The antiquity of man is a subject of such intense interest that any evidence which seems to suggest or offer proof of it receives widespread attention, especially if the evidence is of the kind which is termed scientific. Scientific evidence in cases of this kind is either somatological or geological.
Unfortunately in the limited number of examples of more or less ancient man which have been reported the somatological evidence appears not very satisfactory to the layman, because it is of necessity concerned with mere fragments or with such a limited number of individuals that general conclusions appear to be unsafe.
The geological evidence is also extremely unsatisfactory, because in the great majority of cases in which human remains have been found the first excavations were made by those not skilled in the interpretation of the superficial deposits to which such remains seem to be limited.
The flimsiness of . . .