In Spitzbergen, within twelve degrees of the pole, where now a dwarf willow and a few herbaceous plants form the only vegetation, and the ground is most of the time covered with snow and ice, there were growing, in Miocene times, no less than ninety-five species of trees, including yews, hazels, elders, beech, elms, and others.33 But it is in the Miocene forests of the continent of Europe where we meet with evidence of a singularly mild climate.
There were at least eleven species of palms growing in Switzerland; and one variety of them grew as far north as Northern Germany.34
We can not give a list of all the species. On the one hand, there were elms, willows, poplars, oaks, and beeches, thus far similar to the forest growth of temperate regions. Mingled with these were forests of trees like the tulip-tree, swamp cypress, and liquid amber or sweet gum of the southern part of the United States—plants whose home is in the warm and moist regions of the earth. But there were also representatives of the tropical regions—such as fig-trees, cinnamon-trees, and camphor-trees: these are found growing now in tropical countries. Fruit-trees of the cherry, plum, and almond species were also to be seen. Prof. Heer points out how all this should convince us that a large part of Europe, in the Miocene Age, possessed a climate not unlike that of the Madeira or Canary Islands to-day. He calls especial attention to the fact that these trees were nearly all of evergreen species, and that a severe winter would destroy them. He finds one hundred and thirty-one species of the Temperate Zone—species that can stand a moderate amount of cold, but not very hot and dry climates. He finds eighty-five species of tropical plants that could not possibly live where the Winters are severe. Mingled with these were nearly three hundred species whose natural home is in the warm, temperate portions of the earth. The only way you can explain this motley assemblage of trees is, to suppose that in what is now Europe was a climate free from extremes, allowing the trees to put forth flowers and fruits all the year round. “Reminding us,” says Prof. Heer, “of those fortunate zones where Nature never goes to rest.”35
Let us now inquire as to the animals that roamed through these great forests we have been describing. The Miocene period extended over a long lapse of time, and considerable change took place among the animals belonging to the different parts of this age. We will only give a general outline for the whole period. The marsupials lingered along into the early stages of this period, and then disappeared from Europe. The rhinoceros were present in the early stages, and continued through the entire age. We meet in this period animals of the elephant kind, two species, the mastodon and deinotherium. Antelopes and gazelles wandered in vast troops over the plains of Hungary, Spain, and Southern France. Carnivorous animals resembling tigers and hyenas found abundance of animal food. Herds of horse-like animals fed on the rich herbage of the meadows. The birds were largely represented. In the woods were to be seen flocks of gayly feathered paroquets and trogons. On the plains secretary-birds hunted the serpents and reptiles, which furnished them food—and eagles were on the watch for their prey. Cranes waded in the rivers for fish. Geese, herons, and pheasants must have been abundant.
Our main interest centers in the order Quadrumana. We must remember that this order appeared in the Eocene. Several species were present in the Miocene. They wandered in the forests of France, Switzerland, Germany, and Italy, and doubtless found abundant food in the figs and bread-fruit, walnuts, almonds, dates, and other nuts growing there.36 One of the most important is regarded as belonging to the same genus as the Gibbons.37 This is the genus which has been sometimes regarded as making a nearer approach to man than any other monkey.38 Others, however, consider it as belonging to an extinct family.39 In addition to this species there were at least three other species: thus there was no absence of simian life in the Miocene.40
From the sketch we have thus far drawn of the Miocene Age, it seems to have been a very favorable one in every respect. One writer41 affirms, that “the world never experienced a more beautiful period.” And indeed it seems as if the facts bear out this statement. A genial, temperate climate was the rule, even to high northern latitudes. We need not doubt but that there were grassy plains, wooded slopes, and rolling rivers. Was man present to take advantage of all these favorable surroundings? Did he wander through the evergreen forests, and hunt the deer, antelope, and hogs—the hipparions, and mastodons, and deinotheres—then so numerous?42 We know of no inherent improbability of his existence at that time. An ape belonging to a highly organized genus was then living in Europe. Every condition considered necessary for the primeval Garden of Eden was then satisfied. Let us stop for a minute and examine the nature of the evidence considered sufficient to prove the presence of man during any of the past geological ages.
Should we be so fortunate as to find portions of the bones of the human skeleton in a geological formation in such positions that they could not possibly have been introduced there since the deposition of the containing bed, it would of course prove that man was at least as old as the formation itself. But it happens that human remains in beds of a previous geological age are very rare. Indeed, human remains in formations of the Pleistocene Age,43 during which we have ample testimony, as we shall see, of the presence of man, are very rare. The cases in which there can be no doubt can be reckoned on the fingers. The explanation of this state of things is not at all difficult, for it is only under very rare circumstances that portions of the bones of animals even larger than man are preserved to us in geological strata. Vast numbers die and vanish away without leaving a trace behind them for every fragmentary bone we recover. In the case of man we must remember that, in previous eras, he was present in very small numbers; that, owing to his intelligence, he would not be as liable to be drowned and swept away, and so mingle his remains with beds of river detritus then forming, as were animals. Mr. Lyell has made some remarks on the draining of the Haarlem Lake by the government of Holland in 1853, which shows that even favorable circumstances do not always preserve remains for future inspection. Though called a lake, this body of water was an arm of the sea, covering about forty-five thousand acres. The population which had lived on the shores of the lake was between thirty and forty thousand souls. “There had been many a shipwreck, and many a naval fight on those waters, and hundreds of Dutch and Spanish soldiers and sailors had met there with a watery grave,” yet not a solitary portion of the human skeleton was to be found in its bed.44 Thus we see that, in the majority of cases, we must rely on other evidence than the presence of human bones to prove the existence of man in the geological periods of the past. In the case of the Haarlem Lake again, there was found the wreck of one or two vessels, and some ancient armor. So, had it been a disputed point whether man was a denizen of this planet at the time when the area in question was covered by water, it would have been settled beyond a doubt by these relics of his industry, even though portions of the human frame itself were entirely wanting. And, in reality, proofs of this nature are just as satisfactory as it would be to discover human bones. If, on a desert island, we find arrow-heads, javelins, a place where there had been a fire, split bones, and other débris of a feast, we are as much justified in asserting that man had been there, as we would be had we seen him with our own eyes. In the same manner, if we detect in any strata of the past any undoubted products of human industry—such as weapons, or implements and ornaments—in such position that we know they could not have been deposited there since the formation of the bed itself, we have no hesitancy in asserting that man himself is of the same antiquity as the strata containing the implements. In the great majority of cases, this is the only kind of evidence possible to advance.
It is now well known that the first stage in the culture of any people, is what is called the Stone Age. That is to say, their weapons and implements were made from stone, or at least the majority of them were. We will discuss on another page this point, and also the grounds leading us to infer that many of the extremely rude forms are really the work of man.