THE TERTIARY MAN.
By Professor Henry W. Haynes.
“It must not be imagined that it is in any way proved that the Palæolithic man was the first human being that existed. We must be prepared to wait, however, for further and better authenticated discoveries before carrying his existence back in time further than the Pleistocene or post-Tertiary period.”[EW] This was the position assumed more than twelve years ago by the eminent English geologist and archæologist, Dr. John Evans, and it was still maintained in his address before the Anthropological Section of the British Association on September 18, 1890. I believe that the study of all the evidence in favor of the existence of the Tertiary man that has been brought forward down to the present time will leave the question in precisely the same state of uncertainty.
[EW] A Few Words on Tertiary Man, Trans, of Hertfordshire Nat. Hist. Soc, vol. i, p. 150.
“In order to establish the existence of man at such a remote period the proofs must be convincing. It must be shown, first, that the objects found are of human workmanship; secondly, that they are really found as stated; and, thirdly, the age of the beds in which they are found must be clearly ascertained and determined.”[EX] These tests I propose to apply to the evidence for the Tertiary man recently brought forward in Europe, and then to consider the significance of certain discoveries on the Pacific coast of our own continent.
[EX] Ibid., p. 148.
Tertiary deposits in Europe are alleged to have supplied three sorts of evidence of this fact: First, the bones of man himself; second, bones of animals showing incisions or fractures supposed to have been produced by human agency; third, chipped flints believed to exhibit marks of design in their production.