In Cuvier’s theory of the Earth the date of the origin of our species is discussed, not only on Geological but also on Historical grounds, in a disquisition embracing an immense mass of learning on the subject of the supposed antiquity of the Chinese, Egyptians, and other nations who have laid claim to a very remote origin. These pretensions are rejected, and the date usually assigned to the origin of Man is adopted in this celebrated work. The same views have been expressed by Mr. Lyell; views which he espouses, not merely as the result of his own reasonings, but of the prevalent conclusions of the highest geological authorities. “I need not dwell,” he observes, “on the proofs of the low antiquity of our species, for it is not controverted by any experienced geologist; indeed the real difficulty consists in tracing back the signs of man’s existence on the earth to that comparatively modern period when species, now his contemporaries, began to predominate. If there be a difference of opinion respecting the occurrence in certain deposits of the Remains of Man, and his works, it is always in reference to strata confessedly of the most modern order, and it is never pretended that our race co-existed with assemblages of Animals and Plants, of which all or even a great part of the species are extinct. From the concurrent testimony of history and tradition we learn that parts of Europe now the most fertile, and most completely subjected to the dominion of Man, were, less than three thousand years ago, covered with forests, and the abode of wild beasts. The archives of nature are in accordance with historical records, and when we lay bare the most superficial covering of peat we sometimes find therein the canoes of the savage, together with huge antlers of the wild stag, or horns of the wild bull. In caves now open to the day, in various parts of Europe, the bones of large beasts of prey occur in abundance, and they indicate that at periods comparatively modern in the history of the globe the ascendancy of man, if he existed at all, had scarcely been felt by the brutes.”(2) (See an analogous argument of Berkeley for the Recent Origin of Man, quoted with approbation by Mr. Lyell, vol. iii. p. 203.)