THE PLEISTOCENE OR GLACIAL PERIOD 929 



however, the larger the number of animal types not known to have 

 lived this side the last glacial stage whose remains are commingled 

 with human relics, the stronger the presumption of man's presence 

 before the close of the glacial period. From this point of view, 

 the European case seems to be strong. 



There is one further feature in the European case that is, at 

 least, suggestive. Two climatic groups of animals are associated 

 with the human relics, a subarctic and a subtropical. In the 

 subarctic group, there were reindeers, mammoths, woolly rhinoc- 

 erouses, arctic gluttons, musk-oxen, and other boreal forms; in 

 the subtropical group, lions, leopards, hippopotamuses, hyenas, 

 southern rhinoceroses, and other African types. These contrasted 

 groups, as interpreted by James Geikie and others, imply migra- 

 tions of the kind already sketched as characteristic of the glacial 

 period. While it cannot be positively affirmed that there have 

 been no climatic oscillations of a similar kind since the last glacial 

 epoch, there is a somewhat strong presumption that those implied 

 by these two classes of animals were connected with climatic oscil- 

 lations of the glacial period. This presumption therefore connects 

 man with at least the later of the glacial epochs. 



The relics thus associated with extinct animals have been 

 assigned to paleolithic man, and to a primitive stage of culture. 

 This interpretation is based on the crudeness of the stone artefacs 

 rather than upon the evidence of a higher order of art which the 

 record presents. If, however, the rude stone artefacs are susceptible 

 of being interpreted as the waste incidental to the making of good 

 stone implements, an interpretation which does not seem to have 

 been yet fully adjudicated in Europe, a more favorable judgment 

 of the art of these ancient peoples would be reached; for associated 

 with the ruder artefacs (or paleoliths), there are implements of 

 bone, such as needles, awls, harpoons or spears with barbs, etc., 

 implying some advance in art; there are carvings that show not a 

 little skill, and drawings in which the elements of perspective and 

 shading, as well as skill in delineation, are indicated (Fig. 608). 

 These seem to imply a higher stage of art development than is con- 

 sistent with the exclusive use of paleolithic stone implements. On 

 the whole, present evidence seems to justify the conclusion of most 



