can take our time in deciding what best you can turn your hand to next. For into this cursed hole you'll not bring me again, I assure you. I am no sybarite, but I am not fond of this sort of thing. Come, decide. I will speak to the tailor early to-morrow morning, and in the evening you can find yourself in decent quarters."

Magnus sprang up from the bench as the dwarf brought his argument to a close, walking around the table in a state of bewilderment and agitation that was pitiful to see; then, standing before his little friend and laying his trembling hand on the narrow shoulder, he said with a tremor in his voice: "You mean well, Mr. Hinze, but it won't do, it won't do, it won't do. Do not ask me why; but, in the city-among peopleyou must see for yourself

"Very well," said his would-be benefactor, springing up in turn, anger and indignation flushing his cheeks, "you want to remain a savage. Follow your own instincts. I have nothing more to do here-God protect you."

He seized his stick and started for the door.

"Where are you going?" cried Magnus, overtaking him with a stride.

"Home, back to the city, back to my fellowmen. I do not need your company; I know the way and am afraid of no one. Good-night."

He gained the door in a trice, opened it-it was ajar-and had made a few steps townward when he heard at his side: "Even though you are angry with me you shall not go all the way home on foot." And, stooping low, the sorelytried giant took the little man by the hand, all unwilling as he was, and led him toward the river. Here at anchor lay a large flat-bottomed boat; to lift the dwarf in, step aboard himself, unfasten the boat and push it out in mid-stream was but the work of a few seconds for Magnus. The moon was low in the heavens, the air soft and still, and the novelty of the situation, the rapid gliding through the quiet water under the oarsman's skilful handling would, under ordinary circumstances, have rendered the return home one of the pleasant incldents in Hinze's life, where pleasant incidents were rare enough to be treas

ured. But the strange pair had nothing to say to each other, and preserved a moody silence. This first estrangement, threatening as it did to be a lasting one, distressed and grieved them, though the distress was not strong enough to batter down the walls of pride behind which both giant and dwarf had barricaded themselves. Magnus ransacked his poor brains to devise a scheme whereby he could propitiate his kindly counsellor, and yet not give consent to his plans, while Hinze felt that he owed it to his dignity to stick to his point and prove that little people have full-sized wills of their

own.

So the long half hour seemed doubly long; but at last the houses on the outskirts of the town loomed up in shadow, the boat ran up to the landing-place, the dwarf sprang lightly ashore, gave his boatman a cool "good-night and many thanks," pressed his hat well over his eyes and started off homeward.

And the rower pulled down the stream and cursed himself for a coward. [TO BE CONTINUED.]

From Nature.

THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN.1

no

It will, perhaps, be expected of me that I should on the present occasion bring under review the state of our present knowledge with regard to the antiquity of man; and probably fitter place could be found for the discussion of such a topic than the adopted home of my venerated friend, the late Sir Daniel Wilson, who first introduced the word "prehistoric" into the English language.

Some among us may be able to call to mind the excitement, not only among men of science, but among the general publie, when, in 1859, the discoveries of M. Boucher de Perthes and Dr. Rigollot in the gravels of the valley of the Somme, at Abbeville and Amiens, were

1 From the Inaugural Address at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, in Toronto.

confirmed by the investigations of the late Sir Joseph Prestwich, myself, and others, and the co-existence of man with the extinct animals of the Quaternary fauna, such as the mammoth and woolly-haired rhinoceros, was first virtually established. It was, at the same time, pointed out that these relics belonged to a far earlier date than the ordinary stone weapons found upon the surface, which usually showed signs of grinding or polishing, and that, in fact, there were two stone ages in Britain. To these the terms Neolithic and Palæolithic were subsequently applied by Sir John Lubbock.

The excitement was not less, when, at the meeting of this association at Aberdeen in the autumn of that year, Sir Charles Lyell, in the presence of the prince consort, called attention to the discoveries in the valley of the Somme, the site of which he had himself visited, and to the vast lapse of time indicated by the position of the implements in drift-deposits a hundred feet above the existing river.

The conclusions forced upon those who examined the facts on the spot did not receive immediate acceptance by all who were interested in geology and archæology, and fierce were the controversies on the subject that were carried on both in the newspapers and before various learned societies.

It is at the same time instructive and amusing to look back on the discussions of those days. While one class of objectors accounted for the configuration of the flint implements from the gravels by some unknown chemical agency, by the violent and continued gyratory action of water, by fracture resulting from pressure, by rapid cooling when hot or by rapid heating when cold, or even regarded them as aberrant forms of fossil fishes, there were others who, when compelled to acknowledge that the implements were the work of men's hands, attempted to impugn and set aside the evidence as to the circumstances under which they had been discovered. In doing this they adopted the view that the worked flints had either been introduced into the containing beds at a comparatively recent date, or if they actually formed constituent parts of the gravel then that this was a mere mod

ern alluvium resulting from floous at no very remote period.

In the course of a few years the main stream of scientific thought left this controversy behind, though a tendency to cut down the lapse of time necessary for all the changes that have taken place in the configuration of the surface of the earth and in the character of its occupants since the time of the Palæolithic gravels, still survives in the inmost recesses of the hearts of not a few observers.

In his address to this association at the Bath meeting of 1864, Sir Charles Lyell struck so true a note that I am tempted to reproduce the paragraph to which I refer:

"When speculations on the long series of events which occurred in the glacial and post-glacial periods are indulged in, the imagination is apt to take alarm at the immensity of the time required to interpret the monuments of these ages, all referable to the era of existing species. In order to abridge the number of centuries which would otherwise be indispensable, a disposition is shown by many to magnify the rate of change in prehistoric times by investing the causes which have modified the animate and inanimate world with extraordinary and excessive energy. It is related of a great Irish orator of our day that when he was about to contribute somewhat parsimoniously towards a public charity, he was persuaded by a friend to make a more liberal donation. In doing so he apologized for his first apparent want of generosity by saying that his early life had been a constant struggle with scanty means, and that 'they who are born to affluence cannot easily imagine how long a time it takes to get the chill of poverty out of one's bones.' In like manner we of the living generation, when called upon to make grants of thousands of centuries in order to explain the events of what is called the modern period, shrink naturally at first from making what seems so lavish an expenditure of past time. Throughout our early education we have been accustomed to such strict economy in all that relates to the chronology of the earth and its inhabitants in remote ages, so fettered have we been by old traditional beliefs, that

even when our reason is convinced, and we are persuaded that we ought to make more liberal grants of time to the geologist, we feel how hard it is to get the chill of poverty out of our bones."

Many, however, have at the present day got over this feeling, and of late years the general tendency of those engaged upon the question of the antiquity of the human race has been in the direction of seeking for evidence by which the existence of man upon the earth could be carried back to a date earlier than that of the Quaternary gravels.

There is little doubt that such evidence will eventually be forthcoming, but, judging from all probability, it is not in northern Europe that the cradle of the human race will eventually be discovered, but in some part of the world more favored by a tropical climate, where abundant means of subsistence could be procured, and where the necessity for warm clothing did not exist.

Before entering into speculations on this subject, or attempting to lay down the limits within which we may safely accept recent discoveries as firmly established, it will be well to glance at some of the cases in which implements are stated to have been found under circumstances which raise a presumption of the existence of man in preGlacial, Pliocene, or even Miocene times.

Flint implements of ordinary Palæolithic type have, for instance, been recorded as found in the eastern counties of England, in beds beneath the chalky boulder clay; but on careful examination the geological evidence has not to my mind proved satisfactory, nor has it, I believe, been generally accepted. Moreover, the archæological difficulty that man, at two such remote epochs as the pre-Glacial and the post-Glacial, even if the term glacial be limited to the chalky boulder clay, should have manufactured implements so identical in character that they cannot be distinguished apart, seems to have been entirely ignored.

Within the last few months we have had the report of worked flints having been discovered in the late Pliocene Forest Bed of Norfolk, but in that in

stance the signs of human workmanship upon the flints are by no means apparent to all observers.

But such antiquity as that of the Forest Bed is as nothing when compared with that which would be implied by the discoveries of the work of men's hands in the Pliocene and Miocene beds of England, France, Italy, and Portugal, which have been accepted by some geologists. There is one feature in these cases which has hardly received due attention, and that is the isolated character of the reputed discoveries. Had man, for instance, been present in Britain during the Crag Period, it would be strange indeed if the sole traces of his existence that he left were a perforated tooth of a large shark, the sawn rib of a manatee, and a beaming full face, carved on the shell of a pectunculus!

In an address to the Anthropological Section at the Leeds meeting of this association in 1890 I dealt somewhat fully with these supposed discoveries of the remains of human art in beds of Tertiary date; and I need not here go further into the question. Suffice it to say that I see no reason why the verdict of “not proven" at which I then arrived should be reversed.

In the case of a more recent discovery in Upper Burma in beds at first pronounced to be Upper Miocene, but subsequently "definitely ascertained to be Pliocene," some of the flints are of purely natural and not artificial origin, so that two questions arise: first, Were the fossil remains associated with the worked flints or with those of natural forms? And second, Were they actually found in the bed to which they have been assigned, or did they merely lie together on the surface?

Even the Pithecanthropus erectus of Dr. Eugène Dubois from Java meets with some incredulous objectors from both the physiological and the geological sides. From the point of view of the latter the difficulty lies in determining the exact age of what are apparently alluvial beds in the bottom of a river valley.

When we return to Palæolithic man, it is satisfactory to feel that we are treading on comparatively secure ground, and that the discoveries of the

last forty years in Britain alone enable us to a great extent to reconstitute his history. We may not know the exact geological period when first he settled in the British area, but we have good evidence that he occupied it at a time when the configuration of the surface was entirely different from what it is at present: when the river valleys had not been cut down to anything like their existing depth, when the fauna of the country was of a totally different character from that of the present day, when the extension of the southern part of the island seaward was in places such that the land was continuous with that of the continent, and when in all probability a far more rainy climate prevailed. We have proofs of the occupation of the country by man during the long lapse of time that was necessary for the excavation of the river valleys. We have found the old floors on which his habitations were fixed, we have been able to trace him at work on the manufacture of flint instruments, and by building up the one upon the other the flakes struck off by the primeval workman in those remote times we have been able to reconstruct the blocks of flint which served as his material.

That the duration of the Palæolithic Period must have extended over an almost incredible length of time is sufficiently proved by the fact that valleys, some miles in width and of a depth of from one hundred to one hundred and fifty feet, have been eroded since the deposit of the earliest implement-bearing beds. Nor is the apparent duration of this period diminished by the consideration that the floods which hollowed out the valleys were not in all probability of such frequent occurrence as to teach Palæolithic man by experience the danger of settling too near to the streams, for had he kept to the higher slopes of the valley there would have been but little chance of his implements having so constantly formed constituent parts of the gravels deposited by the floods.

The examination of British cave-deposits affords corroborative evidence of this extended duration of the Palæolithic Period. In Kent's Cavern at Torquay, for instance, we find in the lowest

deposit, the breccia below the red caveearth, implements of flint and chert corresponding in all respects with those of the high level and most ancient river gravels. In the cave-earth these are scarcer, though implements occur which also have their analogues in the river deposits; but, what is more remarkable, harpoons of reindeer's horn and needles of bone are present, identical in form and character with those of the caverns of the Reindeer Period in the south of France, and suggestive of some bond of union or identity of descent between the early troglodytes, whose habitations were geographically so widely separated the one from the other.

In a cavern at Creswell Crags, on the confines of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, a bone has moreover been found engraved with a representation of parts of a horse in precisely the same style as the engraved bones of the French caves.

It is uncertain whether any of the River-drift specimens belong to so late a date as these artistic cavern-remains; but the greatly superior antiquity of even these to any Neolithic relics is testified by the thick layer of stalagmite, which had been deposited in Kent's Cavern before its occupation by men of the Neolithic and Bronze Periods.

Towards the close of the period covered by the human occupation of the French caves, there seems to have been a dwindling in the number of the larger animals constituting the Quaternary fauna, whereas their remains are present in abundance in the lower and therefore more recent of the valley gravels. This circumstance may afford an argument in favor of regarding the period represented by the later French caves as a continuation of that during which the old river gravels were deposited, and yet the great change in the fauna that has taken place since the latest of the cave-deposits included in the Palæolithic Period is indicative of an immense lapse of time.

How much greater must have been the time required for the more conspicuous change between the old Quaternary fauna of the river gravels and that characteristic of the Neolithic Period! As has been pointed out by Prof. Boyd Dawkins, only thirty-one out of the

forty-eight well-ascertained species living in the post-Glacial or River-drift Period survived into prehistoric or Neolithic times. We have not, indeed, any means at command for estimating the number of centuries which such an important change indicates; but when we remember that the date of the commencement of the Neolithic or Surface Stone Period is still shrouded in the mist of a dim antiquity, and that prior to that commencement the River-drift Period had long come to an end; and when we further take into account the almost inconceivable ages that even under the most favorable conditions the excavation of wide and deep valleys by river action implies, the remoteness of the date at which the Palæolithic Period had its beginning almost transcends our power of imagination.

We find distinct traces of river action from one hundred to two hundred feet above the level of existing streams and rivers, and sometimes at a great distance from them; we observe old freshwater deposits on the slopes of valleys several miles in width; we find that long and lofty escarpments of rock have receded unknown distances since their summits were first occupied by Palæolithic man; we see that the whole side of a wide river valley has been carried away by an invasion of the sea, which attacked and removed a barrier of chalk cliffs from four hundred to six hundred feet in height; we find that what was formerly an inland river has been widened out into an arm of the sea, now the highway of our fleets, and that gravels which were originally deposited in the bed of some ancient river now cap isolated and lofty hills.

And yet, remote as the date of the first known occupation of Britain by man may be, it belongs to what, geologically speaking, must be regarded as a quite recent period, for we are now in a position to fix with some degree of accuracy its place on the geological scale. Thanks to investigations ably carried out at Hoxne in Suffolk, and at Hitchin in Hertfordshire, by Mr. Clement Reid, under the auspices of this association and of the Royal Society, we know that the implement-bearing beds at those places undoubtedly belong to a time subsequent to the deposit of the Great

Chalky Boulder Clay of the Eastern Counties of England. It is, of course, self-evident that this vast deposit, in whatever manner it may have been formed, could not, for centuries after its deposition was complete, have presented a surface inhabitable by man. Moreover, at a distance but little further north, beds exist which also, though at a somewhat later date, were apparently formed under Glacial conditions. At Hoxne the interval between the deposit of the Boulder Clay and of the implement bearing beds is distinctly proved to have witnessed at least two noteworthy changes in climate. The beds immediately reposing on the clay are characterized by the presence of alder in abundance, of hazel, and yew, as well as by that of numerous flowering plants indicative of a temperate climate very different from that under which the Boulder Clay itself was formed. Above these beds character. ized by temperate plants, comes a thick and more recent series of strata, in which leaves of the dwarf Arctic willow and birch abound, and which were in all probability deposited under conditions like those of the cold regions of Siberia and North America.

At a higher level and of more recent date than these-from which they are entirely distinct-are the beds containing Palæolithic implements, formed in all probability under conditions not essentially different from those of the present day. However this may be, we have now conclusive evidence that the Palæolithic implements are, in the Eastern Counties of England, of a date long posterior to that of the Great Chalky Boulder Clay.

It may be said, and said truly, that the implements at Hoxne cannot be shown to belong to the beginning rather than to some later stage of the Palæolithic Period. The changes, however, that have taken place at Hoxne in the surface configuration of the country prove that the beds containing the implements cannot belong to the close of that period.

It must, moreover, be remembered that in what are probably the earliest of the Palæolithic deposits of the Eastern Counties, those at the highest level, near Brandon in Norfolk, where the