56 BULLETIN OF THE LIVERPOOL MUSEUMS. 
of species has no correspondence with the list of animals which, in the 
centre and west of Europe, accompany the most ancient Paleolithic flints ; 
but I have already insisted . . . on the contrast which exists between 
the Quaternary fauna of Algeria and that of Europe. I have shown that 
the former is essentially an African fauna, that is to say, is almost exclu- 
sively composed of genera actually inhabiting the Dark Continent, and mainly 
peculiar to it. I have pointed out in regard to certain extinct species, such as 
the Hlephus atlinticus, which is found in Lac Karar, that the bulk of the 
Quaternary species fossil in Algeria are still living in the south of the con- 
tinent, where they are emigrant species, in the same way as the majority of 
the boreal forms of the Quaternary deposits of our country are relegated 
to-day to the extreme north of Eurasia or of America.” 
The remains of the animals and the flint implements must, it is therefore 
evident, have reached the lake not by being floated, but by falling, in to it, 
while the sediment collected in its bottom is due partly to the detritus from 
the subterranean pipe and from the sides and margins of the walls of the 
depression. The question cannot but suggest itself—Did the flint implements 
get into the pond contemporaneously with the now long extinct European 
elephant : or are they even much more recent ! 
One may imagine also that in a hollow fed by a subterranean supply, the 
water may not have risen always in a quiet stream, but may have often been 
ejected with a force capable of mixing up the materials lying on the bottom. 
The absence of true bedding—the real geologic chronometer—is, of course, 
a serious loss in trying to assure oneself of the chronology of the Karar deposits ; 
especially as so many of the fauna of the true Paleolithic Age of Europe, 
some of which are found elsewhere in Algerian Pleistocene deposits, are 
conspicuous by their absence. 
It is noticeable, moreover, that if the faunistic remains are of Palzolithic 
Age, the species to which ‘they belong have remained without variation 
to the present time. One may also ask—Is there any possibility of the 
fossil remains of the elephant having been by some means brought from 
elsewhere and dropped into the lake at a time subsequent to the animal’s 
vanishing from Algeria, just as Moa bones are found in Maori middens 
after the date of the bird’s extinction? and How are the earlier to be 
separated from the later remains, or collated with the implements, some truly 
Paleolithic in form others less so, contemporaneous with them? There rises, 
therefore, just a doubt whether after all the implements rescued from this 
pond belong to the Paleolithic Age of Europe. But, whether this side issue 
be decided for or against the reputed age of the Karar deposits, the fact of 
their being Paleolithic would not, I repeat, go one step along the way towards 
proving—far less bringing to the ‘ verge of certainty —that the surface 
paleoliths of the Egyptian and Somaliland plateaux are of that age also. 
Sir John does not say whether the implements shown at the meeting from 
Imbabaan and from the junction of the Riet and Modder Rivers were found 
on the surface or in a dateable stratum. Are they more certainly paleolithic 
than the tools from the Knysna Caves ! 
According to the opinions (stated shortly) of various authorities who have 
studied the question of the age of flint implements in Egypt, the position is 
as follows :— 
Egypt, as we know it, came into existence in the Pleistocene (or Palzo- 
lithic) Age of Europe (Petrie), when Europe was united to N. Africa, 
and when the maritime plain (or Lower Egypt) was a gulf or 
estuary of the then existing Mediterranean. 
Paleolithic man had, before the Nile Valley was formed, his home amid 
abundant vegetation where he could live and hunt his game, on the 
