160 
mean place of Jupiter,” the argument is now the 
time interval from the epoch of the Kaliyuga, so 
that the table is available for more than 3000 
years further back; while Table XXXIV. is now 
given for days, hours, and minutes, instead of 
days, ghatikas, and palas. 
The tables are clearly printed and the volume 
is furnished with a comprehensive index. To the 
Indian epigraphist and many others the volume 
should prove a welcome supplement to the 
“Indian Calendar.” 
R. J. Pocock: 
THE ANTIQUITY AND EVOLUTION OF 
MAN. 
(1) Man and His Forerunners. By Prof. H. v. 
Buttel-Reepen. Incorporating Accounts of 
Recent Discoveries in Suffolk and Sussex. 
Authorised Translation by A. G. Thacker. Pp. 
96. (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 
1913.) Price 2s. 6d. net. 
(2) The Origin and Antiquity of Man. By Dr. 
G. Frederick Wright. Pp. xx+547. (London: 
John Murray, 1913.) Price 8s. net. 
(3) L’Uomo Attuale una Specie Collettiva. By 
V. Giuffrida-Ruggeri. Pp. viii+ 192+ xiii plates. 
(Milano: Albrighi, Segati e C., 1913.) Price 
6 lire. 
(4) Die Rehobother Bastards und das Bastardie- 
vungsproblem beim Menschen. Dr. Eugen 
Fischer. Pp. vii+327+19 plates. (Jena: 
Gustav Fischer, 1913.) Price 16 marks. 
(1) TN this excellent translation of Prof. Buttel- 
| Reepen’s little book, with the German title 
altered to ‘‘Man and His Forerunners,” the state- 
ment occurs that ‘‘general treatises on Pleistocene 
man published before 1908 are now almost value- 
less.” Such a statement implies that our know- 
ledge regarding the ancestry and evolution of 
man has been revolutionised in the last five years 
—a statement which no one familiar with the sub- 
ject could support for amoment. Yet in that space 
of time certain events have occurred which do 
materially alter our conception of how and when 
mankind came by its present estate. 
There is, in the first place, the discovery of 
definite types of worked flints beneath the Red 
Crag of East Anglia by Mr. J. Reid Moir. Prof. 
von Buttel-Reepen does not question that the sub- 
Crag flints show human workmanship, but he 
seeks to minimise their antiquity by withdrawing 
the Red Crag from, the Pliocene formations and 
setting it at the commencement of the Pleistocene 
series—a change which we believe geologists will 
not be inclined to countenance. Even if the place 
of the Red Crag be changed to the commencement 
NO. 2293, VOL. 92] 
NATURE 
[OcTOBER 9, 1913 
of the Pleistocene, the sub-Crag flints may stil] 
claim a respectable antiquity, for the author quotes 
with approval Penck’s estimate of 500,000 to 
1,500,000 years as the duration of the Pleistocene 
period, and 25,000 years as the time which has 
elapsed since the Pleistocene closed. 
It is during the last five years that we have 
come to realise fully the significance of Neander- 
thal man. He was formerly regarded as our 
Pleistocene ancestor. The recent discoveries in 
France and a more exact study of prehistoric 
remains have made amply clear that Neanderthal 
man is so sharply differentiated in all his features 
from modern man that we must regard him not 
as an ancestor, but as a totally different and col- 
lateral species, and that in past times there was 
not one species of man—subdivided into varieties 
as at present—but that there existed several, per- 
haps many, different species of man. 
We note that Prof. von Buttel-Reepen gives his — 
adhesion to the theory of multiple human species. 
On the other hand, we also observe that Dr. 
Frederick Wright, in the “Origin and Antiquity 
of Man,” adopts the view, usually held by geo- 
logists, that Neanderthal man is merely a variant 
of modern man, and brings forward the time-worn 
examples of Robert the Bruce and the medizval 
Bishop of Toul as representatives of Neanderthal 
man in modern times.’ The difference between 
the crania of Robert the Bruce and Neanderthal 
man is almost as great as that which separates 
the skulls of the chimpanzee and gorilla. 
The third event which has altered our conception 
of man in the past is the discovery made by Mr. 
Charles Dawson in a pocket of gravel by the side 
of a farm-path, at Piltdown, Sussex. The dis- 
covery is noted by three of the authors whose 
books are here reviewed, and it is interesting to 
see what opinion each of them has formed of 
Eoanthropus dawsoni. Prof. von Buttel-Reepen 
gives us the first surprise; he places this new 
species of humanity with Neanderthal man, be- 
tween the second and third glacial phases of the 
Pleistocene. It is true that Mr. Dawson and Dr. 
Smith Woodward did use the term Chellean— 
which refers to the stage of flint workmanship 
usually supposed to have been reached between the 
second and third of Penck’s glacial phases—but 
they were also careful to explain that they regarded 
the Piltdown gravel as having been deposited 
and the skull imbedded at a period long anterior 
to the Chellean age—namely, at the early part 
of the Pleistocene period—perhaps earlier. 
As to the position of Eoanthropus in the human 
lineage, all our authors show circumspection. — 
Prof. von Buttel-Reepen is “inclined to think that 
the anterior curve of the jaw passed more sharply 
