« PreviousContinue »
the latter are still preserved in the Museum of Antiquaries, one of them being a plain circular disc, and the other an elaborate interlaced ornament. Similar ornaments were found in early British graves. He was justified in saying that the subject was a very interesting one, particularly at the present time. The opinion he had formed in relation to the discovery of bronze and of metals generally, was that they belonged to a much earlier period than antiquarians had hitherto been disposed to assign to them. The discovery of flint instruments in Suffolk, and the more remarkable discovery in Gray's Inn Lane, London, were altogether free from the supposed difficulties or doubts of modern speculation; and, therefore, were of special importance in the present stage of the argument.
Sir CHARLES LYELL said he thought it was perfectly clear, from the paper which had just been read, that there must have been several successive changes of level in the lake referred to, and he should have been glad to have heard from the author, and also from Professor Wilson, what, in their opinion, is its probable antiquity. The alteration in the levels would account for the changes spoken of by the author. Lord Lovaine had suggested that the changes of level had been brought about by the growth of peat impeding the ancient out. let of the lake. Now, if the archæologist could determine a proxi. mate date to the lowest of these dwellings, and to the ornaments that were found there, it would throw light on one of the most interesting questions in chronology. It would throw light on the rate of the growth of peat, one of the modes of measuring the chronology of what geologists considered very modern periods—modern, that is, in reference to the existence of man; for those lake dwellings, as far as we knew, all of them relate to a period when the form of Europe was just what it is now, or what it was when the Romans conquered Gaul. Contrasted, therefore, with the period of certain animals found in particular formations, these lake habitations were all modern affairs ; and if the bronze period could be carried back, as Professor Wilson had remarked, to ages far more remote than had previously been thought, those lake dwellings which exclusively belonged to the stone period, but which also strictly belonged to the period of the living groups, and were long posterior to the time of the extinct animals, must be proportionately ancient, contrasted with historical times. He saw a letter the other day from an able Swiss writer, in which it was stated that not less than one hundred and sixty lake dwellings had been found on the lakes of Switzerland. A large proportion of these lakes had been examined, and it was perfectly clear that some of them belonged to the stone period, without the slightest admixture of bronze. Not far from one of these stone period dwellings there might occur one in which there were, perhaps, two thousand instruments, all of bronze, with hardly a mixture of stone. This was a most important fact in connection with the investigation of tumuli, inasmuch as it was said, with great propriety, that the stone may have been employed sometimes by those who could not afford anything better, while those who were more wealthy used weapons of bronze. It was also said that there must have been a gradual passage from one
to the other. But if in some of those lake dwellings—which were geologically recent- there were found some instruments of stone, and in others, at no great distance, instruments of metal, it was perfectly clear that there was no danger of confounding the two-that there was a long period during which the stone implements prevailed, and another in which bronze or metal prevailed, and that in some cases there appeared to be a gradual change in the art of making those instruments. If, therefore, the bronze period could be carried much further than the antiquaries generally supposed, how ancient must those villages be where there was nothing but instruments of stone. And yet both epochs belonged to a period in which there was not found one of those extinct animals of which geologists had found so many unequivocal remains. He might take that opportunity of saying that however convinced he was that there had been a great number of frauds practised, especially in the valley of the Somme, owing to the great demand for specimens, yet he was also perfectly convinced that ninety-nine-certainly more than ninety-out of every hundred which had been submitted to examination were genuine. His faith in the antiquity of the instruments referred to was not shaken by any of the impositions which had come to light. The fraudu. lent specimens were invariably covered by a matrix, on the removal of which all the signs of age and of use by man were wanting. They wanted the discoloration of surface, and the original black fringe, and the incrustations of crystallised carbonate of lime, which characterised the genuine instruments. They had also other marks of their pretended character, which are easily distinguished. It had been observed in reference to the flints of Abbeville that if the workpeople there could impose on so many English and French scientific men, how could we know that we had not been imposed on before! First of all he would say that there was an essential difference in the character of the heads, but he would also remark upon a piece of evidence on which every person could judge as well as scientific men. Was it possible, that after we had gone on for nearly twenty years finding flints of the ancient type 80 rarely that only two or three would turn up at Abbeville during the course of a winter's digging—was it possible, or at least likely, that all at once, in three different places several miles apart, and in gravel of a different character, an epidemic, so to speak, should break out of just the particular types that were wanted ? That was a consideration which ought to have prevented many persons from believing in the authenticity of all the specimens that had turned up. Referring again to the peat growth question, he might remark that it appeared from an island in a lake, in the county of Cavan, Ireland, that the lake had acquired additional depth in consequence of the growth of peat stopping the outlet. He could not help hoping, therefore, that we should by degrees get such a measure of the possible growth of peat under such situations as would serve, to a certain extent, to help us in speculating on the minimum of time which a growth of thirty feet of peat may have required. He still hoped that, upon examination, there would be fouud not merely ornaments but implements, and the remains of domestic and wild animals of the
period. If the lakes of this island were searched with anything like the diligence which was shown in Switzerland, we should doubtless discover a great deal of most important information on the subject of these newly-discovered habitations.
On certain Markings on the Horns of Megaceros Hibernicus. By Professor Beete JÚKES, F.R.S. (C.) Two large portions of bone, found at a depth of forty feet in a peat bog near Longford, were indented near the middle with depressions, arising, in the author's opinion, from pressure exerted from above while they lay at right angles, one upon the other.
Dr. FALCONER said that he had arrived at a diametrically opposite conclusion. Bones of reindeer, cut in precisely a similar manner, had been found in various bone-caves, the rationale of the markings being that the strong extensor tendon had been removed by sawing it away from the bone, just as the Esquimaux do at the present day. The “cross-hatching” marks, often to be seen on such mammalian bones, were undoubtedly produced by human weapons. Natural pressure would not have removed the strong outer layer of the bone, and preserved the weak, cancellated interior.
Professors Rupert Jones, Tyndall, and Wyville Thomson concurred with Dr. Falconer, as to the artificial character of the indented cutsSir W. Armstrong and Mr. Sorby taking the opposite side of the question.
Notes on Sir C. Lyell's “ Antiquity of Man."* By Mr. John CRAWFURD.
Sir R. Murchison said that he had no doubt that the paper which had just been read would create a great deal of discussion. On one point, at least, the author had succeeded in showing that Sir Charles Lyell had made a little slip in the recent work which had been published by him-namely, in attributing to all languages no greater antiquity than a thousand years. Upon the whole, he congratulated Mr. Crawfurd upon the manner in which he had treated the subject; and being an unbeliever himself in the doctrine of the transmutation of species, he cordially approved of the general tenor of the paper.
The Rev. Dr. Hincks said that he differed so entirely from the author of the paper, that he would not have it supposed that if he did not say anything against some portions of the paper, they were to conclude that he agreed with them. The paper was in fact a complete omnium gatherum on every conceivable subject, and it was wasting the time of the section to discuss such a paper. The part he should especially speak on was where he could see very clearly that Mr. Crawfurd had written the most entire nonsense. He pretended to criticise Max Müller, but it was clear that he did not in the least understand what Müller's theory was. He thought it a great pity that Mr. Crawfurd should meddle with such subjects, because it was very evident that he was quite ignorant of the science of language.
This paper was read before the Ethnological Society in April last. See Anthropological Review, p. 60. VOL. I.-NO. III.
After dwelling on matters of detail, and exposing what he thought to be the fallacy of Mr. Crawfurd's assertions and reasoning, he concluded by urging the importance of having a separate section, in which there really could be scientific discussion, especially for questions connected with the science of language.
The Rev. JAMES BRODIE, of Monimail, said, that after having carefully examined Sir Charles Lyell's work on the Antiquity of Man, he had come to the conclusion that he (Sir Charles) had utterly failed to prove that man had existed more than four thousand five hundred years. If there had been time and opportunity he would willingly have stated his reason for coming to that conclusion. As to the origin of variety in the human species, it was very evident, when the mental and bodily characteristics of man were taken into account, that there was but one species. It was very difficult to determine how and when the different varieties came to be formed from the parent stock. The Egyptian mummies and the pictures upon ancient temples proved that distinct races had existed for a great length of time without physical alteration.
Sir Geo. DENNIS said that, like the previous speaker, he also had carefully read Sir Charles Lyell's work, but so far from differing, he cordially agreed with the conclusions at which that learned author had arrived.
The Rev. J. D. Geden, of Manchester, said that the whole structure of the Indo-European languages, throughout their geographical area, was substantially the same. The syllables were constructed on the same principle, and the words were subject to the same laws of accident and derivation.
Sir WALTER JAMES said, that while he admired the ability and skill displayed by Mr. Crawfurd in the preparation of his essay, he totally differed from him on some important points. Mr. Crawfurd's hypothesis assumed that the first man, or the first set of men, must have been savages-a theory quite inconsistent with the notion that man was created by a Supreme Being. Arguing à priori, the first man created by the Supreme Being could not have been imperfect of his kind, but must have been endowed with strong intellectual and physical powers.
Dr. Donkin said that Sir John Herschel had clearly shown that where a man was reduced to a point little above the ape in point of intelligence he was physically the most imperfect creature on the face of the globe.
Professor Wilson said that an essential distinction between man and the lower animals lay in the fact that man was what might be called a naturally domesticated animal, whereas the natural state of the lower animals was wild and untamed. Take the wild ox from the plains of India, house and feed him, and give him an artificial existence, and very soon there would be discernible differences of constitution and form distinctly traceable to the new mode of life. In one respect the one would be improved; that is to say, he would be better fitted for the purposes for which man required him, but the animal would, in point of fact, be degraded from his natural position. But if man were taken from a wild and savage state and domesticated and civilised, everything that was truly noble in him and natural in him would be improved and developed. This proved that man was totally distinct in his primary condition from the lower animals, and that in his first state he must have been—not a half-bred savage, but a thinking, intellectual, noble being. The question of the development of varieties in the human race was one the solution of which would be slow and laborious, and he sincerely hoped that scientific men would not jump to rash conclusions. It was premature to bring forward the ethnological question of the unity of the human race as one capable of receiving a distinct answer. Much light must be thrown on the relations of languages and other subjects before science could solve the problem. In the meantime scientific men must be content to wait and to work backwards from point to point in their investigations—from known to unknown languages and races. One illustration in point could be easily produced, and it was a very valuable one, as showing the development of a new variety of men, When the Anglo-Saxon passed over to the continent of America with the Pilgrim Fathers they were distinguished by all the characteristics of Englishmen. Two hundred years had passed away, and what with the influence of climate, food, and perhaps the admixture of Indian blood, the American race had grown out of the old stock. One could hardly see an American in the street without knowing him to be such. It was important that those who rashly challenged the doctrine of Sir Charles Lyell as to the antiquityof man should bear this fact in mind, for if two hundred years had been sufficient to develope a New Englander, one could easily imagine that the thousands upon thousands of years Sir Charles was prepared to assign to man's past existence were sufficient to change either a white man into a negro or a negro into a white man.
Mr. CRAWFURD, in reply, stated that the exceptional instances of new breeds quoted by Mr. Brodie from the animal kingdom proved nothing in relation to the varieties of the human race. He could point to equally remarkable cases in the human family. Many years ago he met in Burmah a man covered all over with hair, and having no teeth. This man married a fair woman and had two children, one of whom, a boy, was fair, and the other, a girl, was, like her father, covered all over with hair and had no teeth. When the girl grew up, some friends of his were anxious that she should marry, and accordingly they offered a large premium to any one who would take her for a wife. At length a man was found who was sufficiently courageous to do so. Two children were born of the marriage, and again one was fair and the other exactly the counterpart of its mother. But such exceptional facts could not account for the immense varieties in the human species. As to the Americans being a distinct race, there were probably a dozen or more American gentlemen in the room, and he defied Professor Wilson to point them out.
Sir RODERICK MURChison congratulated Mr. Crawfurd on having elicited so interesting a discussion. As a geologist, he was impressed with that portion of Sir C. Lyell's work which had reference to the weapons used by the aborigines of France and England. The