與此同時，在地球的另一端，南非約翰內斯堡的威特沃特斯蘭德大學的澳大利亞裔解剖學負責人雷蒙德·達特于1924年收到了一個非常完整的小孩頭骨，帶有完好的面部、下頜以及所謂的顱腔——一個天然的大腦模型——它是在卡拉哈里沙漠邊緣一個名叫塔翁的地方的石灰巖采石場發現的。達特馬上發現，這并非是杜布瓦發現的爪哇人那樣的直立人，而是與猿更為接近的遠古猿人。他推斷它的生存時間距今有200萬年左右，井將其明明為南方古猿非洲種，或者說“非洲南方猿人”。在發表于《自然》雜志的報告中，達特稱塔翁化石與人類“有驚人的相似之處”，并且建議需要為他的發現建立一個嶄新的科：人屬猿科（“人猿科”）。[qh]

The authorities were even less favorably disposed to Dart than they had been to Dubois. Nearly everything about his theory—indeed, nearly everything about Dart, it appears— annoyed them. First he had proved himself lamentably presumptuous by conducting the analysis himself rather than calling on the help of more worldly experts in Europe. Even his chosen name, Australopithecus, showed a lack of scholarly application, combining as it did Greek and Latin roots. Above all, his conclusions flew in the face of accepted wisdom. Humans and apes, it was agreed, had split apart at least fifteen million years ago in Asia. If humans had arisen in Africa, why, that would make us Negroid, for goodness sake. It was rather as if someone working today were to announce that he had found the ancestral bones of humans in, say, Missouri. It just didn't fit with what was known.[qh]

達持在權威那里所受到的冷遇比杜布瓦有過之而無不及，幾乎有關達特的理論的一切——實際上，好像幾乎有關達特本人的一切——都令他們很不高興。首先，他自己搞分析，沒有要求比較世故的專家提供幫助，證明他是目中無人。連他為化石取的名字，南方古猿——將希臘語和拉丁語詞根組合在一起，也顯示出他的學術能力的欠缺。最為要命的是，他的觀點與約定俗成的理論大相徑庭。大家一致認為，人和猿至少在1500萬年前在亞洲分道揚鑣。如果人類是從非洲出現的，看在老天爺的面子上，我們豈不成了尼格羅人種（黑人種）？！這就好比今天某個上班族聲稱，他在比方說美國密蘇里州，發現了人類祖先的化石一樣。這明顯與已有的知識搭不上邊。[qh]

羅伯特·布羅姆