Bevieios and Notices of Books. 



147 



associated animals are among tlie most recently extinct or exter- 

 minated. It is a sound maxim in palseontology, that tlie more 

 ancient any specific form is, the more widely it differs from exist- 

 ing species of the same genus. Structural variation is, in fact, 



the measure of antiquity 



In dealing, then, with the antiquity of man, we have both its 

 lithological and palseontological, and to some extent also its his- 

 torical, aspects to consider, before we can arrive at any truly phi- 

 losophical conclusion. Lithologically, we see that great changes 

 have taken place in the physical geography of the districts where 

 human remains have been discovered, and the deposits in which 

 they occur are frequently also of considerable thickness, and of a 

 nature that implies slow and gradual accumulation. As geolo- 

 gists, we may feel convinced that more than six or eight thousand 

 years have elapsed since their formation, but how much more, we 

 have, in the present state of our science, no means of definitely 

 determining. Palseontologically, we perceive that other animals 

 whose remains are associated with those of man do not diflPer very 

 widely from species still existing, and are therefore constrained to 

 oppose that enormous antiquity which some geologists are dis- 

 posed to contend for. Historically, all is silent on the subject of 

 these remains ; but while the mammoth and rhinoceros may have 

 died out of Europe within the last five or six thousand years 

 without attracting the notice of the rude inhabitants, the present 

 state of human civilization seems incompatible with such a brief 

 period as five or six thousand years for its development.'' 



We certainly must differ from our author as to the antiquity of 

 man. Whatever may be said in regard to animals and plants, we 

 can have no doubt as to the creation of man, and we have scrip- 

 tural data which certainly seem to fix his appearance on earth within 

 tolerably definite limits. We think that geologists are completely 

 at sea on this subject, and want data on which to found their con- 

 clusions. The author recommends in other parts of his work cau - 

 tious induction and a sifting of facts, and we would apply to him 

 in this case the exhortation which he gives to others. No doubt 

 he does not give a decided statement, — his trumpet here gives an 

 uncertain sound, and he feels the necessity of treading warily on 

 ground which may ere long be found to yield under his feet. Those 

 who advocate progressive development, and the transmutation 

 of the ape into man, find great difficulty in setting aside the state- 

 ments of the Bible as to man's creation, and hence they are glad 

 to lay hold of any speculation as to man's antiquity which they 

 think will throw discredit on the sacred volume, and put it out of 

 the category of a Divine and truthful record. Hence the avidity 

 with which the so-called facts as to the antiquity of man are seized 

 hold of. Already, however, the Darwinian hypothesis has been 

 attacked by able naturalists and geologists such as Flourens and 



