"sibles que l'idée de M. Boucher de Perthes, qui considère Adam et "sa posterité provenant d'une seconde création après l' anéantisse"ment complet d'une première race qui n'aurait laissé aucun représen"tant sur notre globe." We need not point out to our readers how widely these hypotheses, which account for the drift gravels by a succession of cataclysms and deluges, differ from those which are prevalent in this country, and for which we are in great measure indebted to the patient and life-long labours of Mr. Prestwich.

In the second portion of this work, M. Meillet also presents us with some remarkable speculations. He sketches out roughly the history of the human race, as follows:

66

"Première période

La race Scythique, dite Japhéti"que, habite déjà les 'monts Altaï;' race errante et voyageuse, elle "inonde le monde de ses hordes nomades: un rameau immense serait "descendu jusque vers les montagnes de l'Himalaya, et en aurait "occupé le versant nord: c'est la race Arya. Une autre branche se "serait dirigée vers le Turkestan actuel, par les régions nommées par "les anciens Margiane et Bactriane: une partie de la colonie paraît "s'être arrêtée dans ce pays, d'où nous la reverrons sortir plus tard; "l'autre partie serait passée au sud de la mer Caspienne, de là dans la "Turquie d'Asie, la Grèce, (deux pays qui n'en faisaient qu'un à cette 'époque) puis en Italie, en Espagne, en Gaule et ne se serait arrêtée qu'aux confins de l'univers connu, l'Angleterre, qui était alors jointe "au continent." "Passant," he proceeds, "à une autre date qui nous "intéresse, à l'an 13901," [this is certainly a very interesting date; we are not scandalized by the 13000 years, and an extra 900 makes certainly very little difference, but the last straw, we are told, broke the camel's back, and that last 1 is a little too much for us. However, we must let M. Meillet speak for himself. He supposes this first period to have occupied about 10,000 years] "pendant cette longue période, les Aryas, fixés dans les plaines fertiles de “l'Inde, deviennent tout à fait sédentaires; de peuples chasseurs, "ils deviennent successivement pasteurs, agriculteurs, et enfin artistes, cette phase ultime de la civilisation des peuples qui ont su "par leurs travaux agricoles se créer des loisirs qu'il faut occuper. "Les sciences et les arts sont alors portés à un haut degré de perfec"tion sur les bords de l'Indus. Manon leur donne des institutions "civiles et religieuses; c'est un de leurs plus célèbres législateurs. Vers "14611,les Egyptiens inventent le zodiaque, qui ne tarde pas à passer "dans l'Inde."

66

66

The deluge of the year 13901, "dont nous venons de parler dut "être occasionné par la débâcle du pôle sud:" but about the year 2350, "arrivent de nouveaux déluges provenant de la débâcle de la glacière "du pôle nord." These are the deluges, some of which are mentioned in ancient traditions, but in addition to them various "petits cataclysmes locaux " are also mentioned by M. Meillet. Those who wish for more information as to M. Meillet's views must refer to the work itself. He does not, however, go at length into the considerations which have led him to such conclusions, although he refers us to certain authorities which are perfectly satisfactory to him; as, for instance, to "le Souria Syddantha, traité d'astronomie également en Sanscrit, rédigé bien avant 13901." Some, indeed, might be disposed to doubt whether the astronomical treatise known under this name really belonged to a period so remote, but M. Pictet, we are told, has conclusively settled this question. "Je la consigne donc ici," says M. Meillet, "comme un fait." We cannot, however, avoid feeling a little doubt whether M. Pictet himself is prepared to accept the honourable responsibility thus conferred upon him. M. Meillet also refers to various other ancient works, belonging to the Hindu, Persian, and Egyptian literature, in which "cette date précise" is mentioned.

It will be seen that although M. Meillet is more definite as to his dates than M. Brouillet, still our two authors agree very well in their ideas as to the probable history of the quaternary period. They are, moreover, both members of the "Société des Antiquaires de l'Ouest:" and this Society is said to have been scandalized by the high antiquity which our authors had assigned to the human race. A resolution, therefore, appears to have been passed condemning the work of M.M. Brouillet and Meillet. In taking any such step as this, the Society no doubt placed itself in the wrong, and we are informed that M. Meillet, as well as several other members, accordingly sent in their resignation. But M. Brouillet-did not he stand by his friend? Did not he also protest against the condemnation by the Society? We should have thought that, united as he was with M. Meillet, by so many observations made in common, by the remarkable speculations in which they had together indulged, they would have been inseparable even in disgrace. But it was not so. M. Brouillet has not only continued in the bosom of the Society, but has had the fatted calf, in the shape of a medal, offered to him. Nay more, we regret to say that he and M. Meillet began to quarrel, and a not very credit. able correspondence has passed between them with reference to the first

discovery of certain caves described by them. Miss Austin, in one of her novels, describing a somewhat stupid young man, says, that "Jack knew a puddle when he saw one," and we suppose there is no one who does not know a cavern when he happens to see one. We remember once to have heard of a somewhat similar dispute between two entomologists, who were out collecting together. One of them showed to the other a beetle, which he had just found. "What is this ?" he asked. “Oh," replied the second, "it is such and such a beetle, and I am very glad I have found it, as it has never yet been observed in this country." "You found it ?" answered the first, "it was I. I have just swept it off that clematis." "Yes," replied the second, "but you didn't know what it was," and so on. The Entomologists however, were not so foolish as to rush into print, and we regret that M.M. Brouillet and Meillet could not keep their quarrels to themselves. It is a matter of small importance by whom the cavern of Chaffaud was discovered; the real merit consisted in examining it carefully. There is, however, one discovery which M. Meillet generously offered to share with M. Brouillet, and which the latter entirely repudiates. Many of the bones obtained from the caverns examined by these gentlemen, have upon them very curious engravings; but the most remarkable specimen of all, is a bone on which are engraved several Sanscrit letters. This extraordinary specimen was found in the stalagmite, "pêle-mêle avec des os d'hyène, d'ours, d'aurochs, &c., dans une position bien définie. C'est "M. Brouillet et moi qui les avons trouvés nous-mêmes et dans un "terrain vierge de toute fouille." M. Brouillet, however, indignantly repudiates the soft impeachment. "I had nothing to do with it," he says, "and it was M. Meillet alone who found this specimen." Why should M. Brouillet indignantly repudiate that which is without doubt the most remarkable fact recorded in the volume? answer is very curious. The engravings are a forgery-the work of some miscreant, who, knowing that the majority of Ethnologists believed that in very ancient times an Eastern nation, speaking a language belonging to the Sanscrit family had migrated into Europe, thought rightly, that to discover for the first time traces of the use of a Sanscrit alphabet, or indeed of any alphabet at all at so ancient a period, would be a fact of the greatest interest.

66

The

Fortunately, however, such a fraud was almost certain to be detected, and in this case the discovery has been immediate. The forger, whoever he may be, did not use the old Sanscrit characters,

but those belonging to what is known as the Devanagari alphabet, which is not more than about 900 years old. It is perfectly evident, therefore, that a gross fraud has been perpetrated by some one, and it appears that M. Brouillet suspects his colleague of having himself engraved not only these Sanscrit characters, but also many of the other curious figures found on bones, and described in their joint volume.

All this is very much to be regretted. The "Société des Antiquaires de l'Ouest," M. Brouillet and M. Meillet have all succeeded better in their attacks upon one another than in their defence of themselves. We hope that M. Brouillet will continue his search for flint implements; we sincerely trust that M. Meillet will be able to clear himself from the insinuations of his colleague, and that the great abilities which he undoubtedly possesses will not be wasted on speculations such as those to which we have referred in this review, and for which he has not the necessary information.

The most satisfactory part of the business lies undoubtedly in the proof which it affords, that forged antiquities, however cleverly they may be contrived, and however skilfully they may be made, present some indication by which their true character may be detected.

XLV.-RECENT ARCHEOLOGICAL DISCOVERIES.

Two communications have lately been made to the French Academy of Sciences, which are of much interest as regards the recent Archæological discoveries in France and the adjoining countries. On the 14th of August, a letter was read from M. Simonin, addressed to M. Elie de Beaumout, in which the former announced that M. Foresi had discovered in the island of Elba certain objects, supposed to belong to the ages of stone and bronze. Of the objects referred to the age of stone nine-tenths are formed of flints, belonging to varieties which do not occur in the island itself. The principal types are:

1. Triangular arrow heads.

2. Knives resembling those discovered by M.M. Lartet and Christy, in the caves of Aurignac, Les Eyzies, La Madelaine, &c. 3. Scrapers.

4. Axes "de la forme bien connue, révélée par Boucher de "Perthes, mais plus petite."

5. Nuclei, "rappelant les fameux pains de beurre de Pres"signy. L'un d'eux, trouvé à la Pianosa, îlot voisin de l'île d' Elbe, "est en belle obsidienne noire, portant sur tout son contour la trace "de longs éclats longitudinaux. Il a été divisé en deux: les bases en sont polies, et de surface un peu gauche. La forme est conique."

66

6. Objects of indeterminate form.

We do not perceive in the letter of M. Simonin any sufficient reason for referring these objects to the age of stone. Arrow-heads of stone were used throughout the age of bronze, and in the whole of Great Britain up to the present time, so far as we are aware, not a single bronze arrow head has been discovered. Scrapers also were used in the age of bronze.

Although M. Simonin does not describe the nuclei at length, still it is evident that they differ in one very remarkable respect from the "livres de beurre" of Pressigny. He says that they are in part polished, which is never the case in the "livres de beurre."

If the axes belong to the type which is characteristic of the drift gravels, the fact is no doubt extremely interesting. The objects belonging to the age of bronze are axes, "des formes les plus "anciennes, puis une faucille ;" also some objects of undetermined use and some moulds. We hope that we shall receive some more information with reference to these observations of M. Foresi.

At the sitting on the 21st of August, M. Milne-Edwards communicated to the Academy the following letter fro:n M. Lartet, relating to a plate of fossil ivory found in an ossiferous bed at Périgord, and bearing marks which apparently are intended as the representation of a long-haired elephant.

"Since you think it may be useful to make public the paleontological specimen which has been shown to you, and on which may be recognized contours and linear details of an animal form, referable to an elephant, I send you a model of it executed by M. Stahl, the clever artist attached to the Museum of Natural History. Besides which, the original, after my return to Paris, will be at the disposal of any one who shall wish to make a more complete examination of it.

"The history of this specimen, which was discovered more than fifteen months ago is as follows:-In May, 1864, M. de Verneuil and our late friend Dr. Falconer, having expressed to me a desire to visit the