THE QUATERNARY PERIOD 373 



progressive organic evolution through the many millions of years 

 has reached its climax in Man. 



Because of additional discoveries and better methods of study, 

 our knowledge of prehistoric Man is becoming more satisfactory 

 year by year. The ablest students of the subject are agreed upon 

 several important points, while regarding others there is still much 

 disagreement. There is quite a general agreement (1) that Man 

 (physical Man at least) has evolved from lower forms of Primates; l 

 (2) that there are clearly recognizable at least two types or species 

 of Man, namely, (a) Homo primigenius (Paleolithic), a primitive 

 type now extinct, and (b) Homo sapiens (Neolithic to modern), 

 represented by existing Man; (3) that true Man certainly existed 

 during the Pleistocene ; (4) that, on a most conservative basis, true 

 Man was on the earth no less than 100,000 years ago; and (5) that 

 there is no positive evidence for the existence of true Man earlier 

 than the Pleistocene or Glacial epoch. 



Differences of opinion commonly surround such as: (1) The 

 classification of the early ancestral forms, that is whether they 

 should be called Apes, Man-like Apes, or Ape-like Men; 2 and (2) 

 the portions of the Quaternary system represented by the deposits 

 in which Man's bones or implements are found, or by the remains 

 of animals found associated with Man's bones or implements. 



Bones and implements of ancient Man and his early ancestral 

 forms are found chiefly in high river terraces, loess, caves, and 

 glacial deposits. In this connection, it should be stated that, in 

 spite of various reported discoveries, there is no well proved evi- 

 dence for Man's existence in North America during the Pleistocene. 



The following tabular arrangements are introduced in order 

 to graphically represent (synoptically) certain of the most signifi- 

 cant features in connection with the geologic history of Man. The 

 first table is by Clark Wissler and the second by the author. It 

 should be clearly borne in mind that, in some respects, these 

 are only tentative arrangements, though they do summarize our 



1 There is a prevalent popular misconception that the evolutionist con- 

 siders Man to be a direct descendant of the Monkey. What the evolutionist 

 really believes, however, is that Man and Monkey may have sprung from a 

 common ancestry. 



2 It is important to note that this very difference of opinion is one of the 

 strongest arguments in favor of the organic evolution of Man, because prac- 

 tically all intermediate types between true Men and certain higher Primate 

 forms are known. 



