or not earlier than the end of the Pleistocene period immedi- 

 ately preceding it. 



A summing- up of the aYaila1)le information regarding the 

 age of the human skeleton found in Pit 10 at Rancho La Brea 

 from all points of view is as follows : 



. 1 — The evidence of geologic occurrence in the asphalt' 

 chimney taken by itself counts for relatively little owing to 

 the peculiar conditions under which these deposits are formed. 

 Insofar as this is of value it suggests an age later than that 

 of the tar pits containing the typical Rancho La Brea fauna. 



Later Than La Brea Fauna. 



2 — The fauna associated with the human remains in Pit 10 

 is quite dififerent from the ♦ypical Pleistocene Rancho La Brea 

 fauna, and must have inhabited this region at a different 

 period. The fauna in Pit 10 is closely related to that of the 

 present or recent period. It is distinctly later in age than the 

 typical Rancho La Brea fauna. 



3 — The characteristics of the human remains, taken by 

 themselves, show a stage of development similar to that of man 

 of the present day and not older than man of the latest Pleisto- 

 cene time. 



-I — The evidence as a whole indicates that the human 

 skeleton from Pit 10 is of a period much later than the typical 

 Rancho La Brea fauna, the time being either within the recent 

 period or not earlier than the very latest portion of Plestocene 

 time immediately preceding the present. The possible associa- 

 tion of the human remains with extinct species, such as the 

 giant Teratornis, may indicate some anticjuity for the human 

 being, or may indicate comparatively late persistence of 1)irds 

 or mammals now extinct in this region. 



5 — Measured in terms of years, it is not possible to give a 

 definite estimate of the age of the skeleton from Pit 10. It 

 may suffice to state that this person did not live in the period 

 of the Pleistocene, low-browed Neanderthal man of Europe. 

 It belongs to the distinctly modern stage of evolution. 



It does not necessarily belong to the present historic 

 period, but cannot be considered as having antedated it by 

 many thousands of years. The age of this specimen may 

 perhaps be measured in thousands of years, but probably not 

 in tens of thousands. 



6 — The study of the remains at Pit 10 is a problem similar 

 to the occurrence of an arrowhead found in a comparatively 

 recent asphalt deposit in the L'niversity of California excava- 

 tions of 1912. The arrowhead was found imbedded in a deposit 

 somewhat similar to that in Pit 10, and the fauna associated 

 with it was of the same general character as that in Pit 10. 



28 



