Abstract
This article considers the possible contribution of a modified concept of morphological "dating" to paleoanthropology. It is suggested that when a fossil specimen is discovered which does not "fit" morphologically with its supposed contemporaries, morphological dissimilarity should function to focus attention on the accuracy of its suggested antiquity. Examples from the Upper Pleistocene of Europe and North America illustrate that whenever such a situation has occurred in the past, the original dating and/ or the context of the aberrant specimen was subsequently found to be either wrong or at least highly questionable.

This publication has 2 references indexed in Scilit: