of the stones, still less ply the mechanical work of glaciers. We
must therefore recognize in them the results of some deliberate
action and of an intelligent will, such as is possessed by man, and
by man alone. Professor Ramsay[13] tells us that, after twenty years'
experience in examining stones in their natural condition and others
fashioned by the hand of man, he has no hesitation in pronouncing
the flints and hatchets of Amiens and Abbeville as decidedly works of
art as the knives of Sheffield. The deposits in which they were found
showed no sins of having been disturbed; so that we may confidently
conclude that the men who worked these flints lived where the banks
of the Somme now are, when these deposits were in course of being
laid down, and that he was the contemporary of the animals whose
bones lay side by side with the products of his industry.

This conclusion, which now appears so simple, was not accepted without
difficulty. Boucher de Perthes defended his discoveries in books,
in pamphlets, and in letters addressed to learned societies. He
had the courage of his convictions, and the perseverance which
insures success. For twenty years he contended patiently against
the indifference of some, and the contempt of others. Everywhere the
proofs he brought forward were rejected, without his being allowed
the honor of a discussion or even of a hearing. The earliest converts
to De Perthes' conclusions met with similar attacks and with similar
indifference. There is nothing to surprise us in this; it is human
nature not to take readily to anything new, or to entertain ideas
opposed to old established traditions. The most distinguished men
find it difficult to break with the prejudices of their education
and the yet more firmly established prejudices of the systems they
have themselves built up. The words of the great French fabulist will
never cease to be true: