OCTOBER 27, 1899.] 
extensive series of objects was gathered and 
which, if their finders could have success- 
fully maintained, would have gone far 
toward the establishment of the existence 
of man in the tertiary period. 
Professor Capellini found the fossil rib- 
bones of a whale in the tertiary deposit at 
Monte-Aperto, Italy. These ribs had evi- 
dently been cut with a sharp knife or tool 
and might easily have been done by man. 
There was no attempt at engraving, only 
certain kerfs across the ribs. Professor 
Capellini presented his discovery to the 
Academy of Lincei at Rome, and before the 
Congresses of Archeology and Prehistoric 
Anthropology at Budapest in 1876, and at 
Paris in 1878. I had the pleasure of exam- 
ining these specimens in the Museum of the 
University of Bologna, and was much im- 
pressed with the contention of Professor 
Capellini. 
Dr. Arturo Issel, one of the leading scien- 
tists of Genoa, joined the advocates of ter- 
tiary man before the International Congress 
of Archeology and Prehistoric Anthropol- 
ogy in 1867, by the presentation of a human 
skeleton, or a portion of one, found at a 
depth of ten feet in the blue clay, said to 
have been of pliocene formation, near Sa- 
vona, Italy. The skeleton was discovered 
by other persons and had been distributed 
and portions lost, so that only certain mem- 
bers came to Dr. Issel. There were no 
other animal bones found in the deposit, 
but many fossil shells which undoubtedly 
belonged to the pliocene. If the skeleton 
was contemporaneous with the original de- 
posit it would be good evidence of the exist- 
ence of man during that period. Four 
human skeletons were found at Castene- 
dolo, Italy, by Professor Ragazzoni, then 
searching for fossil shells. The deposit was 
determined to belong to the pliocene, or 
at least to the tertiary. 
There were throughout western Europe, 
perhaps a dozen more instances of objects 
_ SCIENCE. 
t 
595 
alleged to be human or related to human, 
found in tertiary deposits. The principal 
of these, and that which obtained the 
greatest prominence, was the discovery of 
Abbé Bourgeois at Thenay near Pontlevoy 
(Loire-et-Cher). Among other reasons for 
the prominence of the discovery of Abbé 
Bourgeois was. the fact that the discov- 
ery was near his own residence, where 
he could give it much of his personal at- 
tention; and he was able to attend many or 
all of the scientific meetings, whether of 
archeology, geology or paleontology, wherein 
the subject would find interested auditors, 
with many opportunities for the presenta- 
tion of the subject. From the year 1867, 
when his discovery was presented to the 
International Congress of Archeology and 
Prehistoric Anthropology at Paris, until 
1883, before the Association Francaise at 
Blois, he kept up an aggressive warfare. 
The deposit at Thenay was agreed to be- 
long to the tertiary, and it had not been 
disturbed; therefore, if the objects were 
made by man, they would be evidence of 
his existence at the time the deposit was 
made. They were all of flint and had evi- _ 
dently been worked ; whether naturally or 
artifically was the important question. 
Some had been crackled as though by fire, 
and others had been chipped as though by 
man. I have three of these pieces of flint 
in the Museum at Washington, and am 
free to confess that, had they been found 
under conditions ordinarily possible to pre- 
historic man, I should have no hesitation in 
accepting them as artificial. The presenta- 
tion of these flint objects before the various 
archeological Congresses created great in- 
terest and begat much discussion. At one, 
that in Brussels, an international committee 
of fifteen members was appointed to inves- 
tigate the question and make report. The 
committee divided, as might have been ex- 
pected. Hight members were of opinion 
that the pieces of flint were artifically 
