the associations between human remains, extinct mammals, and the Flood as
accidental or, at least, unproven (Cook 2004: 180–1; Grayson 1983: ch. 4).
In France research was undertaken by Casimir Picard (1806–41) and Franc ̧ois
Jouannet (1765–1845), whose work formed the basis of some of the discussion
about the Celtic era in Arcisse de Caumont’s (1801–73)Wrst volume of his
Course of Monumental Antiquities(1830) mentioned earlier in this chapter
(Coye 1997: ch. 3; Grayson 1983: 118–19; Groenen 1994: ch. 1). Picard’s work
encouraged Boucher de Perthes’ investigations in the Somme valley near Abbe-
ville, published in hisWrst volume ofCeltic and Antediluvian Antiquitiesin 1847
(the second and third volumes appeared in 1857 and 1864 respectively). This
Wrst volume produced a negative reaction among academic circles mainly
because of its amateurish nature and its inclusion of many mistakes, but became
popular among those working on the fringes of the scientiWc community. One of
those was Marcel-Je ́roˆme Rigollot (1786–1854), a physician from Amiens, a
town also located in the Somme valley, and someone connected to the Society of
Antiquaries of Picardy. In 1854 he published newWnds he had made in St
Acheul, then cited as evidence in the second volume of Boucher de Perthes’
Celtic and Antediluvian Antiquitiesthree years later. This volume showed Bou-
cher’s much better command of contemporary geological approaches, for he
argued his theories in the framework of the debate about the geological
imprint of the Deluge and of its eVects. He proposed that transformation had
been the mechanism by which morphological changes throughout geological
time could be explained (Grayson 1983: ch. 8).
In Britain, Boucher de Perthes’ second volume was received at the time
when the results of the excavation of Brixham Cave near Torquay in southwest
England were becoming known. It was dug by the geologist and educator
William Pengelly (1812–94), who wanted toWnd specimens for the Torquay
Museum, and the palaeontologist Hugh Falconer (1808–65). The latter’s visit
to Boucher de Perthes in 1858 was then followed by the geologist Sir Joseph
Prestwich (1812–96) and then by that of others, including Lyell, who was
convinced by the evidence and accepted humans’ great antiquity. Once he and
the other major academics in Britain and France had admitted this, scholars in
other countries joined the search for data. One of those was Casiano de Prado,
a geologist who had been working for the Spanish Ordnance Survey (Comi-
sio ́n del Mapa Geolo ́gico de Espan ̃a) since 1849. He discovered remains of
Elephas in the site of San Isidro near Madrid in 1850, but only after his visits to
Paris and London in 1851 and 1852, and after having become aware of the
work of the Danish naturalist, Peter Wilhelm Lund (1801–80), in Brazil
(Chapter 4), did he go back to look for more. In 1862 his visit to the
site with the French geologists and palaeontologists, Louis Lartet (E ́douard
Lartet’s son) (1840–99) and E ́douard de Verneuil (1805–73), facilitated the
356 National Archaeology in Europe