APPENDIX. 



ON THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN, AND MORE ESPECIALLY ON 

 NEW FACTS REFERRED TO BY PROF. BOYD DAWKIN3 

 IN HIS WORK ON "EARLY MAN IN BRITAIN." 



No geologist expects to find any human remains in beds 

 older than the Tertiary, because in the older periods the 

 conditions of the world do not seem to have been suitable 

 to man, and because in these periods no animals nearly 

 akin to man are known. On entering into the Eocene 

 Tertiary we fail in like manner to find any human remains ; 

 and we do not expect to find any, because no living species 

 and scarcely any living genera of mammals are known in 

 the Eocene ; nor do we find in it remains of any of the 

 animals, as the anthropoid apes, for instance, most nearly 

 allied to man. In the Miocene the case is somewhat dif- 

 ferent. Here we have living genera at least, and we have 

 large species of apes ; but no remains of man have been 

 discovered, if we except some splinters of flint found in 

 beds of this age at Thenay, in France, and a notched rib- 

 bone. Supposing these objects to have been chipped or 

 notched by animals, which is by no means certain or even 

 likely, the question remains, Was this done by man ? 

 Gaudry and Dawkins prefer to suppose that the artificer 

 was one of the anthropoid apes of the period. It is true 

 that no apes are known to do such work now ; but then 

 other animals, as beavers and birds, are artificers, and 

 some extinct animals were of higher powers than their 

 modern representatives. But if there were Miocene apes 



399 



