other places. An argument, however, having an opposite leaning may perhaps be founded on the phenomena of Aurignac. It may,—indeed it has been said, that they imply that some of the extinct mammalia survived nearly to our times.
First,—Because of the modern style of the works of art at Aurignac.
Secondly,—Because of the absence of any signs of change in the physical geography of the country since the cave was used for a place of sepulture.
In reference to the first of these propositions, the utensils, it is said, of bone and stone indicate a more advanced state of the arts than the flint implements of Abbeville and Amiens. M. Lartet, however, is of opinion that they do not, and thinks that we have no right to assume that the fabricators of the various spear-headed and other tools of the Valley of the Somme possessed no bone instruments or ornaments resembling those discovered at Aurignac. These last, moreover, he regards as extremely rude in comparison with others of the stone period in France, which can be proved palæontologically, at least by strong negative evidence, to be of subsequent date. Thus, for example, at Savigné, near Civray, in the department of Vienne, there is a cave in which there are no extinct mammalia, but where remains of the rein-deer abound. The works of art of the stone period found there indicate considerable progress in skill beyond that attested by the objects found in the Aurignac grotto. Among the Savigné articles, there is a stag's horn, on which figures of two animals, apparently meant for deer, are engraved in outline, as if by a sharp-pointed flint. In another cave, that of Massat, in the department of Arriége, which M. Lartet ascribes to the period of the aurochs, a quadruped which survived the rein-deer in the south of France, there are bone instruments of a still more advanced state of the arts, as, for example, barbed arrows
