44 
THE DATING OF EARLY HUMAN REMAINS. 
any difference m the soil filling the graves and that of the sur¬ 
rounding undisturbed geological deposit. 1 
I will now take some of the more important of the human 
remains, which have been alleged to belong to the earlier stages 
of human history, and consider briefly the evidences of their 
dating. 
PITHECANTHROPUS ERECTUS. 
This is the celebrated Trinil skull, the ape-man of Java, 
found by Professor Dubois in 1891 2 . It is, I think, beyond 
question that this furnishes us with one of the “ missing links,” 
once so much sought for, between the simian type and the 
human form. The exact correlation of the deposit in which 
it was found is still a matter of some uncertainty. It may be 
of about the same age as, or a little earlier than, the Cromer 
Forest bed. 
No flint industry has been found in association with it. It 
is probably pre-Stone Age. 
HOMO HEIDELBERGENSIS. 
The well-known Heidelberg or Mauer jaw, found in 1007, 
appears to be more distinctly human than the Pithecanthropus, 
but it presents many, primitive characters. 3 It is not an inter¬ 
ment, but a genuine fossil contemporary with the deposit. 
The Mauer sands in which it was found are usually referred 
to an early interglacial stage ; they are probably a little later 
than the Cromer Forest bed. The fauna includes Rhinoceros 
etruscus and indicates an earlier date than that of our ordinary 
Palaeolithic river-terraces. 
M. Rutot classes this fossil man in his Maffhan stage of the 
eolithic period, but no true flint industry has been found. Heidel¬ 
berg man was certainly pre-Chellean and possibly pre-Stone age. 
EOANTHROPUS DAWSONI. 
The Piltdown skull is associated with two groups of animal 
remains, 4 one a derivative series earlier than the Forest bed, 
1 H. Peake and A. E. Hooton, “On a Saxon Graveyard at East Shefford, Berks.” Paper 
read at Royal Anthropological Institute, 4 March 1913 
2 W. L. H. Duckworth, Prehistoric Alan (Cambridge Manuals), 1912, pp. 2 and 63. W. J. 
Sollas, Ancient Hunters, 2nd ed., 1915, p. 31. A. Keith, Ancient Types of Man (Harper's 
Library), 1911, p.131. Most of the discoveries referred to are discussed in each of these 
books, with references to the literature of the subject. I shall not burden this brief re¬ 
view of the subject with complete references to all the original memoirs, many of which are 
somewhat inaccessible. 
3 A. Keith, Ancient Types of Man (Harper’s Library), 1911, p. 78. 
4 C. Dawson and A. Smith Woodward, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. lxix., 1913, p. 117; 
vol. lxx., 1914, p. 82. 
