The sun., 1895-04-08
New Arguments for the Antiquity
of Man.

New Arguments for the Antiquity
In the current number of the Nineteenth
Century is an account OF the recent discov-
cry of flint implements in a plateau in Kent,
which, unlike the flint bearing drift depos-
its that carry us no further back than the
post-glacial period, belong to a part of the
glacial age itself. The inference is that, in
addition to the races of neolithc and palBo-
lithic men; which are already known to
have existed in Britain, there was still
earlier race. that of plateau or eolithic man,
separated from paleolithic or post-glacial
human beings by the vast gulf of the period
Of extreme glacialism, when the island Of
Great Britain lay either under ice and snow,
or under an ice-covered ocean.
AS regards the geological age Of the Kent
plateau, in which the discoveries were made,
Prof. PREsTwICH does not hesitate to pro-
nounce it contemporaneous with some part
of the glacial period and the outcome of his
study Of some hundreds of specimens Of
the fints found there is the expression of q
conviction that they were shaped by the
hand Of man. They differ markedly, how
ever, in size and form from the paleolithic
flint implements; none of them, apparently,
was used as n weapon; they seem to have
been employed for hammering, for breaking
bones, for scraping Skins bones and sticks,
or for chipping and trimming other stones
for use. All this points to a very simple and
primitive race whose wants were few
and who perhaps lived largely on fruits and
roots. The absence Of large, massive imple-
ments is the more noticeable because the
elephant, rhinoceros, bear, and various for
midable carnivora had already appeared in
the land, so that weapons of defence would
seem to have been US much needed as in the
subsequent palRolithic period. Was the
absence of such weapons due to lack of in
ventive skill or lack of the physical power
required for welding them The sugges-
tion is offered by Prof. PREsTwICH that the
plateau or eolithic men may have been an
arboreal race, too deficient in intelligence
or too weak in point of physical strength
to cope with their feral enemies, and there
fore driven to seek shelter and refuge in the
trees Of the forest. If skeletons of eolithic
men had been unearthed, we could draw
definite conclusions regarding their muscu-
lar and cerebral capacity. But no bones
have been found, and, therefore, concerning
their structure we have no positive knowl-
| edge. All traces Of the frame of eolithic
| man have disappeared in the long roll of ages.
How surely this would be brought about
| in permeable deposits is exemplified in the
| case of beds of gravel which originally con-
sisted of insoluble silicious elements mixed
with pebbles Of chalk and oolite, but in
| which the latter two calcareous elements
| have been dissolved out as utterly as if they
had been Jumps of sugar.
To fix the chronological date OF palRolithic
or post-glacal man, and that Of his eolithic
forerunner, we must begin by deciding
when we will assume that the glacial period
began and ended. Touching this point there
has been much fuctuation of opinion. For
time geologists were led by the needs OF
the uniformitarian theory to adopt the as
Economical chronology of DIR. CRoLL, who
after first suggesting much higher
figures, concluded that the insetting
of the glacial age took place 24O,
600 years ago, and the end Of the post
glacial period 10000 years ago. Prof
PREsTwICH can find no geological warrant
for these estimates. He denies the existence
of any proof that pal;Rolithic man disap
peared so long ago as so. 900 years, and thu,
| neolithic man has reisncd throughout the
long subsequent interval He himself be
lieves that palseolthic or post-glacial mar
did not appear earlier than 10000 to 30,
900 years ago, and that his disappearance
should not be put back further than 10, ,00C
or 12, 600 years from our own times. The
eolithic man Of the Kent plateau is older
being separated from his palaolithic success
sor by the breadth of the period of extreme
glacialsm. According to CRoLL this period
lasted for more than 10000 years. but
Prof PREsTwIcH prefers an approximate
estimate Of $4,000 to $4,000 years. The
important thing is to recognize that tho
time needed for the advance and retreat Of
the great ice streams must have been long
and it is this which gives the measure o.
the interval between the newly discovered
eolithic man and the previously known
paleolithic races.