TRANSACTIONS OF SECTION D.—DEPT. ANTHROPOLOGY. 553 
“ trial pits’ here and there, or with shafts to be sunk in selected places; but, first, 
to examine and remove the stalagmitic floor; then, the entire bed immediately 
below (if not of inconvenient depth) horizontally throughout the entire length of 
the cavern, or so far as practicable; this accomplished, to proceed in like manner 
with the next lower bed ; and so on until all the deposits had been removed. 
This method, uniformly followed, was preferable to any other, because it would 
reveal the general stratigraphical order of the deposits, with the amount and direc- 
tion of such ‘dip’ as they might have, as well as any variations in the thickness of 
the beds; it would afford the only chance of securing all the fossils, and of thus 
ascertaining, not only the different kinds of animals represented in the Cave, but 
also the ratios which the numbers of individuals of the various species bore to one 
another, as well as all peculiar or noteworthy collocations ; it would disclose the 
extent, character, and general features of the Cavern itself; it was undoubtedly the 
least expensive mode of exploration; and it would render it almost impossible to 
refer bones or indications of human existence to wrong beds, depths, or associations. 
The work was begun in July 1858, and closed at the end of twelve months, 
when the Cavern had practically been completely emptied ; an official Report was 
printed in the Philosophical Transactions for 1873, and all the specimens have been 
handed over to the British Museum. 
The paper on the subject mentioned at the beginning of this Address was read 
in September 1858, during the Meeting of the Association at Leeds, when I had 
the pleasure of stating that eight flint tools had already been found in various parts 
of the Cavern, all of them inosculating with bones of mammalia, at depths varying 
from 9 to 42 inches in the Cave-earth, on which lay a sheet of Stalagmite from 3 
to 8 inches thick; and having within it and on it relics of Lion, Hyzena, Bear, 
Mammoth, Rhinoceros, and Reindeer. 
It soon became obvious that the geological apathy previously spoken of had 
been rather apparent than real. In fact, geologists were found to have been not so 
much disinclined to entertain the question of Human Antiquity, as to doubt the 
trustworthiness of the evidence which had previously been offered to them on the 
subject. It was felt, moreover, that the Brixham evidence made it worth while, 
and indeed a duty, to re-examine that from Kent's Cavern, as well as that said to 
have been met with in river deposits in the valley of the Somme and elsewhere. 
The first-fruits, I believe, of this awakening was a paper, by Mr. Prestwich, 
read to the Royal Society, May 26, 1859, On the Occurrence of Flint Implements, 
associated with the Remains of Animals of Extinct Species in Beds of a late Geological 
' Period, in France at Amiens and Abbeville, and in England at Hoxne. (Phil. Trans. 
for 1860, pp. 277-317.) This paper contains explicit evidence that Brixham 
Cavern tad had no small share in disposing its author to undertake the investiga- 
tion, which added to his own great reputation, and rescued M. Boucher de Perthes 
from undeserved neglect. ‘It was not,’ says Mr. Prestwich, ‘ until I had myself 
witnessed the conditions under which these flint-implements had been found at 
Brixham, that I became fully impressed with the validity of the doubts thrown 
upon the previously prevailing opinions with respect to such remains in caves’ 
(op. cit. p. 280). 
Sir C. Lyell, too, in his Address to the Geological Section of the British 
Association, at Aberdeen, in September 1859, said, ‘The facts recently brought 
to light during the systematic investigation, as reported on by Dr. Falconer, of the 
Brixham Cave, must, I think, have prepared you to admit that scepticism in regard 
to the cave-evidence in favour of the antiquity of man had previously been pushed 
to an extreme’ (Report Brit. Assoc. 1859, Trans. Sects. p. 95). 
It is probably unnecessary to quote further to show how very large a share the 
Exploration at Brixham had in impressing the scientific world generally with the 
value and importance of the geological evidence of Man’s Antiquity. That im- 
pression, begun as we have seen in 1858, has not only lasted to the present day, 
but has probably not yet culminated. It has produced numerous volumes, crowds 
of papers, countless articles in Reviews and Magazines, in various countries; and, 
