Manchester Memoirs, Vol. Ivii. (191 3), No. 1. 19 



fully weighed points to the undoubted conclusion that the 

 skeletal remains of both the Galley Hill and Ipswich man 

 were individuals of Homo S(7pieiis and were simply relics 

 of burials of a comparatively recent date ; both are com- 

 plete skeletons, both resemble the modern type of Euro- 

 pean, both were found in conditions which make burial 

 not onh' possible but immensel)- probable. 



The removals of these Galley Hill and Ipswich men 

 from the early Pleistocene to a much later period 

 simplifies considerably our views on the descent of man. 



Dechelette states in his Manual of Anthropology: 

 "Moreover, as Professor Boyd Dawkins remarked, 'it 

 would be committing a pal?eontological anachronism to 

 look for traces of a human being in a horizon of the 

 earth's history so remote as the beginning of the Miocene, 

 anterior to the age of mastodons. The presence of man 

 in the Pliocene epoch before the full development of the 

 animal kingdom, of which our first ancestors were the 

 crown, would not surprise naturalists in any manner if it 

 could be proved. It is not the same for the Miocene 

 period.' " Mons. M. de Lapparent writes : " During the 

 epoch when the flints of Thenay were formed it is certain 

 that the animal population of our planet was very incom- 

 plete. Hardly had herbivores commenced to develop ; 

 ruminants had not yet any horns ; there were no horses 

 properly so called, nor Proboscideans." To ask Palaeon- 

 tologists to accept the artificial character of the Thenay 

 flints contemporaneous with Anthracotherium, a pachy- 

 derm more ancient than the mastodon, itself the ancestor 

 of elephants, it would be necessary to find them, as G. de 

 Mortillet remarked, among the Anthropoid monkeys, 

 such as DryopitJieais, belonging to the Upper or Middle 

 Miocene, but hypothesis so serious would demand to be 

 supported by material evidence of higher character than 



