The natural fracture of flint and its bearing upon rudimentary flint implements / by J. Reid Moir. The occurence of a human skeleton in a glacial deposit at Ipswich / by J. Reid Moir. Description of the Ipswich skeleton / by Arthur Keith.

  • Moir, J. Reid (James Reid), 1879-1944.
Date:
[1912]
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: The natural fracture of flint and its bearing upon rudimentary flint implements / by J. Reid Moir. The occurence of a human skeleton in a glacial deposit at Ipswich / by J. Reid Moir. Description of the Ipswich skeleton / by Arthur Keith. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    3/32
    THE NATURAL FRACTURE OF FLINT A^D ITS BEARING UPON RUDIMENTARY FLINT IMPLEMENTS By J. Reid Moik. Read at Norwich, December 4t> The determination of human flaking as againsl upon flints has always been a vexed question with archaeologists. It appeared apparently in the first place with the discovery of the Neolithic arrow-heads, as in some old books we find these relics described as “ elf-darts,” which clearly proves that a supernatural origin was accorded to them. Though unfortunately we have no records of the discussions held over these first discovered Neoliths, we may I think assume that in those days the archaeological camp was split into two sharply defined sections, one declaring that the arrow-heads were the outcome ol supernatural agencies, the other that some ancient race of men had fashioned them. Be that as it may, the fact remains that no such discussions have for many long years raged round these particular flaked flints, and they are now accepted as being as much evidences of man’s work as is a dining-room table or a fireside arm-chair. But the state of quiescence which had for such a long time settled over pre-history was rudely and completely disturbed by the assertion of that famous Frenchman, Boucher de Perthes, that he had found definite flint implements in the undisturbed gravels of the River Somme associated with the bones of extinct animals, and that it was abundantly evident that some representative of man was living in the remote period when these animals existed. Immediately this statement was made known to the world the archaeologists were once more plunged into a most bitter con- troversy regarding the flaked flints discovered, and chaos reigned supreme. The majority of authorities made haste to condemn Boucher de Perthes’ discovery as being of no value, as in the first place the flakings on the flints had almost certainly been produced by natural causes, and, if not, then the workmen at the pits had made them themselves, and surreptitiously inserted them in the graVel, where they were dug out by the unsuspecting but misled archaeologist. Lastly the great French biologist, Cuvier, stated that he knew of no evidence which proved that any human remains were contemporaneous with the Pleistocene mammalia. There were, however, a few men who having seen some of Boucher de Perthes’ implements, gave it as their opinion that these stones had undoubtedly been fashioned by man, and that they were of the same age as the mammalian bones found in the gravel with them. But these opinions made no headway7, and for a long period, I believe twenty-five years, the others held the field, the only advance noticeable from the earlier dispute about the Neoliths being that the supernatural agency idea had disappeared. Gradually however—very gradually you will admit