FOOTNOTES:

Strepyan.

The lowest palaeolithic deposit is the Strepyan, so called from Strépy, near Charleroi, typically represented at St Acheul, Amiens, and recognised also in the Thames Valley[42]. The tools exhibit deliberate flaking, and mark the transition between eolithic and palaeolithic work. The associated fauna includes two species of elephant,E. meridionalisandE. antiquus, two species of rhinoceros,R. EtruscusandR. Merckii, and the hippopotamus. It is possible that the Mauer jaw and the Piltdown skull belong to this stage.

Chellean.

The Chellean industry[43], with the typical coarsely flaked almond-shaped implements, occurs abundantly in the South of England and in France, less commonly in Belgium, Germany, Austria-Hungary and Russia, while examples have been recognised in Palestine, Egypt, Somaliland, Cape Colony, Madras and other localities, though outside Europe the date is not always ascertainable and the form is not an absolute criterion[44].

Acheulean.

Acheulean types succeed apparently in direct descent but the implements are altogether lighter, sharper, more efficient, and are characterised by finer workmanship and carefully retouched edges. A small finely finished lanceolate implement is typical of the sub-industry or local development at La Micoque (Dordogne).

The Chellean industry is associated with a warm climate and the remains ofElephas antiquus,Rhinoceros Merckiiand hippopotamus. Lower Acheulean shows little variation, but with Upper Acheulean certain animals indicating a colder climate make their appearance, including the mammoth,Elephas primigenius, and the woolly rhinoceros,R. tichorhinus, but no reindeer.

Mousterian.

The Mousterian industry is entirely distinct from its predecessors. The warm fauna has disappeared, the reindeer first occurs together with the musk ox, arctic fox, the marmot and other cold-loving animals. Man appears to have sought refuge in the caves, and from complete skeletons found in cave deposits of this stage we gain the first clear ideas concerning the physical type of man of the early palaeolithic period. Typical Mousterian implements consist of leaf-like or triangular points made from flakes struck from the nodule instead of from the dressed nodule itself, as in the earlier stages. The Levallois flakes, occurring at the base of the Mousterian (sometimes included in the Acheulean stage), initiate this new style of workmanship, but the Mousterian point shows an improvement inshape and a greater mastery in technique, producing a more efficient tool for piercing and cutting. Scrapers, carefully retouched, with a curved edge are also characteristic, besides many other forms. The complete skeletons from Le Moustier itself, La Chapelle, La Ferassie, and Krapina all belong to this stage, which marks the end of the lower palaeolithic period, the Age of the Mammoth.

Aurignacian.

The upper palaeolithic or Reindeer Age is divided into Aurignacian, Solutrian, and Magdalenian[45]culture stages, with the Azilian[46]separating the Magdalenian from the neolithic period. Each stage is distinguished by its implements and its art. The Aurignacian fauna, though closely resembling the Mousterian, indicates an amelioration of climate, the most abundant animals being the bison, horse, cave lion, and cave hyena, and human settlements are again found in the open. Among the typical implements are finely worked knife-like blades (Châtelperron point, Gravette point), keeled scrapers (Tarté type),burinsor gravers, and various tools and ornaments of bone. Art is represented by engravings and wall paintings, and to this stage belong statuettes representing nude female figures such as those of Brassempouy, Mentone, Pont-à-Lesse (Belgium), Predmost and Willendorf, near Krems. The Neandertal type appears to have died out and Aurignacian man belongs to the modern type represented at Combe Capelle. If the evidence of the figurines is to be accepted, a steatopygous race was at this time in existence, which Sollas is inclined to connect with the Bushmen[47].

Solutrian.

The Solutrian stage is characterised by the abundance of the horse, replaced in the succeeding period by the reindeer. The Solutrians seem to have been a warlike steppe people who came from the east into western Europe. Their subsequent fate has not been elucidated. The culture appears to have had a limited range, only a few stations being found outside Dordogne and the neighbouring departments. The technique, as shown in the laurel-leaf and willow-leaf points, exhibits a perfection of workmanship unequalled in the Palaeolithic Age, and only excelled by late prehistoric knives of Egypt.

Magdalenian.

The rock shelter at La Madeleine has given its name to the closing epoch of the Palaeolithic Age. The flint industry shows distinct decadence, but the working in bone and horn was at its zenith; indeed, so marked is the contrast between this and the preceding stage that Breuil is convinced that "the first Magdalenians were not evolved from the Solutrians; they were new-comers in our region[48]." The typical implements are barbed harpoons in reindeer antler (later that of the stag), often decorated with engravings. Sculpture and engravings of animals in life-like attitudes are among the most remarkable records of the age, and the polychrome pictures in the caves of Altamira, "the Sistine chapel of Quaternary Art," are the admiration of the world[49].

Azilian.

In the cave of Mas-d'Azil, between the Magdalenian and Neolithic deposits occurs a stratum, termed Azilian, which, to some extent, bridges over the obscure transition between the Palaeolithic and Neolithic Ages. The reindeer has disappeared, and its place is taken by the stag. The realistic art of the Magdalenians is succeeded by a more geometric style. In flint working a return is made to Aurignacian methods, and a particular development of pygmy flints has received the nameTardenoisian[50].

The characteristic implement is still the harpoon, but it differs in shape from the Magdalenian implement, owing to the different structure of the material. Painted pebbles, marked with red and black lines, in some cases suggesting a script, have given rise to much controversy. Their meaning at present remains obscure[51].

Chronology.

The question of prehistoric chronology is a difficult one, and the more cautious authorities do not commit themselves to dates. Of late years, however, such researches as those of A. Penck and E. Brücknerin the Alps[52]and of Baron de Geer and W. C. Brøgger in Sweden[53], have provided a sound basis for calculations. Penck recognises four periods of glaciation during the pleistocene period, which he has named after typical areas, the Günz, Mindel, Riss and Würm. He dates the Würm maximum at between 30,000 and 50,000 years ago and estimates the duration of the Riss-Würm interglacial period at about 100,000 years. According to his calculations the Chellean industry occurs in the Mindel-Riss, or even in the Günz-Mindel interval, but it is more commonly placed in the mild phase intervening before the last (Würm) glaciation, this latter corresponding with the cold Mousterian stage. At least four subsequent oscillations of climate have been recognised by Penck, the Achen, Bühl, Gschnitz and Daun, and the correspondence of these with palaeolithic culture stages may be seen in the following table[54].

James Geikie[55], under the heading, "Reliable and Unreliable estimates of geological time," points out that the absolute duration of the Pleistocene cannot be determined, but such investigations as those of Penck "enable us to formsome conception of the time involved." He accepts as a rough approximation Penck's opinion that "the Glacial period with all its climatic changes may have extended over half a million years, and as the Chellean stage dates back to at least the middle of the period, this would give somewhere between 250,000 and 500,000 years for the antiquity of man in Europe. But if, as recent discoveries would seem to indicate, man was an occupant of our Continent during the First Interglacial epoch, if not in still earlier times, we may be compelled greatly to increase our estimate of his antiquity" (p. 303).

W. J. Sollas, on the other hand, is content with a far more contracted measure. Basing his calculations mainly on the investigations of de Geer, he concludes that the interval that separates our time from the beginning of the end of the last glacial episode is 17,000 years. He places the Azilian age at 5500B.C., the middle of the Magdalenian age somewhere about 8000B.C., Mousterian 15,000B.C., and the close of the Chellean 25,000B.C.[56]

But when all the changes in climate are taken into consideration, the periods of elevation and depression of the land, the transformations of the animals, the evolution of man, the gradual stages of advance in human culture, the development of the races of mankind, and their distribution over the surface of the globe, this estimate is regarded by many as insufficient. Allen Sturge claims "scores of thousands of years" for the neolithic period alone[57], and Sir W. Turner points out the very remote times to which the appearance of neolithic man must be assigned in Scotland. After showing that there is undoubted evidence of the presence of man in North Britain during the formation of the Carse clays, this careful observer explains that the Carse cliffs, now in places 45 to 50 feet above the present sea-level, formed the bed of an estuary or arm of the sea, which in post-glacial times extended almost, if not quite across the land from east to west, thus separating the region south of the Forth from North Britain. He even suggests, after the separation of Britain from the Continent in earlier times, another land connection, a "Neolithic land-bridge" by which the men of the New Stone Age may have reached Scotland when theupheaved 100-foot terrace was still clothed with the great forest growths that have since disappeared[58].

One begins to ask, Are even 100,000 years sufficient for such oscillations of the surface, upheaval of marine beds, appearance of great estuaries, renewed connection of Britain with the Continent by a "Neolithic land-bridge"? In the Falkirk district neolithic kitchen-middens occur on, or at the base of, the bluffs which overlook the Carse lands, that is, the old sea-coast. In the Carse of Gowrie also a dug-out canoe was found at the very base of the deposits, and immediately above the buried forest-bed of the Tay Valley[59].

That the neolithic period was also of long duration even in Scandinavia has been made evident by Carl Wibling, who calculates that the geological changes on the south-east coast of Sweden (Province of Bleking), since its first occupation by the men of the New Stone Age, must have required a period of "at least 10,000 years[60]."

Still more startling are the results of the protracted researches carried on by J. Nüesch at the now famous station of Schweizersbild, near Schaffhausen in Switzerland[61]. This station was apparently in the continuous occupation of man during both Stone Ages, and here have been collected as many as 14,000 objects belonging to the first, and over 6000 referred to the second period. Although the early settlement was only post-glacial, a point about which there is no room for doubt, L. Laloy[62]has estimated "the absolute duration of both epochs together at from 24,000 to 29,000 years." We may, therefore, ask, If a comparatively recent post-glacial station in Switzerland is about 29,000 years old, how old may a pre- or inter-glacial station be in Gaul or Britain?

The early History of Man a Geological Problem.

From all this we see how fully justified is J. W. Powell's remark that the natural history of early man becomes more and more a geological, and not merely an ethnological problem[63]. We also begin to understand how it is that, after an existence of some five score millenniums, the first specialised humanvarieties have diverged greatly from the original types, which have thus become almost "ideal quantities," the subjects rather of palaeontological than of strictly anthropological studies.

The Human Varieties the Outcome of their several Environments.

And here another consideration of great moment presents itself. During these long ages some of the groups—most African negroes south of the equator, most Oceanic negroes (Negritoes and Papuans), and Australian and American aborigines—have remained in their original habitats ever since what may be called the first settlement of the earth by man. Others again, the more restless or enterprising peoples, such as the Mongols, Manchus, Turks, Ugro-Finns, Arabs, and most Europeans, have no doubt moved about somewhat freely; but these later migrations, whether hostile or peaceable, have for the most part been confined to regions presenting the same or like physical and climatic conditions. Wherever different climatic zones have been invaded, the intruders have failed to secure a permanent footing, either perishing outright, or disappearing by absorption or more or less complete assimilation to the aboriginal elements. Such are some "black Arabs" in Egyptian Sudan, other Semites and Hamites in Abyssinia and West Sudan (Himyarites, Fulahs and others), Finns and Turks in Hungary and the Balkan Peninsula (Magyars, Bulgars, Osmanli), Portuguese and Netherlanders in Malaysia, English in tropical or sub-tropical lands, such as India, where Eurasian half-breeds alone are capable of founding family groups.

The human varieties are thus seen to be, like all other zoological species, the outcome of their several environments. They are what climate, soil, diet, pursuits and inherited characters have made them, so that all sudden transitions are usually followed by disastrous results[64]. "To urge the emigration of women and children, or of any save those of the most robust health, to the tropics, may not be to murder in the first degree, but it should be classed, to put it mildly, as incitement to it[65]." Acclimatisation may not be impossiblebut in all extreme cases it can be effected only at great sacrifice of life, and by slow processes, the most effective of which is perhaps Natural Selection. By this means we may indeed suppose the world to have been first peopled.

At the same time it should be remembered that we know little of the climatic conditions at the time of the first migrations, though it has been assumed that it was everywhere much milder than at present. Consequently the different zones of temperature were less marked, and the passage from one region to another more easily effected than in later times. In a word the pleistocene precursors had far less difficulty in adapting themselves to their new surroundings than modern peoples have when they emigrate, for instance, from Southern Europe to Brazil and Paraguay, or from the British Isles to Rhodesia and Nyassaland.

Correspondence of Geographical with Racial and Cultural Zones.

What is true of man must be no less true of his works; from which it follows that racial and cultural zones correspond in the main with zones of temperature, except so far as the latter may be modified by altitude, marine influences, or other local conditions. A glance at past and existing relations the world over will show that such harmonies have at all times prevailed. No doubt the overflow of the leading European peoples during the last 400 years has brought about divers dislocations, blurrings, and in places even total effacements of the old landmarks.

But, putting aside these disturbances, it will be found that in the Eastern hemisphere the inter-tropical regions, hot, moist and more favourable to vegetable than to animal vitality, are usually occupied by savage, cultureless populations. Within the same sphere are also comprised most of the extra-tropical southern lands, all tapering towards the antarctic waters, isolated, and otherwise unsuitable for areas of higher specialisation.

Similarly the sub-tropical Asiatic peninsulas, the bleak Tibetan tableland, the Pamir, and arid Mongolian steppes are found mainly in possession of somewhat stationary communities, which present every stage between sheer savagery and civilisation.

In the same way the higher races and cultures are confined to the more favoured north temperate zone, so that between the parallels of 24° and 50° (but owing to local conditionsfalling in the far East to 40° and under, and in the extreme West rising to 55°) are situated nearly all the great centres, past and present, of human activities—the Egyptian, Babylonian, Minoan (Aegean), Hellenic, Etruscan, Roman, and modern European. Almost the only exceptions are the early civilisations (Himyaritic) of Yemen (Arabia Felix) and Abyssinia, where the low latitude is neutralised by altitude and a copious rainfall.

Thanks also to altitude, to marine influences, and the contraction of the equatorial lands, the relations are almost completely reversed in the New World. Here all the higher developments took place, not in the temperate but in the tropical zone, within which lay the seats of the Peruvian, Chimu, Chibcha and Maya-Quiché cultures; the Aztec sphere alone ranged northwards a little beyond the Tropic of Cancer.

Thus in both hemispheres the iso-cultural bands follow the isothermal lines in all their deflections, and the human varieties everywhere faithfully reflect the conditions of their several environments.

FOOTNOTES:[1]Ethnology, Chaps. V. and VII.[2]See A. H. Keane,Ethnology, 1909, Chap. VII.[3]H. Klaatsch, "Die Aurignac-Rasse und ihre Stellung im Stammbaum des Menschen,"Ztschr. f. Eth.LII.1910. See alsoPrähistorische Zeitschrift, Vol.I.1909.[4]Cf. A. Keith's criticisms inNature, Vol.LXXXV.1911, p. 508.[5]W. L. H. Duckworth,Prehistoric Man, 1912, p. 146.[6]W. Ridgeway, "The Influence of Environment on Man,"Journ. Roy. Anthr. Inst., Vol.XL.1910, p. 10.[7]E. Dubois, "Pithecanthropus erectus, transitional form between Man and the Apes,"Sci. Trans. R. Dublin Soc.1898.[8]O. Schoetensack,Der Unterkiefer des Homo Heidelbergensis, etc., 1908.[9]C. Dawson and A. Smith Woodward, "On the Discovery of a Palaeolithic Skull and Mandible," etc.,Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.1913.[10]This was the view of A. Smith Woodward when the skull was first exhibited (loc. cit.), but in his paper, "Missing Links among Extinct Animals,"Brit. Ass.Birmingham, 1913, he is inclined to regard "Piltdown man, or some close relative" as "on the direct line of descent with ourselves." For A. Keith's criticism seeThe Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 503.[11]W. L. H. Duckworth,Prehistoric Man, 1912, p. 8.[12]For the relation between chin formation and power of speech, see E. Walkhoff, "Der Unterkiefer der Anthropomorphen und des Menschen in seiner funktionellen Entwicklung und Gestalt," E. Selenka,Menschenaffen, 1902; H. Obermaier,Der Mensch der Vorzeit, 1912, p. 362; and W. Wright, "The Mandible of Man from the Morphological and Anthropological points of view,"Essays and Studies presented to W. Ridgeway, 1913.[13]Cf. W. L. H. Duckworth,Prehistoric Man, 1912, p. 10, and A. Keith,The Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 237.[14]A. Smith Woodward, 1070 c.c.; A. Keith, 1400 c.c.[15]G. G. MacCurdy, following G. S. Miller,Smithsonian Misc. Colls.Vol. 65, No. 12 (1915), is convinced that "in place ofEoanthropus dawsoniwe have two individuals belonging to different genera," a human cranium and the jaw of a chimpanzee.Science, N.S. Vol.XLIII.1916, p. 231. See also Appendix A.[16]For a full description seeQuart. Journ. Geol. Soc.March, 1913. Also A. Keith,The Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 320, and pp. 430-452.[17]C. Dawson and A. Smith Woodward, "Supplementary Note on the Discovery of a Palaeolithic Human Skull and Mandible at Piltdown (Sussex),"Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.April, 1914.[18]The Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 209.[19]Thus Lucretius:"Arma antiqua manus, ungues, dentesque fuerunt,Et lapides, et item silvarum fragmina rami."[20]Jour. Anthrop. Inst.1896, p. 133.[21]Inaugural Address, Brit. Ass. Meeting, Toronto, 1897.[22]M. Boule, "L'homme fossile de la Chapelle-aux-Saints,"Annales de Paléontologie, 1911 (1913). Cf. also H. Obermaier,Der Mensch der Vorzeit, 1912, p. 364.[23]Prehistoric Man, 1912, p. 60.[24]Der Mensch der Vorzeit, 1912, p. 365.[25]This is not generally accepted. See A. Keith's diagram, p. 5 and pp. 9-10.[26]W. J. Sollas, "On the Cranial and Facial Characters of the Neandertal Race,"Phil. Trans.1907,CXCIV.[27]J. Fraipont and M. Lohest, "Recherches Ethnographiques sur les Ossements Humains," etc.,Arch. de Biologie, 1887.[28]Gorjanovič-Kramberger,Der diluviale Mensch von Krapina in Kroatia, 1906.[29]M. Boule, "L'homme fossile de la Chapelle-aux-Saints,"L'Anthr.XIX. 1908, andAnnales de Paléontologie, 1911 (1913).[30]H. Klaatsch,Prähistorische Zeitschrift, Vol. I. 1909.[31]Peyrony and Capitan,Rev. de l'Ecole d'Anthrop.1909;Bull. Soc. d'Anthr. de Paris, 1910.[32]G. Schwalbe, "Der Schädel von Brüx,"Zeitschr. f. Morph. u. Anthr.1906.[33]Makowsky, "Der diluviale Mensch in Löss von Brünn,"Mitt. Anthrop. Gesell. in Wien, 1892.[34]See A. Keith,The Antiquity of Man, 1915, Chap. X.[35]H. Klaatsch, "Die Aurignac-Rasse," etc.,Zeitschr. f. Ethn.LII.1910.[36]L. Lartet, "Une sépulture des troglodytes du Périgord," and Broca, "Sur les crânes et ossements des Eyzies,"Bull. Soc. d'Anthr.de Paris, 1868.[37]R. Verneau,Les Grottes de Grimaldi, 1906-11.[38]For a complete list with bibliographical references, see H. Obermaier, "Les restes humains Quaternaires dans l'Europe centrale,"Anthr.1905, p. 385, 1906, p. 55.[39]A. Keith,The Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 158. See also W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, p. 186 ff.[40]H. Klaatsch, "Die Aurignac-Rasse,"Zeitschr. f. Eth.1910,LII.p. 513.[41]The Mesvinian implements are now accepted as artefacts and placed by H. Obermaier immediately below the Chellean, though M. Commont interprets them as Acheulean or even later. See W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, p. 132 ff.[42]R. Smith and H. Dewey, "Stratification at Swanscombe,"Archaeologia,LXIV. 1912.[43]So called from Chelles-sur-Marne, near Paris.[44]Cf. J. Déchelette,Manuel d'Archéologie préhistorique,I.1908, p. 89.[45]From Aurignac (Haute-Garonne), Solutré (Saône-et-Loire), and La Madeleine (Dordogne).[46]Mas-d'Azil, Ariège.[47]W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, pp. 378-9.[48]"Les Subdivisions de paléolithique supérieur,"Congrès Internat. d'Anth.1912,XIV.pp. 190-3.[49]H. Breuil and E. Cartailhac,La Caverne d'Altamira, 1906. For a list of decorated caves, with the names of their discoverers, see J. Déchelette,Manuel d'Archéologie préhistorique, I. 1908, p. 241. A completeRépertoire de l'Art Quaternaireis given by S. Reinach, 1913; and for chronology see E. Piette, "Classifications des Sédiments formés dans les cavernes pendant l'Age du Renne,"Anthr.1904.[50]From La Fère-en-Tardenois, Aisne.[51]Cf. W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, pp. 95, 534 f.[52]Die Alpen in Eiszeitalter, 1901-9. See also "Alter des Menschengeschlechts,"Zeit. f. Eth.XL.1908.[53]See W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, p. 561.[54]H. Obermaier,Der Mensch der Vorzeit, 1911-2, p. 332.[55]The Antiquity of Man in Europe, 1914, p. 301.[56]Ancient Hunters, 1915, p. 567.[57]Proc. Prehist. Soc. E. Anglia, 1. 1911, p. 60.[58]Discourse at the R. Institute, London,Nature, Jan. 6 and 13, 1898.[59]Nature, 1898, p. 235.[60]Tiden för Blekings första bebyggande, Karlskrona, 1895, p. 5.[61]"Das Schweizersbild, eine Niederlassung aus palaeolithischer und neolithischer Zeit," inNouveaux Mémoires Soc. Helvétique des Sciences Naturelles, Vol.XXXV. Zurich, 1896. This is described by James Geikie,The Antiquity of Man in Europe, 1914, pp. 85-99.[62]L'Anthropologie, 1897, p. 350.[63]Forum, Feb. 1898.[64]The party of Eskimo men and women brought back by Lieut. Peary from his Arctic expedition in 1897 were unable to endure our temperate climate. Many died of pneumonia, and the survivors were so enfeebled that all had to be restored to their icy homes to save their lives. Even for the Algonquians of Labrador a journey to the coast is a journey to the grave.[65]W. Z. Ripley,The Races of Europe, 1900, p. 586.

[1]Ethnology, Chaps. V. and VII.

[2]See A. H. Keane,Ethnology, 1909, Chap. VII.

[3]H. Klaatsch, "Die Aurignac-Rasse und ihre Stellung im Stammbaum des Menschen,"Ztschr. f. Eth.LII.1910. See alsoPrähistorische Zeitschrift, Vol.I.1909.

[4]Cf. A. Keith's criticisms inNature, Vol.LXXXV.1911, p. 508.

[5]W. L. H. Duckworth,Prehistoric Man, 1912, p. 146.

[6]W. Ridgeway, "The Influence of Environment on Man,"Journ. Roy. Anthr. Inst., Vol.XL.1910, p. 10.

[7]E. Dubois, "Pithecanthropus erectus, transitional form between Man and the Apes,"Sci. Trans. R. Dublin Soc.1898.

[8]O. Schoetensack,Der Unterkiefer des Homo Heidelbergensis, etc., 1908.

[9]C. Dawson and A. Smith Woodward, "On the Discovery of a Palaeolithic Skull and Mandible," etc.,Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.1913.

[10]This was the view of A. Smith Woodward when the skull was first exhibited (loc. cit.), but in his paper, "Missing Links among Extinct Animals,"Brit. Ass.Birmingham, 1913, he is inclined to regard "Piltdown man, or some close relative" as "on the direct line of descent with ourselves." For A. Keith's criticism seeThe Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 503.

[11]W. L. H. Duckworth,Prehistoric Man, 1912, p. 8.

[12]For the relation between chin formation and power of speech, see E. Walkhoff, "Der Unterkiefer der Anthropomorphen und des Menschen in seiner funktionellen Entwicklung und Gestalt," E. Selenka,Menschenaffen, 1902; H. Obermaier,Der Mensch der Vorzeit, 1912, p. 362; and W. Wright, "The Mandible of Man from the Morphological and Anthropological points of view,"Essays and Studies presented to W. Ridgeway, 1913.

[13]Cf. W. L. H. Duckworth,Prehistoric Man, 1912, p. 10, and A. Keith,The Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 237.

[14]A. Smith Woodward, 1070 c.c.; A. Keith, 1400 c.c.

[15]G. G. MacCurdy, following G. S. Miller,Smithsonian Misc. Colls.Vol. 65, No. 12 (1915), is convinced that "in place ofEoanthropus dawsoniwe have two individuals belonging to different genera," a human cranium and the jaw of a chimpanzee.Science, N.S. Vol.XLIII.1916, p. 231. See also Appendix A.

[16]For a full description seeQuart. Journ. Geol. Soc.March, 1913. Also A. Keith,The Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 320, and pp. 430-452.

[17]C. Dawson and A. Smith Woodward, "Supplementary Note on the Discovery of a Palaeolithic Human Skull and Mandible at Piltdown (Sussex),"Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.April, 1914.

[18]The Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 209.

[19]Thus Lucretius:"Arma antiqua manus, ungues, dentesque fuerunt,Et lapides, et item silvarum fragmina rami."

[19]Thus Lucretius:

"Arma antiqua manus, ungues, dentesque fuerunt,Et lapides, et item silvarum fragmina rami."

[20]Jour. Anthrop. Inst.1896, p. 133.

[21]Inaugural Address, Brit. Ass. Meeting, Toronto, 1897.

[22]M. Boule, "L'homme fossile de la Chapelle-aux-Saints,"Annales de Paléontologie, 1911 (1913). Cf. also H. Obermaier,Der Mensch der Vorzeit, 1912, p. 364.

[23]Prehistoric Man, 1912, p. 60.

[24]Der Mensch der Vorzeit, 1912, p. 365.

[25]This is not generally accepted. See A. Keith's diagram, p. 5 and pp. 9-10.

[26]W. J. Sollas, "On the Cranial and Facial Characters of the Neandertal Race,"Phil. Trans.1907,CXCIV.

[27]J. Fraipont and M. Lohest, "Recherches Ethnographiques sur les Ossements Humains," etc.,Arch. de Biologie, 1887.

[28]Gorjanovič-Kramberger,Der diluviale Mensch von Krapina in Kroatia, 1906.

[29]M. Boule, "L'homme fossile de la Chapelle-aux-Saints,"L'Anthr.XIX. 1908, andAnnales de Paléontologie, 1911 (1913).

[30]H. Klaatsch,Prähistorische Zeitschrift, Vol. I. 1909.

[31]Peyrony and Capitan,Rev. de l'Ecole d'Anthrop.1909;Bull. Soc. d'Anthr. de Paris, 1910.

[32]G. Schwalbe, "Der Schädel von Brüx,"Zeitschr. f. Morph. u. Anthr.1906.

[33]Makowsky, "Der diluviale Mensch in Löss von Brünn,"Mitt. Anthrop. Gesell. in Wien, 1892.

[34]See A. Keith,The Antiquity of Man, 1915, Chap. X.

[35]H. Klaatsch, "Die Aurignac-Rasse," etc.,Zeitschr. f. Ethn.LII.1910.

[36]L. Lartet, "Une sépulture des troglodytes du Périgord," and Broca, "Sur les crânes et ossements des Eyzies,"Bull. Soc. d'Anthr.de Paris, 1868.

[37]R. Verneau,Les Grottes de Grimaldi, 1906-11.

[38]For a complete list with bibliographical references, see H. Obermaier, "Les restes humains Quaternaires dans l'Europe centrale,"Anthr.1905, p. 385, 1906, p. 55.

[39]A. Keith,The Antiquity of Man, 1915, p. 158. See also W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, p. 186 ff.

[40]H. Klaatsch, "Die Aurignac-Rasse,"Zeitschr. f. Eth.1910,LII.p. 513.

[41]The Mesvinian implements are now accepted as artefacts and placed by H. Obermaier immediately below the Chellean, though M. Commont interprets them as Acheulean or even later. See W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, p. 132 ff.

[42]R. Smith and H. Dewey, "Stratification at Swanscombe,"Archaeologia,LXIV. 1912.

[43]So called from Chelles-sur-Marne, near Paris.

[44]Cf. J. Déchelette,Manuel d'Archéologie préhistorique,I.1908, p. 89.

[45]From Aurignac (Haute-Garonne), Solutré (Saône-et-Loire), and La Madeleine (Dordogne).

[46]Mas-d'Azil, Ariège.

[47]W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, pp. 378-9.

[48]"Les Subdivisions de paléolithique supérieur,"Congrès Internat. d'Anth.1912,XIV.pp. 190-3.

[49]H. Breuil and E. Cartailhac,La Caverne d'Altamira, 1906. For a list of decorated caves, with the names of their discoverers, see J. Déchelette,Manuel d'Archéologie préhistorique, I. 1908, p. 241. A completeRépertoire de l'Art Quaternaireis given by S. Reinach, 1913; and for chronology see E. Piette, "Classifications des Sédiments formés dans les cavernes pendant l'Age du Renne,"Anthr.1904.

[50]From La Fère-en-Tardenois, Aisne.

[51]Cf. W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, pp. 95, 534 f.

[52]Die Alpen in Eiszeitalter, 1901-9. See also "Alter des Menschengeschlechts,"Zeit. f. Eth.XL.1908.

[53]See W. J. Sollas,Ancient Hunters, 1915, p. 561.

[54]H. Obermaier,Der Mensch der Vorzeit, 1911-2, p. 332.

[55]The Antiquity of Man in Europe, 1914, p. 301.

[56]Ancient Hunters, 1915, p. 567.

[57]Proc. Prehist. Soc. E. Anglia, 1. 1911, p. 60.

[58]Discourse at the R. Institute, London,Nature, Jan. 6 and 13, 1898.

[59]Nature, 1898, p. 235.

[60]Tiden för Blekings första bebyggande, Karlskrona, 1895, p. 5.

[61]"Das Schweizersbild, eine Niederlassung aus palaeolithischer und neolithischer Zeit," inNouveaux Mémoires Soc. Helvétique des Sciences Naturelles, Vol.XXXV. Zurich, 1896. This is described by James Geikie,The Antiquity of Man in Europe, 1914, pp. 85-99.

[62]L'Anthropologie, 1897, p. 350.

[63]Forum, Feb. 1898.

[64]The party of Eskimo men and women brought back by Lieut. Peary from his Arctic expedition in 1897 were unable to endure our temperate climate. Many died of pneumonia, and the survivors were so enfeebled that all had to be restored to their icy homes to save their lives. Even for the Algonquians of Labrador a journey to the coast is a journey to the grave.

[65]W. Z. Ripley,The Races of Europe, 1900, p. 586.

Progress of Archaeological Studies—Sequence of the Metal Ages—The Copper Age—Egypt, Elam, Babylonia, Europe—The Bronze Age—Egypt and Babylonia, Western Europe, the Aegean, Ireland—Chronology of the Copper and Bronze Ages—The Iron Age—Hallstatt, La Tène—Man and his Works in the Metal Ages—The Prehistoric Age in the West, and in China—Historic Times—Evolution of Writing Systems—Hieroglyphs and Cuneiforms—The Alphabet—The Persian and other Cuneiform Scripts—The Mas-d'Azil Markings—Alphabetiform Signs on Neolithic Monuments—Character and Consequences of the later historic Migrations—The Race merges in the People—The distinguishing Characters of Peoples—Scheme of Classification.

Progress of Archaeological Studies.

If, as above seen, the study of human origins is largely a geological problem, the investigation of the later developments, during the Metal Ages and prehistoric times, belongs mainly to the field of Archaeology. Hence it is that for the light which has in recent years been thrown upon the obscure interval between the Stone Ages and the strictly historic epoch, that is to say, the period when in his continuous upward development man gradually exchanged stone for the more serviceable metals, we are indebted chiefly to the pioneer labours of such men as Worsaae, Steenstrup, Forchhammer, Schliemann, Sayce, Layard, Lepsius, Mariette, Maspero, Montelius, Brugsch, Petrie, Peters, Haynes, Sir J. Evans, Sir A. J. Evans and many others, all archaeologists first, and anthropologists only in the second instance.

Sequence of the Metal Ages.

From the researches of these investigators it is now clear that copper, bronze, and iron were successively in use in Europe in the order named, so that the current expressions, "Copper," "Bronze," and "Iron" Ages remain still justified. But it also appears that overlappings, already beginning in late Neolithic times, were everywhere so frequent that in many localities it is quite impossible to draw any well-marked dividing lines between the successive metal periods.

That iron came last, a fact already known by vague tradition to the ancients[66], is beyond doubt, and it is no less certain that bronze of various types intervened between copper and iron. But much obscurity still surrounds the question of copper, which occurs in so many graves of Neolithic and Bronze times, that this metal has even been denied an independent position in the sequence.

But we shall not be surprised that confusion should prevail on this point, if we reflect that the metals, unlike stone, came to remain. Once introduced they were soon found to be indispensable to civilised man, so that in a sense the "Metal Ages" still survive, and must last to the end of time. Hence it was natural that copper should be found in prehistoric graves associated, first with polished stone implements, and then with bronze and iron, just as, since the arrival of the English in Australia, spoons, clay pipes, penknives, pannikins, and the like, are now found mingled with stone objects in the graves of the aborigines.

The Copper Age.

But that there was a true Copper Age[67]prior to that of Bronze, though possibly of not very long duration, except of course in the New World[68], has been placed beyond reasonable doubt by recent investigations. Considerable attention was devoted to the subject by J. H. Gladstone, who finds that copper was worked by the Egyptians in the Sinaitic Peninsula, that is, in the famous mines of the Wadi Maghára, from the fourth to the eighteenth dynasty, perhaps from 3000 to 1580B.C.[69]During that epoch tools were made of pure copper in Egypt and Syria, and by the Amorites in Palestine, often on the model of their stone prototypes[70].

Egypt.

Elliot Smith[71]claims that "the full story of the coming ofcopper, complete in every detail and circumstance, written in a simple and convincing fashion that he who runs may read," has been displayed in Egypt ever since the year 1894, though the full significance of the evidence was not recognised until Reisner called attention to the record of pre-dynastic graves in Upper Egypt when superintending the excavations at Naga-ed-dêr in 1908[72]. These excavations revealed the indigenous civilisation of the ancient Egyptians and, according to Elliot Smith, dispose of the idea hitherto held by most archaeologists that Egypt owed her knowledge of metals to Babylonia or some other Asiatic source, where copper, and possibly also bronze, may be traced back to the fourth millenniumB.C.There was doubtless intercourse between the civilisations of Egypt and Babylonia but "Reisner has revealed the complete absence of any evidence to show or even to suggest that the language, the mode of writing, the knowledge of copper ... were imported" (p. 34). Elliot Smith justly claims (p. 6) that in no other country has a similarly complete history of the discovery and the evolution of the working of copper been revealed, but until equally exhaustive excavations have been undertaken on contemporary or earlier sites in Sumer and Elam, the question cannot be regarded as settled.

Back to Index Next