ABSTRACT
Hooijer and Colbert (1951) seem to have erred in listing Ramapithecus as occurring only in the Tatrot zone fauna which they suggest as being very close to the Plio-Pleistocene boundary. Regardless of these published differences in age determination the provenance of the specimen is known, so that, at least potentially, its temporal position can be verified. Faunal correlations indicate that, even in the unlikely event that Ramapithecus occurs as late as the Tatrot horizon, this primate is distinctly older than the "Villafranchian" hominids of Olduvai gorge. It is evident that most of the misapprehensions regarding Ramapithecus now current trace back to Hrdlicka's discussion of the specimen (1935) in which he insisted that the form could not be a hominid. Preservation of the entire length of the alveolar cavity of the right central incisor allows for comparative measurements as to its size.
