to conceive how men destitute of the use of metals were able to fabricate of bone, ivory, the antlers of the reindeer, an infinite variety of very delicate utensils; to carve, I had almost said to chisel, elegant forms, and to represent by designs engraved in line on the handles of their instruments the figures of different animals. These figures are distinguished by an exactness and artistic skill truly remarkable, and to find in an equal degree the sentiment of art it would be necessary to revert, through many centuries, to the better times of Greece. They form a contrast so absolute with the rude delineations traced on some Celtic monuments, that it might be asked whether they have not been designed since the historic era, by fugitives who may have sought refuge in the caves of our ancient troglodytes. But what other than the man of the quaternary period could have designed in Europe, on the bones or horns of the reindeer, the figure of a species of elephant which differs from all living species? This race of men, so interesting through its civilization, led a peaceable existence. A skull found in the grotto of Bruniquel, of which M. Brun has sent us the photograph, is distinguished by the purity of its form, the softness of its outlines, the little prominence of the apophyses, the slight depth of the muscular insertions; characters incompatible with the violent habits of a savage or barbarous race. What, then, became of this indigenous civilization, so original, so different from all those which are known to us? Was it modified by slow degrees and transformed to the extent of becoming at last wholly unrecognizable? No; it has disappeared in the mass without leaving any trace, and everything tends to the belief that it perished by force. After it, without transition, we find only the impress of a powerful race, religious and warlike, furnished with improved arms and familiar with the polishing of silex, but otherwise little addicted to industry and altogether alien to the notion of art. There are here all the indications of a brutal and successful invasion. The troglodytes of the age of stone, who had learned to conquer the soil and to destroy the last remains of the great mammals of the quaternary fauna, knew not how to defend themselves against the irruption of the barbarians, and an intermediate prehistoric age was interpolated as successor to the bright epoch of a premature civilization, whose origin is thus far wholly unknown.

These men of the age of the reindeer, so much advanced in certain respects were probably the descendants, but the softened and cultivated descendants, of the rude savages of the epoch of the diluvium. Oftener than once, in the soil of the same caverns, the lower strata are found to have enclosed the remains of the rhinoceros and the mammoth, while the superficial layers contained only the relics of the reindeer. The industry of which silex constituted the material had, from the first to the second epoch, been a little modified, but not transformed; and if a more regular cutting, with small fragments, had replaced the more rudimentary execution of earlier days, it was still by pure and simple percussion, without any process of abrasion, that the silex was elaborated. These changes moreover scarcely appear except in the fabrication of the axes; the knives continued to present a remarkable uniformity. It is probable, in fact, that the art of design was already known to the cotemporaries of the Ursus spelous. This would appear at least to result from the curious figure which that indefatigable explorer of the caverns of the Pyrenees, M. Garrigou, has discovered on a silicious stone, taken by him from a grotto containing fossil bones. This figure represents a bear which, in the length of the spinal apophyses of its neck, resembles more the bear of the caves than any other species of the same animal. If the interpretation of M. Garrigou be confirmed, it will be interesting to have thus found the origin of the art of design among a race, susceptible, no doubt, of improvement, but which, at the epoch in question, was half-savage, and which perhaps was still committed to the practice of anthropophagism. M. Garrigou, in effect, and M. Ronjou after him, have exhibited to the society several human bones on which are seen the traces

of methodical percussions designed to open the medullary canal and permit the extraction of the marrow.

Thus we have arrived at the most ancient known epoch in the life of mankind. What were at that time the physical characters of man? The bones of the members which have been found prove that the stature was of little height; and though the skulls or remains of skulls are still quite rare, it may be considered as very nearly demonstrated that our predecessors of the quaternary had the head small, with retreating forehead, and oblique jaws. But a graver and more critical question here presents itself. Our young, but already distinguished colleague, M. Dupont, in the excavations which he has conducted during several years for the Belgic government on the banks of the Meuse, between Liege and Namur, discovered, several months ago, among the bones of the rhinoceros and mammoth which occupy the lower stratum of the cavern of Naulette, a strange jaw, the zoological characters of which might at first seem to be equivocal. From its general form this skull appeared human, and was so in effect; but in the details of its conformation, its excessive thickness, the total absence of the prominence of the chin, finally and chiefly, in the character of the dentition, which is a character of the first order, it deviated considerably from the human type, while approximating to that of the anthropomorphous apes. Analogous traits, though less decided, had been already recognized in the jaw extracted by the Marquis de Vibraye from the cavern of Arcy-sur-Aube, the authenticity of which is not now to be questioned. In order to find in our actual humanity some of these characters, and even then much mitigated, it is necessary to descend to the lowest types of Australia and New Caledonia. The latter, it would follow, form not, as had till now been supposed, the last, or if you like, the first term of the human series. The quaternary man takes his place below them, and thus diminishes the interval which separates man from his zoological neighbors. But what is the signification, the import, of this fact? Must we recognize in this a proof of the transformation of species, or only a proof of the serial distribution of organic forms, of which the Darwinian theory is but a hypothetic explanation?

This doubt still subsists, notwithstanding the discussions to which so grave a subject could not fail to give rise. If it were demonstrated that the type of the man of Naulette, by successive and secular modifications, had been gradually improved so as to be elevated to our own, it cannot be dissembled that this would afford for the Darwinists a very potent argument. But do we know in what manner the quaternary races have made place for those of following ages? What is there to prove that the succession of types has not been the consequence of a substitution of races? Do we not now see, at many points of America and Oceanica, this substitution going on; the races of Europe taking the place of the indigenous races? Let us avow, then, that as yet the facts we possess are too few to solve this vast problem of the origin of the human kind, and let us wait till new discoveries bring us more numerous and decisive indications. The truth, whatever it may be, need not disquiet or humiliate us. Whether man has received his royalty as a congenital appanage, or valiantly conquered it after a long series of evolutions and struggles, does he not always remain master of the earth? He who knows how to manage as a docile instrument the blind forces of nature, who makes of electricity his messenger, who weighs the planets, and analyzes by photochemistry even the substance of the sun-will it be for him to blush at any revelation respecting an origin buried in the immeasurable depths of the past? No; the discussion in this Society, so complete, so conscientious, so learned on the doctrine of the human kingdom, sustained with so much ability by MM. Pruner-bey and de Quarterfages, sufficed to show that. man, to maintain his rank in nature, has no need of undervaluing or degrading the beings which surround him. All the speakers, without exception, recognized the intelligence of animals, and discerned in them the germ of intellectual faculties, of sentiments and passions, which have acquired their full development, their full expan

sion, only within the circle of human society. If MM. Alix, Rochet, Voisin, signalized, under different points of view, the superiority, uncontested as it is, of man, MM. Sanson, Letourneau, Simonot, Roujou, Gaussin, and others pleaded, with not less conviction, the cause of animals. The disputation, it is true, turned only on a single character, on that which henceforth will serve exclusively as a basis for the conception of the human kingdom, on the religious sentiment. It imported first of all to know whether this sentiment necessarily exists among all the tribes of men; whether it is sufficiently universal to serve as the characteristic of humanity. While MM. Quatrefages, Pruner-bey, Martin de Moussy, have no doubt of this, the opposite thesis was sustained by MM. Prat, Letourneau, Dally, Coudereau, and Lagneau. Let us not be surprised at these divergencies of opinion, inseparable from a subject which connects itself with all the most arduous questions of psychology. But let us recall with satisfaction that in this interesting debate, in which everything was in play that might rouse the feelings, and opinions the most contradictory found the utmost freedom of expression, no germ of discord was allowed to take root. Every one proved himself capable of respecting the convictions of his neighbor, and urbanity of language, the consequence of reciprocal esteem, constantly sustained the discussion at the level of the serene heights of science.

I am very far from having finished, and yet it is necessary that I should stop. Time would fail me to complete the analysis of the labors which have so fully occupied our sessions. I have been obliged to pass in silence many interesting facts, many important discussions. But if I have not been able to accomplish all my task, let the blame fall where it is due; by the aggrandizement of the field of research, by the multiplicity of their productions, my colleagues of the society have themselves rendered it impossible to condense in a few pages the results which have been accomplished. Thanks to their persevering efforts, the impulsion given to anthropological studies increases from day to day; the movement of our science becomes generalized, and is propagated in all parts of the world. It suffices to cast a glance on the first steps of the society to recognize with just satisfaction the extent of the route which has been traversed in less than eight years. What has been done in so short a space of time is a sure guarantee of what will be effected in the future.

DRILLING IN STONE WITHOUT METAL.

BY CHARLES RAU.

Some archæologists, among them Sir John Lubbock, incline to the opinion that the perforated stone axes and hammers which have been found in Europe are to be referred to the beginning of the bronze period. Many of those implements doubtless belong to the age of bronze; they have frequently been discovered in connection with bronze articles in ancient graves, and it is, moreover, well known that the manufacture and use of stone weapons and implements were everywhere continued for a long time after the introduction of bronze. These facts, however, furnish no evidence for ascribing pierced stone implements generally to the period in which the use of bronze was already known; in many cases, on the contrary, it may be inferred from the nature of their finding-places, as well as from the character of their perforations, that they belong to the stone age proper. In the illustrated catalogue of the collection in the Copenhagen museum, edited by Mr. J. J. A. Worsaae, there are eleven representations of pierced stone implements attributed to the age of stone, and the foremost objects, figured to illustrate the bronze period, consist of seven perforated stone axes, distinguished by elegant shape and superior workmanship. Though I am not acquainted with the particular circumstances of the discovery of these implements, I have not the least doubt that the learned editor of the catalogue, in referring them respectively to the ages of stone and bronze, based his classification on tenable grounds.

*

A number of those lacustrian pile-works, which pertain exclusively to the stone age, have yielded stone axes and hammers, as, for instance, the station of Nussdorf, on the Lake of Ueberlingen, (an arm of the Lake of Constance) where no less than fifty have been found. Mr. Desor, on whom I rely for these facts, also mentions that in another lacustrian station of the stone age the articles in question are confined to the upper part of the "archæological stratum," that is, the stratum which contains relics of art. Pierced implements, therefore, would seem to belong, in those localities at least, to a later epoch of the stone age, and thus to mark a phase of progress in the gradual development of human skill during that period.t After a careful examination and mparison of the shaft-holes of European stone implements, I have arrived at the conclusion that two different methods, or, at least, two differently shaped drills were employed in making them. The more perfect perforations are of equal width, smooth and shining, and exhibit at certain distances circular striæ or furrows, which have the appearance of a succession of parallel rings. These perforations, I think, have been drilled with a hollow cylinder, perhaps a bronze tube, and I believe that the implements pierced in the manner described were mostly manufactured during the age of bronze. They are, moreover, very often remarkable for elegance of outline and high finish, indicating a state of art superior to that which is generally supposed to have existed in Europe during the period of stone. In other specimens the

* Worsaae, Nordiske Oldsager i det Kongelige Museum i Kjöbenhavn, 1859.

+ Desor, Palafittes, or Lacustrian Constructions of the Lake of Neuchâtel; Smithsonian Report for 1865, p. 359, (note.)

Fig. 1

shaft-holes are likewise more or less smooth, but destitute of the annular striæ, and sometimes narrower in the middle, in which cases, of course, a circular protuberance of corresponding size is formed. (Fig. 1.) These holes evidently were drilled from two sides, and the drilling implement was not a hollow cylinder, but a solid body, probably a wooden stick. Most of the axes and hammers provided with shaftholes of this character are perhaps relics of the age of stone. It is hardly necessary to state that without the application of water and hard sand, drilling with either implement, hollow or solid, would have been impossible, and that the sand is to be considered as the chief agent in the process.

I had occasion to examine a number of European stone hatchets and hammers, which were in an unfinished state, the shaft-holes being only commenced or drilled half through, and the appearance of the latter perfectly corroborated my view concerning the different shapes of the drills used in making them; for some of these unfinished holes, and just such as belong to the striated class, have at the bottom a conical projection or a core, (Fig. 2,) which obviously resulted from Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

the application of a hollow drilling implement; while others (Fig. 3) terminate in a rounded concave bottom, resembling exactly the cavity made by a wooden stick used as a drill.* I would not express this lat

ter opinion so positively, if I could not rely on the results of experiments, having, in fact, succeeded in perforating a hard stone without any use of metal by means of a stick, in connection with sand and water. An account of the method employed by me, and of the results, I hope will be of interest to those archiæologists who pay some attention to the minor details of their study.

In the first place, I will give a description of my drilling implement, (Fig. 4,) which is, in fact, a pump-drill, the same apparatus that was used in former times by the Iroquois for the purpose of producing fire by friction. It consists of a round wooden shaft, about four feet long and an inch in diameter at the upper end, but tapering a little towards the lower extremity, where it is provided with a heavy wooden disk, which acts as a fly-wheel. A bow or bent stick, three feet in length, with a long string attached to it, forms the second part of the apparatus. When used the string of the bow is passed through a notch cut in the top end of

It afforded me some satisfaction to find my views confirmed, to a certain extent, in a work of Dr. Gustav Klemm. This author first alludes to Gutsmuths, who published an article in the "Morgenblatt," (1832, No. 253,) in which he tried to prove that a hollow cylinder of metal, used with emery in the manner of toothless stone saws, was the drilling implement of the ancients, basing his opinion upon the same facts which 1 already have stated, namely, the regularity of the holes, the core at their bottom, and the circular furrows. Klemm himself possessed in his collection a hollow bronze tube, five inches long, three-quarters of an inch in diameter, and covered all over with green rust, theærugo nobilis of antiquaries. With such implements, he thought, the shaft-holes had generally been drilled, "but continued observation," he says, "convinced me that other methods also must have been employed. A stone axe of my collection, bored from two sides, exhibits conical cavities, the shape of which at once excludes the idea that a hollow cylinder was used in drilling them; the implement with which they were made, probably in a slow and painful way, evidently was a solid body." (Klemm, Allgemeine Culturwissenschaft, Werkzeuge und Waffen, Leipzig, 1854, p. 79.) Morgan, League of the Iroquois, Rochester, 1851, description and figure on page 381. Mr. Tylor gives likewise, on page 245 of his valuable Researches into the Early History of Mankind," (London, 1865,) a drawing of the apparatus, but represents it as being moved with one hand only. In order to maintain the equilibrium of the shaft, it is necessary to apply both hands to the bow.