they are so much alike in form, in material, and in workmanship,
that they might easily be taken for the work of the same men."

At a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science
in 1871, Sir John Lubbock showed worked flints from Chili and New
Zealand with others found in England, Germany, Spain, Australia, the
Guianas, and on the banks of the Amazon; which one and all belonged
to the same type. More recently the Anthropological Society of Vienna
compared the stone hatchets found near the Canadian lakes and in the
deserts of Uruguay, with others from Catania in Italy, Angermunde in
Brandenburg, and a tomb in Scandinavia, deciding that they were all
exactly alike. Lastly, those who studied at the French Exhibition of
1878 the hatchets, hammers, and scrapers, the bone implements, pottery,
and weapons brought from different places, the inhabitants of which
had no communication with each other, could not fail to notice in
their turn how impossible it was to distinguish between them. "So
evident is this resemblance," says Vogt,[47] "that we may easily
confound together implements brought from such very different sources."

The same observation applies to megalithic monuments. Everywhere
we find these primitive structures assuming similar forms. It is
difficult enough to believe that the wants of man alone, such as
the craving for food, the need of clothing, and the necessity of
defend. ing himself, have led in every case to the same ideas and the
same amount of progress. Even if this be proved by the worked flints,
we cannot accept a similar conclusion with regard to the megalithic
monuments, which imply reflection and a thought of the future far
beyond the material needs of daily life. Is it not more reasonable
to regard a similitude so striking as a proof of the unity of our race?