THE DATING OF EARLY HUMAN REMAINS. 
4 * 
It is true that we are always liable to be mistaken in taking 
tilings at their face value. Within reasonable limits, it is right 
and proper to bear in mind how easily our opinion may be 
mistaken. Nevertheless there is a point at which an attitude 
of sound criticism tends to overbalance itself, and become that 
of inverted caution. 
In the dating of early human remains, we are all a little 
afraid of saying that the evidence points to a comparatively 
modern interment, in case our opinion should be mistaken. I 
think that our overwhelming fear should be entirely on the 
other side. 
The influence of this intellectual motive force of inverted 
caution is also found where problems of uncertain human 
implements are concerned. We are all more or less imbued with 
the idea that when we are presented with a chipped flint we 
must consider it to be a human implement unless we are able to 
follow out the exact process by which it has been made by 
natural—that is, non-human—agencies. 
In speaking in these various connections of our being “ all ” 
more or less swayed by the current intellectual force of the day, 
I do not by any means exclude myself. One feels the influence 
of such forces upon oneself, no less than one sees their influence 
upon others. My own papers upon the critical side of this 
eolithic question to some extent imply the point of view that is 
referred to above, because it is practically the only way in 
which the subject can be met at the present time. And of 
course, if we can explain how a disputed flint has become acci¬ 
dentally chipped, our scepticism becomes assured, but I question 
the soundness of the position which claims the necessity for so 
doing. In the case of a thing which admittedly presents great 
difficulties of exact determination, it appears to me to be the 
normal attitude of caution to assume it to be natural until it 
can be proved to be otherwise—not to assume it to be human 
unless it can be proved to be natural. 
I cannot enter further into the burning question of the 
eoliths at the present time, although its influence is far-reaching 
upon the problems of our present enquiry. For if a flint-working 
industry which is the product of a truly human intelligence 
extends back to the Oligocene or Eocene periods, this fact must 
profoundly modify our outlook upon the problems presented 
