William Boyd Dawkins and John Magens Mello

../../ (1879)

Summary

William Boyd Dawkins and John Magens Mello ../../ (1879)

From these considerations I find it impossible to follow MM. de Quatrefages and Hamy in their ethnological inferences, which are based on the assumption that in the above cases the human remains belong to Palæolithic men, who lived on in the same area through the stupendous changes which banished some and destroyed other Pleistocene Mammalia—changes in geography and in climate—into the Neolithic age, without, be it remarked, preserving any traces of the art of reproducing animal forms or of the ordinary Palæolithic implements of the men of the caves.
Source: Wikisource

William Boyd Dawkins and John Magens Mello ../../ (1879)

The conditions under which the skull in chamber B was discovered were such that it might have been taken to have belonged to one of the Palæolithic inhabitants of the cave, had not the explorations been conducted with all possible vigilance. My experience of cave-exploration compels me to decline to accept any human bones as Palæolithic without the clearest stratigraphical evidence on the point, such as that offered by the human skull found by MM. Lartet and Chaplain Duparc in the cave of Duruthy, Sorde, in the Western Pyrenees.
Source: Wikisource

William Boyd Dawkins and John Magens Mello ../../ (1879)

He inquired what was the height of the hill on which the Boulder-clay occurred. The circumstances much resembled those in the Thames valley or near Oxford. In the Somme valley the Hippopotamus occurred only in the low-level gravel; here just the reverse. As regarded Prof. Boyd Dawkins's paper, he remarked that the succession also was of great interest; the absence of man from a particular cave, however, would not necessarily prove his absence for the period.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature