606 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1888. 



these terms are used. If other countries liave different things to be 

 described, if different epochs are found, then other names may have to 

 be given, but when we speak now of these epochs, the Chelliau, Mous- 

 tierian, etc., and the implements that belong to them, tbe speaker and 

 hearer are on a common ground in which both understand the same 

 terms used to mean the same thing. 



The world is indebted principally to M. Boucher de Perthes for the 

 great discovery of prehistoric man in the i^aleolethic i^eriod. He lived 

 at Abbeville, on the river Somme, about half way between Paris and 

 Calais. In 1841 he found in a sand-bank, then being worked at Menche- 

 court, a piece of tiint rudely fashioned to an edge and point, which ex- 

 cited his attention and wonder, for he asked himself, " How could this 

 stone have taken this form by any other than human intervention?" He 

 continued his investigations at occasional intervals, chiefly in the ex- 

 cavations and fillings at Abbeville and in the gravel which was be- 

 ing removed he found many of the same implements. In the year 

 184G was published his first work on the subject, in which he announced 

 his belief that these were human implements and of the same age as the 

 gravels in which they were found. This statement made but few con- 

 verts; nevertheless, being an enthusiast, and pressing his belief always 

 in season and sometimes, possibly, out of season, came to be regarded 

 as what would now be called a "crank." 



Doctor Eigollot, in 1853, was the first to make such examinations of 

 the locality by which, finding the implements m situ, he became a be- 

 liever in the new theory. M. Boucher de Perthes was no exception to 

 the rule that prophets are without honor in their own country. At 

 last, however, the tide turned in his favor, and I can not do better 

 than to quote from Sir John Lubbock, himself one of the actors, his 

 description of the event : 



lu 1859 Dr. Faicouer, passiug through Abbeville, examined the collection of M. 

 de Perthes, and on his return to England called the attention of Mr. Prestwich, 

 Mr. Evans, and other English geologists to the importance of his discoveries. In 

 consequence the valley of the Somme was visited in 1859 and 1860, firstly by Messrs. 

 Prestwich and Evans, and shortly afterwards by Sir C. Lyell, Sir R. Murchison, 

 Messrs. Busk, Flower, Mylne, Goodwin-Austen, and Galton; Professors Henslow, 

 Ramsay, Rogers ; Messrs. H. Christy, Rupert Jones, James Wyatt, myself, and other 

 geologists. 



Mr. John Evans, in his "Ancient Stone Implements of Great Britain," 

 describes the same event : 



We examined the local collections of flint implements and the bed in which they 

 were said to have been found, and, in addition to being perfectly satisfied with the 

 evidence adduced as to the nature of the discoveries, we had the crowning satisfac- 

 tion of seeing one of tlie worked flints still m situ in its undisturbed matrix of gravel, 

 at a depth of 17 feet from the original surface. 



The locality was also visited by the French savants who were especi- 

 ally qualified for such a scientific investigation. MM. Mortillet, d'Acy, 

 Gaudry, de Quatrefages, Lartet, Collomb, Hebert, de Yerneuil, and Q. 



