66

"of his antiquity. He must have seen the Somme running at a "height of about a hundred feet above its present level. It is indeed "probable that he dates back in Northern France, almost, if not quite, as far as the rivers themselves. The fauna of the country must "have been indeed unlike what it is now. Along the banks of the "rivers ranged a savage race of hunters and fishermen, and in the "forests wandered the mammoth, the two-horned woolly rhinoceros, a species of tiger, the musk ox, the rein deer, and the urus." Pursuing this branch of the subject, Sir John Lubbock remarks that the discoveries already described by no means exhaust the evidence now accumulated in favour of the great antiquity of the human race. The double change which is shown to have taken place in the prevalent vegetation of Denmark since the human period, the implements disinterred from the gravel-cone of the Tinière, and the calculations of M. Gilliéron as to the time requisite for the siltingup of the head of the Lake of Bienne since the building of the lake habitation of the Pont de Thiéle are among the points touched upon by our author in connection with this part of the subject. The Egyptian researches of Mr. Horner, the calculations of Sir Charles Lyell as to the age of the Mississippi Delta and as to the duration of the glacial epoch in this country are also commented upon. There can be no doubt, he observes, of the interest of these and such estimates, but we must always recollect that they are brought forward "not as proofs but as measures of antiquity." Our belief in the antiquity of man rests not on any isolated calculations, but on the changes that have taken place since his appearance, in the geography, the fauna and the climate of Europe. These, though they afford us no means of measurement, impress us with a vague and overpowering sense of antiquity. Sir Charles Lyell-himself the able advocate and populariser of these views-has fixed upon the pliocene strata as the earliest in which we may expect to find evidence of man's existence. But Sir John Lubbock alleges fairly enough that "if "man constitutes a separate family of Mammalia, as he does in "the opinion of the highest authorities, then, according to all pale"ontological analogies he must have had representatives in Miocene "times. We need not, however, expect to find the proofs in Europe. "Our nearest relatives in the animal kingdom are confined to hot, "almost to tropical, climates; and it is in such countries that we "must look for the earliest traces of the human race."

Having thus far devoted himself to the facts that have been

hitherto collected concerning the primitive peoples of Europe, Sir John Lubbock now turns to the barbarous nations still existing in foreign countries in order to see how far their manners and customs will enable us to understand the habits and usages of the former inhabitants of this part of the world. Drawing a comparison between the labours of the Archæologist and Palæontologist our author remarks that the bone- and stone-implements are in some respects to the one what the remains of extinct animals are to the other. "Our fossil Pachyderms," he observes, "would be almost unintelligible, but for the living species of this group which inhabit Asia and Africa—and the extinct marsupials of the secondary formations are illustrated by reference to their living representatives in Australia and South America. In the same manner if we wish clearly to understand the antiquities of Europe, we must compare them with the rude implements and weapons still, or until lately, used by savage races in other parts of the world." This is rather a wide subject to enter upon, and Sir John Lubbock accordingly limits himself nearly entirely to describing what may be called the "non-metallic savages," amongst whom many weapons and other implements are still in use which curiously resemble those of the ancient inhabitants of Europe.

We will not follow our author into his discussion of the habits and customs of the Hottentots, Veddahs, Mincopies, Maories, Fuegians, and other primitive tribes. But the deductions drawn in the concluding chapter must not be passed over so hastily. As there is no evidence of "degradation,"—that is, of mankind giving up an improved practice and going back to a clumsier method, it is evident, assuming the common origin of the human race, that the lowest races of savages must be at least as far advanced as were our ancestors when they spread over the earth's surface. "What then," asks our author, "must have been their condition ?"

"They were ignorant of pottery; for the Esquimaux, the Polynesians, the Australians, some North and South American tribes, and many other savage races, have none even now, or, at least, had none until quite lately. They had no bows and arrows, for these weapons were unknown to the Australians and New Zealanders; their boats, for the same reason, must have been of the rudest possible character; they were naked, and ignorant of the art of spinning; they had no knowledge of agriculture, and probably no domestic animal but the dog, though here the argument is weaker, inasmuch as experience is more portable than property. It is, how

ever, in my opinion, most probable that the dog was long the only domesticated animal. Of the more unusual weapons, such as the boomerang, blowpipe, bolas, &c., they were certainly ignorant. The sling and the throwing stick were doubtless unknown, and even the shield probably had not been invented. The spear, which is but a development of the knife point, and the club, which is but a long hammer, are the only things left by this line of argument. They seem to be the only natural and universal weapons of man.”

The same argument applies to the mental condition of savages. It is not probable that our earliest ancestors could count ten, for many races now in existence cannot get beyond four. But on the other hand, it is not likely that man can ever have been in a lower condition than is here indicated. Only under the tropics could he have existed without weapons, subsisting solely on fruit, like the monkeys. So soon as he spread into temperate regions, such a mode of life would be impossible, and nourishment, in part at least, must be sought for from the animal kingdom. "Then, if "not before, the knife and the hammer wonld develop into the spear "and the club."

These deductions, as we have observed, assume the original unity of the human race, which is vehemently opposed by Mr. Crawfurd, and other ethnologists. Sir John Lubbock acknowledges the weight of some of their arguments, but alleges, with good reason, that man was, in former ages, a more plastic" animal, and more susceptible of change. In support of these views, he brings forward Mr. Wallace's remarkable application of the Darwinian theory to the origin of human races, of which an abstract was given in the last volume of this Journal. Even, however, if we cannot altogether adopt the conclusions arrived at by Mr. Wallace, as to the future of the human race, we are justified, as our author believes, in considering "that the happiness of man is still greatly on the increase." An animal increases in numbers when conditions are more favourable to it, that is, when it is happier and more comfortable. As civilization increases population increases, and what is equally important, the means of subsistence increase in a still greater ratio, so that, contrary to what happens in a state of nature, "the most densely-peopled countries are those in which food is most abundant." It is all very well to talk of the "free and noble

Nat. Hist. Rev. 1864, p. 328.

savage;❞ but those who, like our author, have troubled themselves more with facts than with fancies, will agree with him that, "the true savage is neither free nor noble; he is a slave to his own wants, and his own passions; imperfectly protected from the weather, he suffers from the cold by night and the heat of the sun by day; ignorant of agriculture, living by the chase, and improvident in success, hunger always stares him in the face, and often drives him to the terrible alternative of cannibalism or death."

In fine, the whole analogy of nature leads us to conclude that "the pleasures of civilized man are greater than those of the savage" -and there can be no doubt that, with the present rapid increase of civilization and of science, human happiness is also on the increase. The experience of the past gives us the most sanguine hopes of the future, for it is not reasonable to suppose that a process that has been going on for so many thousand years should now suddenly cease. "The unselfish mind," says our author in conclusion, "will find its highest gratification in the belief that, whatever may be the case with ourselves, our descendants will understand many things which are hidden from us now; will better appreciate the beautiful world in which we live, avoid much of that suffering to which we are subject, enjoy many blessings of which we are not yet worthy, and escape many of those temptations which we deplore, but cannot wholly resist."

XLIV.-ANTEDILUVIAN HISTORY IN POITOU.

ÉPOQUES ANTEDILUVIENNE ET CELTIQUE DU POITOU. Par M. M. A. Brouillet et A. Meillet. Poitiers, 1865.

Tuis work is divided into two parts: Topography, by M. Brouillet, and Technology, by M. Millet. The first part contains the description of several caverns, and their contents, as well as of numerous cromlechs and some Roman stations, examined by M. Brouillet. It is illustrated by numerous figures, which, though rude in execution, give a tolerable idea of the objects represented. A careful treatise on these subjects could not fail to possess much interest; but as regards the examination of cave-remains, much depends upon the correct determination of the animals to which they belonged. There is unfortunately much reason to doubt whether the species mentioned by M. M. Brouillet and Meillet are in all cases to be depended upon.

For instance, in describing one of the most important caverns, that of Chaffaud, M. Brouillet says that the remains comprised bones of the ox or aurochs, the horse, css, hyæna, bear, wolf, dog, fox, hare, rabbit, and many small rodents. Now, without referring to the other species mentioned, it is well known that the ass was not introduced into Europe until a comparatively recent period. Again, in the Grotte aux Fadets, he mentions remains of the domestic fowl, which is also a species of recent introduction. M. Meillet does not appear to be much more conversant with Zoology than M. Brouillet, if at least we may judge from the fact that he ranges the weasel among the rodents. The worked implements found by M. Brouillet in the caverns, some of which would otherwise be extremely interesting, are unfortunately, as we shall presently see, open to doubt for another reason. Perhaps, therefore, the most interesting part of M. Brouillet's work is that in which he favours us with his views as to the Geological History of the quaternary period. He is a firm believer in cataclysms, but appears to be a little dissatisfied with the deluge of Noah. "Personne," he tells us, ne nie le déluge de Noé, au contraire, tout le confirme, et les tradi"tions et les faits Géologiques. Mais s'il nous dit à peu près l'âge des "societés qui lui sont postérieures, il ne nous dit rien dé celui qu'avait "le genre humain quand Dieu voulut le punir de ses désordres."

We do not deny Noah's deluge, but we do deny that there is any single Geological fact which confirms it. Those who believe in it must rely upon tradition. But if the Deluge does not tell us the age of the human race, "quand Dieu voulut le punir de ses désordres," this is of the less importance, inasmuch as M. Brouillet, with the assistance of M. Meillet, supplies the omission, and reveals to us some new deluges which give us, as we shall see, the most exact information upon the subject. The first Europeau deluge "paraît," modestly observes M. Brouillet, "avoir été occasionné par le soulévement des montagnes de Norvège." It was not until after this deluge that man appeared in Europe. The second European deluge was caused by the elevation of the Alps. The Asiatic or Mosaic Deluge was subsequent," aux deux cataclysmes Européennes," and was "partiel et non universel, comme le dit le livre de Moise." Being, therefore, partial, and not having extended to our Continent, the inhabitants of Europe escaped the misfortunes which fell upon those of Asia. "Il me semble," adds M. Brouillet, and we are not disposed to deny it, "que ces suppositions sont tout aussi admis