RAHONA'S PUBIS

[bh162@scn.org (Phillip Bigelow)]

>I am confused by something in the _Rahona_ paper (_Science_ 279: 
>1915-19). On p. 1917, Forster et al. describe the pubic boot and and 
>'well developed hypopubic cup' seen in the _Rahona_ pubis. Yet, their 
>fig. 4A indicates that the distal end of the pubis is unknown - 
>though they have restored it with a foot - and in the caption they 
>state 'The pubis is missing its distal end'.

>Have I fundamentally misunderstood something here? 


Further into the caption for Fig. 4, the authors note:

"These missing portions are present on the right pubis
and ischium, and their outlines are indicated here by
dotted lines." (p. 1917).

I don't understand why Forster et al. didn't just
illustrate the right pubis as well.


               <pb>


--
                 Phil Bigelow
                 bh162@scn.org