opinion thai the Melanic races are descendants of real Preadamites.J
■•'on, however, has in onr judgment a
''■'' foundation, and ca for a momi i
in comparts >n with the arguments in favor of the common
Origin of man adduced under our arte le An \m -En t The question rather is simplva philological' one.' The
statements ol Scripture must stand or fill by th
y expounded by the n«i of exe ;esis, and
we are not at liberty to Warp them into an ao
witt discoveries in other fleldo.— Ed. : From this conclusion we bee leave to dissent toto eatlo,
and we especially disagree with the view thai I
II. Prehistoric .1/7/;.— By prehistoric peoples we com- monly understand the ancestors of the historic peoples; and. in a still Btricter sense, the ancestors of the An an nation-. In fact, most thai baa been directly learned respecting prehistoric men cue, rna the prt d< i the historic nations of Europe. It should be home in mind, however, that questions respecting primeval man — his antiquity, endowments, condition, and birth- re to be clearly distinguished from similar
questions concerning tie Caucasian ra te the race with which, as we have Been, our r< vealed Scriptures are pri- marily concerned. What ma\ be true ol this race may be very wide of the truth respecting mankind al large. See Species. In discussing prehistoric man we are
constrained to ( ine ourselves to the predecessors of
the modern Caucasians, both because discoveries of prehistoric monuments have been chiefly restricted to Caucasian countries, and because the non-Caucasian i.e.- (especially it we except the .Mongoloids) can hardly be said to possess any indigenous history; so that their prehistoric peri.ni reaches to the present. This circumstance, nevertheless, is fortunate for an- thropological research, since it enables us, by compari- son, to draw inferences respecting the prehistoric con- ditions of the Caucasian race.
1. Sources of Inform < items. — Nearly
every country of Europe contains caverns in which have been discovered either the bones of human beings or the nlies of their industry. More than forty of these were explored by Dr. Schmerling in Belgium (Jiecherches ■<:/,■ les Ossemens fossiles de< Cavernes di laProvina d, Liegi \ 1833 34]), and others, more recently, by M. E. Dupont | Les Temps Prehisto- riques; see also Le 11 on. L'Homnu Fossili \ .'.led. 1*77]). The most important Belgian caverns are those of Engis, Engihoul, Chokier, Naulette, and frontal (or Furfooz). Dr. Buckland published in 1823 </,'• liquia Diluvianw) accounts of the contents of several English caverns; and, in later times, further details have been given by Evans (Ancient Stone Implements of Great Britain [1872]), Owen (History of British Fossil Mammals and 346]), Dawkins (Cave Bunting [1875]), Lub- bock (Prehistoric Times [Lond. 1865 I, Lyell (The Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man | 1th ed. 1873]), Sanford, Falconer, Austen, Pengelly, and others whose works arc scattered through the publications of the geological and palaeontologies] societies and period- icals. The most important English caverns are those of Kent and Brixham (near Torquay), Wokey Hole in Somersetshire, Kirkdale in Yorkshire, and those in the (lower Peninsula of South Wales. The British caverns have afforded thirty-seven species of mammals, of which eightet ii are extinct A large number of French cav- erns and "rock-shelters" have proved fruitful in archae- ological and anthropological remains. As early as 1826 M. Tournal. and in 1829 M. Christol, had announced dis- coveries in the south of France. Later investigations have be.n made by Lartet and Christy (Reliquia Aqui- tanicm f Lond. 1865-69]), Desnoyers, Slortillct. Riviere, Garrigou, and many other French and English anthro- pologists. Nearly a hundred bone- and Hint-producing caverns have been described in France, the greater number ofwhich are situated in the Department of the Dordogne (e. g. Moustier, Eyzies, Madeleine. Laugerie- Ilaute. and Laugerie-Baase) and the north flanks of the Pyrenees (e. g. Aurignac, Lourdes, [zeste, and Lortet).
M. GarrigOU states thai he has explored two bun. h.d
and seventy -five caverns in the Pyrenees, tubers
equally important, how ever, occur in the departments of
Ibranlt (Pondres), Arie'ge (Massat, Bouicheta), Aude
Bi l trn-et-Gar i Bruniquel I, ami on the Medi-
rncea are in any essential point inferior to tl
it far more philosophical t.> argue that their unfavorable surroundings have produced their present dc- rail at ion, rather than lo make it an evidence of in her- cut lack ofcapai ity. Had the latter been the > it must forever operate; whereas we know that under better auspice.- they have hecu aide to surmount it.— Eu.
PREAD AMITE
487
PREAD AMITE
terranean coast (Mentone). The most celebrated cav- erns of Germany are those of Gailenreuth in Bavaria, Rabenstein in Franconia (Bav.), Eggisheim (near Col- mar), and Neanderthal (near Diisseldorf [respecting the Eugis, Neanderthal, and Borreby skulls, see Lyell, I. c. pt. i. eh. v]). Other ossiferous caverns occur in Den- mark, Switzerland (near Geneva), Italy (in the north, and along the north coast of Sicily), Spain (southern flanks of the Pyrenees), Portugal, Austria, Algeria, Egypt, Syria, Australia, and other countries. Dr. Lund explored eight hundred caverns in Brazil.