109 : 17 seq. See pp. 329 seq. of Galton’s Hereditary Genius.
110 : 8. In Dordogne, France, there are people who look as it is thought the Cro-Magnons did. These modern people may belong to that type in the same way that here and there people resembling the Neanderthals are still found. In Dordogne these Cro-Magnon features are quite common, and differ markedly from those of other Frenchmen. For studies of this type see Collignon, 1. For full discussions of the ancient Cro-Magnons see Keith, 1 and 2, and Osborn, 1.
110 : 11. Dr. Charles B. Davenport, in correspondence, remarks: “There can be no doubt that the prolific shall inherit the earth or the proletariat shall inherit the earth, which is etymologically the same thing. We see this law in action in Russia to-day.... Can we build a wall high enough around this country, so as to keep out these cheaper races, or will it be only a feeble dam which will make the flood all the worse when it breaks? Or should we admit the four million picks and shovels which many of our capitalists are urging Congress to admit in order to secure what wealth we can for the moment, leaving it for our descendants to abandon the country to the blacks, browns and yellows, and seek an asylum in New Zealand? I am inclined to think that the thing to do is to make better selection of immigrants, admitting them in fairly large numbers so long as we can sift out the defective strains.”
111 : 20 seq. É. Cartailhac says, in La France préhistorique: “The race of Cro-Magnon is well determined. There is no doubt about their high stature and Topinard is not the only one who believes that they were blonds.” See also G. Retzius, 3. But he derives the Nordics from them. On the other hand, the Dordogne people to-day are dark, and many anthropologists are inclined to the belief that the Cro-Magnons were brunets, a theory in which the writer heartily concurs.
112 : 1. L’Abbé H. Breuil, Les subdivisions du paléolithique supérieur et leur signification, pp. 203–205. Other writers such as Nilsson and Dawkins have also held this theory.
112 : 21. One of the few references to the bare possibility of a Magdalenian dog occurs in Obermaier’s El Hombre Fósil, the footnote on pp. 221 and 223. From this it appears that certain conclusions are drawn that if the Alpera paintings are of late Magdalenian age, if certain nondescript animals in those paintings are intended for dogs and if those dogs are meant to be in a state of domestication, then there can be no doubt whatever that the dog was domesticated in Magdalenian times. But Obermaier does not feel that this furnishes satisfactory proof.
112 : 25–p. 113. Bow and Arrow. Obermaier, 1, chap. V, The Upper Paleolithic, p. 112, says: “The coarse stone implements of the lower Paleolithic no longer exist, being replaced by an industry of very fine flints and ... certain lances with points made of bone, horn or ivory, which were very generally used. The use of the bow is proved by certain representations in mural pictures (i. e., the Archers of Alpera, etc., eastern Spain, Magdalenian; Archer of Laussel, France, Aurignacian).” See the corresponding plates in chap. VII.
On p. 217 of chap. VII, Quaternary Art, there is a man depicted in the pose of an archer. On p. 239 Obermaier says: “Among ... [the paintings of Alpera] are sketches of more than 70 human figures, ... 13 are shown in the act of shooting an arrow at other men or animals.”[[6]] On p. 241 he continues: “The paintings of eastern Spain of Quaternary age also show archers.” A recent letter from the Abbé Henri Breuil says that the bow and arrow did not exist in France in Paleolithic times, and he is, of course, aware of the Laussel figure found by Lalanne and referred to by Obermaier as proof. Alpera is agreed by Obermaier to be of Tardenoisian age, consequently of the transition period to the Neolithic. Beside Alpera, the only other instance of pictured bows and arrows noted occurs at Calpatá, said to be of Upper Paleolithic age and Capsian industry.
[6]. If the Alpera paintings are of this (Magdalenian?) period, then the bow certainly existed at this time, but there is reason to believe that the paintings belong to a later epoch.
See Fig. 174, p. 353, of Osborn, 1, giving a large bison drawing in the cavern of Niaux on the Ariège, showing the supposed spear or arrowheads, attached to large shafts, which are represented as having pierced its side. On p. 354 Osborn says: “It is possible, although not probable, that the bow was introduced at this time and that a less perfect flint point, fastened to a shaft like an arrowhead, and projected with great velocity and accuracy, proved to be far more effective than the spear.... From these drawings and symbols (Fig. 174), it would appear that barbed weapons of some kind were used in the chase, but no barbed flints occur at any time in the Paleolithic, nor has any trace been found of bone barbed arrowheads, or any direct evidence of the existence of the bow.” On p. 410: “Here [Cavern of Niaux] for the first time are revealed the early Magdalenian methods of hunting the bison, for upon their flanks are clearly traced one or more arrow or spear heads with the shafts still attached; the most positive proof of the use of the arrow is the apparent termination of the wooden shaft in the feathers which are rudely represented in three of the drawings.”