PHYSICAL CONDITIONS- PLEISTOCENE. 345 



the relics, observing that the cuts are coated with an incrustation 

 of the same mineral matter which clings to the bones. 1 If their 

 conclusion be true, then the only question that can arise is the 

 antiquity of the beds in which the bones occur. Are these 

 of Pliocene age ? Of this the Italian geologists, who must be 

 the most capable judges, entertain no doubt. We may antici- 

 pate, therefore, the future discovery of human implements, and 

 probably of human remains also, in Pliocene strata. 2 



Of a yet more extreme antiquity are the reputed implements 

 discovered by M. l'Abbe Bourgeois, at Thenay, in strata, the 

 Miocene age of which is not disputed. According to the Abbe 

 these implements betray all the evidence of having been fashioned 

 and used by man. He draws attention to the symmetrical form 

 of the flakings, to the retouches, to the bulbs of percussion 

 (which, however, are rare), to the traces of blows and use, to the 

 marks of fire — some of the stones having been used probably as 

 " pot-boilers " — and lastly, to the multiplied production of cer- 

 tain well-known forms. 3 M. Carlos Eibeiro, of the Geological 

 Survey of Portugal, had already noted similar discoveries of 

 worked flints and quartzites in the Pliocene and Miocene of the 

 Tagus, 4 a collection of which he exhibited at the Anthropological 

 Congress in Paris in 1879. A worked flint has also been re- 



1 Objections, however, have been urged against Capellini's views. Dr. Evans, 

 for example, has suggested that the incisions might have been made by the 

 teeth of fishes {Compt. Bend. Congres Intern. d'Anthrop. et d'Areheol. Preh., 

 1876, p. 46). See also Stefani ; Atti Accad. dei Lincei, Ser. 3, t. ii., 1878. If 

 the incisions had been made either by teeth, claws, or other natural armature of 

 animals, one might well ask, with Capellini, why similar cuttings should not be 

 visible on most of the bones found in the same bed ? 



2 Professor Boyd Dawkins, referring to the fact that flint flakes and fragments 

 of rude pottery have been met with at the place where the incised bones were 

 found, has concluded that the latter cannot be of the age assigned to them by 

 Professor Capellini. " Pottery, " he remarks, "was unknown in Europe in the 

 Pleistocene, and therefore is unlikely to have been known in the Pleiocene age " 

 (Early Man in Britain, p. 92). This objection, however, is based upon a com- 

 plete misapprehension. Professor Capellini tells me tbat the flint flakes and 

 rude pottery were found lying at the surface, and were never for a moment 

 imagined by him to belong to the same age as the cut bones. 



3 Compte Bendu du Congres International d'Anthrop. et d'Areheol. Prehist. , 

 1873, p. 81. 



4 Deseripeao do Tcrreno Quaternario das Bacias dos Bios Tejo e Sado, 1866. 



