 
too, that the zygoma is situated low down on the base 
of the Neanderthal skull, as in anthropoids. 
By the application of this method to the Piltdown 
