the stratum
containing the flints. All geologists are agreed that it is of the
Miocene Age. The question then is, whether the flints were artificially
cut or not. On this question there has been a great division of opinion,
and we can not do better than to examine and see where the Principal
scientific men stand on this point.

In 1872, at the scientific congress in Brussels, this question was
referred to a committee composed of the most competent men from the
different countries of Europe. We are sorry to say that, after a
thorough consideration of them, the judges were unable to agree. Some
accepted them, others rejected them, and still others were
undecided. Some of the latter have since become convinced by recent
discoveries.<45>

Since this discovery, similar specimens have been described as having
been found in Portugal, and from another locality in France. Some men of
the highest authority accept these flints as proving the presence of man
in Miocene times. This is supported by such men as Quatrefages, Hamy,
Mortillet, and Capellini.<46> These are all known to be competent and
careful geologists. Another class does not think the evidence strong
enough to declare these flints of human origin, and so do not think it
proved that man lived in Europe in Miocene times; but do believe that we
will eventually find proofs of his existence during that era in the
warm and tropical regions of the globe. This is the view of such men as
Lubbock, Evans, Huxley, and Winchell. Still others say that, during the
vast lapse of years since Miocene times, all the species of land
mammals then alive have perished<47>--their place being taken by other
species--and therefore it is incredible that man, the most highly
specialized of all animals, should have survived. And hence, if
these Thenay flints are really artificial in their origin, it is more
reasonable to suppose they were cut by one of the higher apes, then
living in France, than by man. This is the view of Prof. Dawkins and
Prof. Gaudry.<48> As to the last view, it is surely but reasonable to
suppose, with Quatrefages,<49> that the superior intelligence of man
would serve to protect him from the operation of causes that would
effect the extinction of lower animals. Hence, unless some evidence
be produced to show that species of apes are known to make rude stone
implements, or some evidence that they did this in past ages, we must
believe, with Geikie and others, that these fli