The Antiquity of Man Part 47

[Footnote 41: This projected larger work, which is often referred to in the "Origin of Species," was never published as such, but Darwin's views on various aspects of evolution were set forth in several later books, such as "The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication," "The Descent of Man," "Various Contrivances by which Orchids are Fertilised by Insects," "Movements and Habits of Climbing Plants," "Insectivorous Plants," and others.]

[Footnote 42: With this section compare the famous chapter with the same t.i.tle in the "Origin of Species."]

[Footnote 43: No attempt has been made to annotate this chapter, owing to the impossibility of doing so within reasonable compa.s.s. Many of the theories here quoted, and the conclusions drawn from them, have not stood the test of time, and recent philological and ethnographical research have clearly shown the danger of attempting to infer the relations.h.i.+ps of different peoples from their languages. The modifications undergone by the languages themselves are also subject to influences of such complex character, so largely artificial in their origin, that any attempt to compare them with natural evolution in the organic world must lead to false a.n.a.logies. The chapter must be regarded as an interesting exposition of one phase of Mid-Victorian scientific thought, but having little real bearing on the subjects discussed in the rest of the book.]

[Footnote 44: That the prophecy here given was justified is shown by the discovery in Java in 1891, of the skull and parts of the skeleton of Pithecanthropus erectus, a form which, according to the best authorities, must be regarded as in many ways intermediate between man and the apes, though perhaps with more human than ape-like characteristics. For an account of the circ.u.mstances of its discovery and a general description of the remains, see Sollas, "Ancient Hunters,"

London, 1911, pages 30 to 39 (with many references). Within the last year or two interest in the ancestry of man has been greatly increased, especially by the Piltdown discovery (see Note 11). This has led to a revision of the whole subject, and the views formerly held have undergone a certain amount of modification. It now seems certain that the different types of culture as represented by the succession of stages given in Note 12 do not correspond to a continuous development of one single race of mankind. There is, undoubtedly, a great break between the Mousterian and Aurignacian. Mousterian or Neanderthal man appears to have become extinct, possibly having been exterminated by a migration of the more highly developed Aurignacian race, which may be regarded as the ancestor of modern man in Europe. It appears, therefore, that the really important line of division comes, not as was formerly thought between Palaeolithic and Neolithic, but in the middle of the Palaeolithic between Mousterian and Aurignacian. Hence it appears that our cla.s.sification will in the near future have to undergo revision, since the stages of culture from Aurignacian to Azilian show a much closer affinity to the Neolithic than they do to the earlier Palaeolithic. At the present time scarcely sufficient data are available to determine the relations.h.i.+p of Pithecanthropus and Eoanthropus to the later types of man. For an excellent summary of the most recent views see Thacker, "The Significance of the Piltdown Discovery," "Science Progress," volume 8, 1913, page 275.]