Abstract
IN criticising Pycraft's paper on the Boskop skull, my whole object was to get a fuller consideration of what I believe to be an extremely important early human skull. Opinions will differ so to the restoration of all imperfect human crania. We have seen how greatly anthropologists have differed in the restoration of the Piltdown man, and it is not surprising that there should be differences about the Boskop man.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to the full article PDF.
USD 39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
BROOM, R. The Boskop Skull. Nature 117, 589 (1926). https://doi.org/10.1038/117589a0
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/117589a0
