History, Ancient; Human beings -- Origin; Prehistoric peoples
Quatrefages meets this by saying that Tertiary men with a larger
brain, and therefore more intelligence than the other Tertiary
mammals, might have survived, where these succumbed to changes and
became extinct. This is doubtless true to some extent, but it hardly
seems sufficient to account for the presence of a higher and more
recent type, like that of Castelnedolo in the Lower Pliocene, that is
a whole geological period earlier than that of the Lower Quaternary.
It is more to the purpose to say with Gaudry that the changes on
which the distinction of species are founded are often so slight that
they might just as well be attributed to variations of races; and to
appeal to instances like that of the Hylobates of the Miocene, one
of the nearest congeners of man, in which no genuine difference can
be detected from the Hylobates or Gibbon of the present day; and if
the discovery referred to at p. 264, of anthropoid primates in the
Eocene of Patagonia, should be confirmed, it would greatly strengthen
the argument for the persistence of the order to which man belongs
through several geological periods.
In any case we require more than the evidence of this one discovery
before we can assume the type of Tertiary man as a proved fact with
the same confidence as we can the existence of something like man
in those remote ages, from the repeated evidence of chipped stones
and cut bones, showing unmistakable signs of being the work of human
intelligence. And in the meantime, the only safe conclusion seems to
be that it is very probable that we may have to go back to the Eocene
to find the "missing link," or the ancestral animal which may have
been the common progenitor of man and of the other quadrumana.
I turn now to the evidence from the New World. I have kept this
distinct, for there is no such proof of synchronism between the later
geological phases of this and of the Old World as would warrant us in
assuming that what is true in one is necessarily true in the other.
Thus in Europe the presence of the mastodon is a conclusive proof
that the formation in which its remains are found is Upper Miocene or
Pliocene, and it has completely disappeared before the glacial period
and the Quaternary era. But in North America it has survived both
these periods, and it is even a question whether it is not found in
recent peat-mosses with arrow-heads of the historical Indians.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account