Prehistoric man — Themes and Context

Fauna as a Chronological Tool

Duckworth treats animal remains as a primary means of correlating cave deposits. He notes that the Reindeer appears so consistently across sites that its presence or absence is less useful than its abundance relative to the Horse. The Mammoth and Hairy Rhinoceros are also constant companions. But the cave at Krapina stands apart: its fauna includes Rhinoceros merckii, suggesting a warmer, more southern environment. Duckworth weighs the possibility that latitude explains this—Krapina lies at the same latitude as Le Moustier and La Chapelle—but leaves the question open. The presence of the Marmot at Krapina may be as significant as the Reindeer elsewhere.

The Contrast at Krapina

Among the cave-finds discussed, Krapina emerges as the outlier. Its fauna is older and points to a southern climate, while other caves indicate temperate or sub-arctic conditions. Duckworth also mentions a discovery at Pont Newydd in Wales, where Mousterian implements were found with R. merckii, complicating the picture. The Krapina remains are assigned to a later period than the fluviatile deposits treated earlier, placing the cave-men in the later Pleistocene. This section shows Duckworth’s method: he presents conflicting evidence without forcing a conclusion, letting the reader see the unresolved tensions in the data.

Stone Implements as Evidence

Duckworth calls stone artefacts the second great class of evidence, but he gives them only a brief sketch, noting that a full treatment would require a separate volume. He emphasizes that the value of implements for dating depends on how closely forms are tied to specific strata—a relationship still debated. He admits that even greater specialization is needed in lithic studies than in comparative osteology. The descriptions that follow are based on extensive examination of both literature and materials, yet he cannot discuss the validity of individual types in detail. The reader is left with a sense of how provisional the classifications remain.

Duckworth’s manual is best read as a snapshot of a field in flux. The preface’s admission that estimates of geological time were ballooning—and the book’s reliance on faunal and lithic markers rather than years—underscores the provisional nature of the conclusions. Readers should pay attention to the tables and the way Duckworth juxtaposes sites: the contrasts he draws, especially around Krapina, reveal the interpretive work still needed. The book rewards those who follow the evidence rather than expect a settled narrative.

That rainy afternoon, tracing the uncertain layers of Krapina in Duckworth’s pages, I kept wondering what those stone circles meant. The book’s honest hesitancy about dates left me restless. Somehow, my hand drifted to a shelf and pulled down Rude Stone Monuments in All Countries: Their Age and Uses — Context and Discussion. And there, the same quiet uncertainty, but warmer, almost human.