Part of the Ashmolean Museum (Dept of Antiquities) manuscript collections.

Sir John Evans archive, JE/B/2/31 © Ashmolean Museum, University of Oxford.

The letters were not numbered at the time of transcription, they have been placed into date order (with one uncertainty about a letter dated September 1877 but without a specific day). We are most grateful to Alison Roberts for her help in producing these transcriptions and also to the Ashmolean Museum for allowing us to include them on this website. Please note that they form part of a much larger John Evans series of correspondence held by the Ashmolean Museum, see here for much more detail about him and his collections. See also here [A2A] for a list of the correspondents with John Evans, including Lane Fox, held at the Ashmolean Museum.

If you want to consult the original documents please contact the Department of Antiquities at Tel: +44 (0)1865 278020 Email: antiquities@ashmus.ox.ac.uk.

A. Petch

Not in Ash.Mus. [in pencil in a different hand]

Guildford July 7th 74

My dear Evans

If I sent you another copy of my catalogue, would you mind sending it to the editor of the Athenaeum.  My reason for asking is that they have put such a high price on it as to prevent its selling, and as there is no publisher I have no means of making it known. the collection as I have arranged it is so little useful without the catalogue that I am afraid all the time I have devoted to it will be thrown away.  The book is as you see something between a catalogue and a book and tho I dare say it has a fair proportion of mistakes in it owing to the hurried way in which it has been finished off so as to be in time for the opening, it has taken a good deal of time.  The South Kensington people usually have to pay the writers of their catalogues but I wrote this for nothing in the hope that by reducing the cost it might be sold cheaply for the use of the East End people.  I find however now that it is finished that the printing and authorship are defrayed out of different funds so that the saving effected by this means goes to the museum which was not at all what I intended.

Yrs [illegible]

A Lane Fox.

Mr. Boyd Dawkins has found some remains of ancient copper workings at Alderley in Cheshire which I hope will turn out important. The hammers are of the usual copper mine types.

[Drawing] Not in Ash.Mus [in pencil in a different hand, probably 1884.127.12 in PRM]

Lubbock has kindly offered to send the catalogue to the editor of Nature.

---------------

Information [in pencil]

Worthing

June 17th 75

My dear Evans,

Thanks for the cheque for 5£ received. the shaft extends for 6 feet below the bottom of the ditch & branches out with galleries.

[Drawing]

We have no evidence as yet to pin the date of the camp.  no pottery is found in the silting of the ditch fill 2 feet from the surface then a kind of ill made pottery is found for about a foot and a half and again bone is found in the lower ½ feet but the only evidence we have got as yet consists in the finding of a quantity of flakes & chips 160 in all.  all together in the space of about a square foot or 1 foot in height by 2 in length at about 2 to 3 feet from the surface in a seam concave (anticlinal) seam of the silting of the ditch.

[drawing]

the position and number of these seems almost to prove that they were flaked in the ditch after it had silted up for 2 feet or so. No implements or flakes have been found as yet in the shaft or galleries but several brow tynes of red deer. [drawing] and the marks of them on the chalk blocks taken out of the galleries from a position in which they could not have been touched by our picks.

in great haste

yrs [illegible]

A Lane Fox

------------------

Information [in pencil]

Guildford

March 17 76

My dear Evans

I am glad you liked your bone. [Added in pencil, Not identified] I wish we had thought of the Blackmore Museum before as I am afraid that there was little left that was worth their acceptance.

With respect to the symbols I think there are some good suggestions in Mr Joass letter I thought well over the possibility of distinguishing British from Roman Camps at the time your paper was read but gave up the idea as impracticable.

Of course British camps are no more circular than they are square.  their peculiarity consists in their ramparts following the tactical line of defence of the hill which is usually disregarded in Roman camps.  You or I or Mr. Joass would no doubt distinguish them easily.  But I am certain that nine out of ten archaeologists would not.  Take for example Hollingbury near Brighton which is usually marked on maps square and has consequently been attributed to the Romans by some but it is no more square nor Roman than I am.  The shape of the hill gives it something of a rectangular form.

A symbol for a line of entrenchment cutting off a bluff of a hill or head of a river might perhaps be of use but even in this case I know Camps that might easily be mistaken for such of course the more detailed the symbols the greater the chance of having them misapplied.

The circle I understood was excluded for being too much like ordinary map marks.  The break in the circle would be a distinction if you could always be sure its being well printed.

As to the symbols marking the class of objects found, it appears to me that they are less liable to be wrongly placed.  Objects like urns[?][illegible] being definite & acount [illegible] it is merely a function of the advisability of multiplying the number of symbols.

Yours very truly

A Lane Fox

--------------------

1927.?3762 ?6033 [by different hand, matching to Ashmolean object]

Seaford

June 21st 1876

My dear Evans,

We had two good days digging today & yesterday but it was rather hot.  We found the bottom of the ditch at 7 feet below the present silting.

[drawing]

We found an old line of surface at 3 feet above below the present bottom & upon this there was a quantity of fragments of Romano British pottery & two roman handles of jugs but not a fragment of pottery as yet below the 3 foot line My impression is that this 3 foot line marks the period of Roman occupation and that all below that line is of the period British period the part above the 3 foot line consisted of mould & below it of chalk rubble.  Not a fragment of pottery as yet in the rampart altho we have excavated it as deep as the original surface.  Tomorrow we shall excavate below the 3 foot line in hope of finding a fragment of pottery perhaps British.  Only a few flakes [in pencil added 1927.?6033q, ?3762] in the ditch & surface not more than 5 or 6.

[illegible]

A Lane Fox

--------------------

Information [in pencil]

Guildford June 28th/ 76

My dear Evans

I enclose you a drawing of the gold coin found on the cliff between the Camp & Seaford.  Lincoln tells me it is a common type.  I promised to send the owner the value of it which Lincoln says is about 21s?

I account for the very marked way in which the Roman line is defined in the silting of the ditch by supposing that the Britons, as long as the camp was in use, kept the ditch open as a defence, by throwing up the chalk rubble which fell into the ditch again upon the rampart. by this means [illegible] and by constant use the grass was prevented from growing. then came the Romans when the defences were abandoned, and the rubble which was fell into the ditch was not taken out. The narrow part of the ditch filled up quickly & remained so, & at last the grass began to grow.  Then the work was occupied by the Romans, but only for convenience, as an old site, not as a fortified place, for the Roman line is clearly a line of silting.

[drawing]

all the Roman pottery was found between 2”6 & 3 feet from the top, that is to say in the last 6 inches, & chiefly in the last 4 inches of the 3 feet of mould which overlies the chalk rubble, and this was the same all through the 20 feet of the ditch which was excavated.

Moreover the 3 feet of mould in the ditch was continuous with the mould on the Rampart, the thickness of which was, 6 inches on the crest of the rampart, 1”10 on the exterior slope and 1”10 at the foot of the interior slope, thus.

[drawing]

I assume from this that the whole of the 3 feet of mould in the ditch above the Roman line was due to the decay of the grass combined with silting upon the grass during the last 17 or 1800 years.  It accords well [illegible] with what we found at Cissbury except there the Roman line was more clearly defined as the line separating the chalk rubble from the mould & also the ditch at Seaford being narrower & deeper, filled up more quickly & deeper with chalk rubble before the grass began to grow.  On the whole I am convinced that the silting of Rampart ditches when we come to know more about it will afford very reliable data by which to estimate the date antiquity of the objects found in it.

Yrs very truly

A Lane Fox

--------------------

Information [added in pencil]

PS All right about the 5 [symbol like + over a minus sign]  let it be as you wish with thanks

Guildford

July 15 ?1876 [added in pencil]

My dear Evans

Thanks for your note.  It is then as I expected from the apparently bare metal & its [illegible ?th...] alate British coin.  I found another in a later pit which tho less distinct has apparently the same obverse & they have been found [?joined] to others & cut asunder a piece of its metal [illegible several words] thus [drawing]

The Evidence goes on to favour the camp being yet [?] date of the Roman [illegible] Roman occupation [illegible several words] the implements [illegible] of late Celtic type. No Samian as I said has been found in any of the pits in Caburn or anything absolutely Roman except a small piece of tile in the top of one of the pits & oysters  but in the adjoining camp which I call Ranscombe which I have now cut a section through samian ware has been found in sufficient quantities distributed all along the foot of the interior slope the pottery associated with this samian is not ornamented like a good deal of that in Caburn but quite plain.  The Ranscombe camp faces Caburn as you know within 300 yards & it really seems as if it must have been occupied by the Romans during an assault upon the Britons in Caburn. 

What could have brought the Romans up [illegible] a position so remote from water & so different from any site they ever selected for encampment except war & if war this was against the Britons in Caburn.

[drawing showing Ranscombe and Caburn with valley between]

I do not call to mind that samian pottery was not used at the time of [illegible, possibly Vespatian] expedition into these parts but tho Ranscombe was unquestionably occupied by the Romans or by people using Roman glazed samian ware it was not made by them.

In the interior slope and in the [drawing] superficial mould of the ditch Roman pottery is abundant but in the body of the Rampart and in the bottom of the ditch beneath x a hard crust of consolidated chalk rubble so hard that it took 2 men ½ a day to cut through 5 feet of it. not a single fragment of Roman but in its place a few fragments of coarse British pottery. not one fragment of the latter having been found in the interior slope or above the consolidated chalk in the ditch [insert] flint flakes abundant [end insert] stags horn & stags bones in place of the [illegible] and Bos found above We have  [illegible] 1st Ranscombe Camp, a large British Camp built first, & now destroyed, all but the the small part of the Rampart which faces Caburn.  2 Caburn, occupied & perhaps built by the British later. 3rd that part of Ranscombe which faces Caburn occupied by the Romans perhaps during an assault on Caburn. At any rate long enough to cover the place with their pottery & in a place which no Romans would fix upon for habitation at ordinary times.

Yrs [illegible]

A Lane Fox

--------------

Guildford Oct 6th 76

My dear Evans

Many thanks for your bronze albums.  I have been digging with Rolleston & Greenwell on Bucklebury common.

Some long mounds about 75 feet by 25, very shallow with slight ditches on both sides were supposed to be long barrows but we could find no trace of anything in them not even charcoal. 

There were precisely similar ones on [illegible Mitch...hampton] Common and on Merrow Down near here & we cannot make out what they are. We dug out the [drawing] graves at Kintbury but could find nothing of consequence & Greenwell thinks they belong to the Saxon period the one close to the church yard.

Yrs [illegible]

A Lane Fox

-----------------------

Guildford Dec 5. 76.

My dear Evans

I attended a meeting of the psychological society the other day and altho I hold psychology to be distantly a branch of anthropology, yet I agree with you in thinking that we should not at present take any further steps towards alliances than admitting them to our rooms. They are at present little more than a debating club. The affairs of the Inst [Institute ie Anthropological Institute probably] as regards the journal appear to be no clearer than before.  I think it will be desirable to put Mr. Harrison at once in Mr Heath’s place in order to put him in a better position for working it out.  we are I think already much indebted to him for the trouble he has taken in finding the matter out. 

Would it be advisable and for the good of the Institute to put up a two days special meeting in a large theatre for discussing the question of the Antiquity of Man. Commencing with a history of the subject and continuing with special papers.  The subject appears to be attracting public notice at this moment through the writings of Mr. Southall, Patterson & Tylor.  It is true that these writers, especially the two former have little or no influence with scientific men. but they have considerable influence with the public and with the writers of goodly [sic] books. And as our object would be to ventilate the subject in public, it might be useful for the Institute to take it up, altho the Geological Society might not think it worth much to them in the meeting.  Would you kindly pass me your opinion on this point.

Will you please keep Galton up to the mark as to continuing to take an interest in the Institute he talked of giving up the Vice Presidency which would be a misfortune for you.

Yrs v t

A Lane Fox

------------------

Information [ added in pencil]

6 ½ a ~

Wednesday

Sept /77- [added in pencil]

My dear Evans

Professor Rolleston writes me to send you the enclosed tho it seems to relate more to the Anthropometric committee.

We continue to obtain satisfactory evidence from pottery & the rampart.

At one time yesterday we thought we were getting pottery of the superior quality out of the second rampart but on digging further we found that it was not the rampart proper but a terreplein on the outer side of the upper ditch which had been silted over in the denudation of the second rampart and consequently the superior pottery may have belonged to the more recent occupants who used therampart terreplein before it was silted over. the construction of the second rampart is interesting and well worth the digging even if no other evidence was obtained.  3 flint hammer stones on terreplein but very few flakes any where. 

Park Harrison was here yesterday starting all sorts of crochets out of sheer opposition but even he could not find any marks in the shaft.  Hilton Price is here. this baby of Professor Rolleston is a nuisance.  I am sure he cant want any more. I get a letter from him every day he is longing to be here but I cant put off the digging as the people owner wont allow the chalk to remain on the grass.

[drawing of terreplein and rampart] 

[illegible]

A L Fox

--------------------

Information [in pencil]

630

Star Inn

Lewes

Thursday, 6. 

Sept 77- [in pencil]

My dear Evans,

I am sorry to say that by practising what I am always preaching against in other people viz. coming to a too hasty conclusion I have misled you about the shafts, I felt confident when I wrote they must be flint mines but the next morning we came to a bottom in both & found them to be simply pits probably for habitation and of the same age a horn comb [insert] Not in Ash.Mus [end insert] [drawing] at the bottom of one an iron bill [drawing] at the bottom of another an iron spud [drawing] in a third pottery of what we should call Romano British down to the bottom of all one being marked [drawings] thus and [drawing] another altho [drawing] animal remains around all through which I have packed up & sent to Rolleston. oysters in surface mould only & Helix hortensis in surface mould only nemoralis undoubtedly they should be observed and let me say that as for Park Harrison's assumption which he spreads about as diligently as his spurious drawing that I did not look out for them.  Years ago I put forward a theory about fine [?or some] organic marks similar to what Dr. Rhys has since published in his book judging by a review of it which I read the other day consequently I was not likely to over look marks and in fact the first marks found in Cissbury in a position which appeared to be beyond the reach of tourists [?] were found by me and not by Harrison and so far from taking no notice of them I took 1st a careful rubbing 2nd an attempt at a cast and 3[rd] cut the pieces out & preserved them, notwithstanding this I doubted and will doubt their genuineness, but I was at first anxious to leave the consideration of these marks to Harrison as he seemed inclined to take the matter up because in the first place division of work is good and also it gives a man an interest to have some particular branch in his own hands.  It was only when I found that he put about drawings which were not accurate and noticed scratches which were not marks at all and was altogether immaterial and crazy in his deductions that I felt it necessary to protest. 

In regard to some of his more recent remarks of this kind I was positive when [drawing] I saw them first they had cross marks on them [drawing] which all were represented of a [illegible ?blu..] leading him wrongly to suspect that whoever made them when he found that cross marks were not wanted, scratched them out: all I am certain of is that the marks were as white as a sheet of paper and the surface of the chalk yellow. but Harrison has done exactly what I expected would be the result of his publication in the Journal. he has got a certain [illegible] of people to believe in him and as one knows when people once commit themselves to an opinion, evidence or no evidence, they dont easily change. It is a pity Rolleston cant come now,  he wants to come very much but is busy propogating his species.  I fear I shall have to begin filling in the pits on Monday as every thing has to be returfed in the filling of the pits & not in surface mould.  I have not means of reference as 5 forms but it appears to me that they must be Romano British if not British of the [illegible] Roman [illegible] age.  I found an iron bill of the [illegible] form in an [illegible] one piece of pottery looks Saxon but it could well be that there is still a large pit which may turn out to be a flint shaft but I should be sorry to predict it is full of white chalk rubble without any surface mould & we have got down more than 10 feet from the surface but there were no flakes or flint chipped blocks about after that will come the question of the relative age of the pits now opened in the interior and the rampart w[ill] be determined by the pottery & animal remains found in this [illegible]. I found very good evidence at Newhaven camp the other day by finding several pieces [illegible] in other section of the rampart of a class of pottery inferior to that found in the interior of the camp In regard to your observationa I must look out for marks in the chalk, most [end of letter not present]

[on previous page] Yrs sin A Lane Fox

-------------------------

Not in Ash.Mus. [ added in pencil]

19 Penywern Road

South Kensington

Feb 25th 1880

My dear Evans

I bought a gold chain of a jeweller in Quimper not long ago which the French antiquarian believes to be Gallo-Roman.  To my delight I find the discovery of it noted in the since published number of the Société d'Emulation de St. Brieuc which confirms the account the jeweller gave me.  He bought it of a girl who found it at Pont Labbe and gave for it, so the notice says, but of course he did not tell me, 75 centimes he sold it to me a few days after.  the notice continues to an “Anglais de passage” for 180 francs this [illegible] is a mistake I only gave 100 francs, its weight in gold.  the jeweller is described as a man “qui meriterait de voir son nom pub lie partout” 

You know most things of this kind can you tell me what the law is in France about treasure trove I should like to send them a drawing of it but dont want to have a row about it  It was sold by the jeweller to me in open market and it is hardly necessary to say that I dont mean to give it up.

Yrs [illegible]

A Lane Fox

[drawing]

Note that this is Add.9455vol3_p765 /3 described as

Date:     Description of object:  c. Gold chain probably Gallo-Roman found in a field at Pont Labbe Brittany in 1878 ... (all removed to Rushmore) [Drawing]

Add.9455vol3_frontflyverso: Note ‘Missing Gold Chain 765  Price:    Deposited at:  Removed from 4 Grosvenor Gardens   Removed to: to Rushmore Gold case   Added: Oak lecturn case Rushmore corridor [in red]

Initially transcribed by Judith White for the Excavating Pitt-Rivers project and amended by Alison Petch and Alison Roberts August 2013.

Transcription of a letter from Henry Balfour to Professor Price dated 15 June 1890 regarding Balfour's long term employment. This letter is held in the PRM ms collections (PRM foundation volume):

‘It is difficult to see how this can be, I thought that I had made my meaning clear, and shewed the letter to others before sending it off. The condition that I make, before undertaking the work for another year, is that I shall be allowed to assume the title of Curator of the collection for that time, and also that I shall be place upon the same footing as other heads of departments, with regard to having a right to attend Delegates meetings and having a voice in affairs of Museum interest.’ Have, for some years, performed duties without privileges or title. As Tylor admits he could not devote one quarter of the time required to manage it, and does not know the system of working the department, ‘I am somewhat surprised that he should be so ready to accept the responsibilities’. To my disadvantage to carry on working full time if cannot take the credit for the work I do. Using the title would assist in correspondence with scientific people outside Oxford. Hope University will appoint a permanent working curator later, and will not make the title one of empty meaning. As election of Deputy Linacre Professorship, which carries curatorship with it, upcoming, this seems a good time to make a change. Tylor writes that a collapse must happen if I resign my post. Would be sorry for this, but it would underline the necessity and reasonable nature of my conditions.'

Feel sure in interests of University to accept them.

Transcription by Frances Larson for the Relational Museum project, 2002-2006

Transcription of part of a letter from Tylor to Balfour on 12 June 1890 regarding Balfour's long term employment. The letter is part of the PRM ms collections (PRM foundation volume):

'I am leaving at 5 this afternoon and am sorry to do so under the impression that the arrangements for you at the Pitt Rivers Museum are breaking down, much in consequence of your letter to Professor Price. Had I known of that letter beforehand I should have advised against sending it. It not only turned the transaction rather wrong side up, but its meaning was misapprehended (by myself as well as I believe the Committee) inasmuch as it seemed to say that you did not wish to work through 1891 except if made the permanent curator. I wish you would go to Professor Price again and make it quite clear what you would be satisfied with. Otherwise it seems to me that there is a great probability that nothing whatever will be done, and the arrangements will be stranded at Christmas. This is written in a hurry but it is I hope intelligible and I shall very much repel the collapse likely to happen.'

Transcribed by Frances Larson for Relational Museum project 2002-2006

Transcription of a letter from Hatchett Jackson to Professor Price regarding the long term future of the Pitt Rivers Collection in the light of Moseley's ill health. This letter is held in the PRM foundation volume, PRM ms collections:

3 May 1890, Anatomical Department, Deputy Linacre Professor

Dear Professor Price,

May I place in your hands for submission to the proper authority, the accompanying special report relating [?] to the Pitt Rivers Museum and Collection which is at present under the curatorship of the Linacre Professor. The Report has been drawn up by Mr. Balfour, who is the working sub-curator of the Collection, and it has been considered by my self and by the Reader in Anthropology (Dr. Tylor) separately and have received our approval.

As you will notice, the grant from the University expires at the end of this year, and consequently unless the University comes to some fresh arrangement, the Museum and Collection will be left without a separate staff, without means of maintenance, and in a state which can hardly be considered to be what is either desirable or suitable to its great value and importance.

The only point to which I wish to make special reference is the relation of the Linacre Professor to the Pitt Rivers Museum and Collection.

By statute IV. 1. par 3. ‘Particular Regulations’ 4d, the Linacre Professor is Curator of the Ethnological Collections in the University Museum. This statute was made by the Commissioners and was passed by the Privy Council in May 1882. When the Pitt Rivers Collection was moved into the present building, Professor Moseley appointed Mr. Balfour of Trinity College to arrange it.

It was Professor Moseley’s opinion expressed to myself early in 1887 that it would be impossible for the Linacre Professor to manage the Pitt Rivers Museum and Collection without a separate staff for the purpose. And I am confident from the knowledge acquired during 15 years of more of less close connection with the management of the Anatomical Department that it would be out of the question for the staff of that department to carry out the double duty.

At present the Linacre Professor is the only permanent official of the University the subject of whose chair is at all cognate to anthropology. The Readership in Anthropology is maintained by the Delegates of the Common University Fund, and may therefore I suppose lapse at some future date. The duties of the Reader were formulated in a decree which passed Convocation on Nov 15. 1883; the appointment of the Reader was notified in the Gazette for Dec 11. 1883 and his office dates from Jan 1. 1884. But in this connection I should like to draw your attention particularly to the fact that the Deed of Gift of the Pitt Rivers Collection provides that there shall always be a person to lecture on anthropology.

If I may be permitted to express a personal opinion in the matter, it seems to me that the University baring in mind the extreme value of the Pitt Rivers Collection, its importance to the subject of anthropology, its capacity for growth and development, and all that is implied in growth and development will consent to maintain a working curator bound to residence and to devote his time to the Collection and its interests. And I feel it my duty to press Mr. Balfour’s claims to this appointment. His intimate knowledge of the collection in its entirety, the manner in which he has fulfilled his duties beyond all praise and his knowledge of the literature which gathers round said collection, entitle him in all fairness beyond any one else to carry on the work with which he has been hitherto charged.

W. Hatchett Jackson

Transcribed by Frances Larson for the Relational Museum project 2002-2006

Transcription of letter from Moseley (Curator in charge of the Pitt Rivers Collection at Oxford) to Henry Balfour, one of his students and potentially Moseley's assistance PRM ms collections PRM Box 1:

11 October 1885

Dear Balfour

I shall require some one to assist me in arranging and labelling the Pitt Rivers Anthropology Collection for about a year. I expect to be able to get from the University about £100 pay for such an assistant. I do not know whether such employment might suit you. It would be pretty hard work of all sorts making little drawings, writing and [typing out?] very neat labels, writing catalogue descriptions, arranging things in cases, mending and batching [?] and cleaning, helping a carpenter fix things on screens, looking up objects of all kinds in illustrated books, Cooks travels etc. I fear there will be little chance of the thing going on after a year but success in it might lead to other openings. I cannot offer the post to you as I have yet no authority just think of it and send me a line and if it appears to you at all feasible come and dine with me at the Savile Club on Thursday next 15th at 7 o’clock and we can talk about it.

Yours faithfully,

H.N. Moseley.

Transcribed by Frances Larson as part of the Relational Museum project 2002-2006

Transcription of a letter from Sir Henry Acland to Pitt-Rivers in October 1887, this letter is held by the Oxford University Museum of Natural History:

21 October 1887

Dear General Pitt Rivers,

I venture to throw myself on your kindness – may I say for auld lang syne, and ask you to advise me on the following serious matter.

You know, to our sorrow, Moseley is ill. I hope and believe he will be well again – but not for some time – He has quite given up work for this term, and is away from Oxford.

You are aware that all the work or rather the chief of the work of arranging & placing your collection has been done by Moseley’s admirable assistant, Balfour.

I have just learnt to my consternation that Balfour intends to leave at the end of this term and go abroad. He is lately married and is uneasy at the position in which he finds himself.

He is an assistant – on a temporary salary to ‘the Professor of Anatomy’. Therefore supposing Moseley could not resume Balfour might not remain. He asked Moseley (I believe) if he could guarantee him to remain three years (?) or till the collection is finished & catalogued. But Moselely naturally & rightly could not give any such pledge.

I cannot worry Moseley with business – rather than write to him I would go to Weymouth if you wished to talk the matter over with him – although I do not see what more can be done by him.

Now what I have to ask you is this. Have you any objection to the University guaranteeing to keep him on for (say) 3 years. If you have not then I would beg to persuade the Council to enact this and we should save the very grave mischief of Balfour leaving in the middle of your great work.

I feel deeply interested in it, & try to provide him with any books or any kind he may need for his labours.

In the event of your expressing to me your concurrence, I should then approach Moseley to ask his. But I don’t like to disturb him needlessly. He would certainly require you to be consulted. He is quite sleepless without narcotics & does no business. I went lately to Weymouth to see him before I knew all this.’

[... Happy to host PR if he is by chance coming to Oxford.]

‘I am, Dear General Pitts Rivers faithfully yours’

Transcribed by Frances Larson during the Relational Museum project 2002-2006

This is a transcription of a letter from Henry Balfour to Sir Henry Acland dated 12 March 1887 regarding Balfour's work on the Pitt Rivers Collection. It is held by the Oxford University Museum of Natural History:

12 March [1887 written on letter by later hand, Balfour wrote letter]

My dear Sir Henry,

Pray dismiss entirely from your mind the thought that I have felt in any way hurt or annoyed during the meeting yesterday. Believe me it is not so. I have thoroughly appreciated the kindness & consideration, which I have learnt always to expect from you, & which you shewed in taking the trouble to have me invited to the meeting. I think that I have some right, as you too have though, to represent the department which for the last few years has been practically entirely under my care, where any question involving the transference of collections is discussed. I have taken trouble to gain all the experience that I can as to practical museum managements, & though my voice may carry but little weight, such experience is to a certain extent of value. The legality or otherwise of may vote on that occasion I leave to others better qualified to discuss, & I am perfectly satisfied that with you presiding the course taken will be the right one. I sympathise with you in the pain you have felt at the discussion, & know how deeply you hold the Museum interests at heart, both for the subjects & for those working on them. I cannot help thinking that the outcome of the acceptance of such a motion as that of Thomson’s will tend rather to increase than diminish the feeling of good fellowship, and at the same time give stimulus to true scientific work. I hope my ideas do not strike you as revolutionary if so pray pardon me. Your advice on all subjects is of great value to me, & as you know I like to think that I can appeal to you for it. I shall have a hard struggle to have my position recognized, & with my present appointment ceasing with the year, I am specially anxious now to improve my position with regard to the Anthropological department, quite as much from regard to the collection at which I have worked, as my own personal interests. That the educational value of the collection can be greatly enhanced I have no doubt, and it is with a view to develop the latent wealth of such a collection that I claim the necessity of a working curator for the department. The whole of a man’s time & interest are required, as I know from having started at the very beginning, & my fears for the future of the collection are well founded, if some step of this kind is not undertaken by the University. The outside public fully recognize the value, & the people of other countries are expecting much of the outcome to science of General Pitt Rivers’ labours, which may influence the future as well as the present, if allowed to be properly developed. You will be tired of reading this & I will spare you more.

I will only express my great approval + appreciation of the kindly course which you took with regard to me yesterday afternoon.’

Transcribed by Frances Larson during the Relational Museum project 2002-2006

Transcription of part of a letter from Henry Balfour to Edward Bagnall Poulton, Hope Professor of Zoology on 15 July 1890. This letter is held by Oxford University Museum of Natural History:

... ‘I think that I could manage a book upon the ‘growth’ or ‘Evolution’ of the Material Arts of Mankind which could take the form of essays upon the development of various arts, viz. warfare weapons, navigation, agriculture, fire-making, decorative art etc.'

‘I think it would be better to keep to essay form in order not to make the book appear to be posing as a text book in any way, a text book is not really wanted as Tylor & Paschel have both produced good ones which cover the ground well. Also I think that many people will read a book of essays rather than take up a formal text book. I can give plenty of illustrations I fancy. I cannot I am afraid undertake to get the book finished by any given time, but as soon as I get back I will commence + must hope not to be too much interrupted, though my really spare time is always limited. When will the other vols of the series be issued; is it required that they shall all appear about the same time.’

Terms satisfactory, title difficult until written, suggests ‘Evolution in the Material Arts of Mankind’. Returning to Oxford (from Aberdeenshire) soon after the beginning of September.

Transcription by Frances Larson as part of the Relational Museum project, 2002-2006.

Notes on a correspondence relating to setting up arrangements at Oxford for the reception of the Pitt-Rivers founding collection 1885-1886, University Archives, Bodleian Library UC/FF/60/2/2 and UC/FF/60/2/3. Tylor is Edward Burnett Tylor, Gamlen is William Blagden Gamlen (University Secretary), Sage built cases for the new museum, Symm were the builders of the new extension and Moseley was Henry Nottidge Moseley, the responsible Curator of the new museum:

UC/FF/60/2/2

19 March 1885: Tylor to Gamlen, forwarded case estimate from F. Sage and Co, £25 per court case including delivery and set up in University Museum (£8 or more below Holland and Sons), EB Tylor has seen their work at the College of Surgeons Museum and has been over their factory, and approves of all. Shall try and arrange a joint examination with Moseley too

24 March 1885: Symm and Co (contractors) contract with University signed

25 March 1885: Secretary, Science and Art Dept, South Kensington, to Gamlen, Dept would be glad to learn that steps are being taken as requested to remove PRC before end next May

15 May 1885: F. Sage to Gamlen, Glad to begin delivering cases on 1^st June

18 May 1885: Moseley to Gamlen, ‘I think you had better arrange with the S. Kensington people in the first instance about the removal but you must refer them to Tylor and me for instructions as to the order in which things are to be moved and the superintendence of the job. Some have to come here others to go to the Clarendon building and the packing must be arranged accordingly. You will I suppose let the builders know that the opening into this building will have to be ready by June 1st for the cases and also an ascent of some kind to the hole outside.’

23 May 1885: Moseley to Gamlen, ‘The Authorities of the Science and Art Department have presented to the University a series of wall screens made especially for the Pitt Rivers Collection and to which a considerable portion of the collection still remains attached.'

'It will be most convenient that the screens should be brought here and stored till they can be erected in the new building, with the exhibits attached to them. As they are of large size it will be impossible to get them in to the rooms at present available without cutting them into short lengths a matter of expense and not without risk of damage to the specimens. It will therefore be of great advantage if some University building the approaches of which will allow the entrance of the screens in tact can be devoted to their storage for six or eight months from the beginning of next month. And I beg that you will bring the matter before the Curators of the University Chest'.

‘The extreme size of the screens is 9ft by 12ft. Most of them are 9ft by 9ft 3.’

30 May 1885: Duncombe, Secretary, Science and Art Dept, South Kensington, to Gamlen, can be ready to pack Pitt Rivers collection at a day’s notice of the date when Moseley and Tylor can be present

12 June 1885: Moseley to Gamlen ‘It is very possible we may want to begin to store some Pitt Rivers things in the Clarendon upper rooms tomorrow. Will you kindly tell the Curators and see if they can be swept out etc.' ‘I am off to town with Tylor to superintend.’

17 June 1885: Tylor to Gamlen, written while at the Athenaeum, EB Tylor is ‘in town about the Pitt-Rivers collection’, writing about the stairs (as Moseley, below, 22 June 1885)

22 June 1885: Moseley to Gamlen, has just heard that the staircase down into the Court has been reduced from 6 ft wide to 4 ft 2 in without referring to him or to Tylor. ‘I cannot conceive how a serviceable building is ever turned out of the University on a system of this kind. We have devised the building and are responsible for its efficience [sic] for the purpose of taking the collection for which it is intended and yet a most important alteration is permitted without a hint to us who are the people who will suffer by the error.

‘The six foot doorway half blocked by a wall of brick only three feet distant from it in a direct line will look absurd and hideous. The four feet two stairway will not allow the carrying down of a single one of the 28 cases now erected in the old building…The front door of the Old Museum was so ludicrously bungled through oversight that it is inconvenient and useless and now we are day by day with our eyes open making a worse bungle of the entrance of the new building.’

Sage says the cases will have to be taken to pieces again to get them down the stairs now. The door is six foot and the stairs 4 ft 2, therefore part of the door is blocked by an internal wall coming to meet the corner of the stairs.

‘How will Pitt Rivers like to see his inscription over such an abortion? Tylor is going to the Vice-Chancellor about the matter.’ …

‘I do trust that if it is proposed to abolish the galleries or omit the skylights or build up hermetically all approaches to the building we shall be afforded an opportunity of expressing our disapprobation first.’

June/July 1885: Deane to Gamlen re alterations to staircase

July 1885: F. Sage and Co. to Gamlen re specs and estimate for cases [N.B. Sage and Co., Shop Fitters, Gray’s Inn Road, London]

29 June 1885: Sage and Co. acknowledging receipt of £700

3 July 1885: Moseley to Gamlen ‘I enclose a statement of expenses of Spencer and myself in attending the removal of the Pitt Rivers Collection. I have paid Spencer the £6.9.8.’ Also enquires re railings for PR building gallery and who contractor is and whether it is in hand. Needs complete drawing so a to decide on desk cases and whether to fit them to the railings

17 July 1885: Moseley to Gamlen, re exhibition cases ‘After consulting with the British Museum authorities concerned with Ethnological collections I concluded that 23 feet is not too long for the wall case compartments.’ [Does this mean the space between case doors? Surely not?] The cases are ‘nearly the kind of case which he [Sage] makes great quantities for shops’ [sic]

25 July 1885: Moseley to Gamlen, re cases for the PRM:, Moseley asked for a plan of the building, giving dimensions, when he ‘set about devising a system on which cases should be made for the Pitt Rivers Building’ and never doubted the plan’s correctness. On the basis of this plan ‘the Keeper and I recommended the order of the 28 transparent cases to fill the available floor space with proper intervals’. Now an extra 6 feet 1 inch added to the building, but this will make little difference.

For wall cases: ‘In selecting the kind of wall cases to be recommended I first got an estimate at per foot run by subsequently thinking it better to get an offer to make the entire set of wall cases required for a lump sum including a certain modification of breadth for 23 feet in the middle of the east wall…’ etc.

Original plans suggested by Redgrave and adopted by the University Chest Curators. Moseley guaranteed the plans as correct in his letter to Messrs Sage (the case-makers). Sage offered 240 ft of wall case for £600. Seems they now need 6 ft extra of wall cases, which will cost £2.10 per foot (ie £13 10s in all), but peculiarities of requirement (e.g. for going round door to PRM etc) means will probably be more than this.

Requests up to date plan so can confirm design of cases, case doors and partitions

Also need 12 additional feet of desk cases

Breadth of building now 76 ft not 70 ft

Needs to confirm situation before Sage begins work. ‘I have given a very great deal of my time to the Pitt Rivers matter’ and has been trying to save expense.

27 July 1885: Secretary, Science and Art Dept, South Ken to Gamlen, invoice for ‘expenses incurred by the Department in connection with the removal of the Pitt-Rivers Collection to Oxford’

12 October 1885: Moseley to Gamlen, 'It is necessary that I should have the help of a skilled assistant for a year to aid me in arranging and labelling the Pitt Rivers Collection. I think I shall be able to obtain such aid as I require for a payment of £100. I propose merely to make the engagement for the job without any suggestion of future employment and I shall be much obliged if you will apply for me to the curators of the University Chest for permission to [unclear – enfeud?] £100 of the sum allotted to the purposes of the collection in the payment of such an assistant.’

Also needs a carpenter ‘for some six months or a year to fit and fix wall screens, shelves, brackets +c and do useful jobs of all kinds’

3 November 1885: Deane to Gamlen, have written to Symm and Co. and the glazing contractors to push on with the work. ‘We are sorry you think the work is progressing slowly but at the same time beg to say that we are in no way the cause of it.’

December 1885: letters from Deane to Gamlen re. pillars, hot water channels, doorway, heating

21 December 1885: Tylor to Gamlen, re doorway, building doorway centrally between buttresses would minimize irregularily, would mean altering steps but would make doorway right in the Museum Court and not harm much in PRM, where already lack of symmetry between buttresses and iron columns. Not an architect, but thinks present arrangement will look ill.

1 January 1886: Tylor to Gamlen, ‘It is correct that I was with Deane about the new doorway and that Moseley acquiesced…It is I suppose useless to say any more about the doorway but I wish you would go round that way and see how it strikes you.’

UC/FF/60/2/3

4 February 1886: F. Sage to Moseley, ‘We have been thinking that as we have had so much wet weather lately the walls of your new building will be very damp for a long time after it is completed, therefore would it not be wise to paint the boards for the back of the cases two stiff coats [sic] of red lead before they are fixed we mean that side next the wall [sic], the cost of doing this will be £10.16.0. If you give the order for this to be done we should do the painting before the work leaves here. Perhaps you will be able to tell us more when the building will be covered in so that we may form an idea when we can begin to fix the cases.’

[Moseley’s order for painting backs of cases received by 8 February]

4 February 1886 Deane to Gamlen re revised estimate for hot-water

February/March 1886: Haden and Son re estimates for heating apparatus, Deane and Son re estimates for heating apparatus, plans for heating

8 February 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, complaining that the £500 set aside for ‘removal and rearranging of the Pitt Rivers collection’ has been drawn upon for other purposes. Original estimate drawn up by Moseley and Tylor, and neither expected this:

‘We counted as most people do when making an estimate on savings on one item compensating for loss on another and in giving three weeks of our time up to the work of superintending packing and preliminary labelling of the collection we were I am sure much actuated by the consideration that we thereby saved must cost which saving would enable a larger proportion of the collection to be placed under glass should the sum granted run short. I also spared my assistants services here in connection with the museum collection with the same view.'

‘I have agreed as is most expedient to receive nearly the whole of the Ashmolean’s ethnological specimens and incorporate them with the Pitt Rivers collection without asking for any increase in the sum for cases +c mainly on the idea that the savings effected would be available for the Pitt Rivers collection and I have also heard from General Pitt Rivers of numerous [insert] valuable sets of [end insert] objects at his house in London shortly to be added to those already received without raising questions of further expense on similar grounds.'

‘I have spent very much time and trouble and correspondence in obtaining everything connected with my part of the work of the collection [insert] at as low a cost as possible [end insert] on purpose to make the money go as far as possible in displaying and preserving the collection suitably and I shall certainly feel disappointed if the result is to be expended on the warming apparatus of another part of the Museum and I find the funds for extra cases +c run short in the end.’

…Hopes original fun for arranging the collection will remain. ‘Nothing is more difficult that to make absolute calculations as to the disposal of a collection of indefinite dimensions which ahs never been arranged as a whole previously anywhere.’

9 February 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, ‘I should have mentioned in my letter that the whole expense of moving the Pitt Rivers collection cannot be regarded as yet defrayed. The cost of moving all the specimens now stowed at the Divinity School and the new Schools to the Museum will be quite considerable. The estimate made by Dr. Tylor and myself was calculated before it was known that two removals would be required.’

15 February 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, ‘I am constantly interrupted during my lectures here on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays by violent hammering in connection with the Pitt Rivers building. At first I was able by leaving my class and finding a servant to take a message to the foreman of the works to resume my lecture in quiet after an interval but now I am unable to get the noise stopped.’

'Can the Curators of the Chest do anything to stop the noise on these days between 10 and 11.30 while Moseley is teaching. ‘If the builders had finished the work according to agreement there would have been no need for hammering during lectures. I have of course no authority at all with the builders.’

17 March 1886: Tylor to Gamlen, might be sensible to have a plank going along roof so that ventilation shutters and roof can be accessed if anything goes wrong, without the need of scaffolding

22 March 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, going on holiday until 3 May, so could Gamlen make arrangements to pay Balfour from the ‘Pitt Rivers fund’ on March 25th ‘one quarters salary, viz £25’ and ‘£20 to be expended during my absence on wages and small purchases under one pound and accounted for my me on my return’

Undated pencil note by Moseley: ‘I prefer in the painting of the interior of the Pitt Rivers building the dark red bases of the pillars with yellow narrow rings about. Also the rails coloured light grey with yellow ring ornaments.

‘If the joints under the galleries and their ends if painted should be coloured nearly white.

‘Borrow scaffold man from Mr Axtell and pulley and rope for handing the screens up to the Galleries’

[NB I think Axtell must have been a technician or maintenance for the University or the OUM]

3 April 1886: Deane to Gamlen re Symm and Co. painting underside of gallery floors, order for this work sent 14 April. Later April, Haden and Son re deciding on circle design for gratings. Late April/May, discussion re blind wells and drainage

6 May 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, ‘Sage’s men are very anxious to begin putting up the wall cases in the Pitt Rivers building. They suggest that the floor round the margin where the cases are to rest might now be finished off at once. I see nothing to prevent this being done. They have been left waiting a long while with the cases filling their warehouses. I dare say Axtell could easily manage the matter.’

8 May 1886: W.J. Hill, Science Collections, S. Kensington, to Moseley ‘In turning out drawers and cup-boards in the office, I have come across some Pitt Rivers labels. I rather think they are copies of many you have but will send them if they are likely to be of any service.' ‘I suppose by this time the Pitt Rivers annexe is built and pretty well furnished…’

14 May 1886: Sage acknowledge order for ’26 additional standards and 8 wrought iron braces’

20 May 1886: Gardner, Anderson and Clarke, Engineers to Gamlen, sending photo of ‘the Anthropological Museum as finished’ – later note (by different hand) states that this is a photo of the finished roof, but no photo remains

2 June 1886: Sage to Gamlen, asking for £500 – had intended to wait until after work finished, but building has been some months longer than anticipated. Their work should be completed by end of month, ‘All the material are on the ground and we believe well advanced’

11 June 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, re inscription over the door. ‘I think the enclosed will look very well but I had an idea that the stipulated inscription was Pitt Rivers Anthropological Collection I know he is very sweet on the long word…’

‘I want leave to ask one of the S. Kensington authorities to allow one of their superintendents who had carge of the Pitt Rivers Collection to come here for a week to give his services in cataloguing the collection. We to pay his expenses [sic]. Such favours are often granted in the case of collections sent to new provinces +c. The man had charge of all the old catalogues of the Museum and has a wide knowledge of the collections and would bring the old catalogues and identify many things the labels of which were mislaid when the collection was shifted in a hurry owing to the University leaving it at Kensington too long. It was determined to ask for this Mr Hill’s services when the things were packed for moving to Oxford. He was then of the greatest use. It is possible the SK people might send him at their own expense.’

19 June 1886: Secretary, Science and Art Dept, S. Kensington, to Gamlen, confirming that Mr Hill’s services will be placed at the disposal of the University authorities on condition they pay travel and personal expenses

22 June 1886: Sage re ventilating wall cases at extra cost

23 June 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, Mr Hill to come week of 18 July (ie on Monday 19), he (Moseley) and Balfour will be here: ‘I want Balfour to find him a lodging +c and write to him when the time comes.’

30 June 1886: Balfour to Gamlen (Balfour’s address is Longlands, Henley-on-Thames), has taken rooms for Hill at Museum Cottage

30 June 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, re petty cash for the Pitt Rivers. ‘Fred Long is a small boy brother of the workman Long who does varnishing +c on his holiday. We shall probably require carpenters assistance in the vac [sic] now the building is finished + the expenditure will thus be a bit higher.’

5 July 1886: Sage sending an account for cases, now completed

10 July 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, has tried all locks on cases and is satisfied, has checked Sage’s invoice

19 July 1886: Deane and Son, need drainage pipe for boiler

24 July 1886: Moseley re blackening grates in PRM

August and October 1886: University Chest settling accounts with contractors

23 October 1886: handwritten ‘Estimate for further expenditure in arranging etc the Pitt Rivers Museum’ includes fittings for cases, screens, more table cases for Upper Gallery, ‘special small cases’, labels painted on wood, salary for assistant to Moseley for one year from Oct 28 at £150 [this is Balfour, up from £100 for first year of work], salary of ‘servants paid weekly from petty cash’ at £39. Total £725.10.0 Total petty cash expenditure for 27 Feb to 23 Oct 1886 was £60

Another estimate, written by Moseley at about the same time: Includes more table cases for upper gallery, fitting screens in upper gallery, wall cases and screens in lower gallery, stands and fittings for cases, special small glass cases, large labels finished in oil colours. Long’s salary for 53 weeks at 15s = £39. Balfour began work on Oct 28 1885 and was paid: £17.10.8 on December 31; and £25 on each of 29 March, 30 June and 23 October

1 November 1886: Moseley to Gamlen, re estimates for following year (see above) ‘I include amongst such specimens those which with the sanction of the University have been transferred from the Ashmolean to the Pitt Rivers collection in exchange for objects formerly in the General Museum, a certain number of objects transferred directly from the General Museum to the Pitt Rivers collection, and a very few objects presented by various donors to the Pitt Rivers collection since it arrived at Oxford. The whole of these additions to the collection as presented by General Pitt Rivers to the University form a very small proportion of the whole. That portion of the objects received from the Ashmolean Museum which is known as ‘Captain Cook’s collection’ has been arranged in a case formerly used for ethnological objects in the General Museum not in a new one purchased for the purpose. I do not think that the objects now in hand can be properly cleaned, preserved, repaired, set up and displayed in cases or on screens without an expenditure such as I propose. No doubt there will remain some small spaces in the cases +c in which future additions may be intercalated but no superfluous accommodation has been definitely allowed for in my estimate. The range of new table cases in the Upper Gallery which I wish to have put up will be entirely occupied by the vast collection of stone and bronze implements ancient and modern still in the new Schools.’

11 November 1886: Sage to Moseley, estimate for 253ft 6in table cases. Desk cases ordered by 13 November 1886 for the ‘upper gallery of the Anatomical Museum’ (must be a mistake due to Moseley’s writing paper)

Transcribed by Frances Larson for the Relational Museum project, January 2006.

Notes on a set of correspondence relating to the movements of the founding collection at South Kensington Museum prior to transfer to the Oxford University Museum, UC/FF/60/2/2 University Archives:

Letter from Henry Nottidge Moseley to William Blagden Gamlen (University Secretary) on 11 February 1885:

‘On going to the Pitt Rivers Collection yesterday I found that it had been shifted out of its place by the S. Kensington authorities and packed closely into one room. The galleries formerly occupied by it were ordered to be cleared for the patent collection. I think the cases have been moved carefully and that the objects are not injured but it is impossible to get at any but those adjoining the passage.

I believe that General Pitt Rivers will receive the first intimation of what has been done from a letter I have written to him tonight. I imagine the Curators of the Chest to whom I beg you will communicate the content of this letter will have to ascertain in how short a time the building for the collection will be ready for its reception and then ask the S. Kensington authorities whether they will permit the collection to remain as now stored till that time. It would also be well to have the collection examined to find out whether it will deteriorate as now placed I could not speak with any confidence on the matter after the very short view I had of it. If the Kensington authorities refuse to house the collection till the building is ready the things will have to be moved to some temporary resting place here. In that case the finer cases which will be required for the new building had better be ordered at once. As all the best things in the collection are now in cases which belong to S. Kensington and would not be stored here safely and so as to preserve their arrangement except in similar cases.’

21 February 1885: Secretary, Science and Art Dept, South Kensington, to Gamlen

‘…although the Department is anxious to disturb the Pitt Rivers Collection as little as possible, it is quite out of its power to undertake that it shall remain in its present situation until the proposed new building at Oxford is ready for its reception. The Collection is at present placed in a Gallery which does not belong to the Department, and which it has received notice to vacate as soon as possible, as the building is required by the Treasury and the Office of Works for other purposes.’

Hope Pitt Rivers Collection will be removed as early as possible and glad to hear of any arrangements in next 3 months

Transcribed in January 2006 by Frances Larson as part of the Relational Museum project

Correspondence in University Archives at the Bodleian Library, dating June and July 1883 relating to arrangements for the founding collection donation:

14 June 1883: Deane (Architect) to Gamlen, has great pleasure in prospect of working for the University again.

19 June 1883, Tylor to Gamlen, hopes to be at forthcoming Curators’ meeting

30 June 1883: T.N. Deane to Gamlen, plans now ready for the surveyor and his specification. Possibility of adding a ‘theatre’ is mentioned (no details given)

6 July 1883: Morrell & Son, Solicitors, to Gamlen, ‘The matter [of executing the Deed], we understood, was standing over whilst a catalogue of the collection was being completed + printed.’ Have heard from Farrer + Co that PR would like the following conditions added: ‘1) That a Lecturer shall be appointed by the University who shall yearly give Lectures at Oxford on Anthropology ‘2) That the Donor and his agents shall have the right at all reasonable times of making drawings of the objects in the collection for purposes of publication’ Morrell has replied that decision only possible during October term, but cannot imagine any objection to (2) but (1) would involve an annual outlay and do not know what view the University would take. ‘To this Messrs Farrer reply that they understood that it had been already agreed by the University Authorities but that they quite consent that it should stand over.’ Should be glad to know whether it has been informally agreed, as could then press to execute the Deed.

27 July 1883: Morrell & Son, Solicitors, to Gamlen, In further reference to your letter of the 21st inst, we have written to Messrs. Farrer and Co urging them to get General Pitt-Rivers to execute the Deed and stating the reasons which make it desirable to get it done at once. We are sorry to say they have replied this morning to the effect that General Pitt-Rivers declines to execute the Deed until further conditions which he requires have been inserted.

24 May 1884: T.N. Deane to Gamlen Plans for the anthropological museum will be sent on Tuesday, and various estimates. Deane in consultation with Gamlen re contracting Symm + Co for building work

June 1884, two large documents, estimates for preliminary works for Anthropological Museum, University of Oxford

June 1884: estimate for construction work for Anthropological museum from Arding, Bird and Buzzard, London

10 June 1884: Form of tender signed by Symm + Co addressed to Curators of the University Chest to effect that they are willing to erect the Museum in accordance with plans and specs by T.N. Deane + Son and giving details of costs – basic cost of £4977, range of possible additional costs also given.

17 June 1884: E.T. Turner to Gamlen, PRM came before Council yesterday, but Council were of the opinion that it could not be considered this late in the term

Notes taken by Frances Larson as part of the Relational Museum project, January 2006.

Letter from Pitt-Rivers to Henry Acland about giving his collection to Oxford:

Bodleian Library MS. Acland d.92, fols.75-76

4 Grosvenor Gardens

S.W.

My Dear Sir,

I am much obliged to you for your letter. It will add much to the pleasure of presenting my Museum to Oxford that you and the scientific members of the University should be so favourable to its going there, and I hope much that it may be brought about. I do not know what the proposals of the committee may be. Professor Westwood’s proposal to me did not involve the suppression of my name in connection with the collection and I thought that arrangement satisfactory. Of course after devoting exactly 30 years to it I look upon it very muchin the light of a child. It commenced in 1852 with a series showing the development of small arms in which I was officially engaged. At that time we had not the advantage of Darwin’s writings. The Christy collection was in embryo like my own and was commencing on a different plan and evolution which is in everybody’s mouth now was almost unheard of then.

I believe I may say that there was at that time no Museum arranged upon the system of shewing the development of ideas. Dr Meyer tells me that he has arranged the Dresden Museum in this order after seeing mine and I believe some others have done the same. I am afraid the incorporation of the Ashmolean Museum with mine may spoil it. Valuable as the objects in that Museum are it has a different object & had better be kept apart. However we shall see what the committee say. Meanwhile I beg to thank you for your very kind letter and wish you every success in your Endeavours to promote Anthropology in Oxford. Professor Rolleston often talked to me about it and we can’t but wish that he had lived to carry it out.

Yours faithfully,

A. Pitt Rivers

Transcribed by Fran Larson 7.12.2005 as part of the Relational Museum project; checked by AP May 2013.

{joomplu:1211 detail align right}

There are a series of documents in the Pitt-Rivers papers at Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum, P1-P4. These have been transcribed or the contents noted and a copy of these notes and transcriptions is attached here. Please note that parts of P4 were difficult to read and the first part of the paper is now lost. There seems to be no record (that has been found to date) of this talk actually being delivered, or published. It is not known when exactly it was written either, but it seems clear that it must have been written during or very shortly after his period of service in Ireland (1862-1866). We are very grateful to Charlotte Diffey for allowing us to use these transcriptions and her notes on this website.

If you know anything about this talk, or any of the other items, then please contact rpr@prm.ox.ac.uk

P1 – Iron spear head, ferrule, and a piece of iron probably part of a knife. Found by Lt. Col A Lane Fox in a Fort near Kilcrea Abbey in April 1864. (3 pictures of the above objects). This Fort was circular and was cut through in the formation of the Cork and Macroom railway. These implements were found about 3 feet below the surface in a layer of ashes with particles of burnt bones and teeth of a ruminant of which all but the enamel had decayed, they were within a few feet of the outside of the crypt.

P1a – Plan and 2 sections of Kilcrea Ring Fort.

P2 – Fig 1. and 2. - Plan and section of a fort in the townland of Milane (sic. Possibly Mylane which Lane Fox was supposed to have excavated with Sir Thomas Tobin) near Ballincollig.

Fig 3 – Plan of Caves (presumably at Milane)

Fig 4 – Diagram showing position of caves in relation to the fort. Dated to May 1865.

P3 – A series of sketches showing the fortifications of Doon, below the Finger Tower at Eask near Dingle.

Fig 1. – Map of Doonmore

Fig 2. – Section of the rampart at Doonmore

Fig 3. – Plan of the Doon peninsular

Fig 4. – Section of ditches at Doon

Fig 5. – Plan showing the original arrangement of the ditches and parapets at Doon.

P4 – (Seems to start on page 21, the paper is not titled.).

Without sufficient data, that a trick of the middle ages, a cipher, based upon the Latin alphabet, should have been so widely accepted as to leave its traces upon monuments in all parts of Ireland, in Devonshire, Wales, Scotland and the Western Isles. (possibly talking about ogham inscriptions.)

p. 22 So little is known, or has been attempted, (respecting?) the Forts which are so numerous in all parts of Ireland that I venture to think a brief description of them from personal observation may not be out of place in connection with Roovesmore.

In speaking of Forts I only adopt the term in general use for them by the country people. It is not however by any means determined that they ought all of them to be regarded as fortifications, although unquestionably many of them, from their situation, must have been constructed with a view to defence. Other on the contrary are so commanded, within arrow shot from the exterior, that it is difficult to believe, even in the most primitive state of warfare, that defence could have been the principal object the builders had in view in the formation of them. I have noticed that they are almost invariably found in close proximity

p. 23 to a good spring, which circumstance alone, of other evidence were wanting, would be sufficient to prove they were inhabited.

They are found thickest, in the most fertile patches in the valleys. The barren, mountainous, tracts in the west of Cork and south of Kerry are almost devoid of them, while they abound in Dallauns and cromlechs. This is favourable to the supposition that they belonged to a pastoral and agricultural people, and the fact of a number of small querns having been found at various times in the parapets and ditches, together with numerous bones of animals, seems to confirm this opinion*

I have observed that upon the round topped hill of the Country of Cork, they are more usually found upon the shoulders, than on the summits of the hills. In such a position they could see into the valleys below, where probably their flocks on their fields were situated. Facilities for obtaining water would also

* Foot note: I have found bones of cow, horse and pig but I have never seen, nor have I heard of bones of the sheep being found.

p. 24 have influenced them in selecting this position in preference to the summits.

It has been affirmed, that they are arranged in threes, and that they are situated so as to be within sight of each other, and keep up a continuous communication throughout the country. Having been constantly on the look out for this peculiarity during three years that my occupation as Asst. Quarter Master General led me frequently to travel over the country with the ordnance maps, I not only failed to discover any especial distribution with a view to continuity of signals, but I am pretty confidently of opinion that, in the south west of Ireland, to which my observations have been chiefly confined, no such arrangement existed. Had this been the object, an infinite number of spots might be pointed out which would have been preferable to those actually chosen. The forts are so numerous, that there are very few valleys in which two or more of them are not necessarily within sight of each other, and it is quite possible that on this account, communications, by means of fires or

p. 25 otherwise, might have extended throughout a considerable distance; but as regards the selection of sites, my observations lead me to believe they were influenced chiefly by the fertility of the soil, and water supply. Very rarely, two forts may be found with their circles cutting each other, as at (Tara?). Occasionally one or more small circles are found near the ditch of a larger work, as if they have belonged, or been dependant on it, but there is no uniformity observable in the arrangement of these out posts with respect to the main fort, or of these again in relation to each other.

In so far as the South West of Ireland is concerned, they may be classified under two heads. The square, rectangular or quadrilateral: and the oval or circular. The ovals are rare, and the circles present sufficient irregularity to prove that they must have been laid out by the eye. These last may be again divided into such as have simple ditch and parapet, and those which are surrounded by two or more concentric circles of parapets with ditches between.

p. 26 Viewed solely by the light if their construction, the circular Forts have all the characteristics of being more ancient than the others. The circle is the most primitive form. All savage nations have adopted it in the construction of their dwellings. Livingstone mentions, that he found it impossible to teach the nation of South Africa to build anything square; they invariably reverted to the circle when not watched. The circular villages of the Bassutos (sic. Basutos) and Kaffirs, enclosing the space set apart for their cattle, which they regard as sacred, and in which they bury their dead; replaced by villages of rectangular form with those that have yielded to European influence. The circular entrenchments of the Shoua (possibly Shuwa) arabs, strongly defended by stakes*¹, in which they dwell with their cattle, women, and children, living in small beehive shaped houses of clay or rushes*², exactly

* Foot notes: ¹ Denham and Clapperton; travels. p. 267. (possibly ‘Travels and Discoveries in Northern and Central Africa) Irish whites have supposed that the raths were defended by stakes.² Clapperton; Journey to Kourka. p. 7.

p. 27 as the ancient Irish appear to have done. The oval entrenchments in which the Assyrians pitched their tents*, the circular Forts in the Mississippi valley: all testify to the circle or oval having been the forms invariably adopted by primitive nations in the construction of their dwellings, and their entrenchments. The circular forts in Ireland are of various sizes. Smith – History of Waterford, - says, that the larger ones in that county, termed Raths, are not usually more than 40 or 50 feet in diameter: the smallest called ‘Lis being from 10 to 15 years in diameter. In the County of Cork, they average from 120 to 150 and 200 feet. The layout I know of, in the neighbourhood of Blarney, called Lis-na-raha is 280 feet in diameter measured between the crests of the parapet. It has a ditch of 30 feet wide, by 12 deep. The Giant’s ring at Belfast is 590 feet in diameter but this, having no present trace of a ditch on the outside, and having a cromlech nearly in the centre, may very possibly be classed amongst those earthworks that were constructed for religious purposes. The same probably applies to a large work

* Foot note: Rawlinson: Ancient Monarchies Vol. II p. 72.

p. 28 near the Curragh that has its ditch on the inner side of the rampart. Rath Maeve near Tara, and Rath na Riog on Tara Hill, are quite exceptional in point of size as defensive works. The former being 720, and the latter 775 feet in diameter. Rath Maeve appears to have been the most important work in a defensive point of view, its exterior slope measuring from 30 to 40 feet on the western side. All these however are exceeded, in point of interior size, by Cashel Fort in the South of Ireland: about 3 miles N. W. of (1 illegible word). This differs from all the smaller double and treble banked raths, in having a detached inner line of entrenchment. In the smaller raths, the parapets and ditches; when these are more than one; succeed each other in close (1 word illegible) opposition, the slopes of the parapets being much a continuation of the scarps and counterscarps of the ditches. It is very rarely that, in this present (1 word illegible) condition, any trace of banquette or covered way can be seen, and the very slight command which the interior parapets have, in some cases, over those beyond, leave it almost a matter of doubt

p. 29 whether they were really intended as successive lines of defence, or constructed for some other object. Here however, the position of the inner entrenchment 60 paces in rear of the outer, confounds those with modern notions of a second, or reserve line, to which the defendants might retreat about the outer line had been taken. Neither of the Entrenchments of Cashel Fort have any very considerable relief, which circumstance, coupled with the absence of any tradition that I have heard of, respecting so extensive a work, leads me to believe it may have arisen from some temporary concentration of tribes for the purposes of defence, and may not have figured prominently in the history of the country. On the other hand, the celebrated entrenchments on Tara Hill have no greater relief than these, and the word “Cashel”, implies a fortress of some significance. It is situated on the summit of a line of hills which would form an important feature in the defence of the country in the present day, extending from Cork harbour, along the left bank of the Owenboy, and commanding the whole of the country to the South, by which an enemy, having landed on the coast; would endeavour to penetrate

p. 30 into the interior. I could only observe one small stream by which it could have been supplied with water, without descending into the valley below. There is a small cairn on the top of the hill in the centre of the work. The whole interior space is now overgrown with heather, but beneath this, there are evidently numerous collections of stones and rubbish which might serve to throw some light on the locality if the heather were cleared away. As far as I can ascertain this place does not appear to have received from Irish archaeologists, the attention which, as the largest defensive work in the country, it deserves.

The most ordinary form of circular fort is that of Roovesmore, having two parapets, with a ditch between, the inner one commanding a similar outer bank is common in the quadrilateral forts, which have never more than one ditch. There was formerly a square fort in the neighbourhood of Cashel fort; with an inner square keep in one corner; it is marked in the ordnance survey but has since been levelled. The quadrilateral forts have occasionally wet ditches, formed by converting a stream

p. 31 into them: this I have never observed in the circular forts. The faces of the square forts vary from 60 to 150 feet, which is rarely exceeded; but on average, they appear to contain nearly the same interior space as the circular ones.

Although some of the circular forts have now more than two entrances, I have more frequently observed that number than any other. They are not confined to any particular point of the compass. In this respect also Roovesmore may be regarded as a typical fort. The circular camps of the Shoua arabs called Dwera, plural of Dower, a circle, have two openings, one for the entrance, and one for the exit of these cattle.

The best specimen of a circular multi-banked fort, is Ballycatteen fort, near Ballinspittle, south-west of Kinsale, and within two miles of Courtmacsherry bay. It has four parapets; including the small outer one which is beyond the furthest ditch; and three ditches 20 to 30 feet wide. It is in a commanding position on the top of a hillock. The interior diameter is 218 feet; and the ditches and outer parapets occupy 100 feet, making 418 feet, exterior diameter. It has now 3 entrances, one to the north, one to the

p. 32 west; and a third to the south east. The inner parapet is now much destroyed but could never have had a great command over the others. Close by, is Tobereen-ri-downey (?), round this well, is a circle of 24 feet diameter, a path has been worn a foot deep in the ground by the people who (1 word illegible) around it three times on certain occasions, praying to it also in three places, within the circle, a small bush covered with (rags?) in which are deposited the ailments of the devotees, and near the bush a small heap of white quartz pebbles. Not long ago, I learnt from a country man, a neighbour attempted to remove this well but; the ever recurring old story -: he was immediately sieved by all the pains and cramps appertaining to the rags from which he never afterwards recovered, and the pious people have therefore continued their devotions to the spirit of the waters as in the good times of yore. This was the “Kings Sunday Well” my informant told me; and the king lived in the Fort above.

As a general rule the earthworks in the cultivated parts of the country have no revetment, in one instance only, north of Macroom, I found an earthen fort in

p. 33 which the interior slope of the rampart had a 6 foot revetment of stones. For the ascent, there was a ramp, also revetted, entering the rampart at right angles, and making a bend to the left in its ascent to the terreplein which was 10 feet 6 inches in width, and had a parapet on the outer side, with an exterior slope of 10 feet. Caher Dargan near Kilmacader, Dingle is the only other example of a revetted earthwork I know of. It has an interior diameter of 100 feet; the interior slope is ascended all round by three steps, diminishing in breadth towards the top, being 1 foot , one foot and 9 inches respectively, there are traces of three hut circles in the interior.

Where forts are found in the (1 word illegible) county, which is very seldom, the earthworks are replaced by circular parapets of moderate sized stones, which are found in immense numbers (slewed?) over the surface of the ground. Of these, which are known by the name of Cahir, Stague (sic. Staigue) Fort, in the County of Kerry with is cyclopean doorway and regularly built stairs on the interior, is by far the most remarkable specimen in this, or indeed any part of Ireland. I have not had an opportunity of examining it but it has been frequently described. No trace of mortar has been found in the construction

p. 34 of these cahirs, they have frequently the remains of hut circles in the interior. Several of them may be seen near Dingle.

Many of the circular forts have underground chambers, and all are believed by the country people to possess these, concealed beneath the surface. Smith, in his history of Cork says, that the entrance to these chambers is on the east-side, that they generally (turn?) spirally for two, or three, or four turns, and terminate in a square room in the centre. After examining a number of them however, I have been unable to ascertain that their entrances are more frequently on the East than any other side. It is difficult to ascertain now, without careful excavation, where the original entrance to these caves really was, as the present opening to them is frequently in places where the roof of a gallery has been opened, or has fallen in, and not by the original entrance. I have however on one to two occasions traced an entrance

p. 35 unquestionably to the ditch on the south side: others I have found to the north, and some appear to have been entered in the interior of the forts.

Not long ago, the construction of the Macroom Railway laid bare the interior of one of these forts near Kilcrea. It consisted of a winding gallery 50 feet long, running north and south; commencing at 9 feet from the ditch on the south where it was closed by a large slab. It evidently communicated originally with the ditch, the 9 feet of earth having been caused by the fall of the parapet. At the entrance, the gallery was only 2 feet square, but it increased gradually to 3.3 by 3.8 at the other end where all further trace of it was lost. The sides were built up with unknown stones, over-lapping as they ascended so as to approach each other towards the top, which was roofed with large horizontal slabs. About half way, the gallery was partly closed by a small doorway

p. 36 formed by two upright unhewn stones on either side as jambs with a lintel on the top, leaving an opening one foot ten inches in width by two feet high. In the centre of the fort; a small beehive shaped crypt was discovered. The ground plan of this chamber was an irregular square 5 feet 8 inches by 6 feet 6 inches. The stones at the sides overlapped so as to form a dome 4 feet 6 inches high closed by a flay at the top which was 1 foot 3 inches below the surface of the ground. The interstices between the stones were in some places filled with what appeared to be lime and very small stones and the floor was strewed with the same, showing that in all probability the interior of the chamber must have been lined with a concrete of this material: but it had no consistency when discovered. There were also traces of burnt lime in other parts of the fort. On the north of the chamber a small drain like opening 2 feet square and topped with a slab, communicated with another chamber of nearly the same dimensions. This, contracted on its northern side into a small gallery, which ascended towards the surface.

The most ordinary from of chamber in these parts, is an oblong, rounded at the corners, 9 feet long by 3 ½ to 4 feet high,

p. 37 the sides lined with rough stones rising perpendicularly for a foot and a half or two feet and then closing gradually to about 2 ½ feet at the top which is flagged over. The communications with other chambers are usually at the bottom, either at the end or sides of the oblong. They are flagged over and average from 1 ½ to 2 feet square, some however are so small that an ordinary sized man is unable to squeeze himself through without assistance, even by placing his shoulders diagonally across the opening. When these communications are upon the floor, it is probable that they may sometimes have been reduced to less than their original dimensions by the accumulation of rubbish, but I happened to discover one of these chambers under the south eastern parapet of a fort in the townland of Garraune between Knockencragh and Bailock rocks County Cork. The end of this chamber was 6 feet from the ditch and had one these little squeezeways outwards, evidently communicating originally with the ditch, although it was then closed up with earth. Its dimensions were on foot in height by one foot 2 inches broad and as it was not upon the floor, but at the top of the chamber, and was regularly built with stones it is evident that these were its original dimensions. There were other chambers, communicating with this one in the interior of the fort.

p. 38 I have observed that the outside entrance is frequently smaller than any of the other communications as at Roovesmore, Kilcrea fort and others*¹ - but if this was the opening by which the set of chambers had it communication with the external air they must certainly have been inhabited by a very diminutive race, as no ordinary sized man of the present day could by and probability have squeezed himself through it. When the soil is retentive, the chambers are frequently excavated in the natural earth. Of this description, a fort in the townland of Milane, Co. Cork affords a good specimen. The dimensions are given in (figs. 1, 2, 3, & 4. Pl. 4). The entrance is on the north; the tops of the chambers and the squeezeways are rounded. Altogether they resemble more the burrow of an animal than the work of man. The chambers follow on continuously and branch off in all directions undermining the interior of the fort, some of them have fallen in and are not given in the plan, others are closed with stones. It was not without some difficulty that I forced by body through one of these openings and a stouter man than myself jammed in the middle and had to be pulled back. In other places I have met with communications that I was unable to pass through*². The chambers frequently run

*Footnotes:

¹ Since writing the above, it has come to my knowledge that this peculiarity vis. the smallness of the entrances has been noticed in the subterraneous (1 word illegible) Pict’s houses and Burghs of Sutherland, Caithness the Orkney and other Scotch islands, and has been supposed to be intended for concealment. See – notice of underground chambers in Forfarshire by John Stuart esq. – Proceedings of the Antiquarians of Scotland Vol III p. 466.

² another fort in the townland of Milane was explored by Sir Thomas Tobin and myself. It consisted of a similar set of unrevetted chambers communicating with the ditch on the south. In the centre of the fort within a few inches of the surface a line of slabs placed side by side with the edges touching appeared, from the marks of fire and the bones of animals found on it, to have been a hearth.

p. 39 under the parapet. In a fort called Derrycahir on the road from Tralee to Dingle about a mile and a half beyond Adagh. I traced a line of chambers across the centre of the fort to the foot of the parapet on the south side, from which place, a small gallery ascended to another chamber 8 feet by 3 and 2’9 high placed lengthwise in the body of the parapet. The main entrance to the chambers appear to more frequently in the ditch than elsewhere.

The caves are not confined to the forts, but are also found in the fields where there are no traces of entrenchments. The natives call them pol fa talla (?) meaning thereby; as I understand; a hole into a house or hall. In the townland of Garane parish of Donamore. I happened to meet with one of these in a field which had just been broken into by the labourers in ploughing. It was of the usual shape, lined with stones, and had marks of fire all over the sides and roof. Smith in his history of Cork mentions, that in the neighbourhood of Ross Carbery, a cave was found having similar traces of fire in the interior, and he states that, in all probability, this was the effect of fires lighted by enemies at the mouth of the cave for the purpose of smoking the

p. 40 inhabitants out, and he says that the Irish M.S.S make mentions of such a practice having been adopted in Ireland in ancient times. It is quite possible that such might have been the case, as it would have been impossible for any animal to have existed with a fire in such a place, nor were there any traces of fire in the numerous other caves which I examine, which could lead to a supposition that fires were habitually lighted in them, though ashes and marks of fire are frequently found in the ground about them. At Lisnaraha; the large rath before mentioned; near Blarney, some excavations on a small scale were conducted by Dr Caulfield F. S. A. and myself, which resulted in discovering the remains of one of these human burrows which had fallen in. Upon what appeared to have been the floor were found, ashes, and numerous minute fragments of burnt bones apparently human. Burnt lime is of frequent occurrence in these forts but, with the excavation of Kilcrea, I have never found a chamber which appeared to have been plastered with lime. On one occasion, in what appeared to have been a small kiln at Coolowen, I found a

p. 41 number of small lumps of mortar in which there were quantities of small fragments of calcined oyster shells: they were mixed with bones of the horse, cow, pig, and numerous small animals, including birds. I was led by this discovery to believe that mortar may in very early times have been made in this way. Since then, I have had a description of Stague fort by Mr Bland in the Dublin Philosophical Journal of March 1825, in which he mentions an ancient building in Kerry, of very uncommon description, built with lime “made from calcised oyster shells”. Very small kilns are sometimes seen in the parapets of raths, but whether constructed during occupation, or subsequently, I have no means of ascertaining: there is no doubt that in modern times kilns have sometimes been built in the parapets of raths which is remarkable considering the dislike the people have to meddle with them in general.

Respecting the objects for which the caves were constructed, I believe that little or nothing has been arrived at with certainty. Some believe them to have been built for containing grain; the tradition of the country is favourable to this view: but they appear to be ill adapted for such a purpose. Others have supposed them to be the cells of hermits but, if so, hermits must have formed a large proportion of the population.

To those archaeologists who are wedded to

p. 42 the notion of an extraordinary advance in civilization, to which the Irish had attained in pre-“Saxon” times; these caves can hardly be expected to afford an (1 word illegible) subject of enquiry. O’Brien in his treatise on the round towers of Ireland alludes to them, but only to include them amongst, - “historical monuments of splendour departed surviving the ravages of time and decay”, - But I think that all who have sat, crouched up in these chambers, or have squeezed through their passages upon the belly, will be disposed to agree with Col Montmorency who describes them as - “those miserable caves, surpassing in dreariness everything in the imagination of man.” – It is indeed scarcely conceivable that they could have been inhabited, and quite beyond belief, that the builders of the round towers could have constructed them for any purpose whatever.

But there is much concurrent evidence in favour of the supposition that they were inhabited by a race of Troglodytes. Smith in his history of Cork goes so far as to affirm that they may be attributed to the Farbolges, “which name signifies no more

p. 43 than a creeping (?) man or one who lived in a cave,” and he quotes several authorities to prove that the Irish anciently occupied caves; amongst others, Gildas, who speaks of “the Irish, daubed with red, creeping out of their caves.” There is no evidence that I am aware of to show whether the caves are more ancient than the Forts, but when associated with them, I am disposed to think they were entered chiefly by the ditch, and that the interior of the fort may have been devoted to the cattle.

In the cahirs, in the stony country, and especially about Dingle, these caves are replaced by stone huts called cloghauns, which are both long, and circular, and communicate with each other by similar drain like passages, built with rough stones, with the sides approaching towards the top, and in all respects similar both in size, and construction, to the caves; except being above, instead of below the surface; to which they were compelled by the rocky nature of the ground. Many of them however are covered with earth on the top, showing that their mole like habits did not desert them even when driven to the surface. On one occasion only, I found a cave in conjunction with a cloghaun in the same fort. These cloghauns also are not confined

p. 44 to the forts, but like the caves may be seen in great numbers in the surrounding fields. The cloghauns appear to bear the same relationship to the caves that the cromlechs do to the sepulchral chambers in the tumuli, which resemble them so closely as to lead some archaeologists to suppose they must all have been originally covered with tumuli, that had been removed by treasure seekers or others in past times.

Unlike the caves however the entrance to the cloghauns when standing alone almost is invariably to the east but when they communicate by narrow passages with each other the entrances are made to face each other. The circular cloghauns; which are the most numerous near Dingle; vary from 6 to 8 feet in diameter. One very perfectly built one, is 16 feet in diameter. It has a small side chamber in the thickness of the wall 11 feet by 3 feet 2 inches, entered from the interior of the cloghaun by a passage 1’3 in width by 2’9 high. The top of the building has fallen in. Some of the larger cloghauns have a cyclopean doorway with jambs and lintel, the opening being narrowed at the top.

p. 45 That the caves were occasionally used as sepulchres, appears from the fact of human bones having been sometimes found in them but there is no reasons to believe that they were invariably, or even generally used for that purpose. It is not unreasonable to suppose that, like many savage races they may have lived in these dwellings*. There are no tumuli in the South West of Ireland while they are numerous in the north and east. I have never seen a cave in a quadrilateral fort, nor have I ever heard an authentic instance of one having been found.

It is very rarely that anything is found in the caves, close to the crypt at Kilcrea fort at about 4 feet below the surface in the midst of a quantity of ashes and some teeth of the cow, I found what had evidently been the iron, pointed ferrule of a lance. It had the slit at the side of the socket, which is common in the Anglo Saxon and modern African spearheads, it was very much corroded and has since broken in 3 pieces; near it was another piece of iron which may probably have been the head of the lance, but was too much corroded to be distinguished as such. At Milane fort I also found, at the mouth of a rabbit hole, the iron point of an arrow. I have also in my possession an iron axe head which is said to have been found in a rath. These weapons prove that however accidentally they may have been constructed

*Foot note: The Esquemaux whose igloos or yourts so much resemble the Irish cloghauns build one of these for their dying relatives and having closed up the door leave them there to perish. Hall, life with the Esquemaux.

p. 46 the forts must certainly have been occupied within the iron period.

One of the border of Lough-Gur, Co. Limerick, there is an earthwork which appears to connect the forms with the stone circles, which are so numerous in these parts. It consists of a circular entrenchment 145 feet in diameter, the parapet being 37 feet thick and having a slight trace of ditch on the outside. The interior slope is line with 62 upright stones, some of them of great-size, composed of conglomerate, which is not found in this neighbourhood, and must have been carried from a distance; several old thorn trees grow up between the intervals of the stones. This must in all probability have been a place devoted to religious purposes. There are several stone circles close by of the same kind of stone, but without parapets*. Without doubt some of the ordinary forts must also have been places of worship, as we find the early Christians built their chapels in them and it was their invariable custom to consecrate places of pagan worship to the uses of Christian Church. One of these is called St Michaels, north of Cork,

*Foot note: In the hills of the neighbourhood of Macroom, I took plans of 7 small stone circles, each of which had 5 stones. Five, is the prevailing number hereabouts, but it not invariable.

p. 47 and another near Blarney has a rectangular mud hovel in it, with a rough stone altar a the east end which was used as a chapel within the memory of persons now living.

p. 48 Some idea of the great quantities of these forts with this distribution and the proportionate numbers of each kind, may be gathered from the following table which is collected from the ordnance survey scale of six inches, in which nearly every vestige of antiquity in the country has been marked.

In Tipperary the forts abound in nearly the same ratio as the other counties, but

p. 49 the proportion of quadrilateral and irregular shaped forts is greater.

Taking the whole of Munster, the total number of all kind may be set down at 10,000 with very tolerable approach to accuracy, but many of them have been destroyed since the survey was taken. It will be seen that the circular, especially the single circles; very far outnumber the quadrilateral, which are confined chiefly to the central counties. It is worthy of remark that the quadrilateral forts are distributed over the same lines of country that are now traversed by the principal railways, and which must at all times have constituted the main highways of the inhabitants. They are for the most part in clusters of two of more at what appear to have been the principal stations in the districts over which they extend.

From Limerick and Cashel, in the neighbourhood of which latter place they abound; they extend to Charleville and Milford, and from thence in a belt, southwards, bounded

p. 50 By the meridian of Cork on the east and that of Milford and Clonakilty on the west. From Milford and Charleville they run S. E. to Liscarrol, Buttervant Mallow. Ballynamona, Whitechurch and Cork and from thence chiefly in a south westerly direction, in a belt, passing south of Ballincollig and north of Innishannon by Cashel Fort, to the sea near Clonakilty. There are none west of Clonakilty, none near Macroom or Millstreet, none in the neighbourhood of Youghal, and only one near Fermoy.

In the county of Waterford, there is a cluster of these near the sea at Minehead and from thence, two chains of isolated forts may be traced at from 8 to 10 miles distant, running N. W. to Mitchelstwon and Charleville, and north to Clonmel and Cashel. There are none between Dungarvan and Waterford.

Towards the direction of Kerry they

p. 51 leave the main stem in the neighbourhood of Buttervant and, avoiding always the hilly tracts, they run to (1 illegible word), Boherboy, Killarney, and from that place upwards to Tralec and Kerry head. They also run from Limerick along the south side of the Shannon to Kerry head.*¹ Between Killarney and the Shannon, northwards, the circular forts are thicker than in any part of Cork, but there are only 11 quadrilateral forts in Kerry, while Cork contain 90*². I have already attempted to show that the square forts, from their construction, the absence of caves, and other circumstances appear to be older than the round ones. Spencer writing about the year 1590 says that the square and round forts were erected by two separate races. The former were called Folke-motes, and were used as places of assembly, having been built by the Saxons, and the round forts he

*Footnotes:

¹ I found two in the peninsular of Corcaguiney stationed at the only equal intervals, on the side of the road from Tralee to Dingle which are not marked in the map.

² in proportion to the acreage the number of circular forts in Kerry exceeds that of Cork by about 300. As however there are very few forts in the hilly country south of Killarney. Whilst those in Cork are more equally distributed, the number in the upper half of Kerry must nearly double that of similar area in Cork.

p. 52 attributes to the Danes. Dr Plot in his natural history of Oxfordshire, at the close of the seventeenth century adopts this view, which is also quoted in Smith’s history of Waterford. During the plantation of Ulster in 1609, the English and Scottish settlers were directed to build upon the lands allotted to them, - Bauns – a term derived from the Irish word - badhun- signifying a fortress for cows; and these were invariably square* they were built at first of earth and subsequently of stone, developing afterwards into square forts flanked with towers which retained the same name. But the fact of Spencer having speculated upon the origin of them, proves that the use of square bauns could not have originated in his time, or within the memory of persons then living, and they must probably have been as much a mystery to them as to us. But without necessarily adopting Spencer’s opinion as to their having been constructed by either the Danes, or Saxons. The whole distribution of them in the South west of Ireland, leads to the belief that they must have belonged to

*Footnote: notes of Bauns by T Lee in a Ulster Journal of Archaeology April 1858.

p. 53 distinct races and the fact of the square forts being abundant towards the north and east, while in the south and west they are only found in belts along the principal thoroughfares, favours the hypothesis that they represent an intruding race, (1 illegible word) amongst those by whom the circular raths were constructed. The dominant races always (1 word illegible) onwards from the east would force the original inhabitants to the south and west of Ireland. Men of like habits with their predecessors (?), the intruding race would follow on the same lines and occupy the same tracts of country, building those earthworks after their own fashion as they advanced.* Leaving their forts in the counties of Cork and Limerick, and avoiding the hilly and unproductive country in the South of Kerry, the circular fort builders would concentrate in the northern half of that county, where their entrenchments are now found in unusual numbers. Followed further by the quadrilateral fort builders they would ultimately retire (1 illegible word) the peninsular of Corcaguiny where in the almost inaccessible passes about Dingle they would make a stand before being driven to the sea.

*Foot note: I happened to come upon a square fort in the neighbourhood of Knocklong the outer bank of which had just been removed by the owner. He found it composed almost entirely of the bones of animals and amongst them the top stone of a quern. The bones were so numerous that he spread them over his field as manure. Search about, I found amongst them teeth of the cow and pig. If this was “kitchen midden” of the fort, which seems probable, it shows, the inhabitants must have lived in much the same style as the circular fort builders.

p. 54 In the traditions of the country, Dingle was the last holding ground of the Danes, or of whatever race, under the name of Danes, the forts are supposed by the country people to have been erected, and the great number of there remains which still exist in very perfect condition prove that they must have crowded into this locality and continued there up to the time when Christianity was first introduced amongst them. Even at the present time the inhabitants of this region are centuries in arrears of their countrymen on the mainland. Crowded in small patches of villages that are dotted about in the valleys, they may be seen squatted on their haunches and surrounded by their animals that live with them under the same roof; in home spun clothing; speaking exclusively their own tongue, paddling about in wicker work canvas, cultivating with their ace of spade shaped shovel, the most impossible patches of the side of the hills, and essentially pagan in all the main features of their religion, these people give to their locality all the appearance of being still a stronghold of barbarism, and prove that; as it is the westernmost, so it remains to this day the most benighted spot in Europe

p. 55 But besides the evidence afforded by tradition, by its ruins, and the present condition of its inhabitants, the peculiar construction of several of the forts in this neighbourhood shows in all probability that they were erected by a people that had been driven to the last extremity, and forced to make a stand against their enemies upon the very last scrap of territory that remained to them after being driven to the coast.

I have already mentioned that throughout the southern districts of Ireland the forts are situated upon the most fertile tracts of land and were evidently located so as to facilitate the operations of agriculture. Such as practice is entirely consistent with what is found to prevail in other countries where the people lived in entrenched camps. It is natural to suppose that from the first ages when the attention of mankind was attracted to the cultivation of the soil, they began to defend their dwellings with the same material and accordingly we find that in New Zealand, in Africa, in America, wherever ancient entrenchments are found, they are invariably associated with the traces of agriculture. Many of these however show a considerable advance in the act of war and the entrenchments of

p. 56 of the Mississippi valley more especially as they are represented in the Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, afford a perfect study from the ingenuity they display in the selection of sites the conformation of their outlines to the geological features of the ground, and the defence of their gateways by means of mounts, demilunes (1 word illegible) and second lines; so curiously resembling the gateway of the Roman encampments that are found in England. But in Ireland the art of fortifications at least in the central districts was of a very inferior order, and their defences, of such as they are to be considered, must have been made entirely subservient (?) to the interests of agriculture or the herding of their cattle. You nowhere meet with the bend of a river cut off by an entrenchment, a flank applied upon an inaccessible cliff, or an entrance judiciously laid out for defence, even in the crannogs in the north of Ireland, where they were driven into the lakes, they appear to have been still wedded to the circle. Along the whole south west coast, from the Shannon to the (1 illegible word), and probably in the remaining cast that I have not had an opportunity of examining there is no example

p. 57 of a promontory or bluff headland, which has been cut off by an entrenchment marked upon the ordnance map, with the exception of Dingle. Here upon the south coast of the peninsular, the three forts, called Doon, Doonmore, and Doonbeg (represented in Pls 5-6) are, I believe, the only examples of this class of defence in Ireland and, as such merit those particular more particular description.

Doonmore to the east of Dingle consists of a single line of entrenchment across the isthmus of a peninsular, which is surrounded on its remaining sides by an inaccessible sea cliff. It is nor further remarkable for anything but the great size of its embankment, and the ditch which is upwards of 30 feet wide. Two roadways appear to have passed it along the cliffs at either flank, and it is along the cliffs at either flank, and it is nowhere commanded from without. Doon is the next of these cliff forts. It is to the west of the entrance to the Dingle harbour, upon a rocky headland with precipitous sides. Jutting out into the sea immediately below the hill on which the finer-tower is situated. Its defences consists, firstly of a straight line of wall, composed of large

p. 58 unhewn stones, built with a smooth facing to the front, across the neck of the peninsular, the flanks resting on the precipices on either side. Its present height averages about 6 feet, but it is in a very ruinous condition. Outside this are two lines of earthen parapet, and three ditches from 11 to 20 feet wide, with the traces of a third parapet to the right of the road. The entrance is in the left half of the work and a roadway runs from the entrance through the outer banks. The parapets are so arranged, that the line of parapet on one side the road way, is continued by a line of ditch on the other, and vise [sic] versa. By this arrangement, the ends of the parapets, abutting upon the roadway, alternate, and are continued to overlap, so that the roadway must originally have wound zigzag fashion round the ends of the parapets in such a manner that the opening in front was commanded, and enfiladed, by a parapet in rear. The parapets and ditches are of course much reduced and jumbled, but enough remains to show clearly the design of this very ingenious contrivance, by means of which the

p. 59 roadway must have been completely defiladed from the enemy, without the assistance of bridges of which they probably had little knowledge.* The only other example of this kind of entrance that I know of in Ireland is in a treble banked rath near Dunbar which is figured in Louthiance by T. Wright. This has two entrances in both of which the parapet of the second line is made to enfilade the entrance through the first by placing the openings in “Echelon”. The ingenuity displayed in the construction of the entrance of the fort of Doon, in the more remarkable from its very defective position at the foot of the Hill of Eask, which towers above it on the north, and completely commands the whole of the interior space, within arrow shot. The want of water also, must soon have accomplished for the besiegers anything which they may have been unable to effect by force, and the whole aspect of the locality leads one to suppose that nothing but

*Foot note: all the communications across the ditches of the Irish raths are by means of embankments.

p. 60 dire necessity would have induced the defenders to entrench themselves upon so inhospitable a spot. Doonbeg, between Vently Harbour and Dunmore head is the westernmost, and most remarkable of the cliff forts. It consists of a straight line of wall cutting off the base of a triangular headland, having precipitous dies, as in the proceeding cases. The wall is defended by two banks, and three ditches, on its exterior, with an additional bank and ditch to the left of the roadway. Unlike Doon the lines of ditch and parapet correspond on both sides of the road way, which runs straight through them from the entrance, near the middle of the wall, and was liable to be swept by the arrows of the enemy right up to the gateway. The outer banks and ditches fall back slightly from the roadway towards the flanks, giving the work on the outside, the form of very obtuse fleche, the roadway passing, so to speak,

p. 61 along the “Capital” of the work. The stone wall at the back does not partake of this fleche form but is quite straight from end to end. The first bank throws back its flanks but slightly, the second more so, and the third, which is on the left side, more still. The angle thus increasing in the outer works. The wall is 204 feet in length, and its total thickness at the base 21 feet. Its present height from 8 to 9 feet. The entrance through the wall is by a small converse cyclopean doorway on the outside, 3 feet wide at the bottom, and 2 feet 2 inches at the top, and 3 feet 6 inches high, with a slab for a lintel overhead. At about three feet from the entrance, two small drain like passages one foot square, lead on each side to chambers in the body of the wall, but I was unable to pass through these passages. At about the same distance from the inner end, two other passages lead to similar chambers right and left, one of these was open at the top, and I found its dimensions to be 11 feet by 3 and 4 feet high. On the interior

p. 62 slope of the rampart, which was in a very ruinous condition, there were traces of steps similar to those which have been already described in other works.

In the interior of the fort, there were two cloghauns communicating with each other by a 5 foot passage. The smallest of these was 9 foot 10 inches, interior length, by 2 feet 6 inches wide. The largest was 17 feet long by 5 wide. They were composed of comparatively large stones and better built than the average of cloghauns. In one of the ditches on the outside, I found a holed stone, it was a slab 4 feet in length, and at one end, a hole had been bored from both faces, the outer diameter of which was 6, and the interior 3 inches. Two similar stones are in the churchyard at Kilmacader.

But the most remarkable feature in this work was the double lining to the wall and entranceway. The optimal width of the entrance has been 7 feet 5 inches, but an inner lining of 2 feet 10 inches on the right side has reduced the present width to 4 feet 7 inches. The small passages to the chambers are continued through this lining, thereby proving, that it was an addition of the ancient builders, made while the chambers

p. 63 were still in use, and not a modern addition. The total thickness of the wall is 21 feet; the stones of the front facing are very evenly built; and are made to fit each other with the case that is always observable in cyclopean buildings, but the interior portion of the wall is composed of stones heaped up irregularly, and without order. I need hardly ay that there is no trace of mortar anywhere. But besides the outer facing, there is a second similar facing in the body of the wall 6 feet behind the fort, throughout its (1 word illegible) length. This second facing is evenly built, with the stones fitting like the first, and behind it again the stones are piled up irregularly. The second facing of the wall extends through the inner lining of the entranceway, but there is no trace of the larger opening of the entrance on the outer facing of the wall, and the lintel of the cyclopean doorway on the outer facing, is not long enough to have covered the larger openings. This proves that the entrance must have been reduced before, or at the same time, the outer facing was added to the work. I was at first led to suppose that the reduction of the gateway, might have been

p. 64 consequent on the breaking of one of the lintels, which is now sat in its broken condition resting on the inner lining. But I have since read Mr Bland’s description of Stague fort, in which he notices a very similar contrivance in this work: he says, “There was a singular contrivance to facilitate the introduction of materials to the interior of the structure, during the time of its erection. A large space was left open on one side which was evidently filled up after the rest of the work was completed. This would have been very effectual for the introduction of wheeled carriages, as it is on that side from which they could best approach it.” As the entrance at Doonbeg is the only place through which the materials for construction are likely to have been conveyed, I think it very probable, it may have been left larger at first for that object, and, when the interior was completed, it may have been reduced to its present size, and the double facing added to the front of the wall. For this double facing two (1 word illegible) may be assigned. Either the wall was found to be too thin, and a six foot addition subsequently made to it, or it may have been part of the original design, with the view of preserving the main wall

p. 65 intact, after the outer facing had been battered down. Forty five feet of the outer facing to the right of the gateway has been so battered down at some time, but the wall is still supported by its inner facing, and offers, for all purposes of defence, a perpendicular front to the enemy. I have not met with any notice of a second facing at Stague fort, but, in the drawing of that building which is given in the catalogue of the Royal Irish Academy, I find a line is shown along the centre of the top of the wall, which can represent nothing but a similar second facing to that of Doonbeg. If so, it confirms my notion that it was part of the original plan, designed to facilitate the repair of a breech that might easily be effected by the besiegers pulling out a few stones in the uncemented material of the outer facing. It displays an amount of cleverness which is quite unparalleled by anything in the way of defence that I have seen in the interior of the country, and shows that in all probability, the art of war must have began

Seems to missing p. 66.

p. 67 intended for the defence of the coast, they would have commanded the landing places. Had they been the work of a maritime people, landing on the coast, for the invasion of the country, they would have selected sheltered positions in the harbours of Ventry, Dingle, or Smerwick, close by, where they could have easy access their vessels. But they are situated on the most exposed headlands, where the waves of the Atlantic dash with full fury on the inaccessible cliffs, by which their flanks and rear are encompassed, and Doon especially, has been the scene of many a shipwreck. No hope of retreat could ever have entered into the heads of the defenders in such positions, and the fate to which they were exposed, must have been precisely that, which is described by the ancient Britons in their appeal to the Consul Aetius. “The Barbarians drive us to the sea; the sea throws us back on the barbarians: thus two modes of death await us, we are either slain or drowned.”

P5: Seems to be rough and neat copies of the same document. (no page numbers though)

The spot is well worth a visit from any one interested in Irish antiquities. At the distance of about 120 paces to the S. W. is another stone, 4½ feet high and about 3 in breadth facing NE and SW. It has no line upon it, both this and the proceeding of this old (1 word illegible) of the country. Within from two to three hundred yards to the eastward are three circular forts. In one of which, now (1 word illegible), there are the remains of two crypts or chambers faced with stone and beehive shaped joined by a passage which communicated with the outside of the fort on the north.

Still further to the eastward on the farm of Coolowen is another circular enclosure. Marked Shanatempleen on the ordnance survey, containing within it the traces of two quadrilateral structures and surrounded formerly by an uncemented wall parts of which have been recently disclosed by digging.

The place is held in great reverence by the people of the neighbourhood, by whom as is usual in such localities marvellous events are said to have occurred within its sacred precincts, untold treasure of gold lays buried beneath the soil, the exact position of which has been put beyond (1 word illegible) by the dreams of sundry old ladies in the neighbourhood, but who have been deterred from profiting by the revelation this made to them by a wholesome dread of the (1 word illegible, possibly Cleuricorn). Here an inscription in animal characters was discovered many years ago recording matters of import in the history of the county. The stone has unfortunately been destroyed but (1 word illegible) been wrongly from Dublin, but also from France, America (?) and other favoured places, like the magi of old, have been attracted to this spot in search of it. Finally it is said to have been a church and a graveyard, but with what truth appears doubtful. No spade had ever desecrated this ground until the other day when through the kind permission of Mr McLeviney the owner, to the (2 words illegible) of the inhabitants, and not withstanding the death of two calves which took place in the adjoining farm immediately the subject was mooted. I commenced an excavation in a cavity at the top of a small mound forming the eastern extremity of one of the rectangular buildings above mentioned. The cavity was popularly supposed to have contained holy water and also served as a pulpit for preaching.

Commencing at the bottom of the holy water basin which was covered with (1 word illegible) and fern, we removed a quantity of loose stones and earth and disclosed a pit 3 feet 9 inches in depth and from 2 to 2.5 in circumference nearly faced with stone but not cemented or built in courses towards the bottom some black earth was found which might have been burnt-turf but there were no traces of charcoal. At the bottom of the pit running in the direction of the interior of the building, a passage or “shore” as it is called by the natives 1’9 in height by 6’10 in width and flagged once by two large flat stones was found to be completely filled with the bones of animals mixed with stones and (1 word illegible)

[Transcribed by Charlotte Diffey, Excavating Pitt-Rivers project, February 2013]

One of the Pitt-Rivers' notebooks recently gifted to the Pitt Rivers Museum by Anthony Pitt-Rivers, seems to represent a more light-hearted side of Pitt-Rivers than we are used to seeing. It is agreen backed notebook, no title but appears to be another Miscellaneous notebook. I think this one is quite early on ie perhaps early 1850s at beginning, the handwriting is less like his later handwriting but I could be wrong as later ones are definitely 1860s. The notebook comprises extracts and jokes copied out. It starts with extract from Pickwick Papers. Here are some transcriptions of some of the contents of this notebook:

‘Job Trotter bowed low; and in spite of Mr. Weller's previous remonstrance, the tears again rose to his eyes. “I never se such a feller,” saidSam “Blessed if I don’t think he’s got a main in his head as is always turned on.” [Chapter 16]

‘Louise XV once heard that an English noble man (Lord Stair) at his court was remarkably like himself. Upon his Lordship’s going to court, the King who was very guilty of saying rude things, observed upon seeing him, “A remarkable likeness upon my word! – My Lord was your mother ever in France?” To which his Lordship replied, with great politeness “No, please your Majesty, but my Father was.”

Speaking of one of the Calumuns against Queen Elizabeth Mr Kingsley says in his review of Sir Walter Raleigh & his times “there is no more to be discovered in the matter except by the vulturine nose which smells a carrion in every rose bed.

Sir Walter Raleigh was in he [sic, the] habit of asking favours of Queen Elizabeth for his friends. When Sir Walter she asked will you cease to be a beggar? When your Majesty ceases to be a benefactor.’

‘If we must lash one another let it be with the manly strokes of wit and satire; for I am of the old Philosphers opinion that if I must suffer from one or the other, I would rather it should be from the paw of a lion than the hoof of an ass. Spectator No 61 Addison’ [Essays and Tales, Joseph Addison Part 2]

‘”When like a lobster boiled the morn from black to red to turn.” Hudibras [Samuel Butler, Hudibras]

‘” To speak loud in public assemblies, and to let every one hear you talk of things that should only be mentioned in private, or in a whisper, are looked upon as part of a reformed education … Some years ago I was at the tragedy of Macbeth, and unfortunately placed myself behind a woman of quality that is since dead; who as I found by the noise she made, was newly returned from France. A little before the rising of the curtain she broke into a loud soliloquy ‘When will the dear witches enter’? and immediately upon the first appearance asked a lady that sat three boxes from her on her right hand, if those witches were not charming creatures. A little after, as Betterton was in one of the finest speeches of the play, she shook her fan at another lady, who sat as far on her left hand, and told her with a whisper, that might be heard all over the pit, ‘We must not expect to see Balloon to night’ Not long after, calling out to a young Baronet by his name who sat three seats before me, she asked him whether Macbeth’s wife was still alive, and before he could give an answer, fell a talking of the ghost of Banquo. She had by this time formed a little audience herself and fixed the attention of all about her. [But] As I had a mind to hear the play, I got out of the sphere of her impertinence, and planted myself in one of the remotest corners of the pit.

This pretty childishness of behaviour is one of the most refined parts of coquetry, and is not to be attained in perfection by ladies who do not travel for their improvement. A natural and unconstrained behaviour has something so agreeable in it [actually in it so agreeable], that it is no wonder to see people endeavouring after it. But at the same time it is so very hard to hit, when it is not born with us, that people often make themselves ridiculous in attempting it. Spectator no 45 Addison’ [The Spectator vol 31 no 45 page 205]

‘By the side of a murmuring stream
An elderly gentleman sat
On the top of his head was his wig
On the top of his wig was his hat.’ [Apparently the first verse of a poem by George Canning]

‘A witty Frenchman attempted to reconcile his taste for the society of married women with his disinclination to enter the married state by the following remark. ‘J’ai les memes idées.’ He said ‘sur le marriage par sur le tabac. Je l’aime beaucoup, je m’en sers frequement, mais je ne porte pas de tabatiereEdinburgh Review April 1860 p 402

‘Mr Ruskin’s wife claimed the right of divorce on the grounds of impotency the following lines were written for her
See stones medieval & Gothic erections
You’ve been very clever we all do agree
But through years of lost hopes & long blighted affections
You’ve had neither nor erections for me.’

If I met you riding a donkey, what fruit wold you be like
A. A pair

Why are you not like a donkey’s tail
A. Because you are no end of an ass

If Neptune were deprived of his Kingdom what would he say
A. I have not a notion / an ocean [he actually writes this down!]

What is the difference between a man & a woman [insert] does a man differ from a woman [end insert]
A. Cannot concieve

“Madame de Sévegné gives a good reason for the love ladies have of frequent confession. They like she tells us to talk of themselves, and would rather talk ill of themselves than not at all” Laws of society vol 1 page 275’

‘Why were the New York brokers like Pharoe’s daughter
Because they found a little profit in the rushes on the Bank’

‘How many wives does the English church allow a man
Ans 16 vir. For / 4 better for / 4 worse for / 4 richer for / 4 poorer’

‘How many weeks are there in [insert] belong to [end insert] the year
Ans 46 because 6 are lent’

‘Count of Toulouse
Oh dear, what will become of us?
Oh dear, what shall we do?
We shall die of the blue devils if some of us
Can’t find out something that’s new’

‘The Bugbear approached has more affinity to the Bug than the bear’

Loose letter at end of volume:
‘The scene is in Miss Gascoigne’s boudoir. It is 6 a.m.! The table is strewed with love letters, Valentine small scraps of poetry, composed by the said Miss Gascoigne, lockets, tokens, pieces of hair of all shades & colours from the purest white to the deepest black & every shade of russet in short, every sort of thing that a young lady ought not to possess.
The sun is peeping above the horizon and
“Like a lobster boil’d the morn
From black to red begins to turn” [as quoted earlier!]
Miss G, fearful lest her dear Mother should discover her manner of passing the night, is retiring stealthily to a pretended rest, when, a voice is heard from above the chimney. She starts, seizes the poker, and rushing madly to the farthest end of the apartment, the following dialogue ensues.
Ist monkey
Hold, Gentle hellen, why so funkey
It is I, your faithful monkey
Here, upon this mantle-shelf
I daily do inform myself
Of all that passeth.
When at night, though lock’st thy door
And fancieth the world no more,
Little, simple, dost thou think
I am the connecting link
That does betray the
[it ends there]

AP May 2012

The following handwwritten draft, possibly an early draft for Primitive Warfare is from notebook Miscellaneous No. 4. p. 103 and on after note from Lyell Antiquity of Man p 497

‘(Note) it is true that this broad distinction may be drawn between man & the brutes, thus man is self improvable where th whereas the lower creation are incapable of progressive improvement in the lowest form & only capable of improvement by external influences in the highest. but on the other hand it must be observed that there is (even by the reasoning which is favourable to transmutation) a vast gap hitherto unexplained between the human & the Simian species. Lyel [sic] has in another place pointed [insert] out [end insert] this is the region of Equatorial Africa may probably some day be looked for in a fossil state the link which separates [insert] joins [end insert] man from [insert] to [end insert] the brutes. That this link if it exists, is now extinct, there can be no doubt. the [illegible looks like ‘noral’] connexion can therefore never be traced. it is the shell only that we can hope to find. But in approaching the borders of this gap are there not traces of [illegible looks like assismtation] which may lead us to presume that, if we had the power of following the two species to the point of junction we might then find even the [illegible looks like noral] differences were produced gradually & not suddenly. We find [illegible] certain that it is only the highest of the brute creation that are capable of any improvement & thus the improvement of which [2 words illegible] capable by external influence has no absolute limits. of time be given [?sic] on the other hand the human race in its [2 words illegible, possibly lowest state] is especially distinguishable from the higher by its unimprovability [insert] illegible [end insert] races continue for generations (as shewn in another part of Lyel’s [sic] work) is the same [illegible] of consideration with scarcely any apparent progress. Intellectual progress it must be born [sic] in mind advances in an increasing ratio that increase had already set in before we arrive at the gap which separates us from the lower animals [insert] the higher animals from man [end insert] we must estimate the interval not by analogy with the lower but by bridging the casm [sic] in the direction pointed out by both higher & lower stages. Of these the differences observable between the highest & lowest humans are greater than that [insert] those [end insert] observable between the lowest human & the simian what is there that deters [?] us from supposing these tendencies when approach [sic] towards a junction may not once have joined our ignorance of the geological record is too well known to require exposition here. This much however we may affirm. The evolution against transmutation is merely negative, which exists in its favour is of a positive nature. time alone can bring absolute proof to our minds, in the mean time we must not shut our eyes to a conclusion which appears imminent & which every fresh discovery tends to confirm. A L Fox

[It isn’t clear what the above passage is, he did not publish between 1861 and 1866, but it appears to be an early draft for Primitive Warfare I (1867) where he says:

“By this view we come to look upon even the most barbarous state of man's existence, as a condition, not so much of degradation, as of arrested or retarded progress, and to see that, notwithstanding many halts and relapses, and a very varied rate of movement in the different races, the march of the human intellect has been always onward.

As, in the lower creation, we find no individuals that are capable of self-improvement, though some appear, by their imitative faculties, to contain within them the germs of an improving element, so the aboriginal man, closely resembling the brutes, may have passed through many generations before he began to show even the first symptoms of mental cultivation, or the rudiments of the simplest arts; and even then his progress may have been, at first, so slow, that it is not without an effort of imagination that the civilized races of our day can realize, by means of the implements which he has left us, the minute gradations which appear to mark the stages of his advancement. This appears to be the view taken by Sir Charles Lyell in his “Antiquity of Man”, when, in comparing the flint implements found in the higher and lower-level gravels of the valley of the Somme, he arrives at the conclusion “that the state of the arts in those early times remained stationary for almost indefinite periods”. “We see,” he says, “in our own time, that the rate of progress in the arts and sciences proceeds in a geometrical ratio as knowledge increases, and so, when we carry back our retrospect into the past, we must be prepared to find the signs of retardation augmenting in a like geometrical ratio; so that the progress of a thousand years at a remote period, may correspond to that of a century in modern times, and in ages still more remote man would more and more resemble the brutes in that attribute which causes one generation exactly to imitate, in all its ways, the generation which preceded it.”

AP May 2012

The following extract is handwritten on a loose set of foolscap papers enclosed in Religions No. 4 Notebook.

‘Project for the establishment of a permanent classification and Distribution Committee under the auspices of the Ethnological Society

Functions of the Committee

1. Admission of Evidence --- the Committee will examine into the validity of all evidence submitted to the Society or otherwise obtainable in relation to the science of man. It will reject false data or such as appear to be unauthenticated or insufficiently proved. It will ascertain as far as possible the period to which all evidence belongs, the locality and date of discovery, the names of discoverers or witnesses or of such persons as may be able to authenticate the discoveries. It will investigate associated facts rejecting as such all the connection of which is insufficiently proved or improbable. the relative value of all evidence whether direct or second hand to be attached to the names according to a scale of abbreviation to be hereafter determined upon.

2. Terminology – the committee will decide upon a recognised terminology as far as may be practicable for all classes of ethnological evidence.

3. Classification – the committee will classify all facts submitted in evidence. the classification to be as follows with the abbreviations attached to each grade

ClassesSub-classesVarietiesSub-varieties

CSCVS V

1IIIIIIIII [sic]

each grade to be a subdivision of the one above it and as far as possible posterior in sequence.

The classification to include the following primary divisions viz Races, Languages, Religions, Myths & Superstitions, Customs Laws and Institutions, Works of art and Industry.

the first two divisions having been made a subject of study for some time this classification will be more easily determined the remaining divisions afford a new field for classification which it will be the province of the committee to inaugurate.

4. Correspondence – the secretary and members will communicate with the several authors and others from whom information is to be obtained and the correspondence will be docketed as far as possible by classes for future reference Information will also be obtained by means of the notes and queries in the Quarterly Journal.

5. Registration. all facts & all evidence classified in accordance with section 3 will be registered upon sheets provided for the purpose by means of abbreviation to be hereafter determined upon. the registers to be kept by classes and accompanied with distribution maps and will include 1st the class, sub-class, variety and sub-variety of the Race, Language custom, or Implement [insert] work of art [end insert] 2. all associated facts classified as above 3 period to which the evidence belongs 4 date of discovery 5 date of registry 6 names of authorities and reference to the Authors or to the correspondence of the committee.

6. Distribution Skeleton maps to be provided for the purpose of shewing the distribution of each class, sub-class, variety or sub-variety to be attached to accompany the registers

7. Reports – Reports to be made to the society from time to time shewing the classification & distribution that have been determined upon then reports to be illuminated by the distribution maps the registers will also be open to any members of the society who desire to obtain from them information or to any special branch that they are investigating

Advantages to be derived from the proposed Committee.

1. As the science of man must of necessity find itself opposed to a number of preconceived opinions, it will be of advantage to shew that the evidence on which it is based has been carefully investigated by a number of competent persons and not left to the judgement of subordinates.

2. The establishment of a recognised terminology will tend to facilitate the procuring of evidence and to prevent confusion of ideas.

3. By means of classification an insight will be obtained into the natural growth and order of development of all the various branches of human culture.

4. the committee by this means will be enabled to collect a number of isolated facts, which are now in possession of individuals who have neither time or inclination to prepare papers but who will be glad to avail themselves of the means thus afforded of briefly recording their experience.

5. By means of the distribution maps the society will be in a better position to determine those branches of culture which appear to be derived from a common source and those which have arisen independently, and to ascertain how far they have been modified by external causes during migration.

6. the distribution maps will be a means of drawing the attention of ethnologists to those regions which are as yet unexplored. they will point out what information is wanted and where to look for it.

7. Persons interested in any special branch of the science of man and who are especially qualified for the investigation of it will be enabled to refer to the registers of the committee for the means of prosecuting their studies by this means a division of labour which is necessary to the success of an undertaking of the kind will be promoted.

8. In order to carry out the objects of the committee, it will be necessary the members should combine their labor to a greater extent than has been the custom hitherto as however the truth can only be promoted by a balance of opinion derived from a broad basis of facts. … advantages will be derived from each … sharing his knowledge with the common … than from the unsatisfactory results obtained through limited … and limited judgement.’

AP May 2012

The Commonplace Notebooks of Augustus Lane Fox

{joomplu:1215 detail align right}

The Pitt-Rivers family kept a series of notebooks which were created at some point just before 1845 (when he joined the Grenadier Guards) and around 1875 when the last of his dated (or dateable) entries was added.

A paragraph in the front of the notebook which was titled (presumably by Pitt-Rivers) as ‘Miscellaneous No. 1’ says:

‘These notes were begun very early when at a private Tutors the first 50 pages or so were noted down before entering the Guards. It The book was then left unused for some years & the subsequent notes were made chiefly since my return from Malta in 1856’

In fact it is clear that the early notes (which mostly relate to military affairs) were written between 1843 (the earliest date) and 1845. The private tutor was presumably employed to cram Lane Fox before his entry in the Guards. The first fifty or so pages relate to this period and there is evidence that the tutor corrected Lane Fox’s notes.

The next set of notes seem to relate to books published in 1850 and it may therefore be that the notes were written in that year or shortly after (that is, slightly earlier than the note suggests). They are very varied, extracts from Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin (1852), Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem, ‘Evangeline’ (1847). There is also a loose sheet of paper headed ‘School of Musketry Hythe’, with pencil note ‘by 3 tomorrow’ which is a form to be filled in regarding the records of rifle shots which must date to after April 1852.

{joomplu:1216 detail align right} In the later 3 ‘Miscellaneous’ volumes the contents are a similar mixture of extracts from books he has read, sometimes relating to archaeology and anthropology but more often general reading, and sometimes parts or whole poems. A fifth miscellaneous volume (which is not labelled as such and is a different sort of notebook) contains witty sayings, short comic stories and jokes (and gives the lie to Lane Fox (and Pitt-Rivers) not having a sense of humour). It even contains a slightly ‘dirty’ story.

In addition to the Miscellaneous notebooks there are the following other books, with the titles given to them by Pitt-Rivers:

Klemm no 2

Religions No 1

Religions No 2

Religions No 3

Religions No 4

Building and Architecture No 1 / Agriculture

Building and Architecture No 2 / Pipes Smoking

Personal Ornament, Sepultre

Continuity

Survivals / Conservatism

Locomotion, Roads, Carriages, Bridges, Transport Animals, Path finding (note that there is only one entry in this notebook despite its long title!)

Catalogue of Arms belonging to Lt Col. A Lane Fox (1862)

And two other booklets without titles

It seems likely that some of these notebooks were intended to serve as notes for future publications (like the notes in the book marked ‘Klemm No.2’ (note: there is no known ‘Klemm No. 1]. It is not known why such an odd selection of subjects were chosen. It is possible that these are just the (known?) surviving notebooks and he had other notebooks relating to other subjects.

As regards the Klemm notebook. In the 1906 edition of The Evolution of Culture, edited by John Linton Myres, the preface says:

The footnotes demand a word of explanation. The author, has the original publications show, was not precise in indicating his sources; he frequently gave, as a quotation, the general sense rather than the exact words of his authority; and occasionally his memory played him false. In the reprint, the precise references have been identified, and are given in full, and obvious errors in the text have been either amended or corrected in a footnote.’ [Pitt-Rivers: 1906: Preface]

This confirms the experience of the author, when the extracts handwritten in the notebooks were checked against other sources it was most often found that there were small errors of transcription, mostly words omitted rather than changed or being added.

The notes in Klemm must refer to Werkzeuge und Waffen (Sondershausen, 1858). Lane Fox has caused each page to be filled with what appears to be a full translation and transcription of Klemm’s text relating to figures in his book etc. The handwriting appears to be too neat and different from Lane Fox’s to be his so he perhaps commissioned a translation (though his handwriting is very changeable over the period of the notebooks). It is possible that it is Lane Fox’s own work because he is known to have holidayed in German-speaking areas of Europe many times and, of course, it is helpful to speak the language of the area you are travelling in. Certainly he is known to have written and spoken French as other notebooks testify.

In the days before photocopying and scanning, copying was the only way of making notes about texts which you did not own or which you wished to condense. Of course, in the case of Klemm the text was in German whilst Lane Fox’s notes are in English. We must therefore assume that the transcriber was able to read German and that he or she was translating it as they went along, a true labour of love? Or a paid commission. Presumably Klemm No. 1 notebook had contained earlier pages from the volume, but No. 2 starts at Figure 124. We are very grateful to Elin Bornemann of the Pitt Rivers Museum who confirmed that the transcription appeared to be a full translation of Klemm’s text, though she commented that it was not always entirely accurate.

AP May 2012

{joomplu:1215 detail align right}

This is a transcription of one of the notebooks previously owned by Anthony Pitt-Rivers and donated to the PRM in 2012.

After transcription, the catalogue entries were matched to entries from the Pitt Rivers Museum founding collection accession books (accession numbers added in red, other notes by the transcriber are italicised). Note that some of the accession book entries have notes saying ‘(old coll [number])’ or ‘(old label [number])’ which match the numbers given in the 1862 catalogue. It is not known for definite where these notes came from, but it seems that these numbers were given on small round bone tags as noted in entry 1884.20.9  1884.24.230, 1884.24.62 and 1884.28.20. It is possible that this was Lane Fox's documentation method in 1862?

In most cases the catalogue descriptions cannot be matched to items in the founding collection because the entries are too unspecific, rather than there definitely not being any object that matches. In fact it seems likely that most if not all the objects listed in the 1862 catalogue are now part of the founding collection. 1884.27.29 actually has exactly the same wording as the 1862 catalogue given as the wording on a label. Often the black book entry is not dissimilar to the entries in the 1862 catalogue.

Catalogue of Arms of Col. A. Lane Fox

{joomplu:1216 detail align right}

Page 1

Catalogue of Arms belonging to Lt Col A. Lane Fox. Gren Guards taken at Park Hill House Clapham 21st August 1862

Clubs

No. 1 Nubian club [1884.12.11, says “Nubian Club No. 1 on it” according to Accession book entry by 1874 this was said to be Australian]

No. 2. Nubian club [1884.12.12, says “Nubian Club No. 2 on it” according to Accession book entry]

3. Tongatabu club South Sea [1884.12.104 or 105]

4. Club South Africa [Can’t match]

5. Club, New Zealand [Can’t match]

6. Club Africa [Can’t match]

7. Club or Lissan Dinka Tribe similar in form to the Ancient Egyptian brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick [1884.12.14]

No. 8. Club South Sea Islands [Can’t match]

9 Club South Sea Islands [Can’t match]

10. Club Feejee Islands [Can’t match]

[9 objects in total]

{joomplu:1059 detail align right}

Page 2

No. 11. War Club New Guinea [Can’t match]

12. Club Ocohyhee [?][1884.12.240?]

13. Club North America [Can’t match]

14. Club British Guiana [Can’t match]

15. Club South Sea Islands [Can’t match]

16. Club from Paddle, South Sea Iles [sic] [Can’t match]

17. Club from Paddle, South Sea Iles [sic] [Can’t match]

18. Club from Paddle used for Steering New Zealand [Can’t match]

19. A War Paddle used as a Club & rudder New Zealand [Can’t match]

20. Club & paddle believed to be South Sea [Can’t match]

21. Paddle British Guiana [Possibly 1884.63.25]

22. Paddle South Sea Islands [Can’t match]

23. Paddle South Sea [Can’t match]

24. Paddle painted [Can’t match]

25. Paddle painted [Can’t match]

[15 objects in total]

{joomplu:1060 detail align right}

Page 3

No. 26. War paddle from the Friendly Isles [Can’t match]

27. War Paddle from the Friendly Isles[1884.55.13]

28. Spear & steering paddle South Sea [Can’t match]

29. Spear & paddle South Sea [1884.19.89]

30. Spear and steering paddle South Sea [1884.19.93]

31. Spear South Sea [1884.19.97]

32. Spear & paddle South Sea [1884.19.95]

33. Spear South Sea [1884.19.96]

34. Spear South Sea [1884.19.77]

35. Spear South Sea [1884.19.94]

36. Spear South Sea [1884.19.86]

37. Spear South Sea [1884.19.287]

38. Spear South Sea [1884.19.79]

39. Spear South Sea [1884.19.80]

40. Spear South Sea [1884.19.83]

41. Spear South Sea [1884.19.82]

42. Spear South Sea [1884.19.87]

43. Spear South Sea [1884.19.75]

[18 objects in total]

Page 4

44. Spear South Sea [Possibly 1884.19.45]

45. Spear South Sea [1884.19.76]

46. Spear South Sea [1884.19.74]

47. Spear South Sea [Possibly 1884.19.45]

48. Spear South Sea [1884.19.101]

49. Spear South Sea [1884.19.100]

50. Spear South Sea [1884.19.99]

51. Spear South Sea [Can’t match]

52. Spear South Sea [Can’t match]

53. Spear South Sea [Can’t match]

54. Lance Australia [1884.19.7]

55. Lance Australia [1884.13.32]

56. Two pronged fork South Sea [?1884.19.296]

57. Two pronged fork South Sea [1884.19.286]

58. Two pronged fork South Sea [1884.19.285]

59. Four pronged fork South Sea [Can’t match]

60. Four pronged fork South Sea [1884.19.280]

61. Caffre Lance [Cant match]

[18 objects in total]

Page 5

No. 62. Esquimaux spear called Nuguit [1884.19.293]

63. Esquimaux Kateleek with Siatko & thong [Can’t match]

64. English Whaling harpoon for comparison with Esquimaux Siatko[1884.20.56]

65. Esquimaux Kataleek in the shape of a fish[1884.20.9][sic bone label says Javelin from Prince of Wales Straight [sic]]

66. Esquimaux Kataleek[1884.20.10]

67. Persian Balam made of the male Bamboo & used by the Mahrattas of India [1884.19.219 or 1884.19.220]

68. Persian Balam [1884.19.219 or 1884.19.220]

69. Lance Zanzibar [1884.19.171 or 172 or 173]

70. Lance Zanzibar[1884.19.170]

71. Lance Africa [Can’t match]

72. Lance India [Can’t match]

[11 objects in total]

Page 6

No. 73. Lance Africa [Can’t match]

74. Neamnam lance deeply barbed & iron pointed brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick[1884.19.157]

75. Lance Africa [Can’t match]

76. Lance Africa [Can’t match]

77. Lance West Coast Africa [Can’t match]

78. Lance Madagascar [Can’t match]

79. Lance Madagascar [Can’t match]

80. Lance Madagascar [Can’t match]

81. Lance Madagascar [Can’t match]

82. Lance Malay [Can’t match NB above 5 from Madgascar and Malay might be Black book Screen 31 733-744?]

83. Lance India [Can’t match]

84. Lance Borneo [Can’t match]

85. Sergeant’s Spear [1884.26.11 or 12]

86. Sergeant’s Spear [1884.26.11 or 12]

87. Lance British Guiana [Can’t match]

[15 objects in total]

Page 7

No. 88. Javelin Obsidian point from New Caledonia also [Can’t match]

89. from Port Essington North Australia [Can’t match]

89. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

90. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

91. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

92. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

93. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

94. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

95. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

96. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

97. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

98. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

99. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

100. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

101. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

102. Do [ditto] Do. Javelin or long Arrow from British Guiana [Can’t match]

103. Lance with Iron shaft Djibba Tribe of Negroes brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick. [Can’t match]

[17 objects in total]

Page 8

[insert] 103A A lance head Neam Nam brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick in 1858 [Either 1884.99.2 or 1884.120.63]

103B Do [ditto] do [end insert] [Either 1884.99.2 or 1884.120.63]

104. Iron javelin taken during the Indian Mutiny 1857[Can’t match]

105. Assagai [sic] South Africa[Can’t match]

106. Assagai South Africa[Can’t match]

107. Assagai South Africa[Can’t match]

108. Assagai South Africa[Can’t match]

109. Assagai South Africa[Can’t match]

110. Assagai South Africa[Can’t match]

?111. Assagai Africa[Can’t match]

112. Assagai Africa[Can’t match]

113. Assagai Africa[Can’t match]

114. Assagai Africa[Can’t match]

115. Club or Battle Axe South Sea [Can’t match]

116. Club or Battle Axe bound with grass Solomon’s Is South Sea [Can’t match]

117. Club or Battle Axe bound with grass Sol. Isd South Sea [Can’t match]

118. Pointed club New Zealand [Can’t match]

[17 objects in total]

Page 9

No 119 Pointed battle axe wood similar to the Ancient Egyptians Djibbber tribe of Negroes brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick [?1884.12.8]

120. Waddy Australia [Can’t match]

121. Battle Axe called Pagee New Zealand [Possibly one of 1884.12.286, 287, 288 or 289]

122. Battle Axe (Pagee) New Zealand [Possibly one of 1884.12.286, 287, 288 or 289]

123. PatapatooNew Zealand [Can’t match]

124. Battle Axe made of deers horn & cane [Can’t match]

125. Sword New Zealand [Possibly 1884.12.273 which is only weapon to be described as sword in primary sources]

126. Club with an iron spike point North America [Possibly 1884.21.3]

127. Adze with obsidian [insert] stone [end insert] head bound with grass & carved shaft, South Sea [Can’t match]

[9 objects in total]

Page 10

No 128. Adze with obsidian [insert] stone [end insert] head bound with grass & carved shaft, South Sea or New Zealand [Can’t match]

129. Adze with obsidian head bound with grass Tahiti [Can’t match]

[NB see on to pages 11-12 for extra items to be inserted here]

130. Battle Axe Natal S. Africa [Can’t match]

131. Caffre Battle Axe S. Africa [Can’t match]

132. N. American Tomahawk made for the Indians by the British Government [Either 1884.21.4 or 1884.101.75]

133. Battle Axe Dôr tribe of Negroes brought by Consul Petherick from Central Africa 1858 [1884.25.5]

134. Circur Battle Axe India [1884.21.38]

135. Dutch Battle Axe 1675 [This must be 1884.26.1, though it is described as German]

136. Afghan Battle Axe [1884.21.42, later ascribed to India, but see 139]

137. Halbert Time of Elizabeth [1884.21.46 or 1884.21.55?]

137a. Halbert head Time of Elizabeth [1884.21.46 or 1884.21.55?]

138. Halbert Time of Charles I [Can’t match, no documentation refers to Charles I]

[12 objects in total]

Page 11

No 139. Afghan Battle Axe [1884.21.42, later ascribed to India, but see 136>]

140. Goomsur Battle Axe India [1884.21.41]

141. Pole Axe Time of Henry VI [1884.21.53]

142. Bill Time of Henry VI [1884.21.60]

143. German Halberd 16th Cent’ry [1884.21.45]

144. Two handed Sword [insert] commencing by [end insert] 16th Centy [1884.24.269]

145. Chinese Partisan [1884.19.298]

* 129a. Stone Adze head said to have been found on the bed of the Clyde with the accompanying shell [1884.123.354]

129f. Fossil shell said to have been found with the Stone Adze head (129a) [1884.123.354]

129b. Stone Adze-head [missing word ‘said’?] to have been found on tertiary beds on the Coast of Peru S. America [1884.126.145]

129c. Do [ditto] Do. [ie Stone Adze-head [missing word ‘said’?] to have been found on tertiary beds on the Coast of Peru S. America] [1884.126.]

129D. Do [ditto] Do. [ie Stone Adze-head [missing word ‘said’?] to have been found on tertiary beds on the Coast of Peru S. America] [1884.126.147]

129E. Flint implement probably a forgery but shewing the character of those found in drift beds [Can’t match]

[13 objects in total]

Page 12

No 129g. Ancient British Battle Axe of the earliest form called by the British Bwy allt. Aru [Can’t match]

129h. Bwyallhter [Can’t match]

129i. Ancient British Celt found on Worsted Common [1884.119.105 NB now spelt Worstead]

129k. Ancient British Battle Axe on the improved principle [Can’t match]

129l. Celt [Can’t match]

129m. Ancient iron Adze [Can’t match]

129n. Ancient iron Adze [Can’t match]

129o. Ancient iron Celt [Can’t match]

146. Two-handed sword from Borneo [Can’t match]

147. Glaive edged with sharks teeth [Either 1884.23.1, 2, 3, 4]

148. Glaive edged with sharks teeth South Sea Islands [1884.23.9]

[11 objects in total]

Page 13

No. 149 Do [ditto] Do. [ie Glaive edged with sharks teeth South Sea Islands] [Either 1884.23.1, 2, 3, 4]

150. Do [ditto] Do. [ie Glaive edged with sharks teeth South Sea Islands] [Either 1884.23.1, 2, 3, 4]

151. Chinese Glaive [1884.22.5 or 1884.24.199]

152. Chinese Glaive with Guard [1884.22.4]

153. Glaive with iron bladed knob at the base (not known) [Can’t match]

154. Malay blade [Can’t match]

155. Chinese Glaive [1884.22.5 or 1884.24.199]

156. Burmese Sword [Can’t match]

157. Burmese Sword with silver handle & scabbard [1884.24.57]

158. Probably a beheading sword [Can’t match, possibly Black 966, not yet found]

159. Sword probably from Malay Archipelago [Can’t match]

160. Boomerang Australia [Possibly 1884.12.59]

161. Do. [ditto] Do. [ie Boomerang Australia] [Can’t match]

162. Collence [possibly Collenee] throwing stick Madras [Can’t match]

[15 objects in total]

Page 14

No 163. throwing knife brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick [1884.25.1 or 2 or 3]

164. Neamnam Boomerang brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick [1884.25.1 or 2 or 3]

165. Spanish throwing knife [1884.24.222]

166. An iron projectile used by the Mondah tribe of Negroes by Consul Petherick [1884.25.6]

167. Goorka Cookaree India[1884.24.136]

168. Sword brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick 1858 from Professor Quicketh [1884.24.113, Quecket or Queckett in other sources]

169. Goorka Cookaree [Can’t match]

170. Goorka Cookaree[1884.24.138]

171. A Polygar’s knife [1884.24.8]

172. A Polygar’s knife[Can’t match]

[10 objects in total]

Page 15

No 173. Goorka’s sword [1884.24.6]

174. Goorka’s sword [1884.24.4]

175. Goorka’s sword & sheath [Can’t match]

176. Goorka’s sword [Can’t match]

177. Albanian Yatagan [1884.24.118]

178. Albanian Yatagan & sheath [?1884.24.119]

179. Albanian Yatagan & sheath [?1884.24.119]

180. English sabre [Can’t match]

181. Turkish sabre [?1884.24.79]

182. Turkish sabre bought from Smyrna Major L. Fox [1884.24.78]

183. 185 [sic] Sabre formerly belonging to William Lane Fox Esq. [Can’t match, this is presumably his father, William Augustus Lane Fox?]

184. Sabre formerly belonging to William Lane Fox Esq[Can’t match]

185. Indian sabre[Can’t match]

186. Portuguese sabre bought by William Lane Fox Esq from the Peninsular War[Can’t match]

[17 objects in total]

Page 16

No 187. French Officer’s sword brought by William Lane Fox Esq from the Peninsular War [Can’t match]

188. Sword of a Bambara Chief Africa [1884.24.110]

189. Mandingo Sword [1884.24.111]

190. Sword Burmah [1884.24.60]

191. Russian Infantry Sword from the Crimea [Can’t match]

192. Japanese or Chinese sword [1884.24.62]

193. French Republican sword [Can’t match, just possible it could be 1884.24.73]

194. English Cavalry sword [Can’t match]

195. English Naval sword [Can’t match]

196. Sword with a Damascus blade brought home by Capt. Hon’ble A. Douglas & given to Captain Fox [Can’t match]

197. Sword the blade dated 1820 & a bayonet handle of older date [1884.24.80]

[11 objects in total]

Page 17

No 198 Officer’s sword Gren Guards belonging to Col A. Lane Fox when a subaltern … continued immediately before the Crimea War [Can’t match, but there are some 18th century swords which may match if this isn’t our Lane Fox being referred to]

199. Guards scabbard time of Peninsular War belonging to W.A. Lane Fox Esq [There is no sword scabbard that matches]

200. Sword used with the diplomatic uniform belonging to W. Lane Fox Esq Attaché at Naples [There are four dress rapiers of 18th century that might match, no mention of owner, who is brother]

201. A German straight single edged sword [Possibly 1884.24.100, only German sword]

202. Short sword & guard edged with shark’s teeth [Can’t match]

203. Neamnam knife brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick [Possibly 1884.34.1 or 1884.140.474 or 1884.140.911]

204. straight short sword double edged from the West Coast of Africa [1884.24.39]

205. Sword from Somali Country South East Africa presented to the U.S. Institution by Brigadier General Coghlan

[8 objects in total]

Page 18

[205 continues] commanding at Aden 2 exchanged for another with Col. Fox [1884.121.28 but doesn’t mention Coghlan]

No 206. Short straight double edged sword Chinese [1884.24.63]

207. Short straight Chinese sword & sheath [1884.24.64]

208. Short straight Roman double edged sword [Can’t match]

209. Short straight Moorish double edged sword brass sheath [1884.24.104]

210. Short straight sword [Can’t match]

211. Malay creese & sheath [Can’t match]

212. Malay creese with silver handle & sheath [1884.24.230]

213. Chinese double short sword & sheath [1884.24.67]

214. Chinese double short sword & sheath [1884.24.69]

215. Chinese short sword & sheath with brass bands [Possibly 1884.24.65 or 1884.24.176]

[17 objects in total]

[Insert, see end starting 26 Bound …]

Page 19

No 216. Indian short sword with Elephant handle & red velvet sheath with a fish at point taken at Lucknow during the mutiny by Col. North 60th Rifles & given by him to Col. Fox. [1884.24.165]

217. Indian short sword & velvet sheath [Could be 1884.24.50, 51, 52, or 141]

218. Indian short sword [Can’t match]

219. Cavalry gauntlet sword India [1884.24.123]

[insert] 219a. Sword very much moth eaten probably Danish[Can’t match]

[insert] 219b. sword very much moth eaten probably Danish [Can’t match]

220. Straight double edged sword 15th century[Can’t match]

221. Straight double edged sword 15th century[Can’t match]

222. Straight double edged sword 15th century[Can’t match]

223. Straight double edged sword XVIth century [1884.24.93]

224. Straight double edged sword XVIth century[Can’t match]

[13 objects in total]

Page 20

No 225 Sword belonging to a Maltese knight XVI th century [1884.140.938]

226. Straight sword XVIIth century [Can’t match]

227. Sword with a waived [sic] blade XVIIth century[1884.24.96]

228. Straight double edged sword XVIIth century [Can’t match]

229. Straight double edged sword XVIIth century [Can’t match]

230. Sword used in the Maltese Galley [1884.24.87]

231. Sword times of Cromwell [1884.24.90]

232. Sword XVIIIth Century [Can’t match]

233. Sword XVIIIth Century [Can’t match]

234. Malay sword ornamented with the hair of an enemy [1 of 1884.24.31, 32, 33]

235. Malay sword same shape as preceding [1884.24.45]

236. Indian sword & scabbard [1884.24.44]

237. Indian sword & scabbard [1884.24.43]

[13 objects in total]

Page 21

No 238 Indian Sword [Can’t match]

239. Fencing foil Modern [Can’t match]

240. Do [ditto] Do [ie Fencing foil Modern][Can’t match]

241. Do [ditto] Do [ie Fencing foil Modern][Can’t match]

242. Do [ditto] Do [ie Fencing foil Modern][Can’t match]

243. Dagger or knife edged with shark’s teeth [Can’t match]

244. Dagger of Horn India [1884.24.153]

245. North American Indian Knife [1884.24.183]

246. Arab dagger Africa [Can’t match]

247. Dagger Indian [1884.24.239]

248. Small dagger unknown probably African [Can’t match]

249. Dagger Soudan [Possibly 1884.140.912]

250. Neamnam knife with sheath brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick [1884.140.911]

251. Malay Dagger [1884.24.189]

252. Indian Dagger [Can’t match]

[16 objects in total]

Page 22

No 253 The Wag-nuk or Tiger Claw secret weapon invented by the Hindoo Sewaju in 1659 with which kind of instrument & a dagger he destroyed the Mahometan Abdoula cann the general of the Bejapoor Government [1884.140.917]

254. Taken during the Indian Mutiny at Lucknow brought home by Major North 60th Rifles said to be an instrument of treachery [1884.24.84]

255. Chinese double dagger in a sheath [1884.24.182]

256. Indian Dagger [1884.24.160]

257. Indian two pronged dagger [1884.24.162 or 163]

258. Moorish dagger with brass scabbard [1884.140.956]

259. Indian Dagger [Can’t match]

260. Moorish Dagger [1884.24.267]

261. Chinese knife in sheath [1884.24.178]

262. Chinese knife in sheath [1884.24.177]

[14 objects in total]

Page 23

No 263 Burmese dagger in a wooden sheath [Can’t match]

264. Turkish Dagger silver sheath & chain (not … [illegible, looks like parked] with other arms) [1884.24.266]

265. European Dagger misericord the blade with holes to receive the poison [1884.24.215]

266. Florentine poiniard [sic] time of Elizabeth [1884.24.216]

267. Modern European dagger belonging to W. Lane Fox [1884.24.218]

268. Plug bayonet introduced [?] at Bayonne 1671 The Musqueteers having no means of defence after they had discharged their match locks until they had unloaded a long … in those days such of them as had daggers used to insert them into the muzzles hence the origin of bayonets [Possibly 1884.28.31 or 34]

269. Plug bayonet in sheath [1884.28.33]

270. Bayonet with sword blade [?1884.28.43]

271. Shell of a tortoise used as a shield by the natives of [blank] [No object like this listed in the founding collection]

[12 objects in total]

Page 24

No 272. Wooden shield Australia [1884.30.18, NB this no. appears to have been written on object]

273. Wooden shield Australia [1884.30.16, NB this no. appears to have been written on object]

274. Do [ditto] Do [ie Wooden shield Australia] [Can’t match]

275. Wooden shield Australia [1884.30.8, NB this no. appears to have been written on label on object]

276. Caffre shield made of hide [1884.30.35]

277. Round Chinese shield of Wicker work raised in the middle brought home by Albert Smith [1884.30.46]

278. Nubian shield of Rhinoceros hide with a loop in the centre from Dongola [?1884.30.57]

279. Round shield Buffalos hide India [1884.30.49]

280. Shield same size and shape as last [1884.30.48]

280a. Shield of the Dyaks of Borneo [1884.30.36 or 37]

[insert] 280b. buckle or target time of Edward IV [Can’t match]

280c. Large over shield made of [?] reeds – Neam nam tribe of Negroes brought home by Consul Petherick in 1858 [end insert][1884.30.33]

281. Gorget South Sea coated with pieces of shell [?1884.140.127]

[insert] 281A. Helmet made of cylindrical white beads worn by the Nouar on both sides of the Nile from 8 to 10 degrees North latitude similar in form to the ancient Egyptian brought home by Consul Petherick [looks like different handwriting][1884.32.3]

282. Back & breast plate of cocoa nut fibre with sleeves of the same & skirt of grass [1884.31.37]

283. New Zealand War Cloak [1884.87.71]

284. Breast plate of Tassets Pike man’s armour [1884.31.10]

284a. Arm guard used with the above [1884.31.11]

[20 objects in total]

Page 25

285. Helmet for Do [ditto] [1884.31.9]

286. Back & breast plate pikeman’s armour [1884.31.8]

287. Helmet to Do [ditto] [1884.31.7]

288. Back plate Pikeman’s armour [1884.31.6]

289. Morion time of Elizabeth [1884.32.6]

290. Breast plate Pikeman’s armour [1884.31.5]

291. Greek helmet copper [1884.32.16]

292. Etruscan helmet [1884.32.15]

293. Etruscan copper girdle [1884.119.629]

294. Breast plate of ring mail made by the Aborigines of S. Africa & fastened upon skin [1884.31.26]

295. Coat of mail & plate united formerly used by the Body Guard of the Moguls [possibly 1945.11.117]

296. Plate Armour India [1884.31.19]

297. Back piece & Jazereen [?] Armour AD 1485 Plate Armour of Steel fastened upon canvas [1884.31.43]

[14 objects in total]

Page 26

No 298 Front piece Jazereen [?] Armour 1485 Memo these 2 last are fixed on boards [1884.31.44]

299. Back & Breast piece & shoulder piece of Saracenic Armour time of Crusades. having the mark of the Turkish Armoury upon them [drawing] affixed to a board with 2 shells showing how in all probability ribbed armour was first suggested [1884.31.15,16,17,18]

300. Ribbed helmet used with the above [1884.32.2]

301. A suit of chain armour including tunic trousers cape gloves & a breast plate of thicker mail [1884.31.20]

302. English officer’s gorget time of George IV last remnant of body armour [1884.31.13 or item returned ie not in founding coll]

303. Do [ditto] Do [ie English officer’s gorget time of George IV last remnant of body armour] [1884.31.13 or item returned ie not in founding coll]

304. Case of 3 Javelins from Caucasus [1884.140.81]

305. Bow with a cane string S. America [Can’t match]

306. Bow with a spike & cane string Made of bamboo painted [1884.15.46 but no mention of spike]

307. Bow [?1884.15.81]

[19 objects in total]

Page 27

308. Bow [Can’t match]

309. Bow [Can’t match]

310. Bow [Can’t match]

311. Bow [Can’t match]

312. Bamboo bow Darnley Islands Torres Strait [1884.15.95]

313. Bow with string painted [?1884.15.17]

314. Bow N. America [Can’t match]

315. Painted bow Ceylon [1884.15.52]

316. Do [ditto] ie Painted bow Ceylon [Not yet found, see PR Cat [1874] 261]

317. Bow [Can’t match]

318. Bow Wa-Tribe Central Africa used with the multibarbed arrows having iron points similar in form to the ancient Egyptians brought home from Central Africa by Consul Petherick 1858 [1884.15.101]

319. Do [ditto] Do [ie Bow Dor-Tribe Central Africa used with the multibarbed arrows having iron points similar in form to the ancient Egyptians brought home from Central Africa by Consul Petherick 1858] [1884.15.103]

320. Do of another form [ie Bow Wa-Tribe Central Africa used with the multibarbed arrows having iron points similar in form to the ancient Egyptians brought home from Central Africa by Consul Petherick 1858][?1884.15.102, documentation says has bone label saying 620 but could be misreading?]

321. Bow West Africa similar in form to the Ancient Egyptian & 3 barbed arrows [Can’t match]

[14 objects in total]

Page 28

No 322 Esquimaux bow made of bone in 4 pieces joined of the ordinary form [?1884.15.29]

323. Esquimaux bow of the Scythian form strengthened at the back with thongs [lot of possible options could be PR cat 1874 272 or 273?]

324. Do [ditto] of the Scythian form strengthened with thongs & spliced with bone [Esquimaux] [lot of possible options could be PR cat 1874 272 or 273?]]

325. Do [ditto] Do with string & a sealskin case [ie Esquimaux bow of the Scythian form strengthened at the back with thongs] [1884.15.20 and 1884.15.26]

326. Indian bow of the Scythian form [Possibly 1884.15.30 but not sure]

327. Do [ditto] of steel [ie Indian bow of the Scythian form][1884.15.19]

328. European bow of steel [Can’t match, it is possible that this could be 1884.15.30?]

329. Chinese bow of the Scythian form [?1884.15.16]

330. Do [ditto] do [ie Chinese bow of the Scythian form] [Can’t match]

331. Persian bow of the Scythian form & silken strings [?1884.15.17]

332. 12 cane arrows pointed with hard wood bound with cane some of these tipped with bone British Guiana [?1884.140.1056? but from New Guinea!]

333. 21 Long Do [ditto] [ie cane arrows pointed with hard wood bound with cane some of these tipped with bone] British Guiana [Can’t match]

[44 objects in total]

Page 29

No 334 Bundle of long arrows British Guiana [Can’t match, possibly unmatched black book entry 237]

[insert] 334a. 10 flint arrow heads and a round flint said to be Ancient British [end insert] [Can’t match]

335. bundle of Esquimaux arrows various shapes tipped with bone [Can’t match]

336. 2 short bushman [sic] arrows poisoned [Can’t match, there are several sets but none of 2 arrows]

337. 15 iron pointed multi barbed arrows of various shapes brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick in 1858 [possibly 1884.140.830 but says 13]

338. 5 barbed iron pointed arrows from Africa [Can’t match]

339. 2 arrows with iron points fastened with sinews [Can’t match]

340. 3 arrows one with large bladed barbed point [Can’t match]

341. 5 Persian arrows [Can’t match]

342. 7 Chinese arrows [Can’t match]

343. 2 Chinese arrows with broad points [Can’t match]

344. 4 Chinese arrows [Can’t match]

345. 15 Indian arrows [Can’t match]

[73 + objects in total]

Page 30

No 346 9 Indian arrows [Can’t match]

347. 9 Indian arrows [Can’t match]

348. 9 Chinese arrows [Can’t match]

349. Esquimaux quiver [1884.17.16]

350. Quiver Dor tribe of Negroes brought home from Central Africa by Consul Petherick 1858 [1884.17.1]

351. Mandingo quiver [1884.17.5]

352. Chinese quiver [1884.17.13]

353. Indian quiver Red velvet from Lucknow brought by Major North 60th Rifles [1884.17.14]

354. trophy consisting of 4 bows & 69 arrows in the form of a star [this may consist of bows and arrows now separately identified by the relevant entry is given in PR catalogue 1874 225]

355. Malay blow pipe for poisoned arrows with bayonet & sheath [1884.18.4]

356. Sumpitan Malay quiver containing poisoned arrows for blowpipe with a gourd for the poison suspended by beads [1884.18.7]

[insert]356A. Murra-wan or throwing stick Australia [Can’t match, spear thrower]

356B. Do [ditto] of another form [Murra-wan or throwing stick Australia][end insert] [Can’t match]

357. Model Onager for slinging stones [unfound, see Black 1267 in prm poss]

358. model Matagunda 11th & 12th cent’ry for slinging stones [unfound, see Black 1264 in prm poss]

[111 + objects in total]

Page 31

No 359 Model Catapulta for throwing arrows [?>1945.10.212 or unfound, see Black 1265 in prm poss]

360. Model Catapulta for throwing arrows [?1945.10.212 or unfound, see Black 1265 in prm poss]

361. Genoese cross bow & windlass [1884.16.16 and 1884.16.17]

362. Latch time of Henry VI [1884.16.11 but note says Henry VII]

363. Do [ditto] Inlaid with ivory [latch] [1884.16.12 but note says Henry VII]

364. Windlass for cross bow time Henry VIII [1884.16.13 but note says Henry VII]

365. Chinese cross bow [1884.16.9]

366. Prodd – time of Charles II [1884.16.14]

368. Modern English cross bow [1884.16.19]

369. Earliest form of hand cannon top touch hole & fitting on to a club – invented at the end of the XIVth Century [1884.27.1]

370. Improved form of Hand Cannon with side touch hole & stock underneath [1884.27.2]

371. Match lock rampart gun India [1884.27.3]

[13 objects in total]

Page 32

No 372 Matchlock Rampart Gun European from Hampton Court [1884.27.4]

373. Chinese matchlock with pouch for match [1884.27.9]

374. Chinese matchlock with red painted stock [1884.27.8]

375. Indian matchlock [cant match]

376. Indian matchlock laminated barrel & ivory stock [Possibly 1884.27.11]

377. Turkish matchlock gun barrel inlaid with silver [1884.27.14, but now provenanced to India]

378. Matchlock Moultan [can’t match]

379. Matchlock India stock inlaid with ivory [Possibly 1884.27.13 or 15]

380. Matchlock musket European introduced at the battle of Pavia superceded [can’t match]

381. Spanish matchlock musket [Only possible match is 1884.27.31 but description completely different]

381a. A Musket Rest & Gunstock combined used with a heavy matchlock [Probably 1884.19.238]

382. Matchlock with spring lock from Borneo [1884.27.18]

383. Matchlock with spring lock from Japan [?1884.27.19]

384. Wheellock earliest form first introduced at the siege of Parma 1521 this specimen is a sporting rifle the bore & … spring of lock outside stock inlaid with ivory [1884.27.21]

[14 objects in total]

Page 33

No 385 A tricker wheellock time of James II the wheel being entirely concealed in the plate of the lock – this was amongst the arms used by the Hungarians in 1848 [1884.27.22 or 23]

386. Do [ditto] time of James II

387. Do [ditto] time of James II [wheellock] having a hole in the stock for the thumb & an eye hole sight in addition to the back sight on the barrel - …. Also used by the Hungarians [1884.27.22 or 23]

388. Matchlock [insert] Wheellock [end insert] latest form [can’t match]

389. Turkish firelock early form the forelock was invented in France in 1630 It was derived from the Spanish platine à Miguelet which took its form from the snaphauce the latter being derived from the wheellock the furrowed piece over the pan in this specimen is a remnant of the furrows on the wheel of the wheellock they were subsequently discontinued [1884.27.29]

390. Spanish firelock in this specimen only the lower part of the piece over the pan is furrowed It may therefore be considered the last remnant of the wheellock. [?1884.27.31 or 1884.27.30]

[5 objects in total]

Page 34

No 391 Fire or flint lock swivel gun early form from Malta [1884.27.32 or 1884.27.33]

392. Musket land service regular pattern Footguards Time of George III & George IV [insert] & bayonet [end insert] [1884.27.36]

393. Musket India pattern for the line & general service time of George III & George IV [insert] & bayonet [end insert][1884.27.35]

394. Musket for Light Infantry Regt Time of George III & George IV [insert] & bayonet [end insert] [1884.27.38]

395. English regulation polygrooved rifle & sword bayonet [1884.27.39]

396. Sword bayonet for rifled scabbard [?1884.28.43]

397. Germans grooved & barrelled revolving flintlock rifle [Possibly 1884.27.61]

398. Indian flint lock Musketoon [possibly 1884.27.37]

399. Spanish firelock swivel Blunderbuss [1884.27.32 or 1884.27.33]

400. Brass barrelled flint Blunderbuss with Ed. Nicholson on the barrel [1884.27.41]

401. Flint Carbine for throwing grenade [1884.27.43]

402. Russian musket bayonet from the Crimea [1884.28.40 or 41]

403. Russian Infantry musket brought by Col Fox from the Alma 20 Sept 1854 [One of 1884.27.47, 48, 49, 50, 51]

[13 objects in total]

Page 35

No 404 Russian Infantry Musket & bayonet from the Crimea [One of 1884.27.47, 48, 49

405. Russian Infantry musket & bayonet from the Crimea [One of 1884.27.47, 48, 49

406. French Infantry percussion smooth bore musket & bayonet [1884.27.52 & 1884.28.42]

407. English Regulation Brown Bess musket and bayonet [1 of 1884.27.35, 38, 39, 56<]

408. Percussion gun for Percussion Dress used by the Hungarians in 1848 [Possibly 1884.27.67 or not listed]

409. Percussion gun barrel and stock to unscrew used by the Hungarians in 1848 [Possibly 1884.27.67 or not listed]

410. Self priming percussion gun barrel 1724 for Percussion discs used by the Hungarians in 1848 [1884.27.68]

411. Self priming percussion musket [1884.27.63

412. American Breechloading musket dated 1845 Percussion [1884.27.65<]

413. Breechloading musket hammer underneath [1884.27.74]

414. Breechloading Zundnadel le Mille brevété à Liege & bayonet [1884.27.72]

[11 objects in total]

Page 36

No 415 German double barrelled needle gun [1884.27.70]

416. German 3 barrelled needle gun 1 rifle [1884.27.69]

417. Double barrelled needle gun Pauly Paris [1884.27.71]

418. Air gun [1884.27.92]

419. Brass airgun used by the Hungarians 1848 [1884.27.89]

420. Air gun used by the Hungarians in 1848 [1884.27.90

Insert 420a. Pump for Air gun [1884.27.91]

421. French Artillery Carbine à tige with sword bayonet in steel scabbard [1884.27.54 or 55 and 1884.28.44]

422. Air gun used by the Hungarians in 1848 [There are no more airguns in founding collection so there is no match for this object, of course the match might be for this not 420]

423. The first Minié Musket made in England by Wilkinson for Col. Fox from a drawing given by the latter 1851 [1884.27.57]

424. Wilkinson’s small bore musket & bayonet [1884.27.58]

425. Short Enfield Rifle [1884.27.60]

[12 objects in total]

Page 37

No 426 Percussion Rifle altered from flint to bored square the sides slightly round [?1884.27.61 also matched earlier to another entry]

427. Flint oval bore rifle [1884.27.34]

428. Lancaster oval small bore [1884.27.59]

429. Trigger flint lock Musquetoon rifle the bore a hexagon [1884.27.37]

430. Russian 2 grooved rifle barrel from the Crimea [can’t match]

431. Part of a firelock with an extremely curious & simple percussion lock this was one of the arms used by the Hungarians in 1848 [?1884.27.68 already possibly matched to another entry]

432. An instrument for Rifle Experiments [can’t match]

433. Match lock pistol or Carbine India [?1884.27.15 already possibly matched to another entry]

434. Snaphaunce Pistol introduced about 1603 in Germany [1884.27.76]

435. Turkish firelock pistol [can’t match]

436. Spanish firelock pistol [can’t match]

437. Early firelock pistol [?1884.27.77]

[12 objects in total]

Page 38

No 438. Flint lock pistol [can’t match, these are likely to be one of 1884.27.78-81 and 83-84]

439. Flint lock pistol [can’t match]

440. Flint lock pistol [can’t match]

441. Flint lock pistol [1884.27.85]

442. Flint lock pistol [can’t match]

443. Flint lock pistol [can’t match]

444. Flint lock pistol from Waterloo [can’t match]

445. Experiment to fire 4 charges consequetively out of the same barrel [1884.27.86 1-2]

446. Do [ditto] do [Experiment to fire 4 charges consequetively out of the same barrel] [1884.27.86 1-2]

447. Percussion Pistol [actually looks like Ritol] [can’t match]

448. Do [ditto] do [ie Percussion Pistol] [can’t match]

449. Percussion Revolver [1884.27.88]

450. Powder flask of the XVIth Century taken from the Armoury at Malta [1884.28.13 or 15]

451. Small priming flask & serpentine powder from the Armoury at Malta [1884.28.14]

452. Flask from the Armoury at Malta XVIth Century [1884.28.13 or 15]

453. North American Indian Flask [1884.28.6]

454. Indian Flask [1884.28.2]

[17 objects in total]

Page 39

No 455 Powder Horn used for Cannon [1884.28.10 or 11]

456. Powder horn [can’t match]

457. Priming flask & spanner for Wheellock [1884.28.8]

458. Powder flask ivory [1884.68.143]

459. Flask to give out charge in one motion used by the Piedmontese Bersaglieri discontinued during the Crimean War [1884.28.16]

460. Flask to give out the charge in one motion [Can’t match]

461. Flask to give out the charge in two motions [1884.28.17 or 1884.28.18]

462. Do [ditto] Do [ie Flask to give out the charge in two motions] [1884.28.17 or 1884.28.18]

463. Patron to hold Cartridges for pistols time of Philip & Mary – introduced the middle of the XVI th century [1884.28.20

464. Leathern pouch probably Mandingo [1884.28.29]

465. Moorish Cartridge belt [1884.28.22, 23 or 24]

466. Do [ditto] do [ie Moorish Cartridge belt] [1884.28.22, 23 or 24]

[13 objects in total]

Page 40

No 467 Double action wheellock [1884.27.26

468. Wheellock [can’t match]

469. Early firelock with furrows on the piece above the pan [1884.27.30]

470. Lock adapted to either flint or percussion showing the transition period [1884.27.45]

471. Russian Infantry back action musket lock 1852 from the Crimea [1884.27.50]

472 Do [ditto] Do. [ie Russian Infantry back action musket lock 1852 from the Crimea] [1884.27.51]

473 Trophy of Liberty Weapons of the Hungarians 1848

No 473 Scythe transformed into a sword [These items have not been found and accessioned, see Black 1236 in prm possibles]

474. Air Gun [Not listed]

475. Sword [can’t match]

476. Sword [can’t match]

476a. Sword [end insert] [can’t match]

477. Short percussion gun [can’t match]

478. Musquetoon with a very simple percussion lock [can’t match]

479. Spike of a standard with the date 1848 upon it [can’t match]

[14 objects in total]

Page 41

No 480 Pistol with a Spanish firelock of early form very rudely made up for the occasion [can’t match]

481. Pistol [can’t match]

Trophy of Russian Arms from the Crimea 1854-5

482. Russian Pioneer Saw & Sword [1884.24.81]

483. Russian Infantry sword [1884.24.72]

484. Do [ditto] do [ie Russian Infantry sword] [1884.24.74]

485. Do [ditto] do [ie Russian Infantry sword] [1884.24.70]

486. Do [ditto] do [ie Russian Infantry sword][1884.24.71]

487. Do [ditto] with scabbard [ie Russian Infantry sword][1884.24.73 or 76]

488. Do [ditto] with scabbard [ie Russian Infantry sword] [1884.24.73 or 76]

489. Russian Pioneer sword with scabbard [1884.24.75]

490. Russian Infantry Helmet [1884.91.25]

491. Do [ditto] Do [ie Russian Infantry Helmet] [1884.32.19]

492. Officers Helmet [1884.32.18]

493. Russian Marine Chako [1884.32.17]

494. Ancient Spur [can’t match]

[18 objects in total]

Page 42

No 495 Flint lock tinderbox [can’t match]

496. Portable Chevaux de … [can’t match]

497. Turkish knout [1884.14.5]

498. Chinese instrument probably of torture [not yet found, see Black 935 in prm possibles]

499. Percussion lock & staff for firing cannon [can’t match]

500. Model of brass cannon & timber [can’t match]

501. Russian Infernal Machine used in the Baltic [can’t match]

502. Do [ditto] cut in half [ie Russian Infernal Machine used in the Baltic] [can’t match]

503-15. Shells of various size & shape [can’t match]

[insert in different hand] A Box containing bullets of various forms introduced into the series or fired in experiments since the abandonment of the smooth bore musket in 1851. [can’t match]

[9+ objects in total]

Insert between pages 18 and 19:

26 Bound & 12 unbound vols including index of Archaeologia
1 Vol True Christian Religion
7 vols Smithsonian Anthropological papers
1 vol Smithsonian contributions to knowledge
1 vol Reliquae Acquitania
1 vol Dixons Geology of Sussex
1 vol Schweinfurths Artes Africanae
2 vols Cyclopidea of costume Planché
2 vols Transactions Kilkenny Archaeological Society
1 vol L’Antechrist
5 vols Journal of the Kilkenny Archaeological Society
3 vols Journal of the Hist. & Arch. Association of Ireland
6 Meuro [sic] books
6 vols Bulletin des Antiquites
1 vol Origin of Civilisation & Primitive condition of man
2 vols Julius Caesar (Napoleon III)

Some of the entries that note in the accession book entry that the objects are (old coll [number]) or (old label [number]) are:

1884.19.45 – old coll 4 [sic, probably 44, 47]
1884.19.74 – old coll 46
1884.19.75 – old coll 43
1884.19.76 – old coll 45
1884.19.77 – old coll 34
1884.19.78 – old coll ?
1884.19.79 – old coll 38
1884.19.80 – old coll 38 [sic, must have been 39 (only missing number from sequence)]
1884.19.82 – old coll 41
1884.19.83 – old coll 40
1884.19.86 – old coll 36
1884.19.87 – old coll 42
1884.19.89 – old coll 29
1884.19.93 – old coll 30
1884.19.94 – old coll 35
1884.19.95 – old coll 32
1884.19.96 – old coll 33
1884.19.97 – old coll 31
1884.19.99 – old coll 50
1884.19.100 – old coll 49
1884.19.101 – old coll 48
1884.19.170 – old coll 70
1884.19.280 – old coll 60
1884.19.285 – old coll 58
1884.19.286 – old coll 57
1884.19.287 – old coll 37
1884.19.293 – old coll 62
1884.19.296 – old coll 35 [sic, already a 35]
1884.21.45 – old coll 143
1884.23.9 – old label 148
1884.24.4 – old coll 174
1884.24.6 – old coll 173
1884.24.8 – old coll 171
1884.24.60 – old coll 190
1884.24.63 - old label 206
1884.24.64 – old coll 207
1884.24.67 - old label 213
1884.24.69 - old label 214
1884.24.70 - old label 485
1884.24.71 - old label 486
1884.24.78 – old label 182
1884.24.93 – old coll 223
1884.24.110 – old coll 188
1884.24.111 – old coll 189
1884.24.118 – old coll 177
1884.24.119 – old coll – [sic]
1884.24.136 – old coll 167
1884.24.138 – old coll 170
1884.24.153 – old coll 244
1884.24.160 – old coll 256
1884.24.177 – old coll 262
1884.24.178 – old coll 261
1884.24.182 – old coll 255
1884.24.183 – old coll 245
1884.24.189 – old coll 251
1884.24.230 – old coll 212
1884.24.239 – old label 247
1884.92.25 – old coll 460 [wrong number]

1884.25.5 just has the above catalogue number in rounded brackets.
1884.23.9 says it is (old label 148)

AP May 2012

General Pitt Rivers's Museum

To the Editor of the Daily News

Sir,-- Referring to the correspondence published on Saturday but an order of the House of Commons relative to the rejection of the offer of my collection to the nation, I request permission through your columns to correct an error arising from a misnomer in the term employed to designate the collection. The Government, whilst expressing an opinion that my museum would form an interesting addition to the British Museum, reject the offer on behalf of South Kensington on the grounds that, being ethnological, it would there clash with the British Museum. The term ethnology has been used in this case for convenience, because the object of my collection being new, there is no recognised name for it. But it is in no sense ethnological. Ethnology as a branch of anthropology relates to the study of races. The object of my museum is not racial. It is a museum of primitive arts. It exhibits by means of selected specimens the development from rude beginnings of certain arts, such as tools, weapons, pottery, musical instruments, clothing, weaving, horse-furniture, agricultural implements, personal ornaments, ship building, ornamentation, &c., and as such I consider that it has more affinity to the collections of the Science and Art Department, under whose auspices it has been exhibited to the public for some years past, than the British Museum. For although it includes some specimens of primitive arts which are found in ethnological museums, it is also largely made up of more modern examples of the same arts, which are necessary to complete the several series, and of models and survivals which could not enter into the British Museum collections without entirely subverting their ethnographical arrangement, and depriving both of the interest which they now possess by reason of the entirely different objects for which they have been collected and arranged. To use the words of the committee, "the collection differs from ordinary ethnographical collections in principle, and does not reduplicate or come into competition with them." With respect to the merits of the collection, I am quite content that they should rest on the report of the committee appointed by the Government, which includes the names of Huxley, Lubbock, Rolleston, and officers of the Government than whom, I believe, it would not have been possible to have appointed gentlemen more competent to deal with the matter in hand. If, as the report states, the committee are "unanimously of opinion that the collection offered to the Government under the conditions stated is of great value and interest, and ought to be accepted by the Government," and if, as Sir F. Sandford says in his letter to me, "their Lordships accept the conclusions at which the committee have arrived," it seems to me a pity the offer should be rejected on account of the misunderstanding of a term. But I desire to bring to notice that precisely the same thing has occurred before. Some years ago I was a member of a committee of the South Kensington Museum, when it was proposed to turn the whole of the exhibition galleries into a museum of primitive arts. The arrangements were progressing, favourably, the collections had been commenced, and the proposal would have had the effect of removing effectually and permanently the chaos which still continues to exist in the exhibition galleries, when a letter was read from one of the British Museum officers to the effect that as the new museum would include ethnographical specimens, he could not countenance any such undertaking unless it was placed under the British Museum, and the proposal was therefore rejected, as my offer has now been, because the departments of the Government could not agree which was to have the control of it.-- I am, Sir, yours obediently,

A. Pitt Rivers.

4, Grosvenor-gardens, August 1.

A Lecture delivered at the Royal United Service Institution, Friday, June 28, 1867; illustrated by specimens from the Museum of the Institution: and published in the Journal of the Royal United Services Institute, (1867) pp. 612-643. The paper was later re-published with Parts II and III, in the edited volume 'Evolution of Culture' in 1906. This is the 1906 version of the paper.

Although it is more in accordance with the purposes for which this establishment has been organized, that the Lecture-room should be devoted chiefly to subjects of practical utility connected with the improvement of our military system and the progress of the mechanical appliances, the organization, and general efficiency of our Army and Navy, than to the efforts of abstract science, yet the fact of your possessing in the three large apartments that are devoted to your armoury, one of the best assortments of semi-civilized and savage weapons that are to be found in this country, or, perhaps, in any part of the world, is sufficient to prove that it is not foreign to the objects of the Institution that the science of war should be ethnographically and archaeologically, as well as practically, treated.

The requirements of our advancing age demand that every vein of knowledge should be opened out, and, in order to make good our title to so interesting a collection of objects as that comprised in what may very properly be called our ethnographical military department, it should be shown that, whether or not the subject may be considered to fall within the ordinary functions of the Society, our Museum is made available for the purposes of science.

The age in which we live is not more remarkable for its rapid onward movement than for its intelligent retrospect of the past. It is reconstructive as well as progressive. The light which is kindled by the practical discoveries of modern science, throws back its rays, and enables us to distinguish objects of interest, which have been unnoticed in the gloom of bygone ages, or passed over with contempt.

Men observe only those things which their occupations or their education enable them to understand and appreciate. When a savage is introduced on board the deck of a European vessel, he notices only those objects with the uses of which he is familiar—the sewing of a coat, a chain, or a cable, at once rivets his attention, but he passes by the steam-engine without observation, and if a work of art is forced upon his notice, he is unable to say whether it represents a man, a ship, or a kangaroo! [1] So in past ages the flint implements of the drift, the parents of all our modern implements, whether for war or handicraft, must have been carted away in hundreds, unobserved, and in ignorance that these inconspicuous objects would one day be the means of upsetting the received chronology of our species.

Whilst, therefore, we devote our energies chiefly to progress, and fix our attention upon the present and future of war, it cannot fail to interest those who are actively engaged in the duties of their profession, if we occasionally take a glance backward and see what recent discoveries have done towards elucidating its origin and early history.

It might, perhaps, assist a right understanding of the principles on which the weapons and implements of savages deserve to be studied, if I were to notice some of those great questions respecting the origin of our species, and man's place in nature, which the investigations of science have been the means of raising in our day. I need hardly say that the rude implements, which I am about to describe, are of little practical interest in them-selves, as models for instruction or imitation. We have no need of bows and arrows in the existing state of war, and if we did require them, the appliances of modern times would enable us to construct them in far greater perfection than could be acquired by any lessons from savages. These weapons are valuable only, in the absence of other evidence, from the light they throw on prehistoric times, and on those great questions to which I have alluded, and from their enabling us to trace out the origin of many of those customs which have been handed down to us by past generations.

As, however, the discussion of these interesting subjects would lead me into matters that are hardly suited to the Lecture-room of this Institution, I must pass over the consideration of them with a few brief remarks.

In so doing, I may appear to postulate some opinions upon points that are still the subject of animated controversy in the scientific world. But it would require a far broader field of investigation than is here afforded me, in order to treat these inquiries successfully, and to adduce all the evidence that would be necessary to support the hypotheses put forward; and I am anxious to devote no greater space to these preliminary remarks than is necessary to point out some of the main features of interest that are involved in the particular study which forms the subject of my lecture.

We are apt to speak of the creation of the universe as a thing of the past, and to suppose that the world, with all the varied life upon it, previous to man's appearance, having been created for his especial happiness and supremacy, was afterwards left to his control and government. But this view of the subject belongs to an age in which the laws of nature in their all-sufficiency and completeness were but little studied and appreciated. Modern science finds no evidence of any such abandonment of the universe to man's jurisdiction. The more comprehensively the subject is viewed, the more restricted appear to be those limits over which the free will of mankind is permitted to range, and the more evident it becomes, that in his social advancement, his laws, arts, and wars, he moves on under the influence and development of those same laws which have been in force from the very first dawn of creation. The lower the archaeologist searches in the crust of the earth for the relics of human art, the more faint become the traces of that broad gulf, which in our times appears to separate man from the brute creation. In all the numerous and varied offsprings of the human intellect, in the arts, and even in speech, the more we investigate and trace them back, the more clearly they appear to point to a condition of the human race in which they had no existence whatever. The great law of nature, ‘natura non facit saltum,' was not broken by the introduction of man upon the earth. He appears to have been produced in the fullness of time, as the work of creation required a more perfect tool, and to have ameliorated his condition, only as the work to be performed became more complicated and varied, just as in the hands of man, the rougher tool is employed for felling, and the finer tool for finishing and polishing.

By this view we come to look upon even the most barbarous state of man's existence, as a condition, not so much of degradation, as of arrested or retarded progress, and to see that, notwithstanding many halts and relapses, and a very varied rate of movement in the different races, the march of the human intellect has been always onward.

As, in the lower creation, we find no individuals that are capable of self-improvement, though some appear, by their imitative faculties, to contain within them the germs of an improving element, so the aboriginal man, closely resembling the brutes, may have passed through many generations before he began to show even the first symptoms of mental cultivation, or the rudiments of the simplest arts; and even then his progress may have been, at first, so slow, that it is not without an effort of imagination that the civilized races of our day can realize, by means of the implements which he has left us, the minute gradations which appear to mark the stages of his advancement. This appears to be the view taken by Sir Charles Lyell in his Antiquity of Man, when, in comparing the flint implements found in the higher and lower-level gravels of the valley of the Somme, he arrives at the conclusion 'that the state of the arts in those early times remained stationary for almost indefinite periods'. 'We see,’ he says, 'in our own time, that the rate of progress in the arts and sciences proceeds in a geometrical ratio as knowledge increases, and so, when we carry back our retrospect into the past, we must be prepared to find the signs of retardation augmenting in a like geometrical ratio; so that the progress of a thousand years at a remote period, may correspond to that of a century in modern times, and in ages still more remote man would more and more resemble the brutes in that attribute which causes one generation exactly to imitate, in all its ways, the generation which preceded it.' (4th ed. 1873, p. 421).

In order to understand the relationship which the savage tribes of our own time bear to the races of antiquity, it is necessary to keep in view that, neither in historic nor prehistoric times is there any evidence that civilization has been equally or universally distributed; on the contrary, it appears always to have been partial, and confined to particular races, whose function it has been, by means of war and conquest, to spread the arts amongst surrounding nations, or to exterminate those whose low state of mental culture rendered them incapable of receiving it.

Assuming the whole of the human species to have sprung originally from one stock, an hypothesis which, although disputed, appears to me by all existing evidence and analogy of known facts, to be the most reasonable assumption, the several races appear to have branched off at various and remote periods, many of them, perhaps, previously to the present geographical arrangement of land and water, and to have located themselves in the several regions in which they are now found, in a state which probably differs but little from that in which they existed at the time of their separation from the parent stem.

Each race, after separation, shows evidence of arrested growth and, finally, the intellect of the nation fossilizes and becomes stationary for an indefinite period, or until destroyed by being brought again in contact with the leading races in an advanced stage of civilization, precisely in the same way that the individuals composing these races, after propagating their species, stagnate, and ultimately decay, or, in a low state of savagery, are often destroyed by their own offspring.

Taking a comprehensive view of the development of civilization, it may be compared to the growth of those plants whose vigour displays itself chiefly in the propagation of their leading shoots, which, overtopping the older and feebler branches, cause them to be everywhere replaced by a fresh growth of verdure. The vegetable kingdom thus furnishes us with the grand type of progress; continuity and bifurcation are principles of universal application,' uniting the lowest with the highest created thing.

The analogy of tree growth has been frequently employed in relation to natural phenomena, and it may very well be taken to explain the distribution of the human race, and the progress and expansion of the arts. It forms the key to the Darwinian theory of natural selection, which is essentially monogenistic in its application to the origin of the human race.

Thus the existing races of mankind may be taken to represent the budding twigs and foliage, each in accordance with the relative superiority of its civilization, appertaining to branches higher and higher placed, upon the great stem of life.

So little is as yet known of the early history of any but our own family of nations, that in the existing state of knowledge, the attempt to classify and place them on their proper branches, must be attended with much difficulty, and great liability to error. However, by arranging the existing races according to their civilization, a tolerably correct judgement may perhaps be formed as to the value of this system of classification, if we distribute them with those of antiquity in some two or three broad divisions. The Caucasian races of modern Europe, for example, may be said to bear to their ancestors of the historical period the same relationship that geologists have shown the existing mammalia of our forests to bear to the mammalia of the tertiary geological period. The semi-civilized Chinese and Hindoos, in like manner, may be classed with the races of ancient Assyria, Egypt, and other nations immediately prior to the first dawn of history, the civilization of which nations they still so greatly resemble, and appear to have retained, in a state of retarded progress from those ages to our own. A third division may perhaps be made of the Malay, Tartar, and African negro nations, which, though now in an age of iron, may, by the state of their arts, and more especially by the form of their implements, be taken as the best representatives of the prehistoric bronze period of Europe, towards which they appear to hold the same relationship that the fish and reptiles of our seas bear to those of the secondary geological period. In a fourth division may be included the still more barbarous races of our times, the Australian, Bushman, and hunting races of America, whose analogy to those of the stone age of Europe may be typified by that of the mollusca of recent species to the mollusca of the primary geological period.

In all these existing races, we find that the slowness of their progression and incapacity for improvement is proportioned to the low state of their civilization, thereby leading to the supposition that they may have retained their arts with but slight modification from the time of their branching from the parent stem, and may thus be taken as the living representatives of our common ancestors in the various successive stages of their advancement.

Many examples of this immobility on the part of savages and semi-civilized races may be given.

Throughout the entire continent o£ Australia the weapons and implements are alike, and of the simplest form, and the people are of the lowest grade. The spear, the waddy, and the boomerang, with some stone hatchets, are their only weapons; but amongst these it has been noticed that, like the implements of the drift, there are minute differences, scarcely apparent to Europeans, but which enable a native to determine at a glance to what tribe a weapon belongs.[2] This, whilst it proves a tendency to vary their forms, shows at the same time either an incapacity, or, what answers the same purpose, a retarding power or prejudice, which prevents their effecting more than the smallest appreciable degree of change. In the island of Tahiti, Captain Cook was unable to make the natives (a superior race to the Australians) appreciate the uses of metal, until he had caused his armourer to construct an iron adze (Plate VI, fig. 1 a) [3] of precisely the same form as their own adzes of basalt (Fig. 1b). After that, metal tools came into general use amongst them, though their old forms are in a great measure preserved to this day. When, during the American War, the English endeavoured to utilize the Indians by arming them, they were compelled to construct for them tomahawks after their own pattern, having a pipe in the handle (Fig. 2). When the Purus Indians of South America receive a knife from Europeans they break off the handle, and fashion the knife according to their own ideas, placing the blade between two pieces of wood, and binding it round tight with a sinew.[4] The natives of Samoa now use iron adzes, constructed after the exact pattern of their ancient stone ones.[5] The Fiji Islanders, though they have now the means of obtaining good blades and chisels from Sheffield, and axes from America, prefer plane irons to any other form of implement, because they are able to fix them by lashing them on to their handles in the same fashion as the ancient stone adzes of their own manufacture, which they resemble. [6] The Andaman Islanders use the European metal that falls into their hands, only to grind it down into spear- and arrow-heads of the same form as their stone ones. The same applies to the whole of the Aborigines of North and South America, which have stood by, for nearly three centuries, passive spectators of the arts of Europeans, without attempting to copy them. Crawfurd, in his History of the Indian Archipelago [7] comments on the obstinate adherence of the Javanese to ancient customs, in accounting for the kris having been retained by them long after the causes which produced that peculiar weapon had ceased to operate. Tylor, in his account of the Anahuac, observes upon the preservation of old types amongst the present inhabitants of Mexico, which have remained almost unchanged from generation to generation, enabling the historian to distinguish clearly those which are of Aztec from those which are of Spanish origin. [8] Herodotus describes the spears carried by the Ethiopians in the army of Xerxes as being armed with the sharpened horn of the antelope. [9] Consul Petherick found still in use by the Djibba negroes, more than two thousand years after, these identical spears, armed with the straightened and sharpened horn of the antelope, and their other weapons also resembled in character those described by Herodotus, although they had passed from the stone weapons then used, into an age of metal.[10] The Scythian bow (Plate VI, fig. 3) is the bow still used by the whole of the Tartar races (Fig.4). The celt of the Tartar, and the celt and sword of the Negro (Fig. 5) are still the celt and sword of the European bronze period (Fig. 6), and this resemblance is not confined to the general outline of the weapons, but extends to the style and patterns of ornamentation. The same identity of form exists between the 'manillas' (Fig. 7) used as a medium of exchange in the Eboe country of West Africa and the so-called penannular rings or ring money (Fig. 8) of gold and bronze which are found in Ireland, and which, with some modifications, belong also to Germany and the Swiss Lakes. The corrugated iron blade of the Kaffir assegai, a section of which is shown in Fig. 9, and which is used also in Central and West Africa, is identical with those found in the Saxon graves (Fig. 10), and is intended to give a spiral motion to these missiles. Chevalier Folard observes that the Gauls were remarkable for the tenacity with which they clung to their ancient customs, while the Romans, their conquerors, are mentioned by all historians as peculiar in their time for the facility with which they adopted the customs of others, and developed their own.[11] In modern Europe, the Gipsies have also been noticed as being distinguished from the Europeans in all the various localities in which they are found, for their remarkable adherence to especial arts, savouring of an extinct civilization. Amongst the Chinese and Hindoos, the conservatism which has caused them to remain for ages in nearly the same condition is too well known to require comment. It will, however, be remembered (in illustration of the fact that customs of minor importance often survive great political changes, and serve to keep up the continuity that would otherwise be broken), that after the Manchu Tartars had conquered and established themselves in the Chinese territory, they were nearly driven again from the country, on account of their forcing upon the subject people the custom of wearing pigtails, after the fashion of their conquerors; showing how difficult it is to ingraft, upon an alien race, customs that are not indigenous.

These, and many other notices of a similar character that are to be found in the pages of travel, establish it as a maxim, that the existing races, in their respective stages of progression, may be taken as the bona fide representatives of the races of antiquity; and, marvellous as it may appear to us in these days of rapid progress, their habits and arts, even to the form of their rudest weapons, have continued in many cases, with but slight modifications, unchanged throughout countless ages, and from periods long prior to the commencement of history. They thus afford us living illustrations of the social customs, the forms of government, laws, and warlike practices, which belonged to the ancient races from which they remotely sprang, whose implements, resembling, with but little difference, their own, are now found low down in the soil, in situations, and under circumstances in which, alone, they would convey but little evidence to the antiquary, but which, when the investigations of the antiquary are interpreted by those of the ethnologist, are teeming with interesting revelations respecting the past history of our race; and which, in the hands of the anthropologist, in whose science that of antiquity and ethnology are combined with physiology and geology, are no doubt destined to throw a flood of light, if not eventually, in a great measure, to clear up the mystery, which now hangs over everything connected with the origin of mankind.

That such a combination of the sciences should have been brought about so opportunely in our days, appears to me to be one of those many indications of an overruling power directing in the aggregate the minds of men, which must, at all times, strike even the most superficial observer of nature; for there can be little doubt that in a few years all the most barbarous races will have disappeared from the earth, or will have ceased to preserve their native arts.

The law which consigns to destruction all savage races when brought in contact with a civilization much higher than their own, is now operating with unrelenting fury in every part of the world. Of the aborigines of Tasmania, not a single individual remains; those of New Zealand are fast disappearing. The Australian savage dies out before the advancing European. North and South America, and the Polynesian Islands, all tell the same tale. Wherever the generous influences of Christianity have set foot, there they have been accompanied by the scourge. Innumerable and often unseen causes combine in effecting the same purpose; diseases which are but little felt by Europeans, act as plagues when introduced into uncivilized communities, and cause them to fall before their ravages, like wheat before the sickle; and the vices of civilization, taking a firmer hold of the savages than its virtues, aid and abet in the same work. The labours of the missionary, if they have produced no other benefit, have been useful in teaching us the great truth, that notwithstanding the philanthropic efforts of the intruding race, the law of nature must be vindicated. The savage is morally and mentally an unfit instrument for the spread of civilization, except when, like the higher mammalia, he is reduced to a state of slavery; his occupation is gone, and his place is required for an improved race. Allowing for the rapidly increasing ratio in which progress advances, it is not too much to assume, that in half a century from the present time, savage life will have ceased to have a single true representative on the face of the globe, and the evidence which it has been the means of handing down to our generation will have perished with it.

When we find that the condition of the aboriginal man must have been one of such complete inanity as to render him incapable of spontaneously initiating even the most rudimentary arts, it follows as a matter of course that in the earliest stages of his career, he must, like children of our own day, have been subject to compulsory instruction. And in looking to nature for the sources from which such early instruction must have been derived, we need not, I think, be long in coming to the conclusion, that the school of our first parent must be sought for in his struggles for mastery with the brute creation, and that, consequently, his first lessons must have been directed to attaining proficiency in the art of war.

Hence it follows that it is to the lower animals that we must look for the origin of all those branches of primitive warfare which it is the object of this lecture to trace out. Nor indeed shall we fail to find abundant evidence that there is hardly a single branch of human industry which may not reasonably be attributed to the same source.

The province of war extends downward through the animal kingdom, showing unmistakable evidence of its existence in forms, offensive and defensive, differing but little from those of the human era, through the unnumbered ages of the geological periods, long prior to man's advent; proving, beyond the possibility of doubt, that from the remotest age in which we find evidence of organized beings, war has been ordained to an important function in the creative process.

Judging by results, which I apprehend is the only true method of investigating the phenomena of life, three primary instincts appear to have been implanted in nearly all the higher animals [12]: alimentiveness, for the sustenance of life; amativeness, for the propagation of species; and combativeness, for the protection of species, and the propagation by natural selection of the most energetic breeds; on which latter subject much important information has been given to the world by Mr. Darwin, in his celebrated work on the origin of species.

Much might, I believe, be said on the connexion which subsists between these functions, all of which are, in some form or other, necessary to a healthy condition. Suffice, however, to observe, that as regards the dawn of an Utopia, in which some men who think themselves practical appear to indulge; whether we study the subject by observing the uses to which animals apply the various and ingeniously constructed weapons with which Providence has armed them, or whether we view it in relation to the prodigious armaments of all the most civilized nations of Europe, we find no more evidence in nature, of a state of society in which wars shall cease, than we do of a state of existence in which we shall support life without food, or propagate our species by other means than those which nature has appointed.

The universality of the warlike element is shown in the fact, that the classifications of the weapons of men and animals are identical, and may be treated under the same heads.

Many constructive arts are brought to greater perfection in animals by the development of faculties, especially adapting them to the peculiar implements with which nature has furnished them, than can be attained by man, and especially by the aboriginal man, whose particular attribute appears, by all analogy of savage life, to have been an increase of that imitative faculty which, in the lower creation, is found only in a modified degree in apes.

The lower creation would thus furnish man not only with the first element of instruction, but with examples for the improvement of the work commenced, or, to use the words of Pope:

"From the creatures thy instructions take,
Thy arts of building from the bee receive;
Learn from the mole to plough, the worm to weave;
Learn from the little nautilus to sail,
Spread the thin oars, and catch the driving gale;
Here, too, all forms of social reason find,
And hence let reason late instruct mankind." [13]

In the art of war, as we shall see, he would not only derive his first instruction from the beasts, but he would improve his means of offence and defence from time to time by lessons derived from the same source.

It therefore appears desirable that, before entering upon that branch of the subject which relates to the progress and development of the art of war, I should point out briefly the analogies which exist between the weapons, tactics, and stratagems of savages and those of the lower creation, and show to what extent man appears to have availed himself of the weapons of animals for his own defence.

In so doing the subject may be classified as follows:—

Classification of the Weapons of Animals anal Savages.

Firstly, with respect to the combative principle itself. The identity of this instinct in men and animals may be seen in the widely-spread custom of baiting animals against each other, a practice which is not derived from any one source, but is indigenous in the countries in which it prevails, and arises from the inherent sympathy which exists between men and animals in the exercise of this particular function.

In the island of Tahiti, long before the first European vessel was seen off their shores, the inhabitants were accustomed to train and right cocks, which were fed with great care, and kept upon finely-carved perches. [14] Cock-fighting also prevails amongst the Malays, Celebes, and Balinese. The Javanese fight their cocks like the Mahommedans of Hindustan, without spurs; the Malays, Bugis, and Macassars with artificial spurs shaped like a scythe. [15] It also prevails in Central Africa, Central America, and Peru. The Sumatrans fight their cocks for vast sums; a man has been known to stake his wife and children, son, mother, or sister on the issue of a battle, and when a dispute occurs, the owners decide the question by an appeal to the sword. In like manner Adrastus, the son of Midas, King of Phrygia, is said to have killed his brother in consequence of a quarrel which took place between them in regard to a battle of quails.

When Themistocles led the Greeks out against the Persians, happening to see two cocks fight, he showed them as an example to his soldiers. Cock-fighting was afterwards exhibited annually in presence of the whole people, and the crowing of a cock was ever after regarded as a presage of victory. [16]

The Javanese also fight hogs and rams together. The buffalo and tiger are matched against each other. In Butan the combat is between two bulls. Combats of elephants took place for the amusement of the early Indian kings. The Chinese and Javanese fight quails, crickets, and fish. The Romans fought cocks, quails, and partridges, also the rhinoceros. In Stamboul two rams are employed for fighting. The Russians fight geese, and the betting runs very high upon them.[17] We find horses, elephants, and oxen standing side by side with man in hostile array, and dogs were used by the Gauls for the same purpose. Amongst the ancients, the horse, the wolf, and the cock were offered on the altar of Mars for their warlike qualities.

Who can doubt with these examples before us, that an instinct so widely disseminated and so identical in men and animals, must have been ordained for special objects?

The causes which give rise to the exercise of the function, vary with the advance of civilization. We have now ceased to take delight in the mere exhibition of brute combats, but the profession of war is still held in as much esteem as at any previous period in the history of mankind, and we bestow the highest honours of the State upon successful combatants.

This, however, leads to another subject, viz. the causes of war amongst primitive races, which is deserving of separate treatment.

Defensive Weapons.

We may pass briefly over the defensive weapons of animals and savages, not by any means from the analogy being less perfect in this class of weapons, but rather because the similarity is too obvious to make it necessary that much stress should be laid on their resemblance.

Hides. The thick hides of pachydermatous animals correspond to the quilted armour of ancient and semi-civilized races. Some animals, like the rhinoceros and hippopotamus, are entirely armed in this way; others have their defences on the most vulnerable part, as the mane of the lion, and the shoulder pad of the boar. [18] The skin of the tiger is of so tough and yielding a nature, as to resist the horn of the buffalo when driven with full force against its sides.[19] The condor of Peru has such a thick coating of feathers, that eight or ten bullets may strike without piercing it. [20]

According to Thucydides, the Locrians and Acarnanians, being professed thieves and robbers, were the first to clothe themselves in armour. [21] But as a general rule it may be said, that the opinions of ancient writers upon the origin of the customs with which they were familiar, are of little value in our days. There is, however, evidence to show that the use of defensive armour is not usual amongst savages in the lowest stages of culture. It is not employed, properly speaking, by the Australians, the Bush-men, the Fuegians, or in the Fiji or Sandwich Islands. But in other parts of the world, soon after men began to clothe themselves in the skins of beasts, they appear to have used the thicker hides of animals for purposes of defence. When the Esquimaux apprehends hostility, he takes off his ordinary shirt, and puts on a deer's skin, tanned in such a manner as to render it thick for defence, and over this he again draws his ordinary shirt, which is also of deer-skin, but thinner in substance. The Esquimaux also use armour of eider drake's skin. [22] The Abipones and Indians of the Grand Chako arm themselves with a cuirass, greaves, and helmet, composed of the thick hide of the tapir, but they no longer use it against the musketry of the Europeans.[23] The Yucanas also use shields of the same material. The war-dress of a Patagonian chief from the Museum of the Institution is exhibited (Plate VII, figs. 11, 12); it is composed of seven thicknesses of hide, probably of the horse, upon the body, and three on the sleeves. The chiefs of the Musgu negroes of Central Africa use for defence a strong doublet of the same kind, made of buffalo's hide with the hair inside.[24] The Kayans of Borneo use hide for their war-dress, as shown by a specimen belonging to the Institution (Fig. 13). The skin of the bear and panther is most esteemed for this purpose. [25] The inhabitants of Pulo Nias, an island off the western coast of Sumatra, use for armour a 'baju' made of leather. In some parts of Egypt a breastplate was made of the back of the crocodile (Fig. 14). In the island of Cayenne, in 1519, the inhabitants used a breastplate of buffalo's hide.[26] The Lesghi of Tartary wore armour of hog's skin.[27] The Indians of Chili, in the seventeenth century, wore corselets, back and breast plates, gauntlets, and helmets of leather, so hardened, that it is described by Ovalle as being equal to metal. [28] According to Strabo (p. 306), the German Rhoxolani wore helmets, and breastplates of bull's hide, though the Germans generally placed little reliance in defensive armour. The Ethiopians used the skins of cranes and ostriches for their armour.[29]

We learn from Herodotus that it was from the Libyans the Greeks derived the apparel and aegis of Minerva, as represented upon her images, but instead of a pectoral of scale armour, that of the Libyans was merely of skin.[30] According to Smith's Dict, of Gr. and Roman Antiquities (s.v. lorica), the Greek 'thorax', called [not transcribed], from its standing erect by its own stiffness, was originally of leather, before it was constructed of metal. In Meyrick's Ancient Armour, there is the figure of a suit, supposed formerly to have belonged to the Rajah of Guzerat (Plate VIII, fig. 15). The body part of this suit is composed of four pieces of rhinoceros hide, showing that, in all probability, this was the material originally employed for that particular class of armour, which is now produced of the same form in metal, a specimen of which, from the Museum of the Institution, taken from the Sikhs, is now exhibited (Fig. 16).

In more advanced communities, as skins began to be replaced by woven materials, quilted armour supplied the place of hides. In those parts of the Polynesian Islands in which armour is used, owing probably to the absence of suitable skins, woven armour appears to have been employed in a comparatively low state of society. Specimens of this class of armour from the Museum of the Institution are exhibited; they are from the Kingsmill Islands, Pleasant Island, and the Sandwich Islands. A helmet from the latter place (PI. VIII, fig. 17) much resembles the Grecian in form, while the under tippet, from Pleasant Island (PL VII, fig. 18), may be compared to the pectoral of the Egyptians (Fig. 19, a and b), which, as well as the head-dress (PI. VIII, fig. 20), was of a thickly quilted material. The Egyptians wore this pectoral up to the time of Xerxes, who employed their sailors, armed in this way, during his expedition into Greece. Herodotus says that the Indians of Asia wore a thorax of rush matting. [31] In 1514, Magellan [32] found tunics of quilted cotton, called ‘laudes', in use by the Muslims of Guzerat and the Deccan. An Indian helmet of this description from my collection (Fig. 21) is exhibited; in form it resembles the Egyptian, and an Ethiopian one (Fig. 22), composed of beads of the same form, brought from Central Africa by Consul Petherick, is exhibited. Fig. 23 shows that the same form, in India, was subsequently produced in metal. A suit of quilted armour formerly belonging to Koer Singh, and lately presented to the Institution by Sir Vincent Eyre, is also exhibited (Plate VII, fig. 24). The body armour and helmet found upon Tippoo Sahib at his death, which are now in the Museum of the Institution (Plate IX, fig. 25, a, b, and c), were thickly quilted. Upon the breast, this armour consists of two sheets of parchment, and nine thicknesses of padding composed of cocoons of the Sahirnia mylitta, stuffed with the wool of the Eriodendron anfractuosum, D.C., neatly sewn together, as represented in fig. 25 1b [33] The Aztecs and Peruvians also guarded themselves with a wadded cotton doublet. [34] Quilted armour or thick linen corselets were used by the Persians, Phoenicians, Chalybes, Assyrians, Lusitanians, and Scythians, by the Greeks, and occasionally by the Romans.[35] By the Persians it was used much later; and in Africa to this day, quilted armour, of precisely the same description, is used both for men and horses by the Bornouese of Central Africa, and is described by Denham and Clapperton [36] (Plate VIII, fig. 26). Plate VII, fig. 27, is a suit of armour in the Institution, from the Navigator Islands, composed of coco-nut fibre coarsely netted. Fig. 28 is part of a Chinese jacket of sky-blue cotton, quilted with enclosed plates of iron; it is precisely similar to the 'brigandine jacket' used in Europe in the sixteenth century, which was composed of 'small plates of iron quilted within some stuff ', and ‘covered generally with sky-blue cloth’ [37] This class of armour may be regarded as a link connecting the quilted with the scale armour, to be described hereafter.

As a material for shields, the hides of animals were employed even more universally, and up to a later stage of civilization. In North America the majority of the wild tribes use shields of the thickest parts of the hides of the buffalo. [38] In the New Hebrides the skin of the alligator is used for this purpose, as appears by a specimen belonging to the Institution. In Africa the Fans of the Gaboon employ the hide of the elephant for their large, rectangular shields. [39] The Wadi, the Wagogo, and the Abyssinians in East Africa, have shields of buffalo's hide, or some kind of leather, like the Ethiopians of the time of Herodotus. The ox-hide shields of the Greeks are mentioned in Homer's Iliad; that of Ajax was composed of seven hides with a coating of brass on the outside. The spear of Hector is described as piercing six of the hides and the brass coating, remaining fixed in the seventh hide. [40] The Kaffirs, Bechuanas, Basutos, and others in South Africa, use the hide of the ox. [41] The Kelgeres, Kelowi, and Tawarek, of Central Africa, employ the hide of the Leucoryx antelope. [42] Shields of the rhinoceros hide, from Nubia, and of the ox, from Fernando Po, are exhibited. In Asia the Biluchi carry shields of the rhinoceros horn, and the same material is also used in East Africa. A specimen from Zanzibar is in the Institution. In the greater part of India the shields are made of rhinoceros and buffalo's hide, boiled in oil, until they sometimes become transparent, and are proof against the edge of a sabre. [43]

In a higher state of civilization, as the facilities for constructing shields of improved materials increased, the skins of animals were still used to cover the outside. Thus the negroes of the Gold Coast made their shields of osier covered with leather.[44] That of the Kanembu of Central Africa is of wood covered with leather, [45] and very much resembles in form that of the Egyptians, which, as we learn from Meyrick and others, was also covered with leather, having the hair on the outside like the shields of theGreeks. [46] The Roman 'scutum' was of wood covered with linen and sheepskin. According to the author of Horae Ferales, the Saxon shield was of wood covered with leather; the same applies to the Scotch target, and leather was used as a covering for shields as late as the time of Henry VIII.

Head Crests. The origin of the hairy crests of our helmets is clearly traceable to the custom of wearing for head-dresses the heads and hair of animals. The Asiatic Ethiopians used as a head-covering, the skin of a horse's head, stripped from the carcase together with the ears and mane, and so contrived, that the mane served for a crest, while the ears appeared erect upon the head (Hdt. vii. 70). In the coins representing Hercules, he appears wearing a lion's skin upon the head. These skins were worn in such a manner that the teeth appeared grinning at the enemy over the head of the wearer (as represented in Plate VIII, fig. 29, which is taken from a bronze in the Blacas collection), a custom which seems also to have prevailed in Mexico.[47] Similar head-dresses are worn by the soldiers on Trajan's Column. The horns worn on the heads of some of the North American Indians (Fig. 30), and in some parts of Africa [48] are no doubt derived from this practice of wearing on the head the skins of animals with their appendages. The helmet of Pyrrhus, King of Epirus, was surmounted by two goat's horns. Horns were afterwards represented in brass, on the helmets of the Thracians (Fig. 31), the Belgic Gauls, and others. Fig. 32 is an ancient British helmet of bronze lately found in the Thames, surmounted by straight horns of the same material. [49] Horned helmets are figured on the ancient vases. Fig. 33 is a Greek helmet having horns of brass, and traces of the same custom may still be observed in heraldry.[50]

The practice of wearing head-dresses of feathers, to distinguish the chiefs from the rank and file, is universal in all parts of the world, and in nearly every stage of civilization. Amongst the North American Indians the feathers are cut in a particular manner to denote the rank of the wearer, precisely in the same manner that the long feathers of our general officers distinguish them from those wearing shorter feathers in subordinate ranks. This custom, Mr. Schoolcraft observes, when describing the head-dresses of the American Indians, may very probably be derived from the feathered creation, in which the males, in most of the cock, turkey, and pheasant tribes, are crowned with bright crests and ornaments of feathers. [51]

Solid Plates. It has often struck me as remarkable that the shells of the tortoise and turtle, which are so widely distributed and so easily captured, and which would appear to furnish shields ready made to the hand of man, should seldom, if ever, in so far as I have been able to learn, be used by savages for that purpose. This may, however, be accounted for by the fact that broad shields of that particular form, though common in more advanced civilizations, are never found in the hands of savages, at least in those localities in which the turtle, or large tortoise, is available.

It will be seen subsequently, in tracing the history of the shield, that in the rudest condition of savage life, this weapon of defence has a history of its own; that both in Africa and Australia it is derived by successive stages from the stick or club, and that the broad shield does not appear to have been developed until after mankind had acquired sufficient constructive skill to have been able to form shields of lighter and more suitable materials than is afforded by the shell of the turtle. It is, however, evident that in later times the analogy was not lost sight of, as the word 'testudo'' is a name given by the Romans to several engines of war having shields attached to them, and especially to that particular formation of the legionary troops, in which they approached a fortified building with their shields joined together, and overlapping, like the scaly shell of the imbricated turtle, which is a native of the Mediterranean and Asiatic seas.

Jointed Plates. In speaking of the jointed plates, so common to all the Crustacea, it is sufficient to notice that this class of defence in the animal kingdom, may be regarded as the prototype of that peculiar form of armour which was used by the Romans, and to which the French, at the commencement of the seventeenth century, gave the name of ‘ecrevisse ', from its resemblance to the shell of a lobster. The fluted armour, common in Persia, and in the middle ages of Europe, is also constructed in exact imitation of the corrugated shell defences of a large class of the Mollusca.

Scale Armour. That scale armour derived its origin from the scales of animals, there can be little doubt. It has been stated on the authority of Arrian (Tact. 13. 14), that the Greeks distinguished scale armour by the term [not transcribed], expressive of its resemblance to the scales of fish; whilst the jointed armour, composed of long flexible bands, like the armour of the Roman soldier, and the 'ecrevisse ' of the middle ages, was called [not transcribed] from its resemblance to the scales of serpents. The brute origin of scale armour is well illustrated by the breastplate of the Bugo Dyaks, a specimen of which, from the Museum of the Institution, is represented in Plate IX, fig. 34. The process of its construction was described in a notice attached to a specimen of this armour in the Exhibition of 1862. The scales of the Pangolin are collected by the Bugis as they are thrown off by the animal, and are stitched on to bark with small threads of cane, so as to overlap each other in the same manner that they are arranged on the skin of the animal. When the front piece is completely covered with scales, a hole is cut in the bark for the head of the wearer. The specimen now exhibited appears, however, to be composed of the entire skin of the animal. Captain Grant, in his Walk across Africa, mentions that the scales of the armadillo are in like manner collected by the negroes of East Africa, and worn in a belt ‘three inches across', as a charm. [52]

It is reasonable to suppose that the use of scale armour, in most countries, originated in this manner by sewing on to the quilted armour before described, fragments of any hard material calculated to give it additional strength. Plate VIII, fig. 35, is a piece of bark from Tahiti, studded with pieces of coco-nut stitched on. The Sarmatians and Quadi are described by Ammianus Marcellinus as being protected by a 'lorica', composed of pieces of horn, planed and polished, and fastened like feathers upon a linen shirt. [53] Pausanias also, who is confirmed by Tacitus, says that the Sarmatians had large herds of horses, that they collected the hoofs, and after preparing them for the purpose, sewed them together, with the nerves and sinews of the same animal, so as to overlap each other like the surface of a fir cone, and he adds, that the ' lorica ' thus formed was not inferior to that of the Greeks either in strength or elegance. The Emperor Domitian had, after this model, a cuirass of boar's hoofs stitched together. [54] Fig. 36 represents a fragment of scale armour made of horn, found at Pompeii. Avery similar piece of armour (Fig. 37), from some part of Asia, said to be from Japan, but the actual locality of which is not known, is figured in Meyriek's Ancient Armour, pi. iii. 1. It is made of the hoofs of some animal, stitched and fastened so as to hold together without the aid of a linen corselet. An ancient stone figure [55] (Plate IX, fig. 38), having an inscription in a character cognate to the Greek, but in an unknown language, and covered with armour of this description, is represented in the third volume of the Journal of the Archaeological Association. The Kayans, inhabiting the eastern coast of Borneo, form a kind of armour composed of little shells placed one overlapping the other, like scales, and having a large mother-of-pearl shell at the end. This last portion of the armour is shown in the figure of the Kayan war-dress already referred to (Plate VII, fig. 13). Plate VIII, fig. 39, is a back- and breast-piece of armour from the Sandwich Islands, composed of seals' teeth, set like scales, and united with string.

Similar scales would afterwards be constructed in bronze and iron. It was thus employed by the Egyptians (Plate IX, fig. 40), two scales of which are shown in Fig. 41; also by the Persians, Assyrians, Philistines, Dacians, and most ancient nations.

The armour of Goliath is believed to have been of scales, from the fact of the word 'kaskassim,’ used in the text of 1 Sam. xvii, being the same employed in Leviticus and Ezekiel, to express the scales of fish. [56] Amongst the Romans, scale armour was regarded as characteristic of barbarians, but they appear to have adopted it in the time of the Emperors. A suit of Japanese armour in my collection shows four distinct systems of defence, the back and breast being of solid plates, the sleeves and leggings composed of small pieces of iron, stitched on to cloth, and united with chain, whilst other portions are quilted with enclosed pieces of iron (Fig. 42, a and b). Fig. 43, a and b, is a suit of Chinese armour, in the Museum, having large iron scales on the inside (Fig. 44). This system was also employed in Europe. Fig. 45 is the inner side of a suit of ‘jazerine’ armour of the fifteenth or sixteenth century, in my collection. Fig. 46 represents a similar suit in the Museum of the Institution, probably of the same date, having large scales of iron on the outside. A last vestige of scale armour may be seen in the dress of the Albanians, which, like the Scotch and ancient Irish kilt, and that formerly worn by the Maltese peasantry, is a relic of costume of the Greek and Roman age. In the Albanian jacket the scales are still represented in gold embroidery. [57]

Offensive Weapons of Men and Animals.

Piercing Weapons. The Gnu of South Africa, when pressed, will attack men, bending its head downwards, so as to pierce with the point of its horn. [58] The same applies to many of the antelope tribe. The rhinoceros destroys the elephant with the thrust of its horn, ripping up the belly (Plate X, fig. 47). The horn rests on a strong arch formed by the nasal bones those of the African rhinoceros, two in number, are fixed to the nose by a strong apparatus of muscles and tendons, so that they are loose when the animal is in a quiescent state, but become firm and immovable when he is enraged, showing" in an especial manner that this apparatus is destined for warlike purposes. [59] It is capable of piercing the ribs of a horse, passing through saddle, padding, and all. [60] Mr. Atkinson, in his Siberian travels, speaks of the tusk of the wild boar, which in those parts is long, and as sharp as a knife, and he describes the death of a horse which was killed by a single stroke from this animal, delivered in the chest. [61] The buffalo charges at full speed with its horn down. [62] The bittern, with its beak, aims always at the eye. [63] The walrus (Fig. 48) attacks fiercely with its pointed tusks, and will attempt to pierce the side of a boat with them. [64] The needle-fish of the Amazons is armed with a long pointed lance. [65] The same applies to the sword-fish of the Mediterranean and Atlantic (Fig. 49), which, notwithstanding its food is mostly vegetable, attacks the whale with its spear-point on all occasions of meeting. There is an instance on record, of a man, whilst bathing in the Severn near Worcester, having been killed by the sword-fish.

The weapon of the sword-fish is used as a spear-head by the wild tribes of Cambodia, and some idea may be formed of its efficiency for this purpose, and of the confidence with which it is used, by the following account of an attack on a rhinoceros with this weapon, by Mons. Mouhot. [66] He says:

‘The manner in which the rhinoceros is hunted by the Laotians is curious, on account of its simplicity and the skill they display ... They had bamboos, with iron blades, something between a bayonet and a poignard. The weapon of the chief was the horn of a sword-fish, long, sharp, strong, supple, and not likely to break. Thus armed, we set off into the thickest part of the forest, with all the windings of which our leader was familiar, and could tell with tolerable certainty where we should find our expected prey. After penetrating nearly two miles into the forest, we suddenly heard the crackling of branches, and rustling of the dry leaves. The chief went on in advance, signing to us to keep a little way behind, but to have our arms in readiness. Soon our leader uttered a shrill cry, as a token that the animal was near; he then commenced striking against each other two bamboo canes, and the menset up wild yells to provoke the animal to quit his retreat.
A few minutes only elapsed before he rushed towards us, furious at having been disturbed. He was a rhinoceros of the largest size, and opened a most enormous mouth. Without any sign of fear, but on the contrary of great exultation, as though sure of his prey, the intrepid hunter advanced, lance in hand, and then stood still, waiting for the creature's assault. I must say I trembled for him and loaded my gun with two balls; but when the rhinoceros came within reach, and opened his immense jaws to seize his enemy [67], the hunter thrust his lance into him to a depth of some feet, and calmly retired to where we were posted.’

After the animal was dead, the chief withdrew his sword-fish blade, and presented it to Mons. Mouhot.

The narwhal has a still more formidable weapon of the same kind (PI. X, fig. 50). It attacks the whale, and occasionally the bottoms of ships, a specimen of the effect of which attack, from the Museum of the Institution, is represented in Fig. 51. The Esquimaux, who, in the accounts which they give of their own customs, profess to derive much experience from the habits of the animals amongst which they live, use the narwhal's tusk for the points of their spears. Fig. 52 represents a 'nuguit' from Greenland, of the form mentioned by Cranz [68]; it is armed with the point of the narwhal's tusk. Fig. 53, from my collection, has the shaft also of narwhal's tusk; it is armed with a metal blade, but it is introduced here in order to show the association which existed in the mind of the constructor between his weapon and the animal from which the shaft is derived, and for the capture of which it is chiefly used. The wooden shaft, it will be seen, is constructed in the form of the fish, and the ivory fore-shaft is inserted in the snout in the exact position of that of the fish itself. At Kotzebue Sound, Captain Beechey [69] found the natives armed with lances composed of a walrus tooth fixed to the end of a wooden staff (Fig.54). They also employ the walrus tooth for the points of their tomahawks (Fig. 55). The horns of the antelope are used as lance-points by the Djibba negroes of Central Africa, as already mentioned (p. 52), and in Nubia also by the Shillooks and Dinkas.[70] The antelope's horn is also used in South Africa for the same purpose. [71] The argus pheasant of India [72], the wing-wader of Australia [73], and the plover of Central Africa [74], have spurs on their wings, with which they fight; the cock and turkey have spurs on their feet, used expressly for offence. The white crane of America has been known to drive its beak deep into the bowels of a hunter. [75] The Indians of Virginia, in 1606, are described as having arrows armed with the spurs of the turkey and beaks of birds. [76] In the Christy collection there is an arrow, supposed to be from South America, which is armed with the natural point of the deer's horn (Fig. 56). The war-club of the Iroquois, called GA-NE-U'-GA-O-DUS-HA, or 'deer-horn war-club', was armed with a point of the deer's horn (Fig. 57), about 4 inches in length; since communication with Europeans, a metal point has been substituted (Fig. 58). It appears highly probable that the 'martel-de-fer ' of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, which is also used in India and Persia, may have been derived, as its form indicates, from a horn weapon of this kind. Horn points suitable for arming such weapons have been found both in England and Ireland, two specimens of which are in my collection. [77] The weapon of the sting-ray, from the method of using it by the animal itself, should more properly be classed with serrated weapons, but it is a weapon in general use amongst savages for spear or arrow points (Fig. 59), for which it has the particular merit of breaking off in the wound. It causes a frightful wound, and being sharply serrated, as well as pointed, there is no means of cutting it out. It is used in this way by the inhabitants of Gambier Island, Samoa [78], Otaheite [79], the Fiji Islands [80], Pellew Islands [81], and many of the Low Islands. Amongst the savages of tropical South America, the blade of the ray, probably the Trygon histrix, is used for arrow-points. [82]

In the Batistes capriscus (Fig. 60a), a rare British fish, the anterior dorsal is preceded by a strong erectile spine, which is used for piercing other fishes from beneath. Its base is expanded and perforated, and a bolt from the supporting plate passes freely through it. When this spine is raised, a hollow at the back receives a prominence from the next bony ray, which fixes the spine in an erect position, as the hammer of a gun-lock acts at full-cock, and the spine cannot be forced down till this prominence is withdrawn, as by pulling the trigger. 'This mechanism may be compared to the fixing and unfixing of a bayonet; when the spine is unfixed and bent down, it is received into a groove on the supporting plate, and offers no impediment to the progress of the fish through the water.' These fishes are also found in a fossil state, and, to use the words of Professor Owen, from whose work this description of the Batistes is borrowed, 'exemplify in a remarkable manner the efficacy, beauty, and variety of the ancient armoury of that order.' [83] The stickleback is armed in a similar manner, and is exceedingly pugnacious. The Coitus diceraus, Ball. (Fig. 60b), has a multi-barbed horn on its back, exactly resembling the spears of the Esquimaux, South American, and Australian savages. The Naseus fronticornis, Lac. (Fig. 60 c), has also a spear-formed weapon. The Yellow-bellied Acanthurus is armed with a spine of considerable length upon its tail.

The Australians of King George's Sound use the pointed fin of the roach to arm their spears [84]; the inhabitants of New Guinea also arm their arrows with the offensive horn of the saw-fish, and with the claw of the cassowary. The sword of the Limulus, or king-crab is an offensive weapon; its habits do not appear to be well understood, but its weapon is used in some of the Malay islands for arrow-points (Fig. 61). The natives of San Salvador, when discovered by Columbus, used lances pointed with the teeth of fish. [85] The spine of the Diodon is also used for arrow-points (Fig. 62). Amongst other piercing weapons suggested by the horns of animals may be noticed the Indian 'kandjar' composed of one side of the horn of the buffalo, having the natural form and point (Fig. 63). In later times a metal dagger, with ivory handle, was constructed in the same country (Fig. 64), after the exact model of the one of horn, the handle having one side flat, in imitation of the half-split horn, though of course that peculiar form was no longer necessitated by the material then used. The same form of weapon was afterwards used with a metal handle (Fig. 65). The sharp horns of the ‘sasin', or common antelope, often steel pointed, are still used as offensive weapons in India (Figs. 66, 67, 68). Several examples of these are in the Museum of the Institution. Three stages of this weapon are exhibited, the first having the natural point, the second a metal point, and the third a weapon of nearly the same form composed entirely of metal. The Fakirs and Dervishes, not being permitted by their profession to carry arms, use the pointed horn of the antelope for this purpose. Fig. 69 is a specimen from my collection; from its resemblance to the Dervishes' crutch of Western Asia, I presume it can be none other than the one referred to in the Journal of the Archaeological Association, from which I obtained this information respecting the Dervishes' weapon. [86] Mankind would also early derive instruction from the sharp thorns of trees, with which he must come in contact in his rambles through the forests; the African mimosa, the Gledischia, the American aloe, and the spines of certain palms, would afford him practical experience of their efficacy as piercing weapons, and accordingly we find them often used by savages in barbing their arrows. [87]

Striking Weapons. Many animals defend themselves by blows delivered with their wings or legs; the giraffe kicks like a horse as well as strikes sideways with its blunt horns; the camel strikes with its fore legs and kicks with its hind legs; the elephant strikes with its proboscis and tramples with its feet; eagles, swans, and other birds strike with their wings; the swan is said to do so with sufficient force to break a man's leg; the cassowary strikes forward with its feet; the tiger strikes a fatal blow with its paw; the whale strikes with its tail, and rams with such force, that the American whaler Essex is said to have been sunk by that animal. [88] There is no known example of mankind in so low a state as to be unacquainted with the use of artificial weapons. The practice of boxing with the fist, however, is by no means confined to the British Isles as some people seem to suppose, for besides the Romans, Lusitanians [89] and others mentioned in classical history, it prevailed, certainly in the Polynesian islands [90] and in Central Africa. [91]

Serrated Weapons. This class of weapons in animals corresponds to the cutting weapons of men. Amongst the most barbarous races, however, as amongst animals, no example of a cutting weapon is found [92] although the Polynesian islanders make very good knives of the split and sharpened edges of bamboo, and the Esquimaux, also, use the split tusk of the walrus as a knife, these cannot be regarded, nor, indeed, are they used, as edged weapons. These, strictly speaking, are confined to the metal age, and their place, in the earliest stages of civilization, is supplied by weapons with serrated, or saw-like edges.

Perhaps the nearest approach in the animal kingdom to an edged weapon is the fore-arm of the mantis, a kind of cricket, used by the Chinese and others in the East for their amusement. Their combats have been compared to that of two soldiers fighting with sabres. They cut and parry with their fore-arms, and, sometimes, a single stroke with these is sufficient to decapitate, or cut in two the body of an antagonist. But on closer inspection, these fore-arms are found to be set with a row of strong and sharp spines, similar to those of all other animals that are provided with this class of weapon. The snout of the saw-fish is another example of the serrated weapon. Its mode of attacking the whale is by jumping up high in the air, and falling on the animal, not with the point, but with the sides of its formidable weapon, both edges of which are armed with a row of sharp horns, set like teeth, by means of which it rasps a severe cut in the flesh of the whale. The design in this case is precisely analogous to that of the Australian savage, who throws his similarly constructed spear so as to strike, not with the bone point, but with its more formidable edges, which are thick set with a row of sharp-pointed pieces of obsidian, or rock-crystal. The saw-fish is amongst the most widely distributed of fishes, belonging to the arctic, antarctic, and tropical seas. It may, therefore, very possibly have served as a model in many of the numerous localities in which this character of weapon is found in the hands of savages. The snout itself is used as a weapon by the inhabitants of New Guinea, the base being cut and bound round so as to form a handle. Plate XI, fig. 70, is a specimen from the Museum of the Institution. The weapon of the sting-ray, though used by savages for spear-points, more properly belongs to this class, as the mode of its employment by the animal itself consists in twisting its long, slender tail round the object of attack, and cutting the surface with its serrated edge. [93] The teeth of all animals, including those of man himself, also furnish examples of serrated weapons.

When we find models of this class of weapon so widely distributed in the lower creation, it is not surprising that the first efforts of mankind in the construction of trenchant implements, should so universally consist of teeth or flint flakes, arranged along the edges of staves or clubs, in exact imitation of the examples which he finds ready to his hand, in the mouths of the animals which he captures, and on which he is dependent for his food. Several specimens of implements, edged in this manner with sharks' teeth, from the Museum of the Institution, are represented in Plate XI, figs. 71, 72, 73, 74. They are found chiefly in the Marquesas, in Tahiti, Depeyster's Island, Byron's Isles, the Kingsmill Group, Radak Island [94] and the Sandwich Islands [95], also in New Zealand (Fig. 75). They are of various shapes, and are used for various cutting purposes, as knives, swords, and glaves. Two distinct methods of fastening the teeth to the wood prevail in the Polynesian Islands; firstly, by inserting them in a groove cut in the sides of the stick or weapon; and secondly, by arranging the teeth in a row, along the sides of the stick, between two small strips of wood on either side of the teeth, lashed on to the staff, in all cases, with small strings, composed of plant fibre. The points of the teeth are usually arranged in two opposite directions on the same staff, so that a severe cut may be given either in thrusting or withdrawing the weapon. [96]

A similarly constructed implement, also edged with sharks' teeth, was found by Captain Graah on the east coast of Greenland, and is mentioned in Dr. King's paper on the industrial arts of the Esquimaux, in the Journal of the Ethnological Society. [97] The teeth in this implement were secured by small nails, or pegs of bone; it was also used formerly on the West Coast. A precisely similar implement (Fig. 76), but showing an advance in art by being set with a row of chips of meteoric iron, was found amongst the Esquimaux of Davis Strait, and is now in the department of meteorolites in the British Museum. Others, of the same nature, from Greenland, are in the Christy collection (Fig. 77). The 'pacho' of the South Sea Islands appears to have been a sort of club, armed on the inner side with sharks' teeth, set in the same manner. [98] The Tapoyers, of Brazil, used a kind of club, which was broad at the end, and set with teeth and bones, sharpened at the point. [99]

Hernandez gives an account of the construction of the Mexican 'maquahuilt' or Aztec war-club, which was armed on both sides with a row of obsidian flakes, stuck into holes, and fastened with a kind of gum (Fig. 78). [100] Herrera, the Spanish historian, also mentions these as swords of wood, having a groove in the fore part, in which the flints were strongly fixed with bitumen and thread. [101] In 1530, according to the Spanish historians, Copan was defended by 30,000 men, armed with these weapons, amongst others [102]; and similar weapons have been represented in the sculptures of Yucatan. [103] They are also represented in Lord Kingsborough's important work on Mexican antiquities, from which the accompanying representations are taken (Figs. 78, 79, 80). One of these swords, having six pieces of obsidian on each side of the blade, is to be seen in a Museum in Mexico.

In the burial mounds of Western North America, Mr. Lewis Morgan, the historian of the Iroquois, [104] mentions that rows of flint flakes have been found lying, side by side, in order, and suggesting the idea that they must have been fastened into sticks in the same manner as those of Mexico and Yucatan.

Throughout the entire continent of Australia the natives arm their spears with small sharp pieces of obsidian, or crystal, and recently of glass, arranged in rows along the sides near the point, and fastened with a cement of their own preparation, thereby producing a weapon which, though thinner in the shaft, is precisely similar in character to those already described (Fig's. 81 and 82). Turning again to the northern hemisphere, we find in the Museum of Professor Nilsson, at Lund, in Sweden, a smooth, sharp-pointed piece of bone, found in that country, about six inches long, grooved on each side to the depth of about a quarter of an inch, into each of which grooves a row of fine, sharp-edged, and slightly-curved flints were inserted, and fixed with cement. The instrument thus armed was fastened to the end of a shaft of wood, and might either have been thrown by the hand or projected from a bow (Fig. 83). Another precisely similar implement (Fig. 84) is represented in the illustrated Catalogue of the Museum at Copenhagen, showing that in both these countries this system of constructing trenchant implements was employed. In Ireland, although there is no actual evidence of flints having been set in this manner, yet from the numerous examples of this class of weapon that are found elsewhere, and the frequent occurrence of flint implements of a form that would well adapt them to such a purpose, the author of the Catalogue of the Royal Irish Academy expresses his opinion that the same arrangement may very possibly have existed in that country, and that the wood in which they were inserted may, like that which, as I have already said, is supposed to have held the flints found in the graves of the Iroquois, have perished by decay.

Poisoned Weapons. It is unnecessary to enter here into a detailed account of the use of poison by man and animals. Its use by man as a weapon of offence is chiefly confined to those tropical regions in which poisonous herbs and reptiles are most abundant. It is used by the Negroes, Bushmen, and Hottentots of Africa; in the Indian Archipelago, New Hebrides, and New Caledonia. It appears formerly to have been used in the South Seas. It is employed in Bootan; in Assam; by the Stiens of Cambodia; and formerly by the Moors of Mogadore. The Parthians and Scythians used it in ancient times; and it appears always to have been regarded by ancient writers as the especial attribute of barbarism. The Italian bravoes of modern Europe also used it. In America it is employed by the Darian Indians, in Guiana, Brazil, Peru, Paraguay, and on the Orinoco. The composition of the poison varies in the different races, the Bushmen and Hottentots using the venomous secretions of serpents and caterpillars [105] whilst most other nations of the world employ the poisonous herbs of the different countries they inhabit, showing that in all probability this must have been one of those arts which, though of very early origin, arose spontaneously and separately in the various quarters of the globe, after the human family had separated. This subject, however, is deserving of a separate treatment, and will be alluded to elsewhere.

In drawing a parallel between the weapons of men and animals used in the application of poison for offensive purposes, two points of similitude deserve attention.

Firstly, the poison gland of many serpents is situated on the upper jaw, behind and below the eyes. A long excretory duct extends from this gland to the outer surface of the upper jaw, and opens above and before the poison teeth, by which means the poison flows along the sheath into the upper opening of the tooth in such a manner as to secure its insertion into the wound. The hollow interior of the bones with which the South American and other Indians arm the poisoned arrows secures the same object (Fig. 85); it contains the poisonous liquid, and provides a channel for its insertion into the wound. In the bravo's dagger of Italy, a specimen of which from my collection is shown in Fig. 86, a similar provision for the insertion of the poison is effected by means of a groove on either side of the blade, communicating with two rows of small holes, into which the poison flows, and is retained in that part of the blade which enters the wound. Nearly similar blades, with holes, have been found in Ireland, of which a specimen is in the Academy's Museum, and they have been compared with others of the same kind from India, but I am not aware that there is any evidence to show that they were used for poison. Some of the Indian daggers, however, are constructed in close analogy with the poison apparatus of the serpent's tooth, having an enclosed tube running down the middle of the blade, communicating with a reservoir for poison in the handle, and having lateral openings in the blade for the diffusion of the poison in the wound. Similar holes, but without any enclosed tube, and having only a groove on the surface of the blade to communicate with the holes, are found in some of the Scotch dirks, and in several forms of couteau de chasse, in which they appear to have been used merely with a view of letting air into the wound, and accelerating death (Figs. 87 a and b). The Scotch dirk, here represented, has a groove running from the handle along the back of the blade to within three and a half inches of the point. In the bottom of this groove ten holes are pierced, which communicate with other lateral holes at right angles, opening on to the sides of the blade. Daggers are still made at Sheffield for the South American market, with a small hole drilled through the blade, near the point, to contain the poison; and in my collection there is an iron arrow-point (Fig. 88), evidently formed of the point of one of these daggers, having the hole near the point.

It often happens that forms which, in the early history of an art, have served some specific object, are in later times applied to other uses, and are ultimately retained only in the forms of ornamentation. This seems to have been the case with the pierced work upon the blades of weapons which, intended originally for poison, was afterwards used as air-holes, and ultimately for ornament only, as appears by a plug bayonet of the commencement of the eighteenth century in the Tower Armoury, No. 390 of the official Catalogue, for a drawing of which, as well as that of the Scotch dirk, I am indebted to Captain A. Tupper, a member of the Council of this Institution.

The second point of analogy to which I would draw attention is that of the multi-barbed arrows of most savages to the multi-barbed stings of insects, especially that of the bee (Fig. 89), which is so constructed that it cannot usually be withdrawn, but breaks off with its poisonous appendage into the wound. An exact parallel to this is found in the poisoned arrows of savages of various races, which, as already mentioned, are frequently armed with the point of the sting-ray, for the express purpose of breaking in the wound. In the arrows of the Bushmen, the shaft is often partly cut through, so as to break when it comes in contact with a bone, and the barb is constructed to remain in the wound when the arrow is withdrawn (Fig. 90). The same applies to the barbed arrows used with the Malay blowpipe (Fig. 91), and those of the wild tribes of Assam (Fig. 92), which are also poisoned. The arrow-points of the Shoshones of North America (Fig. 93), said to be poisoned, are tied on, purposely, with gut in such a manner as to remain when the arrow is withdrawn. The arrows of the Macoushie tribe of Guiana (Fig. 94) are made with a small barbed and poisoned head, which is inserted in a socket in the shaft, in which it fits loosely, so as to detach in the wound. This weapon appears to form the link between the poisoned arrow and the fishing arrow or harpoon, which is widely distributed, and which I propose to describe on a subsequent occasion. Mr. Latham, of Wilkinson's, Pall Mall, has been kind enough to describe to me a Venetian dagger of glass, formerly in his possession; it had a tube in the centre for the poison, and the blade was constructed with three edges. By a sharp wrench from the assassin, the blade was broken off, and remained in the wound.

It has also been supposed that from their peculiar construction most of the triangular and concave-based arrow-heads of flint that are found in this country, and in Ireland, were constructed for a similar purpose (Fig. 95).

The serrated edges of weapons, like those of the bee and the sting-ray, when used as arrow-points, were likewise instrumental in retaining the poison and introducing it into the wound, and this form was copied with a similar object in some of the Florentine daggers above mentioned, a portion of the blade of one of which, taken from Meyrick's Ancient Arms and Armour, is shown in Fig. 96. [106]

Although the use of poison would in these days be scouted by all civilized nations as an instrument of war, we find it still applied to useful purposes in the destruction of the larger animals. The operation of whaling, which is attended with so much danger and difficulty, has of late been greatly facilitated by the use of a mixture of strychnine and ‘woorali ', the well-known poison of the Indians of South America. An ounce of this mixture, attached to a small explosive shell fired from a carbine, has been found to destroy a whale in less than eighteen minutes, without risk to the whaler. [107]

When we consider how impotent a creature the aboriginal and uninstructed man must have been, when contending with the large and powerful animals with which he was surrounded, we cannot too much admire that provision of nature which appears to have directed his attention, during the very earliest stages of his existence, to the acquirement of the subtile art of poisoning. In the forests of Guiana there are tribes, such as the Otomacs, apparently weaponless, but which, by simply poisoning the thumb-nail with ‘curare' or 'woorali', at once become formidable antagonists. [108] Poison is available for hunting as well as for warlike purposes: the South American Indians eat the monkeys killed by this means, merely cutting out the part struck, [109] and the wild tribes of the Malay peninsula do not even trouble themselves to cut out the part before eating. [110] The Bushmen, and the Stiens of Cambodia, use their poisoned weapons chiefly against wild beasts and elephants.

Thus we see that the most noxious of herbs and the most repulsive of reptiles have been the means ordained to instruct mankind in what, during the first ages of his existence, must have been the most useful of arts. We cannot now determine how far this agent may have been influential in exterminating those huge animals, the Mephas primigenius and Rhinoceros tichorhinus, with the remains of which the earliest races of man have been so frequently associated, and which, in those primaeval days, before he began to turn his hand to the destruction of his own species, must have constituted his most formidable enemies.

Missiles. Amongst the offensive weapons of animals, the use of missiles cannot be altogether excluded, although the examples of their use by the lower creation are extremely rare. Some species of cuttle-fish have the power of ejecting water with a good aim. [111] The Toxotes, or archer-fish, obtains its name from its faculty of projecting drops of water at insects some three or four feet from the surface of the water which it seldom fails to bring down. The llama has a habit of ejecting its saliva, but I am not aware of the object of this singular practice. I only know from experience that its manners are offensive, and that it has the power of spitting with a good aim and for some distance. The porcupine has the power of throwing its quills, and is said to do so with effect, although it is not now believed to dart them with any hostile intention. The Polar bear is described in Captain Hall’s recent publication as an animal capable of capturing the walrus by missile force. [112] It is said that the bear will take advantage of an overhanging cliff, under which its prey is seen asleep upon the ice, to throw down, with its paws, large stones, and with such good aim as to hit the walrus on the head, after which, running down to the place where the animal lays stunned, it will take the stone to beat out its brains. That animals are instinctively acquainted with the force of gravitation is evident by their avoiding precipices that would endanger them, and it certainly requires a slight (but at the same time most important) advance upon this knowledge, to avail themselves of large stones for such purposes as are here attributed to the bear; but as the story only rests on the authority of the Esquimaux, it must, I think although they certainly are careful observers of the habits of animals—be rejected, until confirmed by the direct testimony of white men. It has even been doubted whether the alleged habit of monkeys, in throwing coco-nuts at their pursuers, has not arisen from the mistake of the hunter in supposing that fruit accidentally detached from their stalks by the gambols of these animals in the trees, may have been intended as missiles but it appears now to be clearly established that monkeys have the intelligence, not only to throw stones, but even to use them in breaking the shells of nuts. Major Denham, in his account of his travels in Central Africa, near Lake Tshad, says: 'The monkeys, or as the Arabs say, men enchanted, "Beny Adam meshood," were so numerous, that I saw upwards of 150 assembled in one place in the evening. They did not at all appear inclined to give up their ground, but perched on the top of a bank, some 20 feet high, made a terrible noise, and rather gently than otherwise, pelted us as we approached within a certain distance.’ This, I think, is clear evidence of a combined pelting on the part of these untutored animals.

The monkey thus furnishes us with the only example of the use of any external substance for offensive purposes, by any member of the animal kingdom. All others, except, perhaps, the missile fishes above described, use, for offence and defence, the weapons with which nature has furnished them, and which are integral parts of their persons. It is this which so essentially distinguishes man from the lower creation. Man is the tool-using animal. We hare no knowledge of man, in any state of existence, who is not so; nor have we (with the exception of the ape, the link indirectly connecting him with the lower creation, in the same manner that the savage connects the civilized with the aboriginal man, both being branches from the same stem) any knowledge of animals that employ tools or weapons. Herein lies the point of separation, which, in so far as the material universe is concerned, marks the dawn of a new dispensation. Hitherto Providence operates directly on the work to be performed, by means of the living, animated tool. Henceforth, it operates indirectly on the progress and development of creation, first, through the agency of the instinctively tool-using savage, and by degrees, of the intelligent and reasoning man.

DESCRIPTION OF PLATES VI-XI [Please note that these descriptions were prepared by Henry Balfour]

[Revised and abridged from the 'Description' appended to the original text. The roman numeral refers to the Plate on which the figure is printed.]

1. a. Adze of iron, constructed by Captain Cook's armourer for the use of the natives of Tahiti, b. Adze of stone, Tahitian, used as model in making the above. Meyrick (Skelton) Engraved Illustrations of Ancient Arms and Armour (1830), vol. ii. pi. cxlix. Plate VI

2. a. Pipe-handled Tomahawk, of European manufacture, constructed for the use of North American Indians. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) Meyrick (Skelton). 1. c, vol. ii. pi. cxlix. b. Pipe and Tomahawk of pipe-stone, used by the Dacotas of N. America. Schoolcraft, Information concerning the History,etc, of the Indian Tribes of the United States, vol. ii pi. lxix. VI

3. Maeotian, or Scythian Bow, from a vase-painting. Hamilton, Etruscan Antiquities, vol iv. pi. cxvi; Meyrick, Critical Enquiry into Ancient Armour (1824) vol. i. pl. ii.14: Rawlinson, Herodotus (1862), vol. iii. pp. 3, 35. VI.

4. Bow of the Tartar tribes on the borders of Persia. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst. Meyrick (Skelton), 1. c, vol. ii. pi. cxliv. VL

5. Iron Sword (minus the wooden handle) and War-Axe of native manufacture, constructed by the Fans of the Gaboon country. West Africa. (Author's Collection; similar spec, in Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) The patterns of ornamentation are taken partly from the Fan War-Axe, and partly from iron knives brought from Central Africa by Mr. Petherick. (Author's Coll.) VI.

6. Leaf-shaped Bronze Sword (minus the handle), from Ireland (Author's Coll.); and a Bronze Celt (Mainz Mus.), Lindenschmit, Die AllerthiXmer unserer heidnischen Vorzeit (1864 ff.). The patterns of ornamentation are taken partly from Lindenschmit, I.e., pi. iii. partly from Irish bronze-work in Sir W. Wilde, Catalogue of the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy (1863), Bronze, pp. 389-90. VI

7. 'Manilla,' or ring-money of copper and iron, used in the Eboe country, W. Africa. (Author's Coll.) In 1836, a ship laden with a quantity of these 'manillas', made in Birmingham, after the pattern in use in Africa (the spec. here figured forming part of the cargo), was wrecked on the coast of co. Cork. By this means their exact resemblance to the gold and bronze 'penannular rings' found in Ireland (Fig. 8) attracted the attention of Mr. Sainthill, of Cork, by whom the subject was communicated to the Ulster Journal of Archaeology, No. 19 (July, 1857). VI.

8. 'Penannular Ring,' found in Ireland. Wilde, I.e., Bronze, p. 570, Gold, p. 53. Similar forms are found in England and on the Continent. Lindenschmit, pi. iv; Keller, Lake Dwellings of Switzerland (tr. Lee, 1866), pi. Iii a, fig. 9. VI.

9. Kaffir Assegai-head of iron, of native manufacture, with section of blade. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) VI.

10. Saxon Spear-head of iron, having the same section as fig. 9; from a Saxon grave. Neville, Saxon Obsequies (London, 1852), pi. xxxv; Akerman, Saxon Pagandom (London, 1855), Introd., p. x. VI.

11. War-dress of a Patagonian Chief, composed of seven thicknesses of hide on the body part, and three on the sleeves. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) VII.

12. Section of the above, upon the breast, showing how thes even thicknesses are united at the top. VII.

13. Kayan Cuirass of untanned hide, with the hair outside; and Helmet of cane wickerwork. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.; pres. by Capt. D. Bethune, R.N.) VII.

14. Egyptian Breast-plate, made of a crocodile's back. Meyrick (Skelton), I.e., vol. ii.pl. cxlviii. VII.

15. Suit of Armour, supposed to have formerly belonged to the Rajah of Guzerat. The four breast- and back-pieces are of rhinoceros hide, having an inscription upon them, beginning with an invocation to Ali. The remaining portions are of black velvet, ornamented with brass studs, and padded. Meyrick (Skelton), l c, vol. ii. pi. cxli. VIII.

16. Four Plates of steel (Sikh), of similar form to those of rhinoceros hide in fig. 15, ornamented with patterns of inlaid gold. They are fastened with straps over a coat of chain-armour, and are called in Persian 'char aineh,' i.e. 'the four mirrors.' (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) VIII.

17. Helmet of basket-work, from the Sandwich Islands, resembling the Grecian in form. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.; presented by H. Shelley, Esq.) VIII.

18. Suit of Armour of coco-nut fibre, from Pleasant Island, in the Pacific. It is probable that the under tippet, which is now attached to the back- and breast-piece at the top, may originally have been intended to be worn round the loins, like a kilt. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) VII.

19. a. Quilted Pectoral of the Egyptians. Meyrick, 1. c, vol. i. pi. i. o. shows the manner in which it was worn. Rawlinson, Herodotus (1S62), vol. iv. p. 47, No. iii. 3 (but this figure is Kheta, not Egyptian. Ed.). VII.

20. Quilted Head-dress of the Egyptian soldiers. Meyrick, I.e., vol. i. pi. i.18. VIII.

21. Quilted Helmet of nearly the same form as fig. 20, from India. (Author's Coll. VIII.

22. Head-dress of nearly the same form as figs. 20, 21, from the Nouaer tribe of Negroes, inhabiting both banks of the Nile from 8° to 10° N. latitude; brought to England by Mr. Petherick. It resembles the Egyptian very closely, and is composed of cylindrical white beads of European manufacture, fastened together with a kind of string. (Author's Coll.) VIII.

23. Helmet of the same form as fig. 21. composed of united mail and plate. Formerly belonging to the Body-guard of the Moguls. (Author's ColL) VIII.

24. Suit of Quilted Armour, taken in action from Koer Singh, the famous Rajpoot Chief, of Jugdespore in Behar, on August 12. 1857. by Major Vincent Eyre, commanding the field force that relieved Arrah. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.: presented by the captor.) Vll.

25. a. Suit of Quilted Armour, found upon the body of Tippoo Sahib at his death, in the breach of Seringapatam. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) IX.

b. Portion of one of the nine thicknesses of quilting, of the above, showing construction (see p. 62: reduced to 1/6. IX.

c. Helmet of the above suit. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) IX.

26. Quilted Armour of the Bornouese Cavalry. Denham and Clapperton, Travels in Northern and Central Africa (1826) p. 328 (Denham). VIII.

27. Suit of Armour from the Navigator Islands, composed of coco-nut fibre, coarsely netted. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.; presented by Sir W. Burnett, M.D.) Similar armour is used in the Kingsmill Group. VII

28. Bart of a Chinese ' Brigandine Jacket ' of cotton, quilted, with enclosed plates of metaL (Mus. R.U.S.Inst.) VII.

29. Head-dress of Hercules wearing the Lion's Skin, from a Bronze in the Blacas Collection. (British Museum.) VIII

30. Head-dress of a North American Chief. Schoolcraft, l. c, voL iii. p. 68. pi. x. 2. VIII

31. Thracian Helmet of brass [?], with horns of the same. Meyrick, l c, vol 1 pi. Iii VIII.

32. Ancient British Helmet of bronze, with straight horns of the same, found in the Thames. (British Museum.) VIII

33. Greek Helmet, having horns of brass(?). Meyrick,l. c. vol. i. pl iv. VIII.

34. Back-plate and Breast-plate of the Bugo Dvaks, armed with the scales of the Pangolin. Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) IX.

35. Piece of Bark from Tahiti, studded with pieces of coco-nut shell. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst) VIIL

36. Fragment of Scale-Armour of horn found at Pompeii. [Pictorial Gallery of Arts, voL i. figs. 10, 61.) VIII.

37. Piece of Scale-Armour, made of the hoofs of some animal, from some part of Asia; said to be from Japan. Meyrick, l.e., vol. i pi. iii. VIII.

38. An ancient Stone Figure in Scale Armour. Cuming, Journ. Archaed. Assoc, vol iii. p. 31. IX

39. Back-piece and Breast-piece of Armour from the Sandwich Islands, composed of seals' teeth. (Mas. R.U.S. Inst.: pres. by H. Shelley, Esq.) VIII.

40. Egyptian Suit of Scale-Armour. Rawlinson, Herodotus (1862), voL ii. p. 65, fig. iii; Wilkinson (Birch), Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians (187S) fig. 53 a. IX.

41. Two Scales of Egyptian Armour, enlarged. Rawlinson, 1. c., fig. iv. IX.

42. Japanese Armour, composed of chain, plate, and enclosed quilted plates. (a) Left arm; (b) Greaves. (Author's Coll.) IX

43. a. Chinese Suit of Armour, of cotton, having iron scales attached to the inside, b. Iron Helmet of the same suit (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.: presented by Capt. Sir E. Belcher. R.N.) IX

44. A portion of the iron scales attached to the innerside of the above suit. IX.

45. Breast-piece of 'Jazerine' Armour of iron scales, xv-xvi cent.; inner side. (Author's Coll.) Cf. Grose, Treatise on Ancient Armour (London. 1786), p. 15, 'Jazerant': cf. pl. xxxiii. 3; Meyrick. Vol. I pl. lvi IX.

46. 'Brigandine' composed of large iron scales on the outside, probably of the same date as the above; left by the Venetians in the armoury of Candia on the surrender of the island to the Turks in 1715. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst; presented by Lt.-Col. Patrick Campbell, R.A)  IX.

47. Horn of the Rhinoceros. (Author's Coll.) X

48. Skull and Tusks of the Walrus. (Author's Coll.) X.

49. Weapon of the Sword-Fish; scale 1/2 inch to a foot. (Author's Coll.) X.

50. Spear of the Narwhal; scale 1/2 inch to a foot. (Author's Coll.) X.

51. Section, showing part of the timber of the ship Fame, where it was pierced by the narwhal in the South Seas, through 2 1/2-inch oak. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.; presented by Lt. A. T. Tulloch, R.A.) X.

52. Esquimaux Spear, from Greenland, armed with the spear of the narwhal, 1/50. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) X.

53. Esquimaux Spear in the form of a fish, having fore-shaft composed of a narwhal-tusk, inserted so as to represent the tusk of the animal; scale 1/2 inch to a foot. (Author's Coll.)  X.

54. Esquimaux Lance, pointed with a walrus-tooth. 1/25. (Mus. R.US. Inst.) X.

55. Esquimaux Tomahawk or Pickaxe, headed with a walrus-tooth. 1/25. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) X.

56. Arrow-head, probably from South America, headed with the point of a deer's horn. (British Museum, Christy Collection.) X.

57. War-club of the Iroquois, called Ga-ne-ii-ga-o-dus-ha or 'Deer-horn War-Club.' Lewis Morgan, League of the Iroquois (Rochester, N.Y., 18511, p. 363. X.

58. Club of the North American Indians, with a point of iron. 1/25. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.; presented by T. Hoblyn, Esq.) X.

59. Arrow, from S. America, armed with the weapon of the ray, probably Trygon hystrix. 1/25 (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) X.

60. a. Spine of Batistes capriscus, Cuv., erect. Yarrell, British Fishes (2nd ed., London, 1841), vol. ii, p. 472. b. Horn of Cottus diceraus, Pall. Cuvier, Animal Kingdom (1827), s.v. c. Horn of Naseus fronticornis, Lac. Cuvier, I.e. X.

61. Spear of the Limulus or 'King Crab.' X.

62. Arrow, armed with the spine of the Diodon. 1/4. (Author's Coll.) X.

63. 'Khandjar' or Indian Dagger, composed of the horn of the buffalo, having the natural form and point, 1/10. (Author's Coll.) X.

64. 'Khandjar' of the same form, with metal blade and ivory handle, fa. (Author's Coll.) X.

65. ' Khandjar' of the same form, having both blade and handle of iron. The handle is ornamented with the figures of a bird and some small quadruped, 1/10. (Author's Coll.) X. 66. Dagger formed of the horn of the 'sasin,' or common antelope, 1/10. (Author's Coll.) X.

67. Dagger like fig. 66, but with the points armed with metal, 1/10 (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) X.

68. Dagger like figs. 66, 67, but composed entirely of metal, with a shield for the hand. Similar shields are sometimes attached to daggers like those in figs. 66, 67. 1/12. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) X.

69. Weapon composed of the horn of the antelope; steel-pointed; supposed to be that used by the Fakirs in India. (Author's Coll.) X.

70. Sword formed of the serrated blade of the saw-fish from New Guinea. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) XI

71-74.Weapons from the Pacific, edged with sharks' teeth. The teeth near the point are placed points forward; the remainder with the points towards the handle. Two methods of fastening the teeth are shown a. in grooves; b. lashed between two strips of wood. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) XI.

75. Implement from New Zealand, armed with sharks' teeth. (British Museum.) XI.

76. Esquimaux Knife, from Davis Strait, armed with pieces of meteoric iron, (British Museum.) XI.

77. Knife, from Greenland, armed with pieces of iron along the edge. (British Museum, Christy Collection.) XI.

78-80. Mexican 'Maquahuitl.' Lord Kingsborough, Antiquities of Mexico (1830-48), vol. i (numerous examples on pi. x-xv: fig. 79 = No. 1478). XI

81-82. Spear and Knife, from Australia, armed with pieces of obsidian, or rock-crystal. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.) XI

83. Arrow-point of bone, armed with a row of sharp flint flakes on each side. (Museum of Prof. Nilsson, at Lund, in Sweden.) Reduced to 1/2 from the figure in Wilde, 1. c, 'Animal Materials,' p. 254. XI.

84. Arrow-point like fig. 83. (Copenhagen Museum.) Illustr. Cat. of the Copenhagen Museum. XI

85. Arrow-point of hollow bone, from S. America, the hollow of the bone being filled with poison. (Mus. R.U.S. Inst.; Author's Coll.) XI.

86. Dagger of an Italian Bravo, with grooves and holes to contain poison; the handle represents a monk in the act of supplication (Author's Coll.) XI.

87a. Scottish dirk, pierced with holes along the back and sides. Along the back of the blade runs a groove eight inches long, in which holes are pierced that communicate with lateral holes on the side of the blade. (Author's Coll.) XI.

87b. 'Couteau-de-Chasse,' with two grooves on each side near the back of the blade, which is pierced through with holes. (Author's Coll.) XI.

88. Arrow-head, of iron, with a hole near the point for poison; from S. America. (Author's Coll.) XI.

89. Sting of the Bee, serrated or multi-barbed: after F. Huber in Jardine's Naturalist's Library, Entomology vi. Bees (Edinb., 1840), p. 40. XI.

90. Point of Bushman's Arrow, barbed with an iron head, which is constructed to come off in the wound. (Author's Coll.) XI.

91. Malay Blowpipe-arrow, iron-headed; similarly constructed. 1/4. (Author's Coll.) XI.

92. Arrow of the wild tribes of Assam, copper-headed, and similarly constructed. 1/4. (Author's Coll.) XI.

93. Arrow-head of the Shoshones of North America, of flint; constructed to come off in the wound. Schoolcraft, 1. c, vol. i. pp. 212-3, pi. lxxvi. 5. XI.

94. Arrow-point of the Macoushie Indians of S. America; similarly constructed. 1/4 (Author's Coll.; pres. by Rev. J. G. Wood.) XI .

95. Arrow-heads of flint, from the north of Ireland. 1/4. (Author's Coll.) XI.

96. Part of the Blade of an Italian Dagger, serrated and pierced. Full size. Meyrick (Skelton), I.c., vol. ii. pi. cxiii. 14. XI.

Footnotes

[1] Beechey, Voyage to the Pacific (London, 1831), vol. i. p. 298; Oldfield, 'Aborigines of Australia,' Trans. Ethno. Soc, N. S. (London, 1865), vol. iii. p. 227.

[2] Oldfield, 'On the Aborigines of Australia,' Trans. Ethno. Soc, N.S., vol. iii. pp. 261-7.

[3] Meyrick (Skelton), Engraved Illustrations of Ancient Arms, &c. (1830), vol. ii. pi. cxlix. 11.

[4] Klemm, Werkzeuge und Waffen (Sondershausen, 1858), p. 159.

[5] Turner, Nineteen Years in Polynesia (London, 1861), p. 262.

[6] Williams, Fiji and the Fijians (London, 1858), vol. i. pp. 78-9. [Note that this footnote is not placed in the original 1906 edition, but it clearly should be placed here]

[7] Crawfurd, History (Edinburgh, 1820), vol. i. p. 224.

[8] Tylor, Anahuac (London, 1861), p. 70.

[9] Hdt. vii. 69: Rawlinson, Herodotus, vol. iv (2nd ed., 1862, p. 55).

[10] Petherick, Egypt, the Soudan, and Central Africa (Edinb. and London, 1861), p.360

[11] Le Sieur de Folard, Nouvelles Decouvertes sur la Guerre (Paris, 1724), p. 48.

[12] In adopting the nomenclature of phrenology, I am not to be understood as advocating strictly the localization of the faculties which phrenology prescribes. The mind doubtless consists of a congeries of faculties, and phrenology affords the best classification of them that has yet been devised.

[13] Pope, Essay on Man, Epistle iii. 172-80

[14] Ellis, Polynesian Researches (London, 1829), vol. i. pp. 302-3.

[15] Crawfurd, History of the Indian Archipelago (1820), vol. i. pp. 113-4.

[16] Beckman, History of Inventions (London, 1814), pp. 503-4.—Cock-fighting.

[17] Stanley, History of Birds (London, 1848), p. 389.

[18] Darwin, Origin of Species (London, 1859), p. 88.

[19] Williamson, Oriental Field Sports (London, 1807), p. 94.

[20] Swainson, Habits and Instincts of Animals (London, 1840), p. 142.

[21] Thuc. i. 5 (but what Thucydides says is, that they were the last to discard it. Ed.).

[22] Beechey, Voyage to the Pacific (London, 1831), vol. i. p. 248.

[23] Dobrizhoffer, An Account of the Abipones (from the Latin; London,1822), vol. i. p. 262; ii. 361.

[24] Barth, Travels and Discoveries in North and Central Africa (London, 1857), vol. iii. p. 198.

[25] Low, Sarawak (London, 1848), p. 328.

[26] Pigafetta's Voyage Round the World, Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 349.

[27] William de Rubruquis, Travels into Tartary and China in 1253; Pinkerton (London, 1811), vol. viii. p. 89.

[28] An Historical Relation of the Kingdom of Chile, by Alonso de Ovalle, of the Company of Jesus, 1649 (London, 1752), p. 71.

[29] Herodotus, vii. 70; Meyrick's Ancient Armour, vol. i. Introd. p. iv.

[30] Herodotus, iv. 189; Meyrick's Ancient Armour, vol. i. Introd. p. iii.

[31] Herodotus,vii.65 [not transcribed].

[32] Duarte Barbosa, The Coasts of East Africa and Malabar, translated from the Spanish, by the Hon. H. E. Stanley (Hakluyt Society, 1866), p. 55. Since publication, the translator has ascertained that the authorship of this work should be ascribed to Magellan.

[33] The Saturnia mylitta is the caterpillar from which the Tusseh-silk is obtained; the cocoon is of an oval shape when suspended upon the tree, and of exceedingly firm texture; it is figured in Sir Wm. Jardine's Naturalist's Library (Edinb. 1841), Entomology, vol. vii. pi. xiv. 2, pp. 146-53. The Eriodendron anfractuosum, DC, is an Indian Bombax. The woolly cotton which envelops the seed is remarkable for its softness, and is much and deservedly esteemed for making cushions and bedding, owing to its freedom from any tendency to become lumpy and uneven by getting impacted into hard knots. Various attempts have been made to fabricate it into cloth, but hitherto without success, except as a very loose material, fit only for quilting muffs, for which it is superior to cotton or woollen stuffs, the looseness of its texture rendering it an excellent non-conductor, whilst at the same time it is extremely light.—Wight, Illustrations of Indian Botany (Madras, 1840), vol. i. p. 68; Roxburgh, Flora Indica (Serampore, 1832), vol. iii. p. 165 ( = Bombax pentandrum). Both the caterpillar and the plant are found in the jungle in the neighbourhood of Seringapatam. For the identification of the vegetable substance, l am indebted to W. Carruthers, Esq., F.L.S., British Museum.

[34] Schoolcraft, Information concerning the History, &c, of the Indian Tribes of the U.S.A. (Philadelphia, 1851-9), part iii. p. 69.

[35] Meyrick, 1. c, vol. i. Introduction.

[36] Denham and Clapperton, Travels in Northern and Central Africa (London, 1826), p. 328 (Denham).

[37] See Critical Enquiry into Ancient Armour, by Sir Samuel E. Meyrick, vol.iii. p. 21, and pi. lxviii.

[38] Bollaert,' Observations on the Indian Tribes of Texas,' Journ. Ethno. Soc, vol. ii. pp. 262-83.

[39] Du Chaillu, Explorations and Adventures in Equatorial Africa (London, 1861), p. 80

[40] Homer, Iliad, vii. 244-8.

[41] Casalis, The Basutos (London, 1861), pp. 135-6.

[42] Barth, 1. c, vol. i. p. 355.

[43] Meyrick (Skelton), 1. c, pi. cxli (text).

[44] Bosman, Guinea, Pinkerton (1811), vol. xvi. p. 414.

[45] Barth, 1. c, vol. ii. pp. 410, 526; ii. 116 (plate); Denham and Clapperton, 1. c, p. 166 (Denham).

[46] Meyrick, 1. c, vol. i. Introd. pp. i-ii.

[47] Meyrick, 1. c, vol. i. Introd. p. xxiv.

[48] At Fernando Po.—Cuming, ‘Weapons and Armour of Horn,' Journal of Archaeological Association (London, 1848), vol. iii. p. 30.

[49] Fig. 32 is from a rough sketch taken about two years ago, and has no

pretension to accuracy of detail.

[50] Meyrick, I. c, vol. i. pi. iv. 10.

[51] Schoolcraft, Information concerning the History, &c, of the Indian Tribes of the U.S.A. (Philadelphia, 1851-9), vol. iii. p. 67.

[52] Grant, Walk across Africa (London, 1864), p. 47.

[53] Smith, Dict of Gr. And Rom. Antiq., s.v.; Meyrick, 1. c, vol. i. Introd. p. xiv; Amm, Marc. xvii. 12. 2; Pausanias, i. 21. 6; Tac. Hist. i. 79 (praeduro corio).

[54] Kitto, Pictorial Bible (London, 1838-9), note to 1 Sam. xvii.

[55] Cuming, Journal of the Archaeological Association, vol. iii. p. 31.

[56] Kitto, Pictorial Bible, note to 1 Sam. xvii.

[57] Skene, 'On the Albanians,' Journ. Ethno. Soc, vol. ii. pp. 159-81.

[58] Casalis, The Basutos (London, 1861), p. 172.

[59] Maunder, Treasury of Natural History (London, 1862),p. 573.

[60] Williamson, Oriental Field Sports (London, 1807), p. 46.

[61] Atkinson, Oriental and Western Siberia (London, 1858), p. 495.

[62] Williamson, Oriental Field Sports (London, 1807), p. 94.

[63] Thompson, Passions of Animals (1851), p. 225. The American hunter avails himself of this peculiarity to entrap the crane by presenting the barrel of his firelock to the animal; supposing it to be an eye, the crane immediately strikes at the hole, and fixes its beak firmly in the muzzle.

[64] Beechey, Voyage to the North Pole (London, 1843), pp. 93-4.

[65] Bates, Naturalist on the Amazons (3rd ed. London, 1873), p. 230.

[66] Travels in the Central Parts of Indo-China, Siam, Cambodia, and Laos in 1858-9,

by the late M. Henri Mouhot (London, 1864), vol. ii. p. 147.

[67] It is to be observed that this is not the rhinoceros's usual mode of attack.

[68] Cranz, Historie von Grönland (2nd ed. Barby and Leipzig, 1770), p. 196, pi. v. 8.

[69] Beechey, Voyage to the North Pole (London, 1843), p. 252.

[70] Cuming, Journal of the Archaeological Association, vol. iii. p. 25.

[71] Ibid., p. 26.

[72] Swainson, Habits and Instincts of Animals (London, 1840), p. 141.

[73] Gregory, 'Expedition to the North-west Coast of Australia,' Royal Geographical Society's Journal, vol. xxxii (1862), p. 417.

[74] Denham and Clapperton, Travels (1826), p. 20 (Denham).

[75] Hind, Narrative of the Canadian Exploring Expedition (London, 1860), vol. i.

p. 316.

[76] Captain John Smith, Sixth Voyage to Virginia (1606); Pinkerton (1811), vol. xii. p. 35.

[77] Cuming, Journal of the Archaeological Association, vol. iii. p. 27.

[78] Turner, Nineteen Years in Polynesia (London, 1861), p. 276.

[79] Beechey, Voyage to the Pacific (London, 1831), vol. i. p. 143.

[80] Williams, Fiji and the Fijians (London, 1858), vol. i. p. 57.

[81] Wilson, Pellew Islands (ed. Keate, London, 1788), pi. v, fig. 1, p. 310.

[82] Klemm, Werkseuge und Waffen (1858), p. 50.

[83] Owen, Comp. Anatomy and Physiology of Vertebrates (1846), vol. ii. 1. p

[84] Klemm, I.e., p. 81 ('die Schwanzstachel eines Roches,' i.e. 'the caudal spine of a ray.'—Ed.).

[85] Wilson, Prehistoric Man (London, 1862), vol. i. p. 146.

[86] Cuming, Journal of the Archaeological Association, vol. iii. p. 26.

[87] The probability of the aboriginal man having derived his first lessons from this source may be judged of by the accounts given by travellers of the effects produced by the large thorns of trees in South Africa, of which there is a good account in Routledge's Natural History of Man, by Rev. J. G. Wood (1868-70), vol. i. p. 235. Large animals are said to be frequently destroyed, and even to have impaled themselves, upon the large, strong spines of the thorny Acacia. Throughout Central Africa a pair of tweezers for extracting thorns is an indispensable requisite in the equipment of every native.

[88] Beechey, Voyage to the Pacific (London, 1831), vol. i. pp. 47-8.

[89] Strabo, p. 155.

[90] Ellis, Polynesian Researches (London, 1829), vol. i. chap. viii.

[91] Clapperton, Travels, p. 58.

[92] I exclude from this category all nippers, cross-bills, and prehensile implements.

[93] Jardine's Naturalist's Library (Edinb. 1843): Ichthyology (Hamilton), vol. vi, part 2, p. 335.

[94] Choris, Voyage Pictoresque autour du Monde (Paris, 1822), 'Isles Radak,' pi. ii. 1 and 4.

[95] Cook, Third Voyage (London, 1842), vol. ii. p. 251.

[96] Klemm, 1. c., pp. 63-4; Wilkes, Untied States Exploring Expedition (Philadelphia, 1845), vol. v. ch. ii. pp. 49, 79.

[97] King, 'The Industrial Arts of the Esquimaux,' Journ. Ethno. Soc. (1848), vol. i. p. 290.

[98] Ellis, Polynesian Researches, vol. ii. p. 497.

[99] Nieuhoff, ' Travels in Brazil'; Pinkerton (1813), vol. xiv. p. 874.

[100] Tylor, Anahuac, p. 332, Appendix.

[101] Wilson, Prehistoric Man (1862), vol. i. pp. 226, 227.

[102] Lloyd Stephens, Incidents of Travel in Central America, p. 59.

[103] Wilson, Prehistoric Man (1862), vol. i. pp. 226, 227.

[104] Lewis Morgan, The League of the Ho-De-No-Sou-Nee or Iroquois (Rochester, N.Y., 1851), p. 359.

[105] Thunberg, Travels in Europe, Africa, and Asia, 1770-9 (3rd ed., London, 1795), vol. i. p. 156; ii. p. 162; Livingstone, Missionary Travels and Researches in South Africa (London, 1857), p. 171.

[106] Meyrick (Skelton), Ancient Arms and Armour, vol. ii. pi. cxiii, fig. 14, cf. fig. 13.

[107] Times newspaper, Dec. 24, 1866.

[108] Humboldt, Aspects of Nature (London, 1849), vol. i. pp. 25, 203-4.

[109] Klemm, 1. c, p. 53.

[110] 'On the Wild Tribes in the Interior of the Malay Peninsula,' by Pere Bourien. Trans. Ethno. Soc, N.S., vol. iii (1865), p. 78.

[111] Darwin, Journal of Researches into Nat. Hist, and Geology (London, 1845), p.8.

[112] Hall, C. F., Life with the Esquimaux (London, 1864), vol. ii. pp. 329-30.

Transcribed by AP September 2011

{joomplu:173 detail align right}

A lecture delivered at the Royal Institution of Great Britain on Friday, May 28, 1875, and published in the Proceedings of the Roal. Institution, vol. vii. pp. 496-520, PI. i-iv and later (and edited) in ‘Evolution of Culture’, 1906. This is the version published in 1906.

If we accept the definition of the term science as 'organized common sense', we necessarily reject the idea of it as a 'great medicine' applicable only to particular subjects and inapplicable to others; and we assume that all those things which call forth the exercise of our common sense are capable of being scientifically dealt with, according as the knowledge which we pretend to have about them is based on evidence in the first place, and in the sequel is applied to the determination of what, for want of a better word, we call general laws.

But in using this term 'law', we do not employ it in the sense of a human law, as a regulating or governing principle of anything, but merely as deduction from observed phenomena. We use it in the sense of a result, rather than a cause of what we observe, or at most we employ it to express the operation of proximate causes; and of the ultimate causes for the phenomena of nature we know nothing at all.

Further, in this development of the principle of common sense it has been said that the inductive sciences pass through three phases, which have been termed the empirical, the classificatory, and the theoretical.

Of these, the first or empirical stage may be defined as representing that particular phase of unorganized common sense in which our knowledge is simply a record of the results of ordinary experience, such as might be acquired by any savage or uneducated person in his dealings with external nature.

But as this condition of knowledge might perhaps be denied the claim to be considered scientific, it might be better perhaps to extend the term so as to embrace all that can be included under a practical knowledge of the subjects treated, in which these subjects are studied for their own sakes, or on account of their practical uses to man, and not with a view to generalizing upon them.

In this way it may be said that agriculture represents the empirical or practical stage of botany; mining, that of geology; hunting and the domestication of animals, that of zoology; the trade of the butcher, that of anatomy; navigation by means of the stars, that of astronomy.

Passing now over the boundary line which separates what are generally recognized as the physical sciences from the science of culture, in which the subjects treated are emanations from the human mind, we find that these also have their corresponding phases of development.

Commencing first with the science of language, which has been the earliest and perhaps the most important branch of human culture the study of which has been scientifically treated as yet, we find that Professor Max Müller, in the series of lectures delivered in this Institution in 1861-3, [1] has shown that the science of language has its corresponding empirical or practical stage, in which it is studied only for its own sake, or for its utility as a means of intercommunication; not as a means of generalizing upon language as a whole, but merely for the purpose of understanding the particular languages which we wish to make use of in our intercourse with others.

In like manner passing from language to the particular department of culture which, for the reasons to be explained hereafter, I shall make the subject of this discourse, viz. the material arts, I shall endeavour to show that there exists also in relation to them a practical or empirical stage, which is the stage that we are now in with respect to them, in which we may include the whole of the constructive arts of mankind, from the simple flint knife to the most complex machine of modern times, when viewed from the standpoint of the mechanic or the artificer, not as subjects for generalization, but merely from an utilitarian point of view.

There are many persons no doubt who regard utility, not as a primary stage, but as the final and highest result of science. But the highest achievements of science, even the highest practical achievements, would never have been reached by the mere utilitarian. There is a force within us by which we are moved in the direction of acquiring knowledge for its own sake and for the sake of truth, regardless of any material advantage to be derived from such knowledge. Sooner or later such knowledge is sure to bear practical fruits, even though we may not live to realize them.

It is in this spirit that men of science have advanced to the second or classificatory stage, in which, with a view to higher generalization, the subjects studied are grouped together according to their affinities, and specific points of resemblance are taken as the representatives of each class.

These classes are at first grouped round independent centres but such an arrangement of them, having no existence in reality, is purely subjective and can only be transitional. The margins of the classes so formed represent only the margins of our knowledge or our ignorance, as the case may be.

By degrees, as the classes become extended, sub-classes are formed, and they are seen to arrange themselves in the form of branches radiating from a central stem. By still further observation, the stems of the several classes are seen to tend towards each other, and we are led to trace them to a point of union.

Thus from the classificatory or comparative we pass gradually into the third stage, which I have spoken of as the theoretical, but which may perhaps be more clearly defined as the evolutionary. By the use of this term 'evolutionary' we make it apparent that our third stage is but a development of the second, evolution being merely the necessary and inevitable result of the extension of classification, implying greater unity and broader generalizations.

These three stages then, the empirical or practical, the classificatory or comparative, and the evolutionary, are applicable to the development of all the inductive sciences.

But it has been held by some that a broad line of demarcation must be drawn between the physical sciences properly so called, such as zoology, botany, and geology, which deal with external nature, and those sciences which have been termed historic, which deal with the works of man.

This question has been ably treated by Professor Max Müller in the series of lectures to which I have referred, a course of lectures which must be regarded as a starting-point and basis of instruction for all who follow after him in the same path.

But in claiming for the science of language, and for language only, a place amongst the physical sciences, he has made admissions to opponents which, in my humble judgement, ought not to be made, and which are inconsistent with that more extended view of the subject by which I contend that, if language, then all that comes under the head of culture must be included amongst the physical sciences. Thus, for example, we find him admitting this passage as a sound and reasonable argument on the part of those who deny the claim of language' to be included amongst the physical sciences: 'Physical science,’ he says, 'deals with the work of God, historical science with the works of man.’

Now if in dealing with what are here termed the historical sciences, we were to take the subjects of such sciences, as for example the arts or language, implements or words, and were to regard them as entities to be studied apart from their relation to mind, and were to endeavour to deduce from them the laws by which they are related to each other, it is evident that we should be dealing with a matter which could not be correlated with the physical sciences; but such a course would be absurd. It would be as absurd to speak of a boomerang as being derived by inheritance from a waddy, as to speak of a word in Italian being derived by inheritance from a corresponding word in Latin; these words and these implements are but the outward signs or symbols of particular ideas in the mind; and the sequence, if any, which we observe to connect them together, is but the outward sign of the succession of ideas in the brain. It is the mind that we study by means of these symbols.

But of the particular molecular changes or other processes which accompany the evolution of ideas in the mind, we know no more than we do of the particular molecular changes and other processes which accompany the evolution of life in nature, or the changes in chemistry.

If then we are to understand the expression ‘the work of God’ as implying the direct action of ultimate causes, it is evident that we are not in a position either to affirm or to deny or to make any statement whatever respecting such ultimate causes, which may operate either as directly or as indirectly in the one case as the other. We know nothing about them, and therefore to invoke ultimate causes as a reason for distinguishing between the sciences is to take up a position which cannot be scientifically maintained.

With equal if not greater truth we may combat the assertion that the science of culture is historical, whilst nature, on the other hand, as dealt with by the physical sciences, is incapable of progress. However valid this objection might have appeared during the empirical and comparative stages of the physical sciences, it cannot be maintained, since the researches of Darwin and others have fairly landed them in their evolutionary phase. The principles of variation and natural selection have established a bond of union between the physical and culture sciences which can never be broken. History is but another term for evolution. There are histories and histories, as any one may determine who has read Green's Short History of the English People, and compared it with the kind of matter which passed for history in his school days. But our position with regard to culture has always been one which has forced on our comprehension the reality of progress, whilst with respect to the slow progress of external nature, it has been concealed from us, owing to the brief span of human existence and our imperfect records of the past. The distinction, therefore, between the sciences, as historical and non-historical, is but a subjective delusion, and not an objective reality; and herein, I believe, lies the secret of most of those errors that we have to contend with.

But the point in which I venture more particularly to differ from the conclusions of the learned author of the Science of Language is the line which he has drawn between language and the other branches of culture by including language amongst the physical sciences whilst he excludes the rest. 'If language,' he says, ‘be the work of man in the same sense in which a statue, a temple, a poem, or a law, are properly called works of man, the science of language would have to be classed as an historic science’; and again he says, 'It is the object of these lectures to prove that language is not a work of human art in the same sense as painting, or building, or writing, or printing.’

In dealing with this question it is material, as regards the relative claims of language and the arts to be studied as physical sciences, to distinguish between the general and the particular. If it is said that language as a whole is not a work of human design, the same may with equal truth be said of the arts as a whole. A man who constructs a building, a tool, or a weapon, can no more be said to have devised a scheme of arts, than the introducer of a new word can be said to have invented a language; but each particular word bears the impress of human design as clearly as a weapon or a coin. A word may be said to be a tool for the communication of thought, just as a weapon is an implement of war.

But, says Professor Müller, 'art, science, philosophy, religion, all have a history; language or any other production of nature admits only of growth.’ But unless it can be shown that words are entities having the power of generating and producing other words, which arts, tools, or weapons, do not possess, the word growth can only be applied figuratively to language as it is to the arts, and in that case growth and history are synonymous terms. But this is absurd. Words, as I said before, are the outward signs of ideas in the mind, and this is also the case with tools or weapons. Words are ideas expressed by sounds, whilst tools are ideas expressed by Hands; and unless it can be shown that there are distinct processes in the mind for language and for the arts they must be classed together.

But it is said, 'language has the property of progressing gradually and irresistibly, and the changes in it are completely beyond the control of the free will of man.’ This, however, can only be accepted relatively. We know that in certain phases of savage life the use of particular words may be tabooed in the same manner that the use of particular implements or weapons may be tabooed; but it would be quite as hopeless for any individual to attempt to change the entire course of the constructive arts as to change the form of a language; the action of the individual man is limited in both cases to the production of particular words or particular implements, which take their place like bricks in a building.

Man is not the designer in the sense of an architect, but he is the constructor in the sense of a brickmaker or a bricklayer.

But the difficulty of tracing fleeting words to their sources operates to a great extent in effacing the action of the individual in language. Words become public property before they are incorporated in a language. It would be difficult to establish a system of patents for new words. Here again we see that the line drawn between language and the arts is a subjective delusion, not an objective reality. It is not true that words do not originate with individual men, but merely that we do not perceive it.

Modifications of words, like modifications in the forms of the arts, result from the succession of ideas or other causes affecting particular minds. They obtain acceptance through natural selection by the survival of the fittest.

The chance which a new word or a new implement has of surviving depends on the number of words or implements to be superseded, on their relative importance to the art or the language, and the persistency with which these superseded words or implements are retained. The truth of this is seen in the fact that vocabularies change far more rapidly than grammatical forms; because the same grammatical terminations are employed with a large number of different words, and they are therefore a more constant necessity of speech.

Hence early and barbaric languages may be connected by their grammatical forms long after their vocabularies have entirely changed. The same truth is seen in the fact admitted by philologists, that in small communities new words and modifications of words gain more ready acceptance than in large communities; because the struggle of the new words for existence is less in small than in large communities, and the dialects therefore change more rapidly. And the same causes influence the transformations which take place in the arts. Objects in common use change more slowly than those which are but little employed; the difference is merely one of degree and not of kind.

In dealing with the arts, each separate contrivance occupies a larger share of our attention, to the exclusion of any comprehensive survey of them as a whole. The arts present themselves to our mental vision on a larger scale, and we view them analytically; we are as it were in the brickmaker's yard seeing each brick turned out of hand, whereas in dealing with language we see only the finished building; the details are lost. We view language synthetically. The arts may be said to present themselves to us as a sea beach in detached fragments; language in the form of a compact sandstone. The empiric or the utilitarian may deny that there is any resemblance between them; but the geologist knows that the mode of deposition has been the same in both cases, and he classes the whole as rocks.

Then again there are facilities for collecting and arranging the data for the study of language which do not exist in the case of the arts. Whilst words take seconds to record, hours and days may be spent in the accurate delineation of form. Words cost nothing, may be packed in folios, transmitted by post, and stored on the shelves of every private library. Ten thousand classified words may be carried in the coat pocket without inconvenience, whilst a tenth part of that number of material objects require a museum to contain them, and are accessible only to a few this is the reason why the arts have never been subjected to those classifications which form the groundwork of a science.

But when we say that words and implements are both tools employed for the expression of thought, it is important to bear in view one difference between them, which has a practical bearing on the relative value of the two studies as a means of tracing the evolution of culture in prehistoric times and amongst savages. The word is the tool of the ear, the implement the tool of the eye;and for this reason language is the science of historic times, whilst the arts constitute the subject of science to be studied in relation to prehistoric times.

Every new tool or weapon formed by the hand of man retains the same form as long as it continues to exist; it may be handed from man to man, from tribe to tribe, from father to son, from one generation to another; or, buried in the soil, it may under special conditions continue for untold ages without change of form, until in our time it may be discovered and employed as evidence of the condition of the arts at the time it was fabricated. Very different, however, is the history of words. Each word coined by the exercise of the inventive faculty of man to express an idea is liable to change as it passes from mouth to ear. Its continued identity is dependent solely on memory, and it is subject to phonetic and acoustic changes from which the forms of the arts are exempt.

When by the invention of writing each word receives its equivalent in forms that are appreciable to the sense of sight, it gains stability, which places it on a footing of equality with the arts, and enables us to trace with certainty the changes it has undergone; and therefore in historic times language is the surest test of social contact that we can have. But in prehistoric times, before it had acquired this permanence through the invention of writing, the forms of language were, to use Mr. Sayce's expression, in a constant state of flux.

The truth of this is seen in the immense number of dialects and languages employed by savages at the present time. Thus amongst the one hundred islands occupied by the Melanesian race, the Bishop of Wellington tells us, and his statement is confirmed by the late lamented Bishop Patteson, that there are no less than two hundred languages, differing so much that the tribes can have but very little interchange of thought; and similar accounts are given of rapid changes of language in Cambodia, Siberia, Central Africa, North, Central, and South America.

The greater stability of the material arts as compared with the fluctuations in the language of a people in a state of primaeval savagery, is well shown by a consideration of the weapons of the Australians, and the names by which they are known in the several parts of that continent. These people, from the simplicity of their arts, afford us the only living examples of what we may presume to have been the characteristics of a primitive people. Their weapons are the same throughout the continent; the shield, the throwing-stick, the spear, the boomerang, and their other weapons differ only in being thicker, broader, flatter, or longer, in different localities; but whether seen on the east or the west coast, each of these classes of weapons is easily recognized by its form and uses. On the other hand, amongst the innumerable languages and dialects spoken by these people, it would appear that almost every tribe has a different name for the same weapon. The narrow parrying-shield, which consists of a piece of wood with a place for the hand in the centre, in South Australia goes by the name of heileman, in other parts it is known under the name of 'mulabakka', in Victoria it is 'turnmung', and on the west coast we have 'murukanye' and 'tamarang' for the same implement very slightly modified in size and form. Referring to the comparative table of Australian languages compiled by the Rev. George Taplin, in the first number of the Journal of the Anthropological Institute (i, 1872, pp. 84-8), we find the throwing-stick, which on the Murray River is known by the name of ‘yova’, On the Lower Darling it is ‘yarrum’, in New South Wales it is ‘wommurrur', in Victoria 'karrick', on Lake Alexandrina ‘taralye', amongst the Adelaide tribes of South Australia it is 'midla', in other parts of South Australia it is called ‘ngeweangko’, and in King George's Sound 'miro'.

From these considerations we arrive at the conclusion that in the earliest stages of culture the arts are far more stable than language: whilst the arts are subject only, or chiefly, to those changes which result from growth, language, in addition to those which result from growth, is also affected by changes arising from phonetic decay.

The importance therefore of studying the grammar, so to speak, of the arts becomes apparent, as it is by this means alone that we can trace out the origin and evolution of culture in the earliest times.

The task before us is to follow by means of them the succession of ideas by which the mind of man has developed, from the simple to the complex, and from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous;to work out step by step, by the use of such symbols as the arts afford, that law of contiguity by which the mind has passed from simple cohesion of states of consciousness to the association of ideas, and so on to broader generalizations.

This development has to be considered under the two heads of culture and constitution, that is to say, that we have to consider not only the succession of ideas in the mind resulting from experience, but also the development by inheritance of the internal organism of the mind itself, or, to use the words of Mr. Herbert Spencer, 'In the progress of life at large, as in the progress of the individual, the adjustment of inner tendencies to outer persistencies must begin with the simple and advance to the complex, seeing that, both within and without, complex relations, being made up of simple ones, cannot be established before simple ones have been established' (Princ. of Psych., i3 p. 426).

We find no difficulty in assenting to the general proposition that culture has been a work of progress. Our difficulty lies in realizing the slow stages of its early development, owing to the complexities both of our mental constitution and of the contemporaneous culture from which experience is drawn, or, again to use Mr. Spencer's more expressive words, of our 'inner tendencies', and ‘outer persistencies’; we are apt to regard as intuitive, if not congenital, many simple ideas which in early culture can only have been worked out through the exercise of experience and reason during a long course of ages.

We see this error of our own minds constantly displayed in the education of children. The ideas in a child's mind, like those of mankind at large, are necessarily built up in sequence. The instructor makes use of some word, the meaning of which is clearly understood by him, but which does not fall into the sequence of the child's reasoning; the conception associated with it in the child's mind must, however, necessarily conform to such sequence.Hence a confusion of ideas, which is often attributed to the stupidity of the child, but which is in reality due to the inexperience of the instructor;as, for instance, in the case exemplified by Pip, in Dickens' Great Expectations, who, having imbibed the precept that he was to ‘walk in the same all the days of his life', was led by his sequence of ideas to infer therefrom that he was invariably to walk to school by the same path, and on no account go round by the pastrycook's.

And so in studying savages and early races whose mental development corresponds in some degree to that of children, we have to guard against this automorphism, as Mr. Spencer terms it; that is to say, the tendency to estimate the capacity of others by our own, which appears almost completely to incapacitate some people from dealing with the subject.

The question of the free will of man enters largely into this study. I shall not be expected to say much upon a subject which has so lately occupied the attention of the public, having been discussed by some of our ablest scientists; but I cannot avoid quoting, in reference to this point, a passage from Dr. Carpenter's Mental Physiology, who in this controversy is certainly entitled to be regarded as the champion of free will and therefore by quoting him we run no risk of overstating the case against free will. 'Our mental activity,' he says (p.25), is 'entirely spontaneous or automatic, being determined by our congenital nervous organism. ... It may be stated as a fundamental principle that the will can never originate any form of mental activity ...' But it has the power, he continues, of selecting any one out of several objects that present themselves either simultaneously or successively before the mental vision, and of so limiting and intensifying the impression which that particular object makes upon the consciousness, that all others shall be for the time non-existent to it.

The truth of this, in so far as regards the limitation of the will, cannot fail to force itself upon the student of culture. It is, I venture to think, by classifying and arranging in evolutionary order the actual facts of the manifestations of mind, as seen in the development of the arts, institutions, and languages of mankind, no less than by comparative anatomy, and far more than by metaphysical speculation, that we shall arrive at a solution of the question, to what extent the mental Ego has been, to use Professor Huxley's expression, a conscious spectator of what has passed.

I propose, therefore, with your permission, to give a few examples, by means of diagrams, of material evolution derived from the earliest phases of culture. In language and in all ideas communicated by word of mouth there is a hiatus between the limits of our knowledge and the origin of culture which can never be bridged over, but we may hold in our hand the first tool ever created by the hand of man.

It has been said that the use of speech is the distinctive quality of man. But how can we know that? We are literally surrounded by brute language. We can imitate their calls, and we find that animals will respond to our imitations of them. But who has ever seen any of the lower animals construct a tool and use it.

The conception of man, not as a tool-using but as a tool-making animal, is clear, defined, and unassailable; probably if we could trace language to its sources, we should be able to draw the same line between natural sounds employed as a medium of communication, and the created word. Thus the arts which we can study may perhaps be taken to illustrate the origin of language, which we cannot study in this phase.

The ape employs both sticks and stones as missiles and as hammers to crack the shells of nuts. But we have no evidence that he ever selects special forms for special uses. The arts therefore afford us a clearly defined starting-point for the commencement of culture.

To go in search of a particular form of stick or stone in order to apply it to a particular use would require greater effort of the will in fixing attention continuously on the matter in hand than is found to exist amongst the lower animals except in cases of instinct, which term I understand to mean an inherited congenital nervous organism which adapts the mind to the ready reception of experience of a particular kind. But this instinct does not exist in the case in question; there is no tool-making instinct our tool has to be evolved through reason and experience, without the aid of any special organism for the purpose.

The process we have to assume therefore is that, in using stones as hammers, they would occasionally split. In using certain stratified rocks this would occur frequently, and so force itself on the attention of the creature. The creature going on hammering, it would force itself on his notice that the sharp fractured end was doing better work than before. It would be perceived that there were hard things and soft things, that the hard things split the stone, and the soft things were cut by it and so there would grow up in the mind an association of ideas between striking hard things and splitting, and striking soft things and cutting, and also a sequence by which it would be perceived that the fracture of the stone was a necessary preliminary to the other; and in the course of many generations, during which the internal organism of the mind grew in harmony with this experience, the creature would be led to perform the motions which had been found effectual in splitting the stone before applying it to the purposes for which it was to be used.

Thus we arrive at a state of the arts in which we may suppose man to be able to construct a tool by means of a single blow. By constantly striking in the same direction, flakes would be produced; and by still further repeating the same motions, it would at last be found that by means of many blows a stone could be chipped to an edge or a point so as to form a very efficient tool.

But this continued chipping of the stone in order to produce a tool, implies a considerable mental advance upon the effort of mind necessary to construct a tool with one blow.

It implies continued attention directed by the will to the accomplishment of an object already conceived in the mind, and its subsequent application to another object which must also have been conceived in the mind before the tool was begun.

Now we know from all experience, and from all evolution which we can trace with certainty, that progress moves on in an accelerating ratio, and that the earlier processes take longer than the later ones.

But the implements of the drift, which are the earliest relics of human workmanship as yet recognized, are most of them multi-flaked tools, such as the implements figured on Plate XII, Nos. 1-10, requiring a considerable time to construct, and the use of innumerable blows in order to trim to a point at one end.

It appears therefore evident that in the natural course of events the drift period must have been preceded by an earlier period of considerable extent characterized by the use of single-flaked tools. And we may therefore consider it probable that should any evidences of man be hereafter discovered in miocene beds, they will be associated with such large rude flakes as those now exhibited, which require a feebler effort of attention and of reason to construct.

If we examine the forms of the flint implements of the drift, we find that out of many intermediate shapes we may recognize three in particular, which have been minutely described by Mr. Evans in his valuable work on the stone implements of Britain [2]: (1) a side-tool, consisting of a flint chipped to an edge on one side and having the natural rounded outside of the flint left on the other side, where it appears to have been held in the hand; (2) a tongue-shaped implement chipped to a point at one end, and having the rounded surface for the hand at the big end and (3) an oval or almond-shaped tool, which is often chipped to an edge all round.

We have no evidence to show which of these kind of tools was the earliest; but that they were employed for different uses there can be little reason to doubt. But have we any evidence to throw light on the way in which these several forms originated in the minds of men in the very low condition of mental development which we may suppose to have existed at the time?

About eight years ago, whilst examining the ancient British camps on the South Downs, I chanced to discover in the camp of Cissbury, near Worthing, a large flint factory of the neolithic age. There were some sixty or more pits from which flints had been obtained from the chalk, and these pits were full of the debris of the flint-workers. The factory was of the neolithic age, the most characteristic tool of which is the flint celt, a form which differs but slightly from the oval or almond-shaped palaeolithic form, but the cutting edge of which is more decidedly at the broad end. The debris, some six hundred or more specimens of which were collected, consisted chiefly of these celts in various stages of manufacture.

If any one will attempt to make a flint celt, as I have done sometimes (and Mr. Evans, from whom I learnt that art, has done frequently), he will find that it is difficult to command the fracture of the flint with certainty; every now and then a large piece will come off, or a flaw will be discovered which spoils the symmetry of the tool, and it has to be thrown away. In arranging and classifying the remains of this flint factory, I found that all the palaeolithic forms were represented by one or other of these unfinished celts, so much so as to make it doubtful whether some of them may not actually have been used like them.

A celt finished at the thin end, and abandoned before the cutting edge was completed, represented a tongue-shaped palaeolithic implement; a celt finished only on one side represented a palaeolithic side-tool; and a celt rudely chipped out, and abandoned before receiving its finishing strokes, represented almost exactly an oval palaeolithic tool, only differing from it in being somewhat rougher, and showing evidence of unfinish.

Taking a lesson then from this flint-worker's shop of the later neolithic age, we see how the earlier palaeolithic forms originated. They were not designed outright, as the nineteenth-century man would have designed them for special uses, but arose from a selection of varieties produced accidentally in the process of manufacture. The forms were also suggested by those of the nodules out of which they were made. We see, by examining the outside surfaces that were left on some of them, how a long thin nodule produced a long thin celt, a broad thick nodule a broad thick celt, and so forth. Indeed, so completely does the fabricator appear to have been controlled by the necessities of his art, that in tracing these successive forms one is almost tempted to ask whether the principle of causation lay mostly in the flint or in the flint-worker, so fully do they bear out the statement of Dr. Carpenter and the other physiologists, that nothing originates in the free will of man.

On these two diagrams (Plates I and II) I have shown how, from the same form of palaeolithic implement already described, the more complex forms of the spear and axe-blade of the subsequent periods were developed. The point developed into a spear, and the broad end into an axe-blade. You will see by reference to Plate I that the oval tool of the drift suggested the smaller leaf-shaped spear-head of the early neolithic age. This, by a gradual straightening of the sides, became the lozenge-shaped form, which latter developed into the barbed form, and this last into the triangular form, which consists of barbs without a tang.

On the other hand, this same oval tool of the drift (Plate II), when used as an axe-blade with the broad end, became the celt of the neolithic period, chipped only at first and subsequently polished. This gave rise to the copper celt of the same form having convex surfaces, which grew into the bronze celt with flat sides. Then the bronze celt was furnished with a stop to prevent its being pressed too far into the handle by the blow. Others were furnished with projecting flanges to prevent them from swerving by the blow when hafted on a bent stick. Others had both stops and flanges. By degrees the flanges were bent over the stops and over the handle, and then the central portion above the stops, being no longer required, became thinner, and ultimately disappeared, the flanges closed on each other, and by this means the weapon grew into the socket celt. On this socket celt you will see that there is sometimes a semicircular ornamentation on each side. This semicircular ornament, as I pointed out in a paper on primitive warfare read some time ago, is a vestige of the overlapping flange of the earlier forms out of which it grew, which, like the rings on our brass cannon, are survivals of parts formerly serving for special uses (pp. 182-3 below).

In the vertical columns I have given, in the order of their occurrence, the successive periods of prehistoric time, viz. the early palaeolithic, late palaeolithic, early neolithic, late neolithic, early bronze, late bronze and iron periods, beneath which I have placed lines for two distinct phases of modern savage culture, viz. the Australian and the American Indian. A cross beneath each form denotes the periods in which they occur, and a vertical bar denotes that they are of rare or doubtful occurrence;so that the sequence of development may be seen at a glance, and it is only a glance that I ask you to take at these diagrams on the present occasion. I have checked them with Mr. Evans' work and also with Sir William Wilde's Catalogue, [3] and I do not think that any of the statements made in them will be challenged; but as these forms were not developed for the purpose of filling in the spaces in rectangular diagrams, such diagrams only imperfectly convey an idea of the evolution which has taken place, and must be regarded only as provisional and liable to be improved.

In tracing the evolution of prehistoric implements, we are of course limited to such as were constructed of imperishable materials. No doubt our prehistoric ancestors used also implements of wood, but they have long since disappeared; and if we wish to form an idea of what they were, we must turn to those of his nearest congener, the modern savage.

In speaking of savages, the question of progression versus degeneration is probably familiar to most of those present, through the writings of Sir John Lubbock and Mr. E. B. Tylor. To the several weighty arguments in favour of progression given by those writers I will add this one derived from the sequence of ideas.

If the Australians, for example, were the degenerate descendants of people in a higher phase of culture, then, as all existing ideas are made up of previous ideas, we must inevitably find amongst their arts traces of the forms of earlier and higher arts, as is the case amongst some of the savages of South America who early came in contact with Peruvian civilization; but the reverse of this is the case: all the forms of the Australian weapons are derived from those of nature.

In the same way that we saw that the forms of the palaeolithic flint implements were suggested by accidental fractures in the workshop, so the several forms of the Australian wooden implements were suggested by the various forms of the stems and branches out of which they were made. These savages, having only flint tools to work with, cannot saw out their weapons to any form they please; they can only trim the sticks into a serviceable shape. All their weapons are therefore constructed on the grain of the wood, and their forms and uses have arisen from a selection of the natural curves of the sticks.

I have arranged, on Plate III, drawings of nearly all the weapons used by the Australians, placing them together according to their affinities in such a manner as to show hypothetically their derivation from a single form. As all the forms given on this diagram are drawings of weapons in use at the present time, and there are many intermediate forms not given here, I have not arranged them in horizontal lines, as in the previous diagrams, to show their place in time, but have arranged them as radiating from a central point. We know nothing of the antiquities of savage countries as yet, and therefore cannot trace their evolution in time. The development has therefore been shown by means of survivals of early forms existing at the present time.

In the centre I have placed the simple cylindrical stick, as being the simplest form. By a gradual development of one end I have traced upwards the formation of a sharp ridge and its transition into a kind of mushroom form. To the right upwards I have traced the same development of the mushroom head, the projecting ridge of which is constantly liable to fractures by blows; and as savages always systematize accidental fractures so as to produce symmetry, scollops have been cut out of the ridge in different places for this purpose, which had the effect of concentrating the force of the blow on the projections. These were further developed; one of the pilei of the mushroom head was made larger than the others, and this suggested the form of a bird's head, so that it was only necessary to add a line for the mouth and a couple of eyes to complete the resemblance. To the right we see that the plain stick held in the centre gave the first idea of a defensive weapon, and was used to parry off the darts of the assailant; an aperture was then made in the stick for the hand, and the face of it became broader, developing into a shield, the narrow ends, however, being still retained for parrying. Below I have shown that the long stick simply pointed at one end became a lance; a row of sharp flints were gummed on to one side to produce a cutting edge, and these were then imitated in wood, and by pointing them obliquely they were converted into barbs. To the right another kind of barb was produced by binding on a piece of sharp-pointed wood. Between this and the shields we see that the first idea of the throwing-stick, employed to project these lances, was simply constructed like the barbed point of the lance itself. The gradual expansion of the stick arose from its being employed like a battledore, to fence off the enemy's lances. To the left below I have shown the gradual development of a peculiar curved weapon, called the 'malga'', formed from a stem and the branch projecting from it at different angles. The part where the continuation of the stem was cut off was trimmed to a kind of ridge; this ridge developed, and suggested the crest of a bird's head; ultimately the eyes were added, in the same manner as in the club on the opposite side of the diagram. To the left we see the plain round stick first flattened, then curved. Savages are in the habit of throwing all their weapons at their adversaries and at animals. In throwing a flat curved stick it rotates of its own accord, and as the axis of rotation continues parallel to itself, the thin edge is presented to the resistance of the air in front; this increases the range, and its peculiar flight must have forced itself on the attention of the savage as the result of experience: but he has never had the slightest knowledge of the laws of its flight. The different curves of the boomerang are the natural curves of the sticks, and like all the Australian weapons, they are made on the grain of the wood. Some are thicker than others; some will fly in the curves peculiar to that weapon, and others will not: scarcely two are alike.

To the left above, we see the mushroom-headed waddy its projecting ridge flattened, then curved; one side becomes more developed than the other, and this being thrown develops into the waddy boomerang, the ridge of the earlier forms being still represented by a mark on the flat head of the weapon; an intermediate link connects it with the true boomerang.

Many other examples might be given to illustrate the continuity which exists in the development of all savage weapons; but I only ask you to glance at the sequence shown in this diagram and the preceding ones in order to convince you of the truth of the statement which I made at the commencement of this discourse, that although, owing to the complexity of modern contrivances and the larger steps by which we mount the ladder of progress in the material arts, their continuity may be lost sight of, when we come to classify the arts of savages and prehistoric men, the term 'growth’ is fully as applicable to them as to the development of the forms of speech, and that there are no grounds, upon the score of continuity, history, or the action of free will, to separate these studies generically as distinct classes of science.

But in dealing with evolution we have to speak not only of growth, but, as in all other natural sciences, of the principle of decay. By decay I do not mean the decay of the materials of the arts, but the decomposition of the mental ideas which produced them.

As complex ideas are built up of simple ones, so there is also a further process by which they become disintegrated, and the parts go to form parts of other ideas.

This decay in the arts corresponds to what is called phonetic decay in language; and in both cases it arises either from incapacity, the desire to save trouble, or the necessity of abbreviating when ideas originally evolved for one purpose come to form parts of other ideas to which they are merely accessory and subordinate, as in the well-known dialectic changes of speech. Every sound in language had originally a distinct meaning of its own; gradually these sounds or roots came to form parts of words in which the original meanings of the sounds were lost.

I will now endeavour to draw a parallel to this in the arts, by means of what may be termed realistic degeneration.

I will not say much as to the place of realism in culture. The archaeological world has lately been somewhat startled by the discovery of well-executed designs of elephants and other animals in the French caves in association with the rude stone implements of the palaeolithic age, and by the more recent discovery of Mariette Bey, that the earliest Egyptian sculptures of the third dynasty are the most truthful representations of the human form that are to be found in that country. I see nothing surprising in this, when we consider the power that is developed in many children of eight or nine years old of making drawings of animals and other objects, which, when allowance is made for the feeble hand of childhood, are often as truthful as those of the cave-period men, at a time when their minds have acquired but little power of reasoning or generalizing, or even of taking care of themselves; all which goes to prove that this power of imitation, which is a very different thing from ideal art, is one of the most early developed faculties of the mind of man.

When the power of imitation had once been developed, it would naturally be made use of as a means of intercommunication; thus the drawing of a stag would be made to convey information to people at a distance that there was a herd of deer in the neighbourhood to be hunted; and as the object of the drawing was no longer to depict truthfully the peculiarities of the beast, but merely to convey information, the amount of labour expended upon it would be the least that could be employed for the required purpose. All written characters have originated in this way; and no one now requires to be told how pictographic representations developed into hieroglyphic and subsequently into phonetic characters.

But realistic degeneration would equally take place in all cases in which pictorial representations came to be employed for other purposes than those for which they were originally designed, as in the case of ornamental designs.

{joomplu:583 detail align right}So also a coin receives upon its surface the image of a king or a god as a stamp of authority. When from any cause the object of the original design is lost, the object of the stamp being no longer to convey a likeness, but being merely used as a test of genuineness, or perhaps amongst an unlettered people to denote its value, the tendency to realistic degeneration would be proportioned to the difficulties of execution; no further labour would be expended on it than was necessary for the object to be attained. Here I must again remind you of the interesting discourse delivered in this Institution on May 14, 1875, by Mr. Evans, on the evolution of British coins. [4] His examples are figured in his Coins of the Ancient Britons, pp.24-32. With his permission I have introduced some of his diagrams (Plate XXI). You will remember how the coin of Philip of Macedon having been introduced into Britain, the head on the obverse gradually disappeared, leaving only the wreath as a band across the coin, which was ultimately converted into a cross; and how on the reverse, the chariot and two horses dwindled into a single horse, the chariot disappeared, leaving only the wheels, the driver became elevated, not elevated after the manner unfortunately but too common amongst London drivers, but elevated after the manner of the Spiritualists, except that you see he had the precaution to take on a pair of wings, differing also both from the London driver and the Spiritualists, inasmuch as instead of having lost his head he has lost his body, and nothing but the head remains; the body of the horse then gradually disappears, leaving only four lines to denote the legs.

{joomplu:208 detail align right}I will now show you an exact parallel to these transformations in a collection of designs, supposed to be tribal marks, which are drawn upon the paddle blades of the New Irelanders, a race of Papuan savages inhabiting an island on the north-east coast of New Guinea.

Having noticed one or two allied varieties of design in specimens that came into my possession, I determined to collect all that I could find as they came to this country. In the course of several years I succeeded in obtaining the series represented upon Plate IV.

The first figure you will see clearly represents the head of a Papuan: the hair or wig is stuffed out, and the ears elongated by means of an ear ornament, after the manner of these people; the eyes are represented by two black dots, and the red line of the nose spreads over the forehead. This is the most realistic figure of the series. In the second figure the face is somewhat conventionalized: the line of the nose passes in a coil round the eyes; there is a lozenge pattern on the forehead, representing probably a tattoo mark; the body is represented sitting in full. In the third figure the man is represented sitting sideways, simply by lopping off an arm and a leg on one side. In the fourth figure the legs have disappeared. In the fifth figure the whole body has disappeared. In the sixth figure the nose has expanded at the base, and the sides of the face are made to conform to the line of the nose; the elongated ears are there, but the ear ornament is gone: the nose in this figure is becoming the principal feature. In the seventh figure nothing but the nose is left: the sides of the face and mouth are gone; the ears are drawn along the side of the nose; the head is gone, but the lozenge pattern on the forehead still remains; the coil round the eyes has also disappeared, and is replaced by a kind of leaf form, suggested by the upper lobe of the ear in the previous figures; the eyes are brought down into the nose. In the eighth figure the ears are drawn at right angles to the nose. In the ninth figure the nose has expanded at the base; all the rest is the same as in the last figure. In the tenth figure the lozenge pattern and the ears have disappeared, and a vestige of them only remains, in the form of five points; the base of the nose is still further expanded into a half moon. In the last figure, nothing but a half moon remains. No one who compared this figure with the first of the series, without the explanation afforded by the intermediate links, would believe that it represented the nose of a human face. Unfortunately we do not know as yet the exact meaning of these designs, but when further information is obtained about them it will throw considerable light on similar transformations in prehistoric times.

My next and last illustration is taken from the relics of Troy, recently brought to light by Dr. Schliemann.[5] In the valuable work lately published by him he gives illustrations of a number of earthenware vases and other objects, called by him idols, having on them the representation of what he conceives to be the face of an owl, and which he believes to represent Athena, the tutelary goddess of Troy, called by Homer 'Glaukopis Athene', which signifies, according to him, 'with the face of an owl.' Professor Max Müller has given his opinion that the word 'glaukopis' cannot possibly be taken to mean owl-faced, but can only mean large- or bright-eyed. On this point I will venture no opinion, but accepting Professor Müller's high authority for the usually received interpretation of it being correct, I shall in no way weaken the evidence in favour of Dr. Schliemann's discovery of the true site of Troy if I succeed in proving that, according to the true principle of realistic degeneration, this figure does not represent an owl but a human face.

The figures on Plate V are all taken from Dr. Schliemann's representations, and as the depth of each is given it will be seen that the different varieties of face occur in all the different strata excavated by him except the highest, and therefore no argument as to antiquity can be based upon the depth at which they were found. The two first figures, it will be seen, are clearly intended to represent a human face, all the features being preserved. In the two next figures (3, 4) the mouth has disappeared, but the fact of the principal feature being still a nose and not a beak, is shown by the breadth of the base and also by the representation of the breasts. In the two succeeding figures (5, 6) the nose is narrowed at the base, which gives it the appearance of a beak, but the fact of its being still a human form is still shown by the breasts. Had the idea of an owl been developed through realistic degeneration in these last figures, it would have retained this form, but in the two succeeding figures (7, 8) it will be seen that the nose goes on diminishing.

In the remaining figures, some of which are (12-16) of solid stone, not earthenware, and are believed by Dr. Schliemann to be gods, it is clearly shown by the rude scratches representing the eyebrows, and their want of symmetry, that this degeneration of form is the result of haste.

What then are these solid stone objects? I cannot for a moment doubt, from their resemblance to the vases, from the marks denoting the junction of the cover with the vase, and from the representations of handles, that they are votive urns of some kind, similar to those Egyptian stone models of urns represented in the two figures above. Urns of this kind were used by the Egyptians to contain the viscera of the mummies; but with the cheaper form of burial, in which the viscera were retained in the body, stone models of urns, of which these figures are drawings from originals in the British Museum, were deposited in the graves as vestiges of the earlier and more expensive process; these objects therefore cannot be idols, but votive urns. The fact of human remains having been found in some of the human headed urns, and the hasty scratches on the stone models, show that they are merely models appertaining to the conventionalized survival of some earlier or more elaborate system of urn burial.

We see from these facts that both growth and decay, the two component elements of evolution, are represented in the study of the material arts.

My object in this discourse has been not, as I fear it may have appeared to you from the brief time at my disposal and my imperfect treatment of the subject, to extol the material arts as being intrinsically of more interest or importance than other branches of culture, but to affirm the principle that it is by studying the psychology of the material arts alone that we can trace human culture to its germs.

The theory of degradation is supported only by the study of those branches of culture of which the early history is lost.

The tree is the type of all evolution: all trees are seedlings, but they differ in their mode of growth. Some, like the beech and oak, throw their branches upwards, and these are typical of the development of the material arts; others, like the straight-stemmed pine, throw off their branches downwards, and these are typical of the development of some other branches of culture. It is quite true, as stated by mythologists, that the history of myths is one of continued degeneration in so far as they can be traced, and that the element of decay enters far more into their composition than that of growth. But the whole accessible history of these myths represents drooping branches from the upward-growing stem of free thought out of which they sprang. What is the space of time which separates us from the Vedas, as compared with the whole upward growth of humanity before and since!

There are huge gaps in our knowledge of the history of the human race, and it has been the pleasure of mankind in all ages to people these gaps with jugglers and bogies; but surely, if slowly, science will open up these desert places, and prove to us that, so far as the finite mind of man can reach, there is nothing but unbroken continuity to be seen in the present and in the past.

Notes

[1] Lectures on the Science of Language (London, 1861), i, Lecture 1.

[2] John Evans, The Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons, and Ornaments of Great Britain (London, 1872 ), 1897.

[3] Sir W. Wilde, Catalogue of the Antiquities of the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy (Dublin, 1863).

[4] John Evans, 'On the Coinage of the Ancient Britons and Natural Selection,' Journal of the Royal Institution, vii. p. 476 ff.;with a Plate, which is reproduced, by permission, in Plate XXI.

[5] 1 For illustrations, see Troy and its Remains, by Dr. Henry Schliemann (Murray, 1875). The figures may be taken in the following order: No. 185, No. 74, No. 132, No. 13, No. 173, No. 207, No. 12, No. 11, No. 133, No. 141, No. 165. [Plate V has been compiled from the references here given.]

Note that all of the above notes apart from the last were added by Balfour or Myres to the 1906 edition.

Transcribed by AP September 2011

This was a paper read at the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland on December 22, 1874, and first published in the journal of that Institute (vol. iv (1875), pp. 399-43). It was then annotated by Henry Balfour and republished in the 1906 ‘Evolution of Culture’. As the 1906 edition says: '(N.B.— This paper was not furnished by tbe author with either plates or references. The former have been supplied, so far as possible… for illustrations, reference should be made to the section on Navigation in the Pitt-Rivers [sic] Museum, Oxford. Ed.)’

This is the original 1875 version as published in the Journal of the Anthropological Institute. Note that the 'titles' given in capitals are in the original set in normal font, but positioned in the margins to the side of the main text, as markers. Other titles given in italics are included in the main text.

In the paper which I had the honour of reading to this Institute at Bethnal Green [that is, the paper on Principles of Classification, also available here], I spoke of the general principles by which I was guided in the course of inquiries, of which the present paper forms a section. I need not, therefore, now refer to them further than to say that the materials for this paper were collected whilst writing a note to my catalogue raisonné relating to the case of models of early forms of ships.

In inquiries of this nature it is always necessary to guard against the tendency to form theories in the first instance, and go in search of evidence to support them afterwards. On the other hand, in dealing with so vast a subject as Anthropology, including all art, all culture, and all races of mankind, it is next to impossible to adhere strictly to the opposite of this, and collect the data first, to the exclusion of all idea of the purpose they are to be put to in the sequel, because all is fish that comes into the anthropological basket, and no such basket could possibly be big enough to contain a millionth part of the materials necessary for conducting an inquiry on this principle. Some guide is absolutely necessary to the student in selecting his facts. The course which I have pursued, in regard to the material arts, is to endeavour to establish the sequence of ideas. When the links of connexion are found close together, then the sequence may be considered to be established. When they occur only at a distance, then they are brought together with such qualifications as the nature of the case demands. Other members of this Institute have followed the same course in relation to other branches of culture, the object being to lay the foundation of a true anthropological classification, without seeking either to support a dogma or establish a paradox. This is, I believe, the requirement of our time, and the necessary preliminary to the introduction of a science of Anthropology.

Whilst, however, deprecating the influence of forgone conclusions, there are certain principles already established by science which we cannot afford to disregard, even at the outset of inquiries of this nature. It would be sheer moonshine, in the present state of knowledge, to study Anthropology on any other basis than the basis of development; nor must we, in studying development, fail to distinguish between racial development and the development of culture. The affinity of certain races for particular phases of culture, owing to the hereditary transmission of faculties, constitutes an important element of inquiry to be weighed in the balance with other things, just as the farmer weighs in the balance of probabilities the nature of the soil in which his turnips are growing; but when particular branches of culture do run in the same channel with the distribution of particular races, this is always a coincidence to be investigated and explained, each by the light of its own history. It would be just as reasonable to assume with the ancients, that the knowledge of every art was originally inculcated by the gods, as to assume that particular arts and particular ideas arise spontaneously and as a necessary consequence of the possession of particular pigments beneath the skin.

Nobody doubts that there must be affinities and interdependencies between the race and the crop of ideas that is grown upon it; but the law, ex nihilo nihil fit, is as true of ideas as it is of races, and in the relations between them it is as true and has the same value, neither more nor less, as the statement that potatoes do spring out of the ground where no potatoes have been sown. To study culture is, therefore, to trace the history of its development, as well as the qualities of the people amongst whom it flourishes. In doing this it is not sufficient to deal with generalities, as, for example, to ascertain that one people employ bark canoes, whilst another use rafts. It is necessary to consider the details of construction, because it is by means of these details that we are sometimes able to determine whether the idea has been of home growth or derived from without. The difficulty is to obtain the necessary details for the purpose. Travellers do not give them, as a rule, especially modern travellers. The older books are more valuable, both because they deal with nations in a more primitive condition, and also because they are more detailed; books were fewer, and men took more pains with them; now the traveller writes for a circulating-library, and for the unthinking portion of mankind, who will not be bothered with details. I have been careful to give the dates to the authors quoted. But we must endeavour to remedy this evil before it is too late. The Notes and Queries on Anthropology [1], published by the Committee of the British Association, are drawn up with this object. It is to be hoped that they will receive attention, but I fear not much, for the reasons already mentioned; the supply will be equal to the demand. As long as we have a large Geographical Society and a small Anthropological Society, so long travellers will bring home accurate geographical details, abundance of information about the flow of water all over the world, but the flow of human races and human ideas will receive little attention. With these preliminary remarks I pass on to the subject of my paper.

Modes of Navigation.

[DIVISION OF THE SUBJECT] Following out the principle adopted in Parts 1 and 2 of my Catalogue, of employing the constructive arts of existing savages as survivals to represent successive stages in the development of the same arts in prehistoric times, it may be advisable, in order to study the history of each part of a canoe or primitive sailing vessel, to divide the subject under seven heads, as follows: viz.—(1) Solid trunks or dug-out canoes, developing into (2) Vessels on which the planks are laced or sewn together, and these developing into such as are pinned with plugs of wood, and ultimately nailed with iron, or copper; (3) Bark canoes; (4) Vessels of skins and wicker-work; (5) Rafts, developing into (6) Outrigger canoes, and ultimately into vessels of broader beam, to which may be added (7) rudders, sails, and contrivances which gave rise to parts of a more advanced description of vessel, such as the oculus, aplustre, forecastle, and poop.

1. Solid Trunks and Dug-out Canoes. [SOLID TRUNKS AND DUG-OUT CANOES] It requires but little imagination to conceive an idea of the process by which a wooden support in the water forced itself upon the notice of mankind. [ORIGINS] The great floods to which the valleys of many large rivers are subject, more especially those which have their sources in tropical regions, sometimes devastate the whole country within miles of their banks, and by their suddenness frequently overtake and carry down numbers of both men and animals, together with large quantities of timber which had grown upon the sides of the valleys. The remembrances of such deluges are preserved in the traditions of many savage races, and there can be little doubt that it was by this means that the human race first learnt to make use of floating timber as a support for the body. The wide distribution of the word signifying ship—Latin navis; Greek [not transcribed]; Sanskrit nau; Celtic nao; Assam nao, Port Jackson, Australia, nao—attests the antiquity of the term. In Bible history the same term has been employed to personify the tradition of the first shipbuilder, Noah.

It is even said, though with what truth I am not aware, that the American grey squirrel (Sciurus migratorius), which migrates in large numbers, crossing large rivers, has been known to embark on a piece of floating timber, and paddle itself across (Wilson, "Prehistoric Man").

[N. AMERICA. LOG OF WOOD] The North American Indians frequently cross rivers by clasping the left arm and leg round the trunk of a tree, and swimming with the right (Steinitz, "History of the Ship").

[POINTED LOG N.W. AUSTRALIA] The next stage in the development of the canoe would consist in pointing the ends, so as to afford less resistance to the water. In this stage we find it represented on the NW. coast of Australia. Gregory, in the year 1861, says that his ship was visited on this coast by two natives, who had paddled off "on logs of wood shaped like canoes, not hollowed, but very buoyant, about 7 feet long, and 1 foot thick, which they propelled with their hands only, their legs resting on a little rail made of small sticks driven in on each side". Mr. T. Baines, also, in a letter quoted by the Rev. J. G. Wood, in his "Natural History of Man", speaks of some canoes which he saw in North Australia as being "mere logs of wood, capable of carrying a couple of men". [DUG-OUT, WEST AUSTRALIA] Others used on the north coast are dug out, but as these are provided with an outrigger, they have probably been derived from New Guinea. The canoes used by the Australians on the rivers consist either of a bundle of rushes bound together and pointed at the ends, or else they are formed of bark in a very simple manner; but on the south-east coast, near Cape Howe, Captain Cook, in his first voyage, found numbers of canoes in use by the natives on the seashore. [EXCAVATION BY FIRE] These he described as being very like the smaller sort used in New Zealand, which were hollowed out by means of fire. One of these was of a size to be carried on the shoulders of four men.

It has been thought that the use of hollowed canoes may have arisen from observing the effect of a split reed or bamboo upon the water. The nautilus is also said to have given the first idea of a ship to man; and Pliny, Diodorus, and Strabo have stated that large tortoise-shells were used by primitive races of mankind ("Pictorial Bible" Isaiah). It has also been supposed that the natural decay of trees may have first suggested the employment of hollow trees for canoes, but such trees are not easily removed entire. It is difficult to conceive how so great an advance in the art of shipbuilding was first introduced, but there can be no doubt that the agent first employed for this purpose was fire.

[PROBABLE ORIGIN] I have noticed when travelling in Bulgaria that the gipsies and others who roam over that country usually select the foot of a dry tree to light their cooking fire; the dry wood of the tree, combined with the sticks collected at the foot of it, makes a good blaze, and the tree throws forward the heat like a fire-place. Successive parties camping on the same ground, attracted thither by the vicinity of water, use the same fireplaces, and the result is that the trees by degrees become hollowed out for some distance from the foot, the hollow part formed by the fire serving the purpose of a semi-cylindrical chimney. Such a tree, torn up by the roots, or cut off below the part excavated by the fire, would form a very serviceable canoe, the parts not excavated by the fire being sound and hard. The Andaman islanders use a tree in this manner as an oven, the fire being kept constantly burning in the hollow formed by the flames.

[N. AMERICA] One of the best accounts of the process of digging out a canoe by means of fire is that described by Kalm, on the Delaware river, in 1747. He says "When the Indians intend to fell a tree, for want of proper instruments they employ fire; they set fire to a quantity of wood at the roots of the tree, and in order that the fire might not reach further up than they would have it, they fasten some rags to a pole, dip them in water, and keep continually washing the tree a little above the fire until the lower part is burnt nearly through; it is then pulled down. When they intend to hollow a tree for a canoe, they lay dry branches along the stem of the tree as far as it must be hollowed out, set them on fire, and replace them by others. While these parts are burning, they keep pouring water on those parts that are not to be burnt at the sides and ends. When the interior is sufficiently burnt out, they take their stone hatchets and shells and scoop out the burnt wood. These canoes are usually 30 or 40 feet long". In the account of one of the expeditions sent out by Raleigh in 1584 a similar description is given of the process adopted by the Indians of Virginia, except that, instead of sticks, resin is laid on to the parts to be excavated and set fire to; canoes capable of holding twenty persons were formed in this manner.

[GUIANA, WEST INDIES] The Waraus of Guiana employ fire for excavating their canoes; and when Columbus discovered the Island of Guanahani or San Salvador, in the West Indies, he found [fire] employed for this purpose by the natives, who called their boats "canoe", a term which has ever since been employed by Europeans to express this most primitive class of vessel.

[ANDAMAN ISLES.] Dr. Mouat says that, in Blair's time, the Andaman islanders excavated their canoes by the agency of fire; but it is not employed for that purpose now, the whole operation being performed by hand. [BIRMAH] Simes, in 1800, speaks of the Birmese war-boats, which were excavated partly by fire and partly by cutting. Nos, 1276 and 1277 of my collection are models of these boats. [NEW CALEDONIA] In New Caledonia, Turner, in 1845, says that the natives felled their trees by means of a slow fire at the foot, taking three or four days to do it. In excavating a canoe, he says, they kindle a fire over the part to be burnt out, and keep dropping water over the sides and ends, so as to confine the fire to the required spot, the burnt wood being afterwards scraped out with stone tools. [NEW ZEALAND, AUSTRALIA] The New Zealanders, and probably the Australians also, employ fire for this purpose (Cook). [W. AFRICA] The canoes of the Krumen in West Africa are also excavated by means of fire.

[BENDING BY FIRE] A further improvement in the development of the dug-out canoe consists in bending the sides into the required form after it has been dug out. This process of fire-bending has already been described in parts I and II of my Catalogue, when speaking of the methods employed by the Esquimaux and Australians in straightening their wooden spears and arrow-shafts. [NORTH-WEST AMERICA] The application of this process to canoe-building by the Ahts of the north-west coast of North America is thus described by Mr. Wood in his "Natural History of Man". The canoe is carved out of a solid trunk of cedar (Thuja gigantea). It is hollowed out, not by fire, but by hand, and by means of an adze formed of a large mussel-shell; the trunk is split lengthwise by wedges. All is done by the eye. When it is roughly hollowed it is filled with water, and red-hot stones put in until it boils. This is continued until the wood is quite soft, and then a number of cross-pieces are driven into the interior, so as to force the canoe into its proper shape, which it ever afterwards retains. While the canoe is still soft and pliant, several slight cross-pieces are inserted, so as to counteract any tendency towards warping. The outside of the vessel is then hardened by fire, so as to enable it to resist the attacks of insects, and also to prevent it cracking when exposed to the sun. The inside is then painted some bright colour, and the outside is usually black and highly polished. This is produced by rubbing it with oil after the fire has done its work. Lastly, a pattern is painted on its bow. There is no keel to the boat. The red pattern of the painting is obtained by a preparation of annato. For boring holes the Ahts use a drill formed by a bone of a bird fixed in a wooden handle.

[BIRMAH] A precisely similar process to this is employed in the formation of the Birmese dug-out canoes, and has thus been described to me by Capt. O'Callaghan, who witnessed the process during the Birmese War in 1852: "A trunk of a tree of suitable length, though much less in diameter than the intended width of the boat, is cut into the usual form, and hollowed out. It is then filled with water, and fires are lit, a short distance from it, along its sides. The water gradually swells the inside, while the fire contracts the outside, till the width is greatly increased. The effect thus produced is rendered permanent by thwarts being placed so as to prevent the canoe from contracting in width as it dries; the depth of the boat is increased by a plank at each side, reaching as far as the ends of the hollowed part. Canoes generally show traces of the fire and water treatment just described, the inner surface being soft and full of superficial cracks, while the outer is hard and close".

It is probable that this mode of bending canoes has been discovered during the process of cooking, in which red-hot stones are used in many countries to boil the water in vessels of skin or wood, in which the meat is cooked. No. 1256 of my collection is a model of an Aht canoe, painted as here described. No. 1257 is a full-sized canoe from this region, made out of a single trunk; it is not painted, so that the grain of the wood can be seen.

[DISTRIBUTION] The distribution of the dug-out canoe appears to be almost universal. It is especially used in southern and equatorial regions. Leaving Australia, we find it employed with the outrigger, which will be described hereafter (pp. 218-9), [POLYNESIAN AND ASIATIC ISLES.] in many parts of the Polynesian and Asiatic islands, including New Guinea, New Zealand, New Caledonia, and the Sandwich Islands. It was not used by the natives of Tasmania, who employed a float consisting of a bundle of bark and rushes, which will be described in another place. Wilkes speaks of it in Samoa, at Manilla, and the Sooloo Archipelago. De Guignes in 1796 and De Morgan in 1609 saw them in the Philippines, where they are called pangues, some carrying from two to three and others from twelve to fifteen persons. They are (or were) also used in the Pelew, Nicobar, and Andaman Isles. [BAY OF BENGAL] In the India Museum there is a model of one from Assam, used as a mail boat, and called dak nao. [SOUTHERN ASIA] In Birmah, Symes, in 1800, describes the war-boats of the Irrawaddy as 80 to 100 feet long, but seldom exceeding 8 feet in width, and this only by additions to the sides; carrying fifty to sixty rowers, who use short oars that work on a spindle, and who row instead of paddling. Captain O'Callaghan, however, informs me that they sometimes use paddles (Nos. 1276 and 1277). They are made of one piece of the teak tree. The king had five hundred of these vessels of war. They are easily upset, but the rowers are taught to avoid being struck on the broadside; they draw only 3 feet of water. On the Menan, in Siam, Turpin, in 1771, says that the king's ballons are made of a single tree, and will contain 150 rowers; the two ends are very much elevated, and the rowers sit cross-legged, by which they lose a great deal of power. The river vessels in Cochin China are also described as being of the same long, narrow kind. [PERSIA] At Eerhabad, in Persia, Pietro della Valle, in 1614, describes the canoes as being flat-bottomed, hollow trees, carrying ten to twelve persons.

[AFRICA] In Africa, Duarte Barbosa, in 1514, saw the Moors at Zuama make use of boats, almadias, hollowed out of a single trunk, to bring clothes and other merchandise from Angos. Livingstone says the canoes of the Bayeye of South Africa are hollow trees, made for use and not for speed. If formed of a crooked stem they become crooked vessels, conforming to the line of the timber. On the Benuwé, at its junction with the [Yola], Barth, for the first time in his travels southward, saw what he describes as rude little shells hollowed out of a single tree; they measured 25 to 30 feet in length, 1 to 1 1/2 foot in height, and 16 inches in width; one of them, he says, was quite crooked. On the White Nile, in Unyoro, Grant says that the largest canoe carried a ton and a half, and was hollowed out of a trunk. On the Kitangule, west of Lake Victoria Nyanza, near Karague, he describes the canoes as being hollowed out of a log of timber 15 feet long and the breadth of an easy-chair. These kind of canoes are also used by the Makoba east of Lake Ngami, by the Apingi and Camma, and the Krumen of the West African coast; of which last, No. 1272 of my collection is a model.

[SOUTH AMERICA] In South America the Patagonians use no canoes, but in the northern parts of the continent dug-out canoes are common. One described by Condamine, in 1743, was from 42 to 44 feet long, and only 3 feet wide. [WEST INDIES] They are also used in Guiana, and Professor Wilson says that the dug-out canoe is used throughout the West 'Indian Archipelago. According to Bartram, who is quoted by Schoolcraft, the large canoes formed out of the trunks of cypress trees, which descended the rivers of Florida, crossed the Gulf, and extended their navigation to the Bahama Isles, and even as far as Cuba, carrying twenty to thirty warriors. [NORTH AMERICA] Kalm, in 1747, gives some details respecting their construction on the Delaware river already referred to, and says that the materials chiefly employed in North America are the red juniper, red cedar, white cedar, chestnut, white oak, and tulip tree. Canoes of red and white cedar are the best, because lighter, and they will last as much as twenty years, whereas the white oak barely lasts above six years. In Canada these dug-outs were made of the white fir. The process of construction on the west coast of North America has been already described.

[EUROPE. SWISS LAKES] In Europe Pliny mentions the use of canoes hollowed out of a single tree by the Germans. Amongst the ancient Swiss lake-dwellers at Robenhausen, associated with objects of the stone age, a dug-out canoe, or Einbaum, made of a single trunk 12 feet long and 2 1/2 wide, was discovered (Keller, "Lake Dwellings"). [IRELAND] In Ireland, Sir William Wilde says that amongst the ancient Irish dug-out canoes were of three kinds. One was small, trough-shaped, and square at the ends, having a projection at either end to carry it by; the paddlers sat flat at the bottom and paddled, there being no rowlocks to the boat. A second kind was 20 feet in length and 2 in breadth, flat-bottomed, with round prow and square stern, strengthened by thwarts carved out of the solid and running across the boat, two near the stem and one near the stern. The prow was turned up; one of these was discovered in a bog on the coast of Wexford, 12 feet beneath the surface. The third sort was sharp at both ends, 21 feet long, 12 inches broad, and 8 inches deep, and flat-bottomed. These canoes are often found in the neighbourhood of the crannoges, or ancient lake-habitations of the country, and were used to communicate with the land; also in the beds of the Boyne and Bann. Ware says, that dug-out canoes were used in some of the Irish rivers in his time, and to this day I have seen paddles used on the Blackwater, in the south of Ireland. [SCOTLAND] Professor Wilson says that several dug-out canoes have been found in the ancient river-deposits of the Clyde, and also in the neighbourhood of Falkirk. In one of those discovered in the Clyde deposits, at a depth of 25 feet from the surface, a stone almond-shaped celt was found. Others have been found in the ancient river-deposits of Sussex and elsewhere, in positions which show that the rivers must probably have formed arms of the sea, at the time they were sunk.

2. Vessels in which the Planks are Stitched to each Other. [STITCHED PLANKS] All vessels of the dug-out class are necessarily long and narrow, and very liable to upset; the width being limited by the size of the tree, extension can only be given to them by increasing their length. In order to give greater height and width to these boats, planks are sometimes added at the sides and stitched on to the body of the canoe by means of strings or cords, composed frequently of the bark or leaves of the tree of which the body is made. In proportion as these laced-on gunwales were found to answer the purpose of increasing the stability of the vessel, their number was increased; two such planks were added instead of one, and as the joint between the planks was by this means brought beneath the water line, means were taken to caulk the seams with leaves, pitch, resin, and other substances. Gradually the number of side planks increased and the solid hull diminished, until, ultimately, it dwindled into a bottom-board, or keel, at the bottom of the boat, serving as a centre-piece on which the sides of the vessel were built. Still the vessel was without ribs or framework; ledges on the sides were carved out of the solid substance of each plank, by means of which they were fastened to the ledges of the adjoining plank, and the two contiguous ledges served as ribs to strengthen the boat; finally, a framework of vertical ribs was added to the interior and fastened to the planks by cords. Ultimately the stitching was replaced by wooden pins, and the side planks pinned to each other and to the ribs; and these wooden pins in their turn were supplanted by iron nails.

[NEW ZEALAND] In different countries we find representations of the canoe in all these several stages of development. Of the first stage, in which side planks were added to the body of the dug-out canoe, to heighten it, the New Zealand canoe, No. 1259 of my collection, is an example. Capt. Cook describes this as solid, the largest containing from thirty men upwards. One measured 70 feet in length, 6 in width, and 4 deep. Each of the side pieces was formed of an entire plank, about 12 inches wide, and about an inch and a half thick, laced on to the hollow trunk of the tree by flaxen cords, and united to the plank on the opposite side by thwarts across the boat. These canoes have names given to them like European vessels.

[AFRICA] On the Benuwé, in Central Africa, Barth describes a vessel in this same early stage of departure from the original dug-out trunk. It consisted of "two very large trunks joined together with cordage, just like the stitching of a shirt, and without pitching, the holes being merely stuffed with grass. It was not water-tight, but had the advantage," he says, "over the dug-out canoes used on the same river, in not breaking if it came upon a rock, being, to a certain degree, pliable. It was 35 feet long, and 26 inches wide in the middle." No. 1258 of my collection is a model of one of these. [BIRMAH] The single plank added to the side of the Birmese dug-out canoe has been already noticed. Although my informant does not tell me that these side planks are sewn on, I have no doubt, judging by analogy, that this either is or was formerly the case.

[SOUTH AMERICA] The Waraus of Guiana are the chief canoe-builders of this part of South America, and to them other tribes resort from considerable distances. Their canoe is hollowed out of a trunk of a tree, and forced into its proper shape partly by means of fire and partly by wedges, upon a similar system to that described in speaking of the Ahts of North America and the Birmese; the largest have the sides made higher by a narrow plank of soft wood, which is laced upon the gunwale, and the seam caulked. This canoe is alike at both ends, the stem and stern being pointed, curved, and rising out of the water; there is no keel, and it draws but a few inches of water. This appears to be the most advanced stage to which the built-up canoe has arrived on either continent of America, with the exception of Tierra del Fuego, where Commodore Byron, in 1765, saw canoes in the Straits of Magellan made of planks sewn together with thongs of raw hide; these vessels are considerably raised at the bow and stern, and the larger ones are 15 feet in length by 1 yard wide. They have also been described by more recent travellers. Under what conditions have these miserable Fuegians been led to the employment of a more complex class of vessel than their more advanced congeners of the north ?

[AFRICA] In order to trace the further development of the canoe in this direction, we must return to Africa and the South Seas. On the island of Zanzibar, Barbosa, in 1514, says that the inhabitants of this island, and also Penda and Manfia, who are Arabs, trade with the mainland by means of "small vessels very loosely and badly made, without decks, and with a single mast; all their planks are sewn together with cords of reed or matting, and the sails are of palmmats". On the river Yeou, near Lake Tchad, in Central Africa, Denham and Clapperton saw canoes 'formed of planks, rudely shaped with a small hatchet, and strongly fastened together by cords passed through holes bored in them, and a wisp of straw between, which the people say effectually keeps out the water; they have high poops like the Grecian boats, and would hold twenty or thirty persons '. On the Logon, south-east of Lake Tchad, Barth says the boats are built ‘in the same manner as those of the Budduma, except that the planks consist of stronger wood, mostly Birgem, and generally of larger size, whilst those of the Budduma consist of the frailest material, viz. Fogo. In both, the joints of the planks are provided with holes, through which ropes are passed, overlaid with bands of reed tightly fastened upon them by smaller ropes, which are again passed through small holes stuffed with grass’. On the Victoria Nyanza, in East Central Africa, Grant speaks of "a canoe of five planks sewn together, and having four cross-bars or seats. The bow and stern are pointed, standing for a yard over the water, with a broad central plank from stem to stern, rounded outside (the vestige of the dug-out trunk), and answering for a keel."

Thus far we have found the planks of the vessels spoken of, merely fastened by cords passed through holes in the planks, and stuffed with grass or some other material, and the accounts speak of their being rarely water-tight. Such a mode of constructing canoes might serve well enough for river navigation, but would be unserviceable for sea craft. Necessity is the mother of invention, and accordingly we must seek for a further development of the system of water-tight stitching, amongst those races in a somewhat similar condition of culture, which inhabit the islands of the Pacific and the borders of the ocean between it and the continent of Africa.

The majority of those vessels now to be described are furnished with the outrigger; but as the distribution of this contrivance will be traced subsequently, it will not be necessary to describe it in speaking of the stitched plank-work.

[POLYNESIAN ISLES] In the Friendly Isles Captain Cook, in 1773, says "the canoes are built of several pieces sewed together with bandage in so neat a manner that on the outside it is difficult to see the joints. All the fastenings are on the inside, and pass through kants or ridges, which are wrought on the edges and ends of the several boards which compose the vessel." At Otaheite he speaks of the same process, and says that the chief parts are formed separately without either saw, plane, or other tool. La Perouse gives an illustration of an outrigger canoe from Easter Island, the sides of which are formed of drift-wood sewn together in this manner. At Wytoohee, one of the Paumotu, or Low Archipelago, Wilkes, in 1838, says that the canoes are formed of strips of cocoa-nut tree sewed together. Speaking of those of Samoa, he describes the process more fully. "The planks are fastened together with sennit; the pieces are of no regular size or shape. On the inside edge of each plank is a ledge or projection, which serves to attach the sennit, and connect and bind it closely to the adjoining one. It is surprising," he says, "to see the labour bestowed on uniting so many small pieces together, when large and good planks might be obtained. Before the pieces are joined, the gum from the husk of the bread-fruit tree is used to cement them close, and prevent leakage. These canoes retain their form much more truly than one would have imagined; I saw few whose original model had been impaired by service. On the outside the pieces are so closely fitted as frequently to require close examination before the seams can be detected. The perfection of workmanship is astonishing to those who see the tools with which it is effected. They consist now of nothing more than a piece of iron tied to a stick, and used as an adze; this, with a gimlet, is all they have, and before they obtained their iron tools, they used adzes made of hard stone and fish-bone." The construction of the Fiji canoe, called drua, is described by Williams in great detail. A keel or bottom board is laid in two or three pieces, carefully scarfed together. From this the sides are built up, without ribs, in a number of pieces varying from three to twenty feet. The edges of these pieces are fastened by ledges, tied together in the manner already described. A white pitch from the bread-fruit tree, prepared with an extract from the coco-nut kernel, is spread uniformly on both edges, and a fine strip of masi laid between. The binding of sennit with which the boards, or vanos, as they are called, are stitched together is made tighter by small wooden wedges inserted between the binding and the wood, in opposite directions. The ribs seen in the interior of these canoes are not used to bring the planks into shape, but are the last things inserted, and are for uniting the deck more firmly with the body of the canoe. The carpenters in Fiji constitute a distinct class, and have chiefs of their own. The Tongan canoes were inferior to those of Fiji in Captain Cook's time, but they have since adopted Fiji patterns. The Tongans are better sailors than the Fijians. Wilkes describes a similar method of building vessels in the Kingsmill Islands, but with varieties in the details of construction. ‘Each canoe has six or eight timbers in its construction; they are well modelled, built in frames, and have much sheer. The boards are cut from the coco-nut tree, from a few inches to six or eight feet long, and vary from five to seven inches in width. These are arranged as the planking of a vessel, and very neatly put together, being sewed with sennit. For the purpose of making them water-tight they use a slip of pandanus leaf, inserted as our coopers do in plugging a cask. They have evinced much ingenuity,' he says, ‘in attaching the uprights to the flat timbers.’ It is difficult, without the aid of drawings, to understand exactly the peculiarities of this variety of construction, but he says they are secured so as to have all the motion of a double joint, which gives them ease, and comparative security in a seaway.

[ASIATIC ISLES] Turning now to the Malay Archipelago, Wallace speaks of a Malay prahau in which he sailed from Macassar to New Guinea, a distance of 1,000 miles, and says that similar but smaller vessels had not a single nail in them. The largest of these, he says, are from Macassar, and the Bugi countries of the Celebes and Boutong. Smaller ones sail from Ternate, Pidore, East Ceram, and Garam. The majority of these, he says, have stitched planks. No. 1268 of my collection is a model of a vessel employed in those seas. Wallace says that the inhabitants of Ké Island, west of New Guinea, are the best boat-builders in the archipelago, and several villages are constantly employed at the work. The planks here, as in the Polynesian Islands, are all cut out of the solid wood, with a series of projecting ledges on their edges in the inside. But here we find an advance upon the Polynesian system, for the ledges of the planks are pegged to each other with wooden pegs. The planks, however, are still fastened to the ribs by means of rattans. The principles of construction are the same as in those of the Polynesian Islands, and the main support of the vessel still consists in the planks and their ledges, the ribs being a subsequent addition; for he says that after the first year the rattan-tied ribs are generally taken out and replaced by new ones, fitted to the planks and nailed, and the vessel then becomes equal to those of the best European workmanship. This constitutes a remarkable example of the persistency with which ancient customs are retained, when we find each vessel systematically constructed, in the first instance, upon the old system, and the improvement introduced in after years. I wonder whether any parallel to this could be found in a British arsenal. The psychical aspect of the proceeding seems not altogether un-English.

[SOUTHERN ASIA] Extending our researches northward, we find that Dampier, in 1686, mentions, in the Bashee Islands, the use of vessels in which the planks are fastened with wooden pins. On the Menan, in Siam, Turpin, in 1771, speaks of long, narrow boats, "in the construction of which neither nails nor iron are employed, the parts being fastened together with roots and twigs which withstand the destructive action of the water. They have the precaution", he says, "to insert between the planks a light, porous wood, which swells by being wet, and prevents the water from penetrating into the vessel. When they have not this wood, they rub the chinks, by which the water enters, with clay". In the India Museum there is a model of a very early form of vessel from Birmah, described as a trading vessel. The bottom is dug out, and the sides formed of planks laced together. A large stone is employed for an anchor. Here we see that an inferior description of craft has survived, upon the rivers, in the midst of a higher civilization which has produced a superior class of vessel upon the seas.

[INDIA] Turning westward, we have the surf-boat of Madras, called massoola, which, on account of its elasticity, is still used on the seashore. Its parts are stitched together in the manner represented in the model, No. 1267 of my collection. On the Malabar coast the ships of the Pardesy, who consisted of Arabs, Persians, and others who have settled in the kingdom of Malabar, are described by Barbosa in 1514. "They build ships," he says, "of 200 tons, which have keels like the Portuguese, but have no nails. They sew their planks with neat cords, very well pitched, and the timber very good. Ten or twelve of these ships, laden with goods, sail every year in February for the Bed Sea, some for Aden and some for Jeddah, the port of Mecca, where they sell their merchandise to others, who transmit it to Cairo, and thence to Alexandria. The ships return to Calicut between August and October of the same year. The earliest description we have of these vessels in this part of the world, in historic times, is in the account of the travels of two Mahomedans in the ninth century. In these travels it is related that there were people in the Gulf of Oman who cross over to the islands that produce coco-nuts, taking with them their tools, and make ships out of it. With the bark they make the cordage to sew the planks together, and of the leaves they make sails; and having thus completed the vessel, they load it with coco-nuts and set sail." Marco Polo, at the commencement of the fourteenth century, confirms this, and says, speaking of the ships at Ormuz, in the Persian Gulf, "that they do not use nails, but wooden pins, and fasten them with threads made of the Indian nut. These threads endure the force of the water, and are not easily corrupted thereby. These ships have one mast, one sail, and one beam, and are covered with but one deck. They are not caulked with pitch, but with the oil and fat of fishes. When they cross to India they lose many ships, because the sea is very tempestuous, and they are not strengthened with iron." In the Red Sea, Father Lobo, in 1622, describes the vessels called gelves, which, he says, are made almost entirely of the coco-nut tree. The trunk is sawn into planks, the planks are sewn together with thread which is spun from the bark, and the sails are made of the leaves stitched together. They are more convenient, he says, than other vessels, because they will not split if thrown upon banks or against rocks.

[EGYPT] We have now arrived in the region which is usually regarded as the cradle of Western civilization, certainly the land in which Western culture first began to put forth its strong shoots; and we must expect to find that the art of shipbuilding advanced in the same ratio as other trades. But, unlike the Phoenicians, the Egyptians confined their navigation chiefly to the Nile, and had an abhorrence of Typhon, as they termed the sea, because it swallowed up the great river, which, being the chief source of their prosperity, they regarded as a god.

Here it may be desirable to digress for one moment from the chain of continuity which we have been following, in order to say a few words about the most primitive form of vessel used on the Nile, viz. that mentioned by Isaiah (xviii. 2) as being of Ethiopian origin, the vessel of bulrushes to which the mother of Moses entrusted her infant progeny. What the coco-nut tree was to the navigators on the eastern seas, the papyrus was to the Egyptians, and from it every part of the vessel—rope, planks, masts, and sails—was constructed. Adverting to the earliest and simplest of these papyrus vessels, the common use for a bundle of faggots, for such it was, is not, perhaps, one of those coincidences which, viewed by the light of modern culture, we should select as evidence of connexion between distant lands. And yet there are peculiarities of form which make the bulrush float of the Egyptians worthy of comparison with those used in the rivers of Australia.

[AUSTRALIA] The Australian float, as represented by a model in the British Museum, consisted of a bundle of bark and rushes, pointed and elevated at the ends, and bound round with girdles of the same material. [TASMANIA] The only vessel, according to Mr. Calder, used in Tasmania, on the west coast, is thus described by him in the "Journal of the Anthropological Institute", iii. 22. "It was of considerable size, and something like a whale-boat, that is, sharp-sterned, but a solid structure, and the natives, in their aquatic adventures, sat on the top of it. It was generally made by the buoyant and soft, velvety bark of the swamp tea-tree (Melaluca sp.), and consisted of a multitude of small strips bound together." [CALIFORNIA] Professor Wilson says that the Californian canoe consists of a mere rude float, made of rushes, "in the form of a lashed-up hammock." [EGYPT] A wood-cut in Sir Gardner Wilkinson's Ancient Egypt, No. 399 of his work, represents three persons making one of these papyrus floats. It is the baris, or Memphite bark, bound together with papyrus, spoken of by Lucan, and it is of precisely similar form to those above described, elevated and pointed at the ends, and the men are in the act of binding it round with girdles. This is the kind of boat in which Plutarch describes Isis going in search of the body of Osiris through the fenny country; a bark made of papyrus. Pliny attributes the origin of shipbuilding to these vessels - "Naves primum repertas in Egypto in Nilo ex papyro" (Lib. viii cap. 56) and speaks of their crossing the sea and visiting the Island of Taprobane (Ceylon, Sir G. Wilkinson); but it seems probable that he must refer to a more advanced form of vessel than the mere bulrush float.

The racial connexion between the Australians and the Egyptians, first put forward by Professor Huxley, has hardly met with general acceptance as yet; but, startling as it at first sight appeared, the more we look into the evidence bearing upon it, the less improbable, to say the least, it becomes, when viewed by the light of comparative culture. I have already shown, in another place,[2] how closely some of the Australian weapons correspond to some of those still used on the Upper Nile, and the remarkable resemblance here pointed out in a class of vessels which might well have been used in passing short distances from island to island of the now submerged fragments of land that are supposed to have formerly existed in parts of the southern hemisphere, is, at least, worthy of attention amongst other evidence of the same kind that may be collected, although I fully admit that it is not of a character to stand alone. I will not exceed my province by attempting to defend the theory of the Australioid origin of the Egyptians on physical grounds, preferring to leave the defence of that theory in the hands of its author, who is so well able to support his own views; but I may take this opportunity of commenting' on some remarks made by Professor Owen in his valuable paper, published in the last number of our Journal, on the psychical evidence of connexion between them and the black races of the southern hemisphere. Adverting to the fresco painting, in the British Museum, of the ancient Egyptian fowler, who holds in his hand a stick, which he is in the act of throwing at a flock of birds, I am inclined to agree with Professor Owen in thinking there is nothing in its shape to denote that it is a boomerang. Other figures, however, in Rosellini's "Egyptian Monuments", show the resemblance more clearly, and if these are not enough, the specimen of the weapon itself in the glass case in the Egyptian room of the British Museum proves the identity of the weapon beyond possibility of doubt. I have elsewhere stated at length, [3] that having made several facsimiles of this weapon from careful measurements, so as to obtain the exact size, form, and weight of the original, for the purpose of experiment, I found that it possessed all the properties of the Australian boomerang, rising in the air, and returning in some cases to within a few paces of the position from which it was thrown. In fact, it was easier to obtain the return flight from this weapon than from many varieties of the Australian boomerang, with which I experimented at the same time.

But supposing the ancient Egyptian to be "convicted of the boomerang", says the learned professor, "common sense repudiates the notion of the necessity of inheritance in relation to such operations." Against this I would urge, that the application of the general quality of common sense to the determination of questions of psychical connexion, between races so far removed from us, as the Australians or the predecessors of the earliest Egyptian kings, is inconsistent with all that we know of the phenomena of mental evolution in man, seeing that there must necessarily be many stages of disparity between them and any intelligent member of the Anthropological Institute to whose common sense this appeal was made.

If the common sense of the nineteenth century does not repudiate the fact that the steam engine, the electric telegraph, vaccination, free trade, and a thousand other contrivances for the benefit of our race, have sprung from special centres, and have been inherited, or otherwise received, by the highly cultivated races to which they have spread in modern times, neither would the common sense of the Australian or prehistoric Egyptian, after its kind, bar the likelihood of such contrivances as the boomerang, the parrying-shield, or the ‘baris' having been handed from one savage people to another in a similar manner. Wherever two or three concurrent chains of connexion, whether of race, language, or the arts, can be traced along the same channel, such evidence is admissible, and is indeed frequently the only evidence available in dealing with prehistoric times.

The peculiar elevated ends of the papyrus floats are almost identical in form, but not in structure, with those now used in parts of India, especially on the Ganges; and the word junk is said to be related to juncus, a bulrush. Somewhat similar rafts, but flat, turned up in front but not behind, and called tankwa, are described by Lieut. Prideaux as being still used on Lake Tsana, in Soudan, and they are also used by the Shillooks, who make them of a wood as light as cork, called ambads [Anemone mirahilis). A paper by Mr. John Hogg, in the "Magazine of Natural History" (1829), to which my attention has been kindly drawn by Mr. John Jeremiah, contains some useful information on the subject of Egyptian papyrus vessels. Denon describes and figures a very primitive float of this sort, consisting of a bundle of straw or stalks, pointed and turned up in front, and says that the inhabitants of the Upper Nile go up and down the river upon it astride, the legs serving for oars; they use also a short double-bladed paddle. It is worthy of notice that the only other localities, that I am aware of, in which this double paddle is used, are the Sooloo Archipelago and among the Esquimaux. Belzoni also describes the same kind of vessel. Mr. Hogg, in his paper, gives several illustrations of improved forms of these solid papyrus floats, derived from a mosaic pavement discovered in the Temple of Fortune at Praeneste. From these it seems that they were bound round with thongs, pointed, and turned up and over at both ends. But Bruce, in 1790, describes more particularly the class of vessel used in Abyssinia in his time, called tankwa, or, as he writes it, tancoa, and says that it corresponds exactly to the description of Pliny [Nat. Hist., Lib xiii. 2). His description appears possibly to indicate that there was a separate line of development of hollow vessels derived from the flat raft. "A piece of acacia tree was put in the bottom to serve as a keel, to which plants were joined, being first sewed together, then gathered up at the ends and stern, and the ends of the plant tied fast there". (On Lake Tsana they are only turned up in front: see above). Bezzoni [sic] describes a similar kind of vessel on Lake Moeris, which seems clearly to be hollow. "The outer shell or hulk was composed of rough pieces of wood, scarcely joined, and fastened by four other pieces wrapped together by four more across, which formed the deck; no tar, no pitch, either inside or out, and the only preventive against the water coming in was a kind of weed which had settled in the joints of the wood." The only other locality, that I know of, in which similar vessels to these are used, is Formosa, a description of which is given by Mr. J. Thomson F.R.G.S. ("The Straits of Malacca, Indo-China, and China", London), for the sight of which I am indebted to Mr. L. Distant. He says: "We went ashore in a catamaran, a sort of raft made of poles of the largest species of bamboo. These poles are bent by fire, so as to impart a hollow shape to the raft, and are lashed together with rattan. There is not a nail used in the whole contrivance."

But the boats "woven of the papyrus", mentioned by Pliny, certainly refer to something more complex than the papyrus bundle above described. Lucan describes them as being sewn with bands of papyrus, and Herodotus describes them more fully. This passage has been variously translated by different authors, but the version given by Sir Gardner Wilkinson is as follows: "they cut planks measuring about two cubits, and having arranged them like bricks, they build the boat in the following manner: they fasten the planks round firm long pegs, and, after this, stretch over the surface a series of girths, but without any ribs, and the whole is bound within by bands of papyrus." The exact meaning of this is obscure; but I would suggest, that as the "fastening within" clearly shows it was not a solid structure, the more reasonable interpretation of it is by supposing that the planks, arranged in brick fashion, were fastened on the inside by cords, in the manner practised in the South Sea Islands and elsewhere. What the long pins were is uncertain; but as Sir Gardner Wilkinson says that the models found in the tombs show that ribs were used at a time probably subsequent to this, these pins may have been rudimentary ribs of some kind, and they also may have been "bound within" to the planks in the same manner. It seems not unlikely that these boats may have also been bound round on the outside to give them additional strength, after the manner of the papyrus floats above described.[4] With this vessel, which was called baris, they used a sort of anchor, consisting of a stone with a hole in it, similar to one on a Birmese vessel, of which a model is in the India Museum.

The larger class of Egyptian vessels were of superior build, the planks being fastened with wooden pins and nails, and their construction somewhat similar to those still used on the Nile.

[AREA OF WESTERN CIVILISATION] Returning now to the link of the chain to which we have appended this digression, and carrying our inquiries further northward into the area of Western civilization, it is to be expected that we should lose all trace of this primitive mode of ship-building. The earliest vessels recorded in classical history were fastened with nails. In Homer's description of the vessel built by Odysseus, both nails and ribs were employed, and it had a round or a flat bottom (Smith's Dic.). [BOAT OF THE NYDAM MOSS] No trace of any earlier form of ship has been discovered in Europe, until we come to the neighbourhood of the North Sea. Here, in the Nydam Moss, in Slesvic, in 1863, was discovered a large boat, seventy-seven feet long, ten feet ten inches broad in the middle, flat at the bottom, but higher and sharper at both ends, having a prow at both ends, like those described by Tacitus as having been built by the Suiones, who inhabited this country and Sweden in ancient times. This vessel, from its associated remains, has been attributed to the third century. The bottom consisted of a broad plank, about two feet broad in the middle, but diminishing in width towards each end. A small keel, eight inches broad and one deep, was carved on the under side of the plank, which corresponds to the bottom plank, which, in Africa and the Polynesian Islands, we have shown to be the vestige of the dug-out trunk. On to this bottom plank, five side planks, running the whole length of the vessel, were built, but they differed from those previously described in over-lapping, being clinker-built, and attached to each other, not by strings or wooden pins, but by large iron bolts. The planks, however, resembled those of the southern hemisphere, in having clamps or ledges carved out of the solid on the inside; these ledges were perforated, and their position corresponded to rows of vertical ribs, to which, like the vessels at Ké Island, and elsewhere in the Pacific, they were tied by means of cords passing through corresponding holes in the ribs. Each rib was carved out of one piece, and, like those of Ké Island in the Asiatic Archipelago, could easily have been taken out and replaced by others after the vessel was completed. In short, the vessel represented the particular stage of development which may be described as plank-nailed and rib-tied, or which might be characterized as having removable ribs; differing in this respect from the more advanced system of modern times, in which the ribs, together with the keel, form a framework to which the planks are afterwards bent and fastened.

This mode of fastening the ribs to ledges carved out of the planking, Mr. Engelhardt, to whom we are indebted for the accurate drawings and description of this vessel,[5] remarks, is a most surprising fact, considering that the people who constructed the boat are proved by the associated remains to have been not only familiar with the use of iron, but to have been able to produce damascened sword-blades. But this fact, which, taken by itself, has been justly described as surprising, analogy leads us to account for, by supposing these particular parts of the vessel to have been survivals from a universally prevalent primitive mode of fastening, the nearest southern representative of which, at the present time, is to be found in the Red Sea and adjoining oceans. Nor can there be any reason to doubt, I think, that this mode of constructing vessels may have been used in the intervening countries, which have been the scene of the rise of Western civilization since the earliest times, but which have now lost all trace of the most primitive phases of the art of ship-building.

[NORTHLAND BOAT] Mr. Engelhardt, however, traces a connexion between this ancient vessel, found in the Nydam Moss, and the Northland boats now used on the coast of Norway and the Shetland Isles, the peculiar rowlocks of which, and also the clincher-nails by which the sides are fastened, correspond very closely to those of the Nydam boat. [FINLAND AND LAPLAND] Here also, and in Finland and Lapland, we find survivals of a still earlier mode of ship-building, corresponding to the more primitive plank-stitched vessels, before described, in so many places in the southern hemisphere. Regnard, in 1681, describes the Finland boats as being twelve feet long and three broad. "They are made of fir, and fastened together with the sinew of the reindeer; this makes them," he says, "so light that one man can carry one on his shoulders others are fastened together with thread made of hemp, rubbed with glue, and their cords are of birch bark or the root of the fir." Outhier, in 1736, confirms this account of the manner in which they are sewn together, and says that it renders them very flexible, and suitable for passing cataracts, on account of their lightness, and because they do not break when they are cast against a rock. The Lapland sledge called pulea is also described by Regnard as being of the same construction—boat-shaped, and the parts sewn together with the sinew of the reindeer, without a single nail. I have not as yet been able to trace this mode of fastening vessels continuously in Russia; but Bell, in 1719, says that the long, flat-bottomed barks used on the Volga for carrying salt have not a single iron nail in their whole fabric; and Atkinson describes vessels on the Tchoussowaia which are built without nails, but these are fastened with wooden pins.

3. Bark canoes.

[BARK CANOES, AUSTRALIA] The use of bark for canoes might have been suggested by the hollowed trunk; but, on the other hand, we find this material employed in Australia, where the hollowed trunk is not in general use. Bark is employed for a variety of purposes, such as clothing, materials for huts, and so forth. Some of the Australian shields are constructed of the bark of trees. The simplest form of canoe in Australia consists, as already mentioned, of a mere bundle of reeds and bark pointed at the ends. It is possible that the use of large pieces of bark in this manner may have suggested the employment of the bark alone. Belzoni mentions crossing to the island of Elephantine, on the Nile, in a ferry-boat which was made of branches of palm trees, fastened together with cords, and covered on the outside with a mat pitched all over. The solid papyrus boats represented on the pavement at Praeneste, before mentioned, have evidently some other substance on the outside of them; and Bruce imagines that the junks of the Red Sea were of papyrus, covered with leather. [6] The outer covering would prevent the water from soaking into the bundle of sticks, and thus rendering it less buoyant. Bark, if used in the same manner, would serve a like purpose, and thus suggest its use for canoe-building. Otherwise I am unable to conceive any way in which bark canoes can have originated, except by imitation of the dug-out canoe.

For crossing rivers, the Australian savage simply goes to the nearest stringy-bark tree, chops a circle round the tree at the foot, and another seven or eight feet higher, makes a longitudinal cut on each side, and strips off bark enough by this means to make two canoes. If he is only going to cross the river by himself, he simply ties the bark together at the ends, paddles across, and abandons the piece of bark on the other side, knowing that he can easily provide another. If it is to carry another besides himself, he stops up the tied ends with clay; but if it is to be permanently employed, he sews up the ends more carefully, and keeps it in shape by cross-pieces, thereby producing a vessel which closely resembles the bark canoe of North America ("Nat. Hist. of Man" Wood). I have not been able to trace the use of the bark canoe further north than Australia on this side of the world, probably owing to its being ill adapted for sea navigation; nor do I find representatives of it in any part of Europe or Africa, although bark is extensively used, in the Polynesian Islands and elsewhere, for other purposes.

It is the two continents of America which must be regarded as the home of the bark canoe.

[SOUTH AMERICA] The Fuegian canoe has been described by Wilkes, Pritchard, and others. It is sewn with shreds of whalebone, sealskin, and twigs, and supported by a number of stretchers lashed to the gunwale; the joints are stopped with rushes, and, without, smeared with resin. In Guiana the canoe is made of the bark of the purple-heart tree, stripped off and tied together at the ends. The ends are stopped with clay, as with the Australians. This mode of caulking is not very effectual, however, and the water is sure to come in sooner or later.

The nature of the material does not admit of much variety in the construction; suffice it to say that it is in general use in North America, up to the Esquimaux frontier. Its value in these regions consists in the facility with which it is taken out of the water and carried over the numerous rapids that prevail in the North American rivers. The Algonquins were famous for the construction of them. Some carry only two people, but the canot de maitre was thirty-six feet in length, and required fourteen paddlers. Kalm, in 1747, gives a detailed account of the construction of them on the Hudson river, and Lahontan, in 1684, gives an equally detailed description of those used in Canada. The bark is peeled off the tree by means of hot water. They are very fragile, and every day some hole in the bottom has to be stopped with gum.

Mr. T. G. B. Lloyd, in an excellent paper descriptive of the Beothucs of Newfoundland, published in the last number of the journal, has described the remarkable bark canoe of these people. Its form is different from any other canoe of this or any other region that I have heard of, the line of the gunwale rising in the middle, as well as at the ends, and the vessel being V-shaped in section, with a straight wooden keel at the bottom. Its form is so singular, that the only idea of continuity which I can set up for it is, that it must have been copied from some European child's paper boat, capable, by a single additional fold, of being converted into a cocked hat; the central pyramidal portion of the paper boat having given the form to the pyramidal sides of the Beothuc vessel. If this be rejected, then its history has yet to be told, for no native tribe ever employed such a peculiar form unless by inheritance.

Nos. 1248 and 1249 of my collection are South American bark canoes; Nos. 1250 to 1252 are bark canoes from North America.

[WICKER SKIN CANOES] 4. Canoes of Wicker and Skin. As we approach the Arctic regions, the dug-out and bark canoes are replaced by canoes of skin and wicker. As we have already seen, in the case of the bow, and other arts of savages, vegetable materials supply the wants of man in southern and equatorial regions, whilst animal materials supply their place in the north.

The origin of skin coverings has been already suggested when speaking of bark canoes. The accidental dropping of a skin bottle into the water might suggest the use of such vessels as' a means of recovering the harpoon, which, as I have already shown elsewhere, was almost universally used for fishing in the earliest stages of culture. The Esquimaux lives with the harpoon and its attached bladder almost continually by his side. [ESQUIMAUX] The Esquimaux kayak, Nos. 1253 and 1254 of my collection, in which he traverses the ocean, although admirable in its workmanship, and, like all the works of the Esquimaux, ingenious in construction, is in principle nothing more than a large, pointed bladder, similar to that which is lashed to the harpoon at its side; the man in this case occupying the opening which, in the bladder, is filled by the wooden pin that serves for a cork.

This is, I believe, a very primitive form of vessel, although there can be no doubt that many links in the history of its development have been lost. Unlike the dug-out canoe, such a fragile contrivance as the wicker canoe perishes quickly, and no direct evidence of its ancestry can be traced at the present time. It is only by means of survivals that we can build up the past history of its development; and these are, for the most part, wanting.

[INFLATED SKINS] The skin of an animal, flayed off the body with but one incision, served, as I have elsewhere shown, a variety of purposes: from it the bellows was derived, the bagpipes, water-vessels, and pouches of various kinds; and, filled with air, it served the purpose of a float. [INDIA] Steinitz, in his "History of the Ship", gives an illustration of an inflated ox skin, which in India is used to cross rivers; the owner riding upon the back of the animal and paddling with his hands, as if it had been a living ox.

[ASSYRIA] In the Assyrian sculptures there are numerous illustrations representing men floating upon skins of this kind, which they clasp with the left hand, like the tree trunks, already mentioned, that are used by the American Indians, and swim with the right. [MESOPOTAMIA] Layard says this manner of crossing rivers is still practised in Mesopotamia. He also describes the raft, composed of a number of such floats, made of the skins of sheep flayed off with as few incisions as possible; a square framework of poplar beams is placed over a number of these, and tied together with osier and other twigs. The mouths of the sheep-skins are placed upwards, so that they can be opened and refilled by the raft-men. On these rafts the merchandise is floated down the river to Bagdad; the materials are then disposed of and the skins packed on mules, to return for another voyage. [EGYPT] On the Nile similar rafts are used, the skins being supplanted by earthen pots, which, like the skins on the Euphrates, serve only a temporary purpose, and after the voyage down the river are disposed of in the bazaars.

[MOROCCO] This mode of floating upon skins I should conjecture to be of northern origin, and to be practised chiefly by nomadic races but we find it employed on the Morbeya, in Morocco, by the Moors, who no doubt had it from the East. It is thus described by Lempriere, in 1789. A raft is formed of eight sheep-skins filled with air, and tied together with small cords; a few slender poles are laid over them, to which they are fastened, and that is the only means used at Buluane to convey travellers, with their baggage, over the river. As soon as the raft is loaded, a man strips, jumps into the water, and swims with one hand, whilst he pulls the raft after him with the other; another swims and pushes behind. [SOUTH AMERICA] This reminds us of the custom of the Gran Chaco Indians of South America, who, in crossing rivers, use a square boat or tub of bull's hide, called pelota. It is attached by a rope to the tail of a horse, which swims in front; or the rope is taken in the mouth of an expert swimmer.

I have not traced the distribution of these rafts of inflated skins as continuously as, I have no doubt, they might be traced amongst nomadic and pastoral races, moving with their flocks and herds, the skins of which would be employed in this way nor have I been able to trace the connexion which, I have no doubt, existed between the inflated skin and the open ‘curragh’ of wicker covered with skins. [SKIN AND WICKER BOATS] Where one is found, the other is often found with it. Herodotus describes the boats used by the people who came down the river to Babylon, [EUPHRATES] and says they are constructed in Armenia, and in the parts above Assyria, [HERODOTUS] thereby connecting them with the north. "The ribs of these vessels," he says, "are formed of willow boughs and branches, and covered externally with skin. They are round, like a shield, there being no distinction between head and stern. They line the bottom with reeds and straw, and taking on board merchandise, chiefly palm wine, float down the stream. The boats have two oars, one to each man: one pulls and the other pushes. They are of different dimensions, some having a single ass on board and others several. On their arrival at Babylon the boatmen dispose of their goods, and offer for sale the ribs and straw; they then load the asses with the skins, and return with them to Armenia, where they construct new boats"—just as is [BAGHDAD] now done with the inflated skins of the rafts at Baghdad.

[SASSANIAN SCULPTURES] In the Pictorial Bible an illustration is given from the Sassanian sculptures at Takht-i-Bostan of several of these round vessels, probably of wicker, covered with skins. In one of these the principal figure carries a composite bow, which, as I have elsewhere shown, is of northern origin. [NIMROUD] Mr. Layard discovered in Nimroud a sculpture in which one of these boats is represented. It is round, like those described by Herodotus; back and stern alike; carrying two people, one of whom pulls and the other pushes; and in the same sculpture are represented men swimming on the inflated sheep-skins. [BAGHDAD] He says that these same round vessels are still used at Baghdad, built of boughs and timber covered with skins, over which bitumen is smeared to render it more water-tight. [Hamilton] also speaks of the same vessels (of reeds and bitumen) on the Euphrates, at the commencement of the eighteenth century.

[INDIA] On the Cavery, in Mysore, Buchanan, in 1800, describes ferry-boats that are called donies, which are circular baskets covered with leather; but whether these vessels, like the composite bow used in the same region, can be traced to a northern origin I have not the means of determining, nor have I as yet sufficient materials to enable me to ascertain whether such vessels are employed in the north of Asia at the present time. What the inflated skin is to these circular vessels, the kayak is to the baidar of the Esquimaux. Throughout the whole region occupied by this race, these two kinds of vessels are used, differing only in minute varieties of detail in the different localities. [ESQUIMAUX] According to Dr. King, whose valuable paper, "On the Industrial Arts of the Esquimaux," was published in the first volume of the "Journal of the Ethnological Society" (1848), the varieties of the kayak in the different localities consist merely in the elevation and shape of the rim of the hole in which the man sits. [PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND] In Prince William Sound, on the NW. coast, the kayak is frequently built with two or three holes to contain two or three men. The bow has two beaks, one of which turns up, according to Captain Cook, like the head of a violin, as represented in No. 1254 of my collection. [ALEUTIAN ISLES] This is also used in the Aleutian Isles. The meaning of this double beak I have not been able to ascertain. The baidar used on this coast has also a double beak, as represented in No. 1255 of my collection.

[BEHRING STRAITS] In the British Museum there is a kayak with a single opening, from Behring Straits, which differs but little from another in the same museum from [GREENLAND] Greenland; the kayak of Greenland has a knob of ivory at each end to protect the sharp point. The baidar is used at [OCHOTSK AND KAMTSCHATKA] Ochotsk and Kamtschatka, on the Asiatic coast, and all along the northern coast of America, eastward from Behring Strait. Models of both baidar and kayak are in the British Museum, from Kotzebue Sound. [KOTZEBUE SOUND] [FROBISHER STRAITS] In Frobisher Strait, Frobisher, in 1577, says the boats are of two kinds of leather stretched on frames, the greater sort open, and carrying sixteen or twenty people (the baidar), and the lesser, to carry one many covered over, except in one place where the man sits (the kayak). [HUDSON'S STRAITS] In Hudson's Straits and Greenland, where the larger vessels are called oomiak, they are flat-sided and flat-bottomed, about three feet high, and nearly square at the bow and stern, whereas this sort on the north-west coast is sometimes pointed at bow and stern. [GREENLAND] Kerguelen, in 1767, mentions both kinds in Greenland; and Kalm, in 1747, speaks of both, though not from personal observation, on the coast of Labrador. [LABRADOR] The Esquimaux canoe has been known to have drifted from Greenland across the north of Scotland, and has been picked up, with the man still alive in it, on the coast of Aberdeen (Wilson).

[BRITAIN] In Britain the coracle of osier, covered with skin, is mentioned by Caesar, and in Britain, Gaul, and Italy by Lucan (A.D. 39-65). [SCOTLAND] In Scotland, Bellenden, in the sixteenth century, speaks of the currock of wands, covered with bulls' hide, as being in use in the sixteenth century, and its representative is still used in the west of Ireland. [IRELAND] Sir William Wilde says that, under the name of curragh, it is still made of leather, stretched over a wooden frame, on the Boyne, and in Arran, on the west coast, of light timber, covered with painted canvas, which has superseded the use of leather. I have seen these vessels at Dingle, on the south-west coast, where they go by the name of nevog; they are there 23 feet in length by 4 in width, and 1 ft. 9 inches deep, made of laths, and covered with painted canvas; they are used, from Valentia, along the west coast as far as Galway. In the south they are larger than in the north, where they are called curraghs, and a single man can carry one on his back, as the ancient Briton did his coracle. Their continuance is caused by their cheapness, costing only £6 when new. Here also they were, until recently, constructed of leather. They have a small triangular sail, and, like the most ancient forms of vessels, they are guided, when sailing, by means of oars, one on each side.

[RAFTS] 5. Rafts. The trunks of trees, united by mutual attraction, as they floated down the stream, would suggest the idea of a raft. [AUSTRALIA] The women of Australia use rafts made of layers of reeds, from which they dive to obtain mussel-shells. [NEW GUINEA] In New Guinea the catamaran, or small raft formed of three planks lashed together with rattan, is the commonest vessel used. Others are larger, containing ten or twelve persons, and consist of three logs lashed together in five places, the centre log being the longest, and projecting at both ends.

[MADRAS. GANGES. MANILLA. PERU] This is exactly like the catamaran used on the coast of Madras, a model of one of which is in the Indian Museum; they are also used on the Ganges, and in the Asiatic isles. At Manilla they are known by the name of saraboas; but the perfection of raft navigation is on the coast of Peru. Ulloa, in 1735, describes the balzas used on the Guayaquil, in Ecuador, and on the coast as far south as Paita. They are called by the Indians of the Guayaquil jungadas, and by the Darien Indians puero. They are made of a wood so light that a boy can easily carry a log 1 foot in diameter and 3 or 4 yards long. They are always made of an odd number of beams, like the New Guinea and Indian rafts, the longest and thickest in the centre, and the others lashed on each side. Some are 70 ft. in length and 20 broad. When sailing, they are guided by a system of planks, called guaras, which are shoved down between the beams in different parts of the raft as they are wanted, the breadth of the plank being in the direction of the lines of the timbers. By means of these they are able to sail near the wind, and to luff up, bear away, and tack at pleasure. When a guara is put down in the fore part of the raft, it luffs up, and when in the hinder part, it bears away. This system of steering, he says, the Indians have learnt empirically, "their uncultivated minds never having examined into the rationale of the thing."

It was one of these vessels which Bartolomew Ruiz, pilot of the second expedition for the discovery of Peru, met with; and which so astonished the sailors, who had never before seen any vessel on the coast of America provided with a sail. Condamine speaks of the rafts in 1743, on the Chinchipe, in Peru. [BRAZIL] They are also used on the coast of Brazil, where they are also called jungadas, from which locality there is a model of one in the British Museum, and another in the Christy collection. Professor Wilson thinks it was by means of these vessels, driven off the coast of America westward, that the Polynesian and Malay islands were peopled; and this brings us to the consideration of the peculiar class of vessel which is distributed over a continuous area in the Pacific and adjoining seas, viz. the outrigger canoe, which, I shall endeavour to show, was derived from the raft.

[OUTRIGGER CANOE. PACIFIC OCEAN. DOUBLE LOG RAFT.] The sailing properties of the balza, or any other similar raft, must have been greatly impeded by the resistance offered to the water by the ends of its numerous beams. In order to diminish the resistance, the obvious remedy was to use only two beams, placed parallel to each other at a distance apart, with a platform laid on cross-poles between them.

[TASMANIA] Of this kind we find a vessel used by the Tasmanians, and described by Mr. Bonwick, on the authority of Lieut. Jeffreys. The natives, he says, would select two good stems of trees and place them parallel to each other, but a couple of yards apart cross-pieces of small size were laid on these, and secured to the trees by scraps of tough bark. A stronger cross-timber, of greater thickness, was laid across the centre, and the whole was then covered by wicker-work. Such a float would be thirty feet long, and would hold from six to ten persons (Herbert Spencer, Descriptive Sociology (London, 1874), No. 3, Table V).

[FIJI] In Fiji, Williams describes a kind of vessel called ulatoka, a raised platform, floating on two logs, which must evidently be a vessel of the same description as that used in Tasmania.

From these two logs were derived the double canoe on the one hand, and the canoe with the outrigger on the other.

[LINK] A link between the catamaran and the outrigger canoe is seen in a model in the India Museum, from Madras. [MADRAS] It consists of the usual catamaran, already described, of three beams lashed together, the longest being in the centre, across which are attached, their ends extending on one side, long outrigger poles, to the extremities of which, parallel, and at some distance from the catamaran, is fastened an outrigger log, of smaller size and length, pointed at both ends, and boat-shaped, exactly like those used with the outrigger canoes to be hereafter described. When the art of hollowing out canoes was introduced, then one canoe and one log, or two canoes, were employed, as the case might be. [DEVELOPMENT] This I consider to be a more natural sequence than to suppose the outrigger invented as a means of steadying the dug-out canoe.

[DISTRIBUTION] The outrigger canoe, and its accompanying double canoe, is used over the whole of the Polynesian and Asiatic islands from Easter Island on the east, to Ceylon and the Andamans on the west. Their varieties are also, in some cases, continuous and I will endeavour to trace the distribution of each, commencing with the canoe with the single outrigger. [SINGLE OUTRIGGER]

[POLES ATTACHED DIRECTLY TO OUTRIGGER] Towards the eastern and northern extremities of the Polynesian Islands we find that the canoes have a single outrigger, and that the ends of the outrigger poles are attached directly to the outrigger log, instead of being connected with it by upright supports, as is the case elsewhere. As the outrigger log is on a lower level than the line of the gunwales of the canoe, across which the other ends of the outrigger poles are lashed, they are generally curved downwards to meet the outrigger.

[DISTRIBUTION] This is the form described by La Perouse in Easter Island. It is the same in the drawings of canoes from Marquesas; also in the one, figured by Wilkes, from Wytoohee or Disappointment Isle, in the Low Archipelago; and in the one from Tahiti, Society Isles; also in those of the Sandwich Isles and the Kingsmill Isles; and it reappears again on the extreme west of the group in Ceylon, No. 1265 of my collection.

[VARIATION OF HULL] But whilst this peculiarity appears to be constant in the above-mentioned region, the form of the body of the canoe differs in each group of islands. In the Marquesas the bow turns up very much, in the Sandwich Islands only slightly (No. 1264); in Disappointment Isle there is a projecting part before and behind, by which they step into it; in Tahiti they have a similar projection over the stern only, which is used for a similar purpose.

[OUTRIGGER ATTACHED BY UPRIGHTS] To the westward of these, in a group extending over the centre of the region in question, all the outriggers that I have seen described, either by means of models or drawings, have upright supports on the upper side, and on these the outrigger poles rest, so as to be on the level of the line of the gunwales. [DISTRIBUTION] This is the case in Nuie or Savage Island; in Samoa (No. 1262); in the Caroline Isles; in Bowditch Island, one of the Union group; in Tonga and Fiji; in New Guinea; in the Louisiade Archipelago, and in North Australia.

[CYPRAEA OVULA SHELLS] Another peculiarity in this central region deserves notice. The ends of the canoe are covered with a deck extending over about one-third of its length fore and aft, and on this deck there is a row of upright pegs, carved out of the same piece as the deck, and running down the centre of it. Each peg is surmounted by a white Cypraea ovula shell tied on. The origin and meaning of this custom is unknown, but it was probably adopted originally as insignia of the rank of the owner. [DISTRIBUTION] Its distribution is limited to a group of islands lying between about the 10th and 20th parallel of south latitude, and 170° and 180° west longitude. Cook, in 1773, speaks of it in the Friendly Isles; and Wilkes, in 1838, mentions it in Samoa, Fiji, and Bowditch Island. The canoes of the Solomon Isles and other islands are, however, also ornamented with shells in different parts.

[SINGLE OUTRIGGER] The canoe with the single outrigger is also used in [Garret Dennis Island], which is described by Dampier in 1686; in the Ladrones, by Pigafetta, 1519; in the Pelew Islands; in Borneo; in Ceylon; in the Nicobar and Andaman Islands.

In Kingsmill and the Caroline Islands, to the north, the outrigger is somewhat smaller than elsewhere, its length not exceeding one-third o£ the length of the canoe. In the adjoining groups of the Kingsmill and Ladrone Islands we have a variety of this vessel in which the canoe, on the outrigger side, is nearly flat, having a belly only on the opposite side. [FLAT SIDES] This is described by Wilkes in 1838, and Dampier in 1686.

[DOUBLE CANOE] The double canoe represents a variety in which both logs of the double-logged raft have developed into canoes. The two canoes are placed side by side, at a little distance apart, and transverse spars are lashed across the gunwales of both; a platform being built upon the cross spars; No. 1266 of my collection.

[DISTRIBUTION] Double canoes of this kind were used in New Zealand formerly, also in New Caledonia. Mr. Baines mentions it in North Australia, but I am not aware that it is used in New Guinea. Cook speaks of it in the Friendly Isles, Wilkes in Fiji. It was formerly used in Samoa, but Wilkes says it has been discontinued, and the single outrigger only is now used; in Tahiti; in the Low Archipelago, the inhabitants of which group are very expert sailors, steering by the stars, and seldom making any material error; in the Sandwich Isles; also in Ceylon, where it is called a paddy boat; in Birmah and in some of the Indian rivers; at Mosapore, where it goes by the name of langardy and in Cochin, on the southern portion of the Malabar coast, where it is employed as a ferry-boat. It also appears, by a model in the India Museum, that it is used as high up as Patna, on the Ganges.

[LINK] In Fiji we find a connecting link between the double canoe and the canoe with the single outrigger. Here the outrigger consists of a boat, similar in construction to the large one to which it is attached, but smaller, and connected with the platform between them by upright supports.

[SAILING PECULIARITIES] Contrivances for sailing near the wind with the single out-rigger canoe have led to the introduction of several other varieties of this class of vessel. It is necessary that the out-rigger should always be on the windward side. The outrigger acts as a weight on the windward side, to prevent the narrow canoe from being blown over on the opposite side. When it blows very hard, the men run out on to the outrigger, to give it the additional weight of their bodies. Wilkes says that whenever the outrigger gets to the leeward side, there is almost invariably an upset. [SAILING FORE AND AFT] The outrigger probably is pressed too deeply into the water, and meeting with too much resistance, breaks the poles. To meet this difficulty both the canoe and outrigger are, in some parts, made pointed at both ends. When they wish to tack, instead of luffing and coming about, they bear away, until the vessel gets on the opposite quarter, and then, by shifting the sail, they sail away again stern first. [DISTRIBUTION] This system is pursued in Fiji, in parts of New Guinea, and northward, in Kingsmill Islands (Wilkes).

[DOUBLE OUTRIGGER] Another mode of meeting this difficulty consists in having two outriggers, one on each side. [DISTRIBUTION] This is employed in the Louisiade Archipelago (No. 1260), in parts of New Guinea, and to the north, in the Sooloo Archipelago. Yet another method remains to be described. [WEATHER PLATFORMS] In Samoa the canoes are built with bow and stern, and the outrigger is pointed towards the fore part only. As these vessels can only sail one way, the outrigger, in tacking, must necessarily be sometimes on the leeward side; to meet this, they rig out a platform corresponding to the out-rigger platform on the opposite side; this, for distinction's sake, we may term a weather platform. It has no outrigger log, nor does it touch the water, but when the wind blows so heavily as to press the outrigger down on the lee side, they run out on the weather platform, and counterbalance the effect of the wind by their weight. [DISTRIBUTION] This contrivance is used in some parts of New Guinea, where, it may be observed, the varieties of the outrigger canoe are more numerous than in most of the other islands. It is also used in the Solomon Isles, where the weather platform is of the same width as the outrigger platform; and probably in some of the other islands to the north.

Finally we have, in the Asiatic Archipelago, a contrivance which may be said to be derived partly from the double out-rigger, and partly from the weather platform last described. In proportion as the simple dug-out canoe began to be converted into a built-up vessel, and to acquire greater beam, they began to depend less and less on the support of the outrigger. [DOUBLE WEATHER PLATFORM] The double outrigger necessarily presented considerable resistance to the water, but the vessel was still too narrow to sail by itself. A weather platform had, however, been found sufficient to balance the vessel on one side, and the next step was to knock off the outrigger log on the other side, thereby converting the outrigger platform into a weather platform; the two platforms projecting one on each side of the vessel, on the level of the gunwales, without touching the water, and thereby acting on the principle of the balancing-pole of a tight-rope dancer, whilst the resistance to the water was by this means confined to that of the hull of the vessel itself. These double weather-platform boats were also found more convenient in inland waters, in the canals in Manilla, and elsewhere.

[DISTRIBUTION] De Guignes, in 1796, mentions a contrivance of this sort in the Philippines, but from the account, it is not quite clear whether he refers to a double weather platform, or a vessel with an outrigger and a weather platform. He says "The boats at Manilla are very sharply built, and furnished with yards, which serve as balances, on the windward side of which, when the wind blows hard, the sailors place themselves to counterpoise the effect of the wind on the sails. This contrivance does not, however, always ensure safety, for at times the bamboos which form the balance break, in which case the boat founders and the crew are lost." Dampier, however, in 1686, clearly speaks of the double weather platform at Manilla. [MANILLA] He says "The difference between these Manilla boats and those at Guam, in the Ladrones, is that, whereas at Guam there is a little boat, fastened to the outriggers, that lies in the water, the beams or bamboos here are fastened transverse-wise to the outlayers on each side, and touch not the water like boats, but one, three, or four feet above the water, and serve for the canoe-men to sit and row and paddle upon." He says, that "when the vessel reels, the ends of the platform dip into the water, and the vessel rights itself." [BIRMAH] Still further north, at Rangoon, on the Irrawaddy, we find the same contrivance described by Symes in 1795. He says "The boats are long and narrow, sixty feet in length, and not more than twelve in the widest place; they require a good deal of ballast, and would have been in constant danger of upsetting, had they not been provided with outriggers which, composed of thin boards, or oftener of buoyant bamboos, make a platform that extends horizontally six or seven feet on the outside of the boat from stem to stern. Thus secure, he says, the vessel can incline no further than until the platform touches the surface of the water, when she immediately rights on this stage the boatmen ply their oars."

[RESULTS] This constitutes one out of many points of evidence that might be mentioned, serving to show that the arts and culture of the Birmese, and of all this part of Asia, have been derived from the Malay Archipelago more probably than the reverse.

The outrigger canoe itself has never, I believe, been known on the Irrawaddy within the memory of man, but, as already seen, it is used in the Nicobar and Andaman Isles and on the coast to the south.

These outriggers, or balancing platforms, appear gradually to have diminished in size as the vessel increased in beam, and there can be little doubt that the rude stages or balconies outside the gunwales represented in the models of many of the larger vessels used in these seas are the last vestiges of the outrigger. No. 1278 of my collection is an example of this.

[RESULTS] All the various items of evidence which I have collected, and endeavoured to elucidate by means of survivals, whether in relation to modes of navigation or other branches of industry, appear to me to tend towards establishing a gradual development of culture as we advance northward. Although Buddhism and its concomitant civilization may have come from the north, there has been an earlier and prehistoric flow of culture in the opposite direction—northward—from the primaeval and now submerged cradle of the human family in the southern hemi- sphere. This, I venture to think, will establish itself more and more clearly, in proportion as we divest ourselves of the numerous errors which have arisen from our acceptance of the Noachian deluge as a universal catastrophe.

[OCEAN HIGHWAY] As human culture developed northward from the equator toward the 40th parallel of latitude, civilization began to bud out in Egypt, India, and China, and a great highway of nations was established by means of ships along the southern margin of the land, from China to the Red Sea.

[DISTRIBUTION OF OTHER SHIP FORMS] Along this ocean highway may be traced many connexions in ship forms which have survived from the earliest times. [OCULUS] The oculus, which, on the sacred boats of the Egyptians, represented the eye of Osiris guiding the mummy of the departed across the sacred lake, is still seen eastward— in India and China—converted into an ornamental device, whilst westward it lived through the period of the Roman and Grecian biremes and triremes, and has survived to this day on the Maltese rowing-boats and the xebecque of Calabria, or has been converted into a hawser-hole in modern European craft. [RUDDER] The function of the rudder— which in the primitive vessels of the southern world is still performed by the paddlers, whilst paddling with their faces to the prow—was confided, as sails began to be introduced, to the rearmost oars. In some of the Egyptian sculptures the three hindermost rowers on each side are seen steering the vessel with their oars. Ultimately one greatly developed oar on each side of the stern performed this duty; the loom of which was attached to an upright beam on the deck, as is still the case in some parts of India. In some of the larger Malay prahaus there are openings or windows in the stern, considerably below the deck, by which the steersmen have access to two large rudders, one on each side; each rudder being the vestige of a side oar.

Throughout the Polynesian Islands the steering is performed with either one or two greatly developed paddles. Both in the rudder of the Egyptian sculptures and in the gubernamdum of the Roman vessels, we see the transition from the large double oar, one on each side, to the single oar at the stern. The ship of Ptolemaeus Philopator had four rudders, each thirty cubits in length (Smith's Dic., s. v. ‘Navis'). The Chinese and Japanese rudder is but a modification of the oar, worked through large holes in the stern of the vessel; which large holes, in the case of the Japanese, owe their preservation to the orders of the Tycoon, who caused them to be retained in all his vessels, in order to prevent his subjects from venturing far to sea. [BUCCINA] The buccina, or shell trumpet, which is used especially on board all canoes in the Pacific, from the coast of Peru to Ceylon, is represented, together with the gubemaculum, in the hands of Tritons in Roman sculptures (Smith's Dic., s. v. ‘Navis '), and the shell form of it was preserved in its metallic representatives.

[SAIL] The sail, in its simplest form, consists of a triangular mat, with bamboos lashed to the two longer sides. In New Guinea and some of the other islands, this sail, which is here seen in its simplest form, is simply put up on deck, with the apex downwards and the broad end up, and kept up by stays fore and aft. When a separate mast was introduced, this sail was hauled up by a halyard attached to one of the bamboos, at the distance of about one-fifth of its length from the broad end, the apex of the bamboo-edged mat being fastened forward by means of a tack. By taking away the lower bamboo the sail became the lateen sail of the Malay pirate proa, the singular resemblance of which to that of the Maltese galley of the eighteenth century (a resemblance shared by all other parts of the two vessels) may be seen by two models placed side by side in the Royal United Service Institution. Professor Wilson observes that the use of the sail appears to be almost unknown on either continent of America, and the surprise of the Spaniards on first seeing one used on board a Peruvian balza arose from this known peculiarity of early American navigation. Lahontan, however, in 1684, says that the Canadian bark canoes, though usually propelled by paddles, sometimes carried a small sail. He does not, however, say whether the knowledge of these has been derived from Europeans. Mr. Lloyd also mentions small sails used with bark canoes in Newfoundland.

[CROW'S NEST] The crows-nest, which in the Egyptian vessels served to contain a slinger or an archer at the top of the mast, and which is also represented in the Assyrian sculptures, was still used for the same purpose in Europe in the fifteenth century, was modified in the sixteenth century, and became the mast-head so well known to midshipmen in our own time. [PROPA AND PUPPIS] The two raised platforms, which in the Egyptian vessels served to contain the man with the fathoming pole in the fore part, and the steersman behind, became the prora and the puppis of the Romans, and the forecastle and poop of modern European vessels. [APLUSTRE] The aplustre, which, in the form of a lotus, ornamented the stern of the Egyptian war-craft, gave the form to the aplustre of the Greeks and Romans, and may still be seen on the stern of the Birmese war-boats at the present time.

[ARGUMENT AND CONCLUSION] All these numerous examples serve to show that where civilization has advanced the forms have been gradually changed; where, on the other hand, it has not advanced, they have remained unchanged. Sir Gardner Wilkinson and others have pointed out the striking resemblance between the boats of the ancient Egyptians and those of modern India. "The form of the stern, the principle and construction of the rudder, the cabins, the square sail, the copper eye on each side of the head, the line of small squares at the side, like false windows, and the shape of the oars of boats used on the Ganges, forcibly call to mind," he says, "those of the Nile, represented in the paintings of the Theban tombs." We have also seen that the inflated sheep-skin still serves to transport the Mesopotamian peasant across the Euphrates, as it did when Nimroud was a thriving city. The skin and wicker tub-shaped vessels still float down the Euphrates with their cargoes to Baghdad, are broken up, and the skins carried up the river again on mules, as they were in the time of Herodotus, upwards of 2,000 years ago. What is there to prevent our believing that the primitive vessels which we have been describing in the southern hemisphere, the representatives of some of which have been discovered in river deposits of the stone age in Europe, may have been in use in the countries in which they are now found, as long, and longer—far longer?

What reason is there to doubt that the rude bark-float of the Australian, the Tasmanian, and the Ethiopian; the catamaran of the Papuan; the dug-out of the New Zealander; the built-up canoe of the Samoan; and the improved ribbed vessel of the Ké islander, are survivals representing successive stages in the development of the art of ship-building, not lapses to ruder methods of construction as the result of degradation; that each stage supplies us with examples of what was at one time the perfection of the art, inconceivable ages ago? Some, as we have seen, especially the more primitive kinds, spread nearly all over the world, whilst others had a more limited area of distribution. Taken together, they enable us to trace back the history of ship-building from the time of the earliest Egyptian sculptures to the commencement of the art.

Nor does the interest of this inquiry confine itself to the development of ship-building. As affecting the means of locomotion, it throws light on the development of other branches of culture in early times. For even if we set aside exceptional instances in which individual canoes have been driven away to—such as the case in which an Esquimaux in great distances his kayak was picked up off the coast of Aberdeen, or that of a Chinese junk having been wrecked on the north-west coast of America, which might or might not have produced permanent results—and confine ourselves to those cases in which the distribution of like forms of vessels proves that there must probably have been frequent communication between shore and shore; and if we further assume, as I propose to do, that the existing means of communication in the Pacific in a great measure represents the amount of intercourse that took place across the sea in prehistoric times, that is to say, in times prior to the earliest Egyptian sculptures, we find no difficulty in accounting, by this means, for the striking similarity observable in the arts and ideas of savages in distant lands; for not only have these vessels been the means of conveying from place to place the material form of implements, such as celts, stone knives, and so forth, which, being imperishable, have been handed down to us unchanged, and the forms of which we know to have spread over large geographic areas; but also each voyage has conveyed a boat-load of ideas, of which no material record remains, in the shape of myths, religions, and superstitions, which have been emptied out upon the seashore, to seek affinity with other chatter that was indigenous to the place.

Thus, by means of intercommunication, no less than by spontaneous development, have been formed those numerous combinations which so greatly puzzle the student of culture at the present time..

DISCUSSION

Professor T. McK. HUGHES, after mentioning several early historical notices of long voyages made by Phoenicians, Greeks, and others, pointed out that the more advanced form of boat, in which long voyages could be made, would be most widely known; whllst the ruder forms, determined by the requirements and capabilities of different localities, would probably be local. The coracle, for instance, had held its own in Wales from the time of the Romans, from the facility with which it can be made, carried from pool to pool, and used in netting.

Mr T.G.B. LLOYD described a skin canoe which he had had built by the Indians during a trip across the Island of Newfoundland in the fall of the present year. A framework of green spruce and "var" (Balsam fir), bound together with spruce roots, formed the inside of the canoe, around which three shaved skins of the Caribou deer were tightly stretched. The skins were sewn together with sinews taken from the back of a deer. When finished, the canoe was about seventeen feet long and four feet wide amidships, and in shape resembled a "flat" or American "dory," rather than a birch-bark canoe. It was found capable of carrying a load of about 600 or 700 pounds, and proved a serviceable craft for running rapids and navigating the lakes of the interior of the island. The employment of such is confined in Newfoundland to the Micmac Indians, who, during their hunting and furring expeditions, construct them at the waterside, use them during the season, and when done with, remove the skins, which they make use of, if in a sufficiently good state of preservation, for the manufacture of mocassins and babiche for snow-shoes.

Mr. PARK HARRISON said that Colonel Lane Fox had shown conclusively how the outrigger arose, and also clearly defined the area where it was used. It did not, however, appear to him to be equally certain that the improvements in boat-building in the Indian Archipelago had been developed without foreign influence. There was a great mixture of races in the islands, owing, probably, to early commerce. Amongst others, the Arabs, it is known, reached Sumatra and Java several hundred years ago. Vessels formed of planks sewn together with sennit may consequently have been introduced by them, and also into Ceylon and the coasts of India, where they are still found side by side with the canoes and rafts of non-seagoing people. A curious story is related by an Arab writer of the ninth century, that a wreck had been found some time previously at the entrance of the Mediterranean Sea, near the Pillars of Hercules, which, from its construction, led to the conclusion that it must have circumnavigated Africa. A certain amount of Phoenician influence might also have to be taken into account, if, as the written characters in Sumatra seem to indicate, some of that race arrived there.

Mr BLACKMORE and the PRESIDENT also spoke on the paper.

Colonel A. LANE FOX, in reply to some remarks by the President, said that he had considered the possibility of the outrigger having been invented for the purpose of preventing the long, narrow, dug-out canoe from upsetting. That was undoubtedly its object. But viewed as an invention, he thought it was too great a step for savages, and contrary to all analogy of savage progress to suppose that it was introduced suddenly. It was a very clumsy contrivance, and one that would hardly have suggested itself had not their ideas been led up to it by contrivances previously in use. Such a sequence of ideas he found to exist in the varieties of the catamaran or raft, as he had already shown. Nearly all over the world savages used the long, narrow, dug-out canoe, specially liable to upset whenever it was employed; and yet the outrigger was unknown in either continent of America, in Europe, Asia, or Africa. It was confined to the area specified, which was limited by Ceylon on the west and Easter Island on the east. Nor was this all. Within this area there were varieties, and the distribution of these varieties was also continuous. There could be nothing, he thought, in the nature of the trees used which could necessitate the direct attachment of the outrigger to the outrigger poles on the extreme east and west of this area, whilst in the central region it was attached to them by means of upright supports. So also the variety with one flat side; the custom of using a large shell attached to upright pegs upon the deck; the variety with the double outrigger; the weather platform, the double weather platform without outrigger logs, all these have continuous areas of distribution, which could not have been influenced exclusively by the nature of the materials employed, though, of course, no variety could prevail in places where the materials were unsuitable. Besides which, the several varieties showed a connected sequence of ideas which had spread over the region in question, and this, he thought, was sufficient to prove absolutely that a connection of idea had existed. With respect to what had been said about the importance of weighing carefully the dates of the several contrivances referred to in the paper, the question of date was precisely the problem to be solved. We had few, if any, direct data to go upon. We knew that little or no change had taken place between the time of Cook and the time of Wilkes, but this gave us a very short base to work upon. Analogy only served to point out the direction in which evidence had to be looked for. The nature of survivals and root-indicating branches, thanks to the writings of Mr. Tylor and others, was now beginning to be understood. We knew that on the Euphrates the same tub-shaped, wicker, and skin vessels are now used as they were 2,000 years ago, and the forms of Egypt have survived in India. His argument was that the forms of these savage vessels may have survived from a still earlier period. But until geologists give us some clue to the antiquity of man in the southern hemisphere, and the state of his arts, we can have no direct evidence as to the sequence of the forms.

Notes

[1] Notes and Queries on Anthropology, for the use of travellers and residents in uncivilised lands, drawn up by a Committee appointed by the British Association for the Advancement of Science Standford, Charing Cross, 1874.

[2] 'Lectures on Primitive Warfare,' in the Journal of the Royal United Services Institution

[3] Address to the Anthropological Department at the Brighton meeting of the British Association, 1872.

[4] Since writing this I have seen the illustration in Sir H. Rawlinson's note to this passage, in which he gives it as his opinion that this is the meaning and use to be ascribed to these pins; and he says that this system is still employed in Egypt, where they raise an extra bulwark above the gunwale. Rawlinson, Herodotus vol. ii. p. 132.

[5] "Denmark in the Early Iron Age", by Conrad Engelhardt 1866.

[6] 'On Vessels of Papyrus,' by John Hogg, Esq., M.A., F.L.S.; "Magazine of Nat. Hist.", vol. ii (1829)

Transcribed by AP, September 2011.

P136c

This is a printed set of papers headed 'Return to an Order of the Honourable The House of Commons dated 27 June 1881. No. 1 is the letter from Pitt-Rivers to Thompson, No 2 [the report] is given below and No. 3 is the letter from Sandford to Pitt-Rivers

No. 2.

Report of the Committee appointed by the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education on the offer made by General Pitt Rivers with regard to his Collection

1. At the first meeting of the Committee a letter addressed by General Pitt Rivers to Mr Thompson ... was considered ... and as it appeared that the intentions and wishes .... were not so fully expressed and defined ... as seemed desirable he was requested to furnish the Chairman with a complete written statement of his views.

2. The following letter ... was laid before the second meeting of the Committee:-

19 Penywern-road, South Kensington | 21 July 1880

Sir

Having been asked by the Committee ... to define the terms on which I make the offer of my Museum to the nation, I now do so premising that, as my object is to extend and develope [sic] the collection on a particular plan, it is necessary that I should make my gift subject to certain conditions.

I will present the collection to the nation as it now stands, by deed of gift, subject to the following conditions, viz:

1st. That as the objects in this collection hang together as a whole, they shall never be dispersed or sold.

The following to operate during my lifetime.

2nd That should there be specimens which I consider useless for the purposes of the collection, they shall be withdrawn previous to the signing of the deed of Gift

3rd That I should have the management of the collection during my life or as long as I please, in so far as regards the arrangement of the specimens in the cases, on the screens and in the rooms, the disposal of duplicates, and the ticketting and the cataloguing; and to have such facilities of access as may be necessary.

4th. That the Government shall provide, at once, additional space for the present collection and ultimately space for the additions that I may make to it, with cases for preserving and exhibiting the same, to the extent of the entire length of the gallery in part of which the present collection is contained, or the one above it; or provide an equal amount of accommodation for it elsewhere

5th. That the specimens which I shall add to the collection, after signing the deed of gift, shall become the property of the Government subject to the above & other conditions herein contained, six months after they have been entered in the stores lists, until which time they shall be considered on loan & space shall be provided for this with the means of exhibiting them temporarily.

6th. That room space and case accommodation shall be provided by the Government for the objects added to the collection after the signing of the deed of gift within a reasonable time, that is to say within 6 months after they have been entered in the stores lists providing the accommodation thus allotted to the whole collection shall not exceed the amount mentioned in clause 4.

7th. That if the government should fail to provide accommodation for the objects in the manner detailed in clause 4 & 6 the entire collection shall revert to me and I shall have the power of disposing of it as I may think fit

8th That after the space detailed in clause 4 has been filled up, I shall be permitted to add drawers and trays at my own expense for the purposes of containing further additions and perfecting the part of the collection which is exhibited in cases

9th That no object shall be lent temporarily from the collection without my consent.

10th The Government to provide lighting, attendance & police supervision

11th The Government to provide for the repair of objects that may be broken

12th I am willing to provide and pay a curator as long as I have the management of the collection, should the government approve. But should this not be approved, I should wish that an officer having an special knowledge of the subject should appointed, whose duties should be confined to the collection and who will act subject to the conditions contained in clause 3

I wish to add that I am very anxious that a decision on this subject should be arrived at as soon as possible as many private arrangements are dependent on it.

I have &c (signed) A. Pitt Rivers ....

[NB a draft of this is given as P134, transcribed here]

3. The Committee is unanimously of opinion that the collections offered to the Government ... is of great value and interest.

4. [explanation, using Pitt-Rivers 1877 catalogue as basis] of the aim of Pitt-Rivers collection]

5. That the collection therefore differs from ordinary ethnological collections in principle, and does not reduplicate or come into competition with them

6. The Committee recommends the acceptance of the collection by the Government, leaving General Pitt-Rivers full powers to add or substitute specimens, or dispose of duplicates, and arrange the whole according to his own views.

7. The Committee suggests, however, that the development of the collection shall be strictly limited to the efficient illustration of the principle upon which it has been formed; and they think that some reduction in the number of specimens already existing in the collection, may be effected without injury to its scientific completeness.

8. The Committee is of opinion that twice as much space as is at present occupied will be sufficient for the adequate illustration of General Pitt Rivers' idea. The collection and arrangement of the specimens will be a work of time.

9. The Committee considers that if General Pitt Rivers' collection be accepted by the Government, it should be with the reservation that if at any time the Government should cease ... to retain the collection as a whole, it should in the first instance be offered to other public bodies in England, and if not accepted under the conditions of this letter, should be offered to the representatives of General Pitt Rivers, and if not accepted by them, that the Government should be at liberty to dispose of it in any way it may think fit. ...

[There is a note at the end saying that Rolleston disagreed with the suggestion that the development should be limited in para 7]

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project August 2011

P136a and P136d [2 identical versions]

Science and Art Department | South Kensington | 3rd June 1881 | E.M. 2911/ 81

Sir,

I am directed by the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education to acquaint you that their Lordships have had under consideration the report of the Committee appointed to advise them in reference to the liberal proposal you have made with regard to your Ethnological Collection now being exhibited in the galleries belonging to the Commission for the Exhibition of 1851 on the Western side of the Horticultural Gardens.

The report in question proves the value and interesting nature of the Collection and recommends that it should become the property of the Nation.

Their Lordships whilst accepting the conclusions at which the Committee have arrived, are however, compelled for the following reasons to decide that it is not possible for them to accept the Collection for permanent exhibition in connection with the Department for Science and Art.

In the first place the space which the Collection at present occupies has to be relinquished by the Department and there is no other space now at Their Lordships disposal, or likely to be provided elsewhere, in which the Collection could be placed.

It is however chiefly on other grounds than want of space that My Lords have felt it incumbent on them to decline the custody of the Collection. Ethnology is not now represented in the collections of the South Kensington Museum and it is undesirable to commence a collection with special reference to this branch of Science while there is in another National Establishment, the British Museum, a large collection of a similar kind.

It has been represented to Their Lordships that your Collection is arranged on a different system to that adopted at the British Museum and that as shewing the development of [insert] form and [end insert] shape it would constitute an appropriate part of a museum like that at South Kensington, which is intimately connected with Education in General and Industrial Art. Admitting to some extent the force of this argument it, nevertheless, appears to My Lords that your Collection if the Trustees of the British Museum should be willing and able to accept it, would not in any way interfere with that already contained in that Museum, but on the contrary, would increase the interest of the Ethnological specimens which it now possesses.

My Lords feel strongly the inexpediency of national museums competing against each other, and wish that so far as possible, a distinct line should be drawn between the collections at South Kensington and those at the British Museum. Each should be made as perfect as possible, but should occupy different ground.

My Lords must add a few words as to the question of expense, although you have liberally proposed to keep up the Collection mainly at your own charge during your life-time, the whole cost of its maintenance would eventually devolve on the Department which accepts your offer. This might lead to heavy expenditure for a Curator, attendants, further purchases, cases &c, and the Collection would require an amount of space not only large in itself, but out of proportion to that which they can ever hope to be able to set aside for other Branches of Science of more immediate practical and educational use. The expenditure would be exceptionally large at the South Kensington Museum, where there is at present no one connected with Ethnological Science on the Establishment; and after you had relinquished the management, it would be necessary to secure the services of a gentleman, with special qualifications for [insert] the care of [end insert] this valuable Collection.

My Lords throughly appreciate the liberality and public spirit which have prompted you to make the offer, whilst they regret that they are unable to take advantage of it on behalf of the Department of Science and Art.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
(signed) F.R. Sandford

General Pitt-Rivers | &c &c

Transcribed by AP

P134

Handwritten draft with many amendments, the sent version is given here.

Sir

Having been asked by the committee to define the terms on which I make the offer of my Museum to the nation I now do so [illegible] that as my object is to extend and develop the collection in a particular plan it is necessary I should to that object that I should make my gift subject to certain condition.

1. I will present the collection [insert] by deed of gift [end insert] to be [illegible] as it now [illegible] [insert] by deed of gift [end insert] subject to the following conditions

2. I am to leave the management of it during my life once long [sic] is placed in so far as regards the arrangement of the thing in the cases or the screens in the rooms the ticketing and the [illegible] catalogue of the arts such facilities deemed by them to be the necessity to such management

3 that should there be one or two things in it that I consider usefless for the purposes of the collection shall be withdrawn previous to the signing of the deed of Gift

the following to operate during my life time

4 I am to have the management of the collection during my life or as long as I please in so far as regards the arrangement of the things in the cases or the screens or in the rooms the ticketting [insert] and [end insert] the catalogue with such facilities of access to the things as may be necessary for such management

5. Government shall ultimately provide [insert] at once additional [illegible] for the present collection and ultimately space for [end insert] space for the present collection and the additions that I may make to it with cases for preserving and exhibiting the things [insert] same [end insert] to the extent of the [illegible] lengths of the gallery in which the illegible now exhibited [insert] the present collection is contained [end insert] or the one above it or provide an equal amount of accommodation for it elsewhere

6. that the objects things which I think add to the collection after signing the deed of gift shall become the property of the government subject to the above & other conditions [insert] herein contained [end insert] 6 months after they have been entered on the Stores lists, [words illegible] counted on loan & space shall be provided for this with the pieces exhibiting there temporarily.

7. That room space and case [illegible] shall be provided by the Government for the objects aded to the colln after the signing of the deed of gift within a reasonable term that is to say within 6 months after they have been written in the stores lists providing the space [insert] accommodation [end insert] thus allotted to the collection [insert] whole collection [end insert] should not exceed the amount mention in clause 5.

8 That if the government should fail to provide accommodation for the objects in the manner detailed in clause 5 & 7 the entire collection shall revert to me and I shall have the power of dispersing of it as I may think fit

10 [sic] [insert] 10 stet [end insert] that no object shall be lent temporarily from the collection without my consent

11 that the objects added permanently to the collection in the manner detailed in clause 6 should be subject to the approval of the Lord President of the council or such person as he may appoint providing that [illegible] to this clause shall be made to accommodate the conditions of clauses 5 & 7

12 that the Government shall provide lighting [illegible] & police supervision

13 that the Government shall provide the necessary repairs of objects that may be broken

14 I am willing to provide & pay a curator illegible should the present arrangement of it but [words illegible] I should wish this an officer [rest illegible

14 I am willing to provide & pay a curator as long as I have the management of the collection should the government approve this should this not be approved should with this an officer having an official knowledge of the subject should appointed [words illegible] to the collection and [words illegible] subject to the conditions contained in clause 4

I wish to add that I am very anxious that a decision on this subject should be arrived at as soon as possible as many [insert] many [end insert] private arrangements are dependent on it

Transcribed by AP August 2011 for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project

P128

Science and Art Department of the Committee of Council on Education

South Kensington Museum

22nd day of June 1880

Forwarded from the Museum, Science and Art Department, London S.W.

102 Copies - Pamphlet on the arrangement of Anthropological Collection at Bethnal Green Museum

W.G. Groser
Storekeeper

Major Gen. Pitt-Rivers F.R.S. | 19 Pen-y-wern Road | S.W.

P130

Forwarded from the Museum, Science and Art Dept,

1 levelling rod,
12 volumes of books and 32 plates
64 maps
1 carved wooden box
1 Russian enamelled scabbard containing short sword
11 books (7 volumes and 4 pamphlets)
2 articles of female dress

as lent on 24th ultimo

W.G. Groser
Storekeeper

Major Gen'l Pitt-Rivers F.R.S. |29 Pen-y-wern Road | Earl's Court | S.W.

On back says 2.10.1880 Objects returned from lot from Clermont Ferrand

Transcribed August 2011 by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project

P126

Memorandum about General Pitt-Rivers Museum at South Kensington

This is an Ethnographical Museum now and for sometime past exhibited in the long rooms to the west of the Horticultural Garden belonging to the Commissioners of 1851.

It contains about 14,000 objects. The arrangement is psychological and gives the history and development of various arts such as Pottery, Weapons, Shipbuilding, Agricultural implements, Ornamentation &c. its utility has been recognized by men of Science.

General Rivers is anxious to increase it largely on the same plan and wants more space.

He would like Lord Granville to convince himself of the utility of the Museum with a view to its continuance in any arrangement come to between the Commission of 1851 and the Government.

Transcribed by AP for the Relational Museum project and rechecked in August 2011 for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project

P125 [handwritten] and P135, P136a [2 printed versions] all identical

19 Penywern Road, S.W. | April 14th 1880

Dear Mr Thompson [1]

Having already explained to you privately the circumstances which have led to this communication I now proceed by your suggestion to put the subject of our conversation into writing with a view to action upon it.

I propose, if I live, to extend much more rapidly than hitherto the Ethnological Collection now exhibited at the South Kensington to which as you know I have devoted much attention during the last twenty five years and I am anxious to know whether in view of such extension the Museum Authorities will undertake the housing [insert] and exhibition [end insert] of it or whether it will be necessary for me to seek accommodation [insert] for it [end insert] elsewhere.

The collection now occupies the rooms "L" and "K" West Galleries [insert] Exhibition Buildings [end insert] on the ground floor and it is intimated that there are 14,000 objects in it, but the space is insufficient to exhibit even the present collection properly and the arrangement on which the value of the series [insert] mainly depends [end insert] cannot be fully carried out by [insert] with [end insert] the present arrangement [insert] accommodation [end insert] I shall want nearly double the space at once and if my intentions are fulfilled more room with be required ultimately.

It may be usefull [sic] that I may [insert] should [end insert] state briefly the plan on which the objects have been brought together in order that it may be understood why a collection of this kind should exist side by side with other Ethnological or Colonial exhibitions. My collection differs from others in this that the arrangement is psychological rather than geographical, that is to say, objects from different countries appertaining to like arts or phases of the human mind have been classed together, the intention being to shew how far one nation has borrowed from another and for [insert] or [end insert] on the other hand to what extent the phases of art have arisen spontaneously in different Countries and to trace the development of each branch. I do not affirm that the [insert] all [end insert] Museums should be arranged upon this plan but having been in constant communication with men of science on the subject, anthropologists and others, I find that the utility of this arrangement is recognized as a means of shewing connections which could not be brought to light otherwise. Dr Meyer writes to me that he is arranging the Dresden Museum upon the same plan which he has adopted after examining my collection at South Kensington and amongst those who have spoken on the subject I may mention Professors Huxley and Rolleston to whose opinion I attach much value.

If the Museum Authorities decide to give me the space I require with any prospect of permanence there is one point to which I would invite attention viz that the arrangements for superintendence which are satisfactory in the case of other collections which having been once handed over to the Museum remain constantly in the same cases, without change or addition are not satisfactory in the case of my collection to which additions are being made daily, and which must be subject to constant arrangement as the things accumulate. The objects are collected with a view of demonstrating certain principles of evolution and it is quite necessary that the superintendent should understand what those principles are and enter into the spirit of the arrangement. Either it will be necessary to have an officer in the position of a Curator who has special qualifications for the post or the person superintending must be a subordinate officer of intelligence whose time is devoted exclusively to the Collection and who will act under my guidance, I shall be most happy to provide and pay the Superintendent myself, if that arrangement meets the views of the authorities, but I think I need not dilate upon a point so obvious further than to say that to carry out [insert] the extension of [end insert] my Museum in the manner proposed [insert] with [end insert] the system of superintendence which has been in vogue hitherto would be impracticable.

If it should be decided not to entertain the proposal which I now make with respect to the collection generally, I hope that sufficient time may be given me either to make other arrangements or to build a Museum of my own.

I may add that my intention is if I am able to increase the Museum in such a way as to make it worthy of the purpose for which it has been commenced, either to leave it to the nation or to some other Nation or to some Institution which would [insert] will [end insert] carry it on.

Believe me
yours truly
A Lane Fox
Major General

R. Thompson Esq | Assistant Director | South Kensington Museum

Notes

[1] Richard Anthony Thompson (1819-1908)

Transcribed by AP for Relational Museum project and checked and revised August 2011 for Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project

P122

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 8th day of August 1879

Machy No 4043 / 79

South Kensington Museum

Sir,

I am directed to transmit for your information the enclosed copy of a letter which has been received at this Office from Messrs Ransomes, Sims, & Head, stating that a model may be made of the plough exhibited by them in the South Kensington Museum.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
A.J.R. Trundell

Major General Lane Fox | 19 Penywern Road | S.W.

Copy

Ipswich | August 1879

Messrs Ransomes Sims & Head present their compliments to Major General Lane Fox and they have much pleasure in giving their permission for a model to be made of their Egyptian and Java plough, now in the South Kensington Museum, for exhibition in the Anthropological collection

Science and Art Department | South Kensington | London A.E.R

These models [?] do not appear in the catalogue of either collection [founding or second], they may have been removed from the founding collection in 1885 when the other agricultural objects were removed but not listed in the catalogue of the second collection.

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project August 2011

P121

Dec 31. 1878

Dear Gen'l Fox

Your Collection was opened for public inspection on Thursday last at South Kensington, and looks well in its new home.

Enclosed is the Stores receipt for all the objects received since you left

No statuettes have been received from Mesr [sic] Feuardent

Very truly yours
Richard Thompson

Richard Anthony Thompson (1819-1908) was employed at the Great Exhibition of 1851, in the English section of the Paris Universal Exhibition of 1855, and at subsequent international exhibitions, he was also a curator at the South Kensington Museum according to his DNB entry, joining in January 1857 to set up its educational collection. He was assistant director from 1866 until his retirement at the end of 1891, and acting Director from 1876-8 and in 1886.

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project August 2011

P118

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 4th day of September 1874

E.L.M. No 6689 / 74

Bethnal Green Branch Museum

Sir,

I am directed to inform you, with regret, that the five small darts attached to the Bengal Blow-pipe, No. 1009 in your collection of Anthropological specimens at the Bethnal Green Branch Museum, were taken away on Saturday evening last, it is supposed by a visitor.

The darts were, as you may perhaps remember, fastened by wire to the Blow-pipe. It has, however, become evident that the wire does not afford sufficient protection, and arrangements have therefore been made to place under glass, with as little delay as possible, the few small objects that are now not thus protected.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant
G.F. Duncombe

Colonel Lane Fox | &c &c | Guildford

The blowpipe is 1884.18.1, there were still 5 blowdarts remaining which are now in the PRM Oxford see 1884.18.2

----

P123

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 15th day of September 1879

A.M. No 4549 / 79

South Kensington Museum

Sir,

I am directed to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th intant, [insert] addressed to Mr Thompson [end insert] and, in reply, to inform you that the Stores Division of this Department has been instructed to receive the objects which you mention as coming from Copenhagen, to be added to your Collection at the South Kensington Museum

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant
G.F. Duncombe

Major-General A. Lane Fox | 19 Penywern Road | Earl's Court | S.W.

These objects presumably are 1884.50.8, 1885=4.53.26, 1884.76.119, 1884.127.94.

----

P124

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 15th day of September 1879

A.M. No 4049 / 79

South Kensington Museum

Sir,

With reference to your letter of the 4th ultimo addressed to Mr Thompson, the delay in answering which has arisen from the knowledge of the fact that you have been absent from England, I am directed to express regret that there should be any uncertainty regarding the reception at the South Kensington Museum of the Enamels to which you refer.

A copy of the report of the officer who superintended the unpacking of the box in question is transmitted herewith for your information, and I am to observe that the Department has no reason to doubt the accuracy of this report as no case is known in which articles received packed in a box have been omitted from the Stores List prepared at the time of unpacking.

Mr Johnson, the only person here who has seen the Enamels, suggests that you brought them with you showed them to him, and took them away again; and for the purpose of ascertaining this, the Department will be obliged if you will kindly make a search at home for the missing specimens

Instructions have been given for mounting, according to your request, the photographs mentioned in your letter of the 9th instant.

The Stores have also been instructed to receive the box coming from Goleborg [sic]

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant
G.F. Duncombe

Major-General A. Lane Fox | 19 Penywern Road | Earl's Court

Copy of Officer's Report

Sir,

I beg to state for your information that I was in charge of unpacking the Collection belonging to General Lane Fox, on the 5th May 1879.

I made a list of the objects and had them placed in baskets as each piece was unpacked and taken to Mr Hills office. As usual the packers went over the packing the second time for fear of any object having been missed.

I can state positively that no Enamels were in this collection.

(signed) John Clark

7/8/79

W.G. Groser Esq

-----

P131

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 14th day of December 1881

E.M. No 5133 / 81

South Kensington Museum

Sir,

The Lords of the Committee of Council on Education learn that some additions have been sent in by you to your Anthropological Collection in the Western Galleries since the termination of the Correspondence between you and their Lordships as to the transfer of the Collection.

You are aware that the tenure by their Lordships of these galleries is very uncertain, and that they are liable to be called on to give them up and to remove all their contents at short notice. They have no desire to press for the removal of your Collection until the decision as to their tenure of the Galleries make it necessary; but they do not feel it desirable under existing circumstances that any further additions should be made to it, and they will not be able to provide cases or other fittings for the reception of any such additions.

They would suggest that the attention of the Curator (who they learn from your letter of August 31 has been appointed by you) should be directed to the necessary preparation for facilitating the ready removal of the collection which may have to be carried out in great haste.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant
G.F. Duncombe

General Pitt Rivers, F.R.S. | 4 Grosvenor Gardens, | S.W.

----

P132

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 30th day of May 1883

E.M. No 3203

Sir,

I beg to enclose a copy of a letter dated the 24th instant received from Messrs Farrer & Co: and of the reply which has been addressed to those gentlemen.

I am to add that every effort will be made to prepare from the Store Lists &c an Inventory of your Collection sufficient for Messrs Farrer & Co:'s purpose

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant
G.F. Duncombe

General Pitt Rivers, F.R.S. | 4 Grosvenor Gardens, | S.W.

Copy 3023

66 Lincoln's Inn Fields | London W.C. | 24th May 1883

Dear Sir,

You are aware that General Pitt-Rivers has arranged to present the the greater portion of his Anthropological Collection to the University of Oxford.

For the purposes of the Deed of Gift we wish to have an Inventory of the Collection and we understand that you have one at South Kensington. Would you kindly lend us this inventory or a copy of it for a day or two.

We are acting for General Pitt-Rivers.

We are, Dear Sir,

Yours truly

(signed) Farrer & Co.

The Secretary | Science & Art Department | South Kensington Museum, | S.W.

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 30th day of May 1883

E.M. No 3203

Gentlemen,

I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th instant, a copy of which has been sent to General Pitt-Rivers, and I am to state that instructions have been given for the preparation of an Inventory of the Collection for your use.

I am,
Gentlemen,
Your obedient Servant
(signed) G.F. Duncombe

Messrs Farrer & Co. | 66 Lincoln's Inn Field's | London W.C.

----

P133

Answered 30 Jan. 86 The objects to be sent to 4 Grosvenor Gardens

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 22 day of January 1886

E.M. No 399/86

Sir,

I am directed to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 17 instant and in reply to inform you that the printed book and a box of minerals have been returned to 4 Grosvenor Gardens in accordance with your request.

I am to enquire whether it is your wish that the residue of your Collection which the Oxford authorities left behind shall also be returned to you at the same address.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient Servant
G.F. Duncombe

Major General | A.H. Pitt Rivers | Rushmore | Salisbury

Science and Art Department of the Committee of Council on Education South Kensington

5th day of February 1886

Forwarded from the Science and Art Department, South Kensington, London, S.W.

4 packing cases containing human or other bones, flint implements, fragments of pottery, chalk, plaster casts of brain and spear heads, plaster medallions etc etc
1 packing case containing Chinese fireworks various *
1 packing case containing fragments of red sandstone conglomerate, and stone bored by ....
1 packing case containing 21 cocoa nut shells and 9 stuffed birds (moth eaten)
1 large piece of matting
1 folding box used for personal ornaments of savage races
1 plaster cast Human head
3 plaster casts human heads
1 fragment of plaster cast human head
1 map of world (torn)
2 boxes iron bound
1 case containing 2 preparations for skeletons of monkeys
1 tail of sting ray*
1 straw dress
1 specimen of coarse bark rope
2 sticks for weaving
1 bag woven from sennit
2 fur hats canework frames
1 tent or chair cover, yellow work with fringe
1 straw petticoat
1 straw cloak [Japanese]
1 box with lock
1 black leather trunk studded with nails
1 box containing 2 large pieces of chalk
½ pod of monkey nut
1 gun case containing bullet mould, key for nipple and turnscrew and ramrod
1 straw or wicker basket containing fragments of shell and pottery
1 small case covered with bookbinders cloth
1 leather portmanteau containing hammer, screwdriver and 2 sets of pulleys
1 pair top boots (much torn)
1 plaster cast of head (broken)
1 plaster cast mask (broken)
3 empty cases and 2 hampers

Returned loans

H. Lloyd Storekeeper

* NB Items marked like this can be matched to items in PRM possibles database held by the PRM, Oxford August 2011.

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project August 2011

P117

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 27th day of May 1874

E.L.M. No 4061 / 74

Bethnal Green Branch Museum

Sir,

I am directed to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 22nd instant, addressed to Mr Johnson, stating that you have sold to Colonel Fox some of the objects belonging to you which are exhibited in the Bethnal Green Branch Museum.

In reply I am to inform you that it is contrary to the regulations of the South Kensington Museum that objects should be sold during the time for which they have been received on loan, and that the Authorities are therefore unable to recognize the sale to which you refer.

I am to add that at the expiration of the period (six months) for which the specimens were lent, you will be at liberty to withdraw them from the Bethnal Green Museum, and to transfer them to Colonel Fox.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
Norman MacLeod

T.J. Hutchinson Esq | 98 Talbot Road | Bayswater, W.

P117

5th June 1874 Purchase of objects from Mr Hutchinson in Bethnal Green Museum

Anthropological Institute | Great Britain & Ireland | 4 St Martin's Place W.C. | May 27th 1874

My Dear Colonel Fox

I saw Mr Johnson this morning who told me about the difficulty of which you wrote in your note just received. I think Mr Johnson must be likely to obviate it, by not having these things enrolled. In fact none of my collection is yet registered in their books, so that must not be likely to come under the ban - the fact of my having disposed of them to you I explained to Mr Johnson I would not have done the latter but that they were to remain in the Museum. Hoping you will have no difficulty in the transfer

Believe me
Yours ... [illegible]
Thos Hutchinson

P117

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 5th day of June 1874

E.L.M. No 4323 / 74

Bethnal Green Branch Museum

Sir,

I am directed to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 29th ultimo, addressed to Mr Thompson, with reference to the purchase of certain specimens which are exhibited by Mr T.J. Hutchinson at the Bethnal Green Branch Museum.

In reply, I am to inform you that under the circumstances stated in your letter, the regulation prohibiting the sale of objects during the period for which they are lent to the South Kensington Museum or its Branch at Bethnal Green, will be exceptionally relaxed, and the specimens which you have purchased may at once be transferred to your collection.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
Norman MacLeod

Colonel Lane Fox | Guildford

This is 1884.57.21 and on

P119

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 16th day of February 1875

No 5

Sir,

The Lords of the Committee of Council on Education direct me to transmit the enclosed copy of a minute [insert] Form No 47 SKM [end insert] which they have passed in reference to the formation of a loan Exhibition of scientific apparatus to be opened in the South Kensington Museum during the months of June, July and August.

Their Lordships desire me to enquire whether it would be agreeable to you to act on this Committee and to afford them the benefit of your advice and assistance in the formation of the collection of scientific apparatus.

The Sub-Committee on the Biological Division of the Loan Exhibition will meet in the Board Room at South Kensington Museum on Tuesday the 23rd instant at 4 p.ml. when your attendance is requested.

I have the honour to be
Sir
Your obedient servant
Norman MacLeod

Colonel Lane Fox | Anthropological Institute | St Martin's Place | Trafalgar Square

P120

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 9th day of January 1878

ELM

Sir,

With reference to the proposed loan of your Collection of specimens now at St Martin's Lane, for exhibition in the Bethnal Green Branch Museum, I am directed to state that if you will be so good as to furnish this Department with an Order for the removal of the specimens to Bethnal Green, they shall be sent for, and cases shall be provided for their exhibition.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
Norman MacLeod

Colonel Lane Fox | The Uplands | Guildford

P127

... South Kensington Museum, London, S.W. | 25th day of May 1880

A.M. No 2195/80

South Kensington Museum

Sir,

I am directed by the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education to transmit for your information the enclosed copy of a letter from General Lane Fox, now General Pitt Rivers, as to the proposed development of his Ethnological Collection at present exhibited in the Western Exhibition Galleries at South Kensington; and I am to request that you will have the goodness to inform me whether it will be agreeable to you to act with the gentlemen whose names are given on the opposite page, as a Committee to report on the Collection and on the advantage to Science and Art which may be expected to accrue from the proposal made by General Pitt Rivers.

I am,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
Norman MacLeod

Sir John Lubbock, Bart., F.R.S.

Mr J. Fergusson

Professor Huxley, F.R.S.

Mr E.J. Poynter, R.A.

Sir P. Cunliffe Owen, K.C.M.G., C.B., I.J.E. and

Colonel Donnelly, R.E.

Professor Rolleston | &c &c | Pembroke College | Oxford

Note that Pitt-Rivers also attended the meetings of the committee as P129 makes clear (where he receives letters about arrangements for the meeting, and postponements). Normal MacLeod was an Assistant Secretary at South Kensington.

George Francis (probably) Duncombe (1831-1915) worked at South Kensington Museum, French-born British subject; served on the Executive Committee of the Great Exhibition of 1851. [See here] He might have been a member of the 1st Middlesex Engineer Corps. He seems to have been the Chief Clerk of the General Administration Department under Francis Sandford of the Science and Art Department in 1876..

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project August 2011

[This letter must have been written before November 1891 when Moseley died, however, the exact date is unknown and is not clear from the contents but is perhaps before 1883 when Primitive Locks was published by Pitt-Rivers? The locks referred to have not been identified but are / were presumably in the founding collection]

{joomplu:808 detail align right}

14, St Giles | Oxford

Dear Gen Pitt Rivers

I can only send you one lock the other is locked up by means of another a third Chinese padlock of which I have mislaid the key & which I cannot succeed in picking To open this depress A as [illegible] arrow then plate C can be drawn outwards this allows plate D at the other end to be turned round half a revolution and then the long plate at bottom of the lock can be slid out exposing the keyhole

In hast

HN Moseley

[Another sheet, it is not clear if it is related, it is presumably part of another letter dating from before 1883 when Primitive Locks was published (as this is part of Moseley's comments on it)]

Development of Primitive Locks and Keys

Line 6 Clou French a nail add ?? Clout English provincial a boot nail

Line 7 from bottom [illegible] "too late" from zero to put. The connection between these two words in which the quantity of the e is different is very uncertain. It is still more improbable that the connection if it must be through the meaning given namely "when the bar is put up. I have this from a very expert classic. It would probably be more judicious to omit reference to zero too late as such is not necessary to the argument.

page 4 line 9 from bottom after "Pad" Dutch a path insert ?Pfad German a path

Page 8 line 6 I cant make out the three tumblers in the plate referred to a word or two more of explanation in the text or explanation of the Plate might be of advantage

NB In the first two pages several additional connections as to Capital letters require to be made

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project in July-August 2011

L2300

Cloth Copy * | Sent Dec 29/98

Ethnographical Department | (Pitt Rivers Collection) | University Museum | Oxford | 23.12.98

Dear General Pitt Rivers

I should greatly like to have the 4th vol of your "Excavations" to complete the set which you have so kindly sent me. I look forward to reading your recent results, as also to possessing another of the splendid volumes. I hope that your health has been better of late. With kind regards and many thanks in anticipation of receiving your new volume

yrs very truly
Henry Balfour

* Note that earlier Pitt-Rivers had sent a calf-bound copy to the Athenaeum, there was definitely a pecking order about who got what and Balfour was not in the first rung. Pitt-Rivers was most generous with his publications, sending them out to anyone who wanted them, and it was not often noted who got what but presumably most people who requested them (and many did) got cloth-bound copies.

L2312

Balfour

Ethnographical Department | (Pitt Rivers Collection) | University Museum | Oxford | 4.1.99

Dear General Pitt Rivers

Very many thanks for the new volume of Excavations, which has duly arrived. It is a truly splendid work, & I look forward to reading its contents, particularly the parts referring to Bronze Age. I have for a long time been anxious to place in this Museum some portrait of yourself, but I have so far not come across any published engraving or other representation which I could purchase, so I am writing in the hopes that you may have one which you could spare, & which you would be kind enough to give to the Museum. I am anxious in every way to identify as fully as possible your name with the Museum, & I am sure that some portrait would greatly further this object. I am sure that you will forgive me asking you.

With kind regards and again many thanks

Believe me
Yrs very truly
Henry Balfour

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project in July-August 2011

Ansd Aug 8/98

Rieder-Furka | Moerel (Valais) Aug 4 98

Dear General Pitt-Rivers

I had some talk with Salomon Reinach of the Musée de St Germain lately about your coil and meander series at the Museum at Oxford when he examined your specimens carefully with me not long ago. We met again on the Calais steamer and he said that he had not a set of your papers and only knew your views from one, I think the Bethnal Green Catalogue. I said that of all places these papers ought to be at Saint Germain, and that I would write to ask you what can be done.

Writing this reminds me that it is some while since I wrote to or heard from you. There is a steady if rather slow growth going on in your various series from new specimens, which you will I think like to look at if you can find time to come to Oxford after the Vacation. Now and then some new lines of connexion start. You will be interested to hear that the Tasmanian area of quasi-palaeolithic implements is at last found to extend into Australia. For years whenever we go into Somerset, I pay a visit to Mr Sanford of Nynehead and get him to bring out a gum-hafted stone blade, chipped after the rudest Tasmanian manner, which he brought from West Australia over 40 years since. After attempting for years without success to get the examination pushed in this region, there has at last come a letter from Mr A. Morton of Hobart, who has been in the Murchison River district and finds tribes there in the same quasi-palaeolithic stage as the Tasmanian, so that it seems reasonable to extend the area of this rude stone age over Australia also, treating the ground stone hatches as introduced from the northern part into which they came across the Torres Strait in some comparatively recent period. It is hoped you may come to Bristol for the British Association in September, so I mention that I am arranging for a short paper to set this subject moving. You will remember the carved and painted small totem-posts from North-West America, which are placed in the Human Figure series. I have lately been examining them carefully with Balfour and they seem not be merely [sic] art carvings but to have value as actual totem-figures, as I find by having taken a great deal of trouble lately about the meaning & origin of totems. The theological world of Oxford has been exciting itself much of late about the works of J.G. Frazer and F.H. Jevons, and I have been called in to say what the truth is about the theory of totems as expounded by McLennan in his papers long ago, as to the totems being among the greatest factors in the development of the religions of the world. The whole business seems to be of minor importance and most of the theories worthless which have been built on it by these ingenious writers. But in the meantime the totems are rather interesting and worth working out, and your Haida specimens will I hope come in useful. The longer I live the more I feel the value of your method of working in series of actual objects rather than mere talk.

Mrs Tylor sends her very kind regards to Mrs Pitt-Rivers. We are here in the mountains for a few weeks but shall return next week to Oxford.

Believe me
yrs very truly
Edward B. Tylor

Nynehead is about 1.5 miles from Wellington, where Tylor maintained a house. Nynehead Court was the residence of the Sanford (or Sandford) family. This might be William Ayshford Sanford (1818-1902).

Note that the answer to this letter may come from Tylor papers PRM ms collections Box 13 P11 Pitt-Rivers although that letter is dated August 7, a day before the above letter was annotated as having been answered.

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project in July-August 2011

{joomplu:631 detail align right}

Ethnographical Department | (Pitt Rivers Collection) | University Museum | Oxford | 26.1.78 [sic]

Dear General Pitt Rivers

Pray accept my best thanks for the excellent lithograph of yourself, & also for having had it framed. I shall have it hung in the main court of this Museum, & it will prove a welcome addition.

With kind regards
Yrs vy truly
Henry Balfour

Please note that the photograph on this page is probably the portrait referred to

Transcribed by AP for Rethinking Pitt-Rivers July 2011

Ansd. Sept 18/97

Egypt Exploration Fund | 37 Great Russell St. | London W.C. | September 15th, 1897

Sir,

I have the honour to inform you that the President and Committee of the Egypt Exploration Fund have voted a donation of antiquities from Deshasheh and Behnesa (Oxyrhynchus), Upper Egypt, to your Museum at Oxford.

A list of the antiquities is given inside

I have the honour to be
your obedient Servant
Jas. S. Cotton.
Hon. Secretary

To: Gen: Pitt-Rivers | Rushmore | Salisbury

Antiquities from Deshaheh & Behnesa

Papyrus basket Vth Dynasty - Deshaheh

2 baskets & rope Ditto

End of a composite bow ?Roman Behnesa (Oxyrhymehus)

6 reed pens Ditto

Bronze cross Ditto

Pair of amulets (?) Ditto

Hair pin Ditto

These items from el-Behnasa are listed as being from W.M. Flinders Petrie in the accession books of PRM, they are 1897.49.3 [bronze pin], 1897.49.4 bronze cross pendant, 1897.49.5 Pair of pendant wood tablets [?possibly what was referred to as a pair of amulets above], 1897.49.6 Wooden stylus Roman period [not listed], 1897.49.7-12 6 reed pens, 1897.49.13 'turned wooden object, use unknown, Roman period', [not listed], 1897.49.14 Extremity of a composite bow of late form, Roman period (there are more items listed here from Behnesa than are listed by EEF letter.

The items from Deshasheh are 1897.49.16 long covered basket of parallel slaths, V dyn., Deshasheh, and 1897.49.17-19 [more than listed by EEF] 3 circular spiral basket, V dyn., Deshasheh, 1897.49.20 portion of large rope-work mat, V dyn., Deshasheh [there are more items from here listed in the accession book]

Balfour

Ethnographical Department | (Pitt Rivers Collection) | University Museum | Oxford | Aug 18. 1897

Sir:

Your letter to hand this morning.

Mr Balfour is now away in Russia, and will not be here till the end of September.

The Museum is now closed till next Monday, for cleaning purposes, if you propose sending your clerk before then I could meet him if you would kindly let me know what day he is coming.

I am, Sir,
your obedient servant
J.T. Long
Assistant to Mr H. Balfour Curator

Transcribed for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project by AP July 2011

{joomplu:793 detail align right}Ethnographical Department | (Pitt Rivers Collection) | University Museum | Oxford. | 30.4.97

Dear General Pitt Rivers

Dr. Tylor has sent me in a letter which he received from you relating to your series illustrating the peculiarities and distribution of the Kopis blade. I am writing in answer to this as I am solely responsible for the disposition and arrangement of the specimens in this Museum. After the death of Professor Moseley, the original Curator of the collection, whose assistant I had been, the University appointed me to the Curatorship and I therefore have the entire control over the Ethnographical Department, which is your own magnificent collection together with the Ethnographical additions to it, which are I am glad to say numerous. I mention this because I do not think that you are aware of it as you seem to think that Dr Tylor is the official head, which is not so. Dr. Tylor is Professor of Anthropology whereas I have charge of the Ethnographical Museum, just as Ray Lankester has change of the Zoological Department etc. I am therefore entirely responsible for the whole of the arrangement & am glad of the responsibility, as I am devoting my whole time to the progress of the collection so magnificently presented by you to the University.

Now as regards the kopis blade ... Let me hasten to assure you that that series is absolutely intact, its component specimens have never been distributed, and it is and always has been arranged according to your own original disposition. Beginning with the symmetrical bronze leaf shaped blade, the Almedinilla sword is next to it & there follow the Kukri, yataghan, flissa & Indian swords of similar shape. The drawings (4) from Greek vases etc are all exhibited by their side, & your own map shewing distribution is there also. The whole series is demarkated [sic] and labelled as a distinct whole. I have in fact from the beginning seen the importance of this series & shall always keep it together. I have added drawings to it, and widened the geographical distribution by the inclusion of a Chinese knife [arrow pointing to drawing] (or as I believe it to be a Malayan one) I have added a sketch of the iron sword from Praeneste. I have the series arranged next to that comprising the "flamboyant" blades as the latter in their single edged form approach so nearly to the "kopis" shape. [3 drawings 2 captioned Swiss lake bronze and 1 captioned French bayonet] e.g. the forms sketched here, which have edges of similar shape to that of "Kopis".

{joomplu:794 detail align right}As regards the name, in view of the doubts which have been expressed as to the use of "Kopis" to designate this type of blade, I have thought that it might be better to adopt a general and purely descriptive term, and as the peculiarity of the edge of typical "Kopis" blades is to present a combination of concave and convex elements or curves [Drawing] it has occurred to me that it would perhaps be desirable to class these blades as "OGEE-EDGED BLADES", not of course to be confounded with the "ogee-section blades" of which of course I have maintained the series in your collection. Hitherto I have kept to your name of "Kopis", but should be very glad to hear what you think of the name which I suggest & which seems to meet the difficulty. The whole subject is one of great interest to me, and the continuous distribution of the "Kopis" blade is, I consider, a matter of great Ethnographical importance.

I have examined the Halstatt  period finds in the Museums of Vienna and of Sarajevo in Bosnia & see how closely the "Kopis" shape is identified with that period. I have omitted to say that the description of the "kopis" series from your catalogue is fixed up by the side of the series so that everyone may read it.

I hope that my paper (a copy of which I sent you) describing a very interesting Assyrian composite bow, was of interest to you. I have given this bow with its arrows & also an Egyptian bow & arrows to the Museum and it now forms part of your series of composite bows. I regard it as a very important find & was delighted to have the opportunity of describing it and of purchasing the whole equipment.

I am very glad to hear that you have a new volume of excavations ready, especially as it relates to bronze age entrenchments, it will be a most important addition to our knowledge. I am very sorry to learn that you have again been in poor health & hope soon to hear a better account.

If at any time you should wish to know anything relating to your collection I shall always be very pleased to tell you what has been or is being done. Much progress has been effected & the Museum is greatly appreciated by all who visit it.

Yrs very truly
Henry Balfour

Transcribed by AP for Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project June 2011

Penmaenmawr Apr 13 97

Dear General Pitt-Rivers

It was a pleasure to recognize your handwriting this morning after so long a time since last hearing. I am sorry to hear of your having been out of health of late, but at any rate you manage to keep up your work which is the greatest of consolations. I speak feelingly having had a long and severe illness last year and though better now, finding work no longer easy. In writing about the Kopis series I had better not trust to memory, but in a week or two I shall be back in Oxford and will go over them with Balfour. My impression is that the series is much or altogether on the original lines, and that the drawings go with the specimens. No doubt the geographical continuity in such series is as important as it would be to a zoological. Indeed the problem which most occupies me is to trace inventions &c from their geographical origins, especially because ideas and customs are so apt to follow the same tracks. In working out the whole course of culture, it seems to me that to follow the diffusion of such a thing as a special weapon, is to lay down the main lines of the whole process, so that I should be among those most interested in the travelling of the Kopis.

In three weeks or so you will hear from me again. I go on getting Tasmanian implements which continue to conform to the same type, with variants

yrs very tly

Edward B Tylor

Transcribed by AP for Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project June 2011

Andrew | Ansd Jan 25/97

Cadster House | Near Whaley Bridge | Derbyshire | 9:1:97

Dear Sir

In your account in Archaeologia 47.2 of excavations at Caesars Camp Folkestone you mention the discovery of a coin of the reign of Stephen.

May I venture to ask you in possession the coin now is? I am engaged on a numismatic history of that reign and wish to record its whereabouts

If it is in your collection I shall be happy to give you some information about it which I think you will find interesting

yours truly

W.J. Andrew

(Mem. Lond. Numis'c Society)

The only coin this could be (if it was recorded in the first or second collections) is 1884.99.25

Transcribed by AP for Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project June 2011

L1037

University Museum Oxford | Aug 19 1894

Dear General Pitt-Rivers

Reading your letter makes me regret that I did not catch the opportunity of passing through your hands the whole lot of Tasmanian implements, wasters, and chips, now here, approaching 200 in number, and mostly got by me from Brown's River near Hobart. At Section H [of BAAS] my point being to contrast the 3 ground specimens from Brighton with the ordinary chipped stones, I only put a few on the table beside similar ones from Le Moustier. I see now that I ought to have put on the most complete series possible. But I hope that before long you will give me the benefit of your opinion as to which are only to be considered wasters. One thing has to be noticed, however, that the Europeans saw the natives pick up a stone or knock off a flake, and either with a little further trimming, or put as it was, use it for their immediate purpose and then throw it away, which looks as if what elsewhere might be mere waste bits were here used often as implements. Milligan himself told me that when an implement was good, the women would take the trouble to carry it away with them, which looks as if many poorly shaped stones must have been used and thrown away. As yet among the worked stones which have come from Tasmania (putting the three ground Australians out of the question) none have appeared better than those figured in my paper (of which I send a copy with some passages marked). These seem to correspond with the descriptions of the natives trimming and edging them by blows taking off chips on one side only, but I cannot find as yet any description or specimen giving evidence that they did work of a higher class. To judge from the description of your 15 specimens which I trust will yet turn up, they seem much the same. But no one can be more sensible than myself that the matter ought to be settled by more careful examination on the spot, such as you say ought to be made. Can you suggest any way of getting this done? Perhaps the discussion now passed may stimulate the Van Diemeners to go into the problem again. The Anthropological Institute might write a formal letter to the Royal Society of Tasmania. I have nothing more to say but that Cartailhac tells me he has another cave where the worked stones correspond more closely to Tasmanian than those of Le Moustier.

Your visit to Oxford was a source of great profit and enjoyment to us, as your too rare visits always are, and you must have been gratified to see how Anthropology flourishes here.

Your very truly
EB Tylor

Pitt-Rivers had attended the 1894 BAAS meeting in Oxford, and had spent time with the Tylors. Obviously he had reacted either face-to-face or by letter afterwards to one of Tylor's presentations at the meeting. Tylor was particularly intrigued by Tasmanian stone tools and what they might tell about Tasmanian Aboriginal culture (then deemed to have died out).

The stone tools that Tylor mentions in the first sentence from Brown River, Tasmania did not form part of the Pitt Rivers Museum collections in 1894. There is a handlist of correspondence about Tasmanian stone tools in the Tylor papers at the Pitt Rivers Museum, the first entry is dated August 1893 and comes from W.L. Williamson and relates to material from Browns River. Further correspondence continues until 1897. I am very grateful to Ollie Douglas for pointing out this connection to me and adding that 'this appears to have been material that was bunched together with Moir materials and accessioned subsequent to Tylor’s death – see a subset of some 87 items within 1917.53. in the PRM collections, which all seem to contain reference to Williamson'. This relates to items 1917.53.157 and on, the accession book entry for which reads 'Accession Book Entry - COLLECTION of the late Sir Edward Burnett Tylor, D.C.L., F.R.S. Presented by LADY TYLOR, 1917. PREHISTORIC - [1 of] 87 Implements of stone more or less worked into shape or trimmed at edges (some of secondary work is very slight), TASMANIA. Collected by Alexander Morton, W.L. Williamson, J.P. Moir.' So the number appears to have dropped considerably. See E.B. Tylor 'On Stone implements from Tasmania. extracts from a letter from J. Paxton Moir' JAI vol 30 (1900) 257-262. In Tylor's introduction to H. Ling Roth 18999 'The Aborigines of Tasmania' 2nd edition '...Some of the best of these [stone tool collections from Tasmania in the Pitt Rivers Museum] were sent by Mr Alexander Morton of the Hobart Museum, and my own collection [he presumably means his private collection], containing numerous formed implements and chips of varied quality, was mostly procured for me by Mr Williamson of Brown's River...' [p. vii]. There actually appears to be 95 of these objects.

Judging by the letter it seems likely that the tools from Brighton were probably (but not definitely) borrowed from the founding collection, there are 18 stone tools from Pitt-Rivers excavations at Hollingbury all found on 10 June 1868 in that collection, Tylor would have had access to them as Keeper of the University Museum. He could also have borrowed the stone tools from Le Moustier from the Pitt Rivers Museum, at this time there were 15 in the collections from John Wickham Flower and Christy and Lartet (most of the latter via the founding collection). Emile Cartailhac (1845-1921) was a French prehistorian, one of the founding fathers of the study of cave art. At this time he was teaching at the University in Toulouse.

----

L1064

The Museum House Oxford | Sep. 30 1894

My dear General Pitt Rivers

It was a great satisfaction to have your opinion on the Tasmanian implements after going through the evidence. I wish however that another effort could be made to get the geologists and anthropologists at Hobart Town to have fuller searches in different districts of Tasmania, so as to see whether the rude chipped implements are the same everywhere, and whether the polished ones are ever to be found. If any way of getting this done occurs to you will you kindly tell me. We were much pleased to see the appreciative article in the Spectator on your Museum and Garden.

I am very glad that you think Section H did well. For myself, I found it a profit and pleasure to have more talks with your than I had had for a good while

Yrs very truly
EB Tylor

Enclosure

[Printed, extract from British Association Report]

On some Stone Implements of Australian type from Tasmania

By E.B. Tylor, D.C.L., F.R.S.

The ordinary stone implements used by the Tasmanians were remarkable for their rudeness. They come generally under the definition of substantial flakes, trimmed and edged by chipping on one side only, not ground even at the edge, and grasped in the hand without any kind of handle. The palaeolithic level of these implements, notwithstanding their often recent date, had been pointed out by the writer. [1] In illustration of this comparison, Tasmanian implements wre not exhibited side by side with flint implements from the cavern of Le Moustier, in Dordogne. But an important point of exception as to this comparison, mentioned in the paper referred to, demands reconsideration in view of the new evidence now brought forward. In the investigation as to native stone implements conducted about twenty years ago by the Royal Society of Tasmania, some exceptional statements were made as to stone axes or 'tomahawks' being ground to an edge, and fixed in handles, and these were explained as due to the Australian natives who have passed into Tasmania since the European settlement. What was meant by these statements now appears more clearly from three ground implements of distinctly Australian character, well authenticated as brought from Tasmania, and now exhibited by the courtesy of the Municipality of Brighton, to whose museum they belong. The largest has a label showing that it was obtained through Dr Joseph Milligan, probably from Mr G.A. Robinson, the first protector of the aborigines after the native war; and that it was grasped in the hand for notching trees in climbing. The other two specimens are merely marked 'Tasmanian.' with the initials 'G.A.R.' The coexistence of two such different types as the chipped and ground forms in Tasmania requires, however, further explanation. This may probably be found in the immigration of Australians either after or before the English colonisation, but it would be desirable that anthropologists in Tasmania should make further enquiry into the question on the spot, so as fully to clear up the interesting position of the Tasmanian Stone Age.

[1] 'On the Tasmanians as Representatives of Palaeolithic Man'' in Journ. Anthrop. Inst., vol xxiii 1893, p.141

Transcribed by AP for Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project June 2011

University Museum, Oxford | Dec. 14. 1891

Dear General Pitt-Rivers

I have had the notice of your Society of Arts paper for Wed'y evening, and as Mrs Tylor will be in town I hope to go up & join her & be present.

I wonder whether the Tower [of London] authorities would make it possible to fill one or two gaps in the Firearms Series by models. It could be well too I think to have a model of the Old English Yew Bow, and the "cloth-yard shaft", unless there is any possibility of original specimens

Believe me
Yours [illegible]
Edward B Tylor

[D'Alviella Ans'd]

Oxford May 1891

Dear Sir

I have been to your Lecture last Thursday at the Oxford Museum and took such an interest in it that I take the liberty of sending to you a book I have just published on the Migration of Symbols. You will see, by a glance at the figures, especially in the last chapter, that I have particularly devoted my attention to these passages of one form to another, which you have worked out with such a success in case of implements and architectural Designs.

Perhaps it will interest you to know that there is at Brussels a museum proposed on the plan carried out at Oxford, thanks to your magnificent gifts, viz on the principle of Development. But, as it is part of a larger scheme for a People's Palace I do not know when and how for it will be carried out

I remain
Your's [sic] sincerely
Goblet Alviella*
Hibbert Lecturer for 1891

P.S. I have borrowed from you, I believe, my fig. 41 p. 129 If I have not quoted my source more fully, it is because I had to take it second hand from a French book.

* Eugène Félicien Albert, Count Goblet d'Alviella (1846-1925) was a lawyer, liberal senator of Belgium and a Professor of the history of religions and rector of the Universite Libre de Bruxelles, see here

Transcribed by AP May 2011 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

L559

[Ans'd Howarth]

5 King Henry's Road, | South Hampstead | N.W. | 26. Oct. 88

Dear Sir,

I understand from Mr Tylor that in offering the Azorean "Disciplinas" for your museum at Oxford I have proposed somewhat too high a value for them. I was, as I said, rather at a loss how to value them at all: but if you care to have them for, say, £5, I shall be pleased to send them up. I should prefer before leaving England again to see them housed in such a collection, where they can be seen & compared.

Yours faithfully
Osbert H. Howarth

This refers to 1888.31.1-4 described as:

Accession Book Entry - Lt Gen A Pitt Rivers Rushmore Salisbury. 2 Flagella, candle and 'medida' from the Azores. Obtained by Mr OH Howarth 1888 (v JAI 1888 Standard 29 May 1888 (leading article) Brit Ass (Anthro Section 1888) JAI 1888 vol 18 pp 275 - 280, pl xii)

In a small exercise book found with other Museum documentation, titled 'Additions to Pitt Rivers collection, subsequent to its removal to Oxford, Pres. by Gen. Pitt Rivers' is the following entry: 'Oct 1888 Azoraque, flagellum, sacred candle and medida from St Michaels, Azores, obtained by Mr Howarth and purchase from him £5', so it is clear that Pitt-Rivers did pay the price Howarth asked for.

----

L570

5 King Henry's Road, | South Hampstead | N.W. | 2 Nov: 88

Dear Sir,

I am much obliged to your letter of the 28th.

I have forwarded the flagella, &c, to Dr Tylor, & hear that they have arrived safely

Yours faithfully
O.H. Howarth

Lt Gen'l Pitt Rivers

Transcribed by AP May 2011 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

L541

University Museum, Oxford | Oct. 4 1888

Dear General Pitt Rivers

I was away from here yesterday or should have answered your letter. If I remember rightly, I was beginning to speak to you about the idea of a 3d Guide to the Pitt Rivers Museum when something else intervened and the subject did not come up again. The idea arose from the old Strangers Guide to the University Museum being now out of print and the Delegates wishing me to make arrangements to get a new one into shape. As this would involve some pages about the Pitt-Rivers Museum, the possibility suggested itself of these pages being also issued separately for visitors. The space (perhaps 10 - 15 pages 18vo) [sic] would be too limited for anything of the nature of a Catalogue but a ground-plan might be given with directions to the stranger where to find some of the principal series. For instance, he might be informed that on entering, he would find in the two Court Cases to right & left specimens illustrative of the development of fire-arms from the matchlocks to the wheel-flint, and percussion types. Further to the left, he would come to the wall-case showing the development of the shield from the parrying-stick, and of metal armour from rude defensive coverings. When he gets this information, the large labels on the cases, so far as Balfour has done them, will tell him more about the meaning of the series. When Balfour returns I will let you know, and I feel sure that your going over the Series with him will promote their being arranged so as to be open to the public (I mean those in the Galleries.) You will be able to ascertain from him what prospect there is of the publication of a Catalogue. To me it seems distant from the amount of work involved and the cost of illustrations. I think your active cooperation would do more than anything else to push it forward.

Believe me
Yours sincerely
Edward B Tylor

P.S. I have just seen Balfour returned from Finland and looking forward to your visit

----

L552

University Museum, Oxford | Oct. 20 1888

Dear General Pitt Rivers

I am glad we may expect to see you here soon.

There seems to me no doubt that an Illustrated Catalogue showing development series would have great effect in the world. The Bethnal Green Catalogue though on so limited a scale was very useful as showing something of the general scheme, & I wish it were not out of print When you settle the day of your visit will you let me know beforehand. Believe me

Yours [illegible]
EB Tylor

-----

{joomplu:712 detail align right}

L573

University Museum, Oxford

Nov 4 1888

Dear General Pitt Rivers

I have been reading Collier's Art Primer which you were so good as to send me, and am glad to see him breaking ground in a rational theory of Art very different to what used to prevail. I see he gives the [Drawing] as a Peruvian form. Your remark about somewhat similar form in the Zuni property has drawn attention to the desirability of getting a Mexican specimen. As Gilbert has been here for a day or two I have asked him to pick up some Mexican pottery showing it. There are good Mexican figures as you know in the Museum, but not vases. The scourges have duly arrived & doubtless Balfour has acknowledged them. With many thanks for the book I am

Yours very sincerely
Edward B. Tylor

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project 2011

L421

[Acland ans'd 30 Nov 87]

University Museum, Oxford | Department of Medicine and Public Health | Nov 25 1887

My dear General Pitt-Rivers

I cannot help writing an additional private line of thanks [4 words illegible] I have been very anxious in many ways, about the end of our last meeting I hope all will be quietly arranged for the present, at the next Convocation Till it is over I cannot tell. The Dean & [illegible] do and have done all in their power

I am
My dear General Pitt Rivers
yours faithfully
... Acland

Transcribed by AP May 2011 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

L405

[Ans'd]

Gailants Hotel Suffolk St Pall Mall | Nov 3 1887

Dear Gen'l Pitt Rivers

Col. Murdoch Smith RE Director of the Museum of Science & Art at Edinburgh asks me for anything of yours of the nature of Catalogue beyond Parts 1 & 2. If you can spare him a copy of your lecture on Primitive Warfare this would be useful to him.

Steps are being taken as to the carrying on of Balfour's work in your Museum. I am sorry to hear accounts of Moseley which give a less favourable impression of his condition of health. The doctors have forbidden him to think of resuming work at the beginning of the year. It is still that he cannot get natural sleep.

Yours very [illegible]
Edward B Tylor

----

L419

[In red 'Oxford Museum']

The Museum House, | Oxford | Nov 20 1887

Dear General Pitt-Rivers

The first steps towards arranging for Balfour were duly taken, but there has been great difficulty in the Hebdomadal Council, & it seems quite doubtful whether they will put forward a proposition which Balfour would accept if Convocation passed it. The matter is to come up in Council again tomorrow I am vexed about it but not surprised as just now it is not easy to get money grants out of the University Chest which has been much depleted. Will you tell me if you have a set of electrotypes of the John Evans series of British Coins illustrating degeneration of form. I was thinking of getting a set done to be placed in your Collection, if there is not a set already.

Yours sincerely
Edward B. Tylor

----

L420

[Tylor ans'd 30 Nov 87]

University Museum Oxford | Nov 21 87

Dear General Pitt Rivers

The Hebdomadal Council are bringing forward a very liberal proposal, viz to grant £400 per annum for three years for completing the arrangement & for the catalogue. It is to be opposed on the ground of economy but I hope will go through

Yours [illegible]
Edward B Tylor

Mrs Tylor has a letter from Mrs Moseley which is the most encouraging we have had, as he seems to be getting right both as to food and sleep.

----

L424

[Oxford in red pencil]

University Museum, Oxford | Dec 1 1887

Dear General Pitt-Rivers

The opposition to the Supplementary Grant was for the most part on economic grounds, but it was happily got over. I have been to the British Museum seeing about the Coin Degeneration series. Head and another man who seemed extremely clever undertook to get a set of casts sent here from which a smaller set may be selected for declotyping. Keary in a little book called "Morphology of Coins" has some interesting points, but I hear of nothing better for explaining the principle than the Evans set. I am puzzled however with the band crossing the wreath at right angles, which is not accounted for by the Macedonian stater. Have you looked into this? You saw I think the asserted Andrea Ferara given by Mr Rigaud of Magdalen. One or two Court swords have also come in, but Pollock remarked when here on the gaps in the Sword Series where the Rapier in the earlier stages should be.

You will have noticed the Gold Medal awarded to Moseley.

Yours very much
Edward B Tylor

Transcribed by AP May 2011 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

{joomplu:693 detail align right}

[NB there are two L280s, the other is written by John Lubbock]

[Answered]

Wellesley Studio: Sutton: Surrey | March 4: 1887

Dr. Sir

I think you will kindly excuse the liberty I take in addressing you when I say that I am engaged in the preparation of a very large work on the origins of ornamental forms, & that I am indebted to your most interesting collection of savage-tribe objects for some most important facts. When I first had the advantage of seeing your collection at South Kensington I think a diagram was exhibited showing how the form of a man had degenerated into a mere ornament. In one of my own founds [sic] from central Africa occur these two figures [2 Drawings] and if my memory serves me rightly these were on your diagram. If you could assist me by completing the series I should feel deeply indebted to you.

You may possibly know my work on the arts & industries of Japan (Longman).*

Trusting that you will pardon the liberty that I take in addressing you

I am
Yours faithfully
C.W. Dresser

To Gen. Pitt Rivers &c &c

---

L282

Wellesley Studio: Sutton: Surrey | March 12th 1887

Dear Sir

I thank you for kind letter of yesterday's date & will look up the Journal of the Royal Institution.** Any information that you can give me, or direct me to respecting the origin of ornamental forms I shall be most grateful for.

I am Yours truly
C.W. Dresser

To: General Pitt Rivers &c &c

Christopher Dresser (1834-1904) was an English designer and design theorist, a pivotal figure in the Aesthetic movement according to his entry on wikipedia. For more information see here and also here. It seems possible that he never published his large work on ornamentation as his last well-known work was published in 1886 (before this letter was written) although that too was on a similar subject, 'Modern Ornamentation'.

* This presumably refers to 'Japan, its Architecture, Art and Art-Manufactures' [1882]

** Pitt-Rivers obviously suggested he read The Evolution of Culture,Journal of the Royal Institute 7 [1875] pp. 357-389 and presumably was referring him to the changes in New Ireland paddle decoration

Transcribed by AP May 2011 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum, Pitt-Rivers papers L220

Oriel Coll | Oxford | Mar 1. 1886

Dear Sir

The Hebdomadal Council has allotted me the agreeable duty of inviting you to come down to Oxford at Commemoration for the purpose of receiving the Honorary degree of D.C.L.
I hope that you will be able to accept this invitation and it will give me great pleasure if you and Mrs Pitt-Rivers will stay with me when you come.
Commemoration day is June 30 but as you probably know the gaieties begin three or four days earlier.

I am Dear Sir
Yours very faithfully
D B Monro

David Binning Monro (1836-1905) was a classical scholar. In 1886 he was Provost of Oriel College, member of the Hebdomadal Council and also a curator at the Museum (it is not clear from his Dictionary of National Biography entry which one). He was vice-Chancellor of the University from 1901-1904.

Pitt-Rivers did receive the Honorary D.C.L. in June 1886, confirmed by University Gazette notice of the Encaenia in 1886 (30 June). [Simon Bailey, University Archivist, pers comm.]

L235

Oriel Coll | Oxford | 19 July 1886

Dear Sir

Can you kindly let me know in a day or two when you will be able to come down to Oxford? You probably know something of Commem. gaieties but I would mention the procession of boats on Monday the 28th as a very pretty sight.

It would suit us very well if you could come as early as Saturday. On the other hand, I am counting on seeing you on Tuesday at latest when the Tylors & the Moseleys are coming to meet you.

Yours very faithfully
DB Monro

Transcribed by AP, May 2011 for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project

L193, Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Pitt-Rivers papers

University Museum, Oxford | Feb 18 1886

Dear General Pitt-Rivers

The enclosed rough tracing & particulars of the Baskir Tatars’ water-mill which is like those we saw in the Lewis, has been done some time. But I kept it waiting in order to send with it a curious old fashioned kind of padlock which an old man still sells in the Oxford cattle-market. It seems however that the maker is ill, for after repeated trials I have failed to find him, so I send the water-mill paper by itself. There is another Asiatic mention of the upright Norse mill but I cannot for the moment find it. The roof of your museum has at last the slates on so I trust it will be fit to receive its contents before long.

Believe me
Yours very truly
Edward B. Tylor

[Enclosure a tracing of plate I, Pallas, Reise durch veischielene Provinzen des Russischen Reichs St Petersburg 1771-6 p. 45 and text [presumably from same source]

L193, Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum, Pitt-Rivers papers

Rushmore, Salisbury | March 1. 86

Dear Mr Tylor

Many thanks for sending me the drawing of the Baskir Water mill. It is very interesting both in its resemblances & its variations from the Norse mill we saw. The fact of their supposing it to have been invented themselves does not of course prove that it was so and the ... [word illegible] is a likely one for the ... [words illegible] to have spread, the account does not speak of an arrangement of levers to raise the upper millstone for the purpose of grinding fine or coarse but the drawing .... [2 words illegible] to me to shew that such an arrangement does exist as in the Norse Mill. I have got my Norse Mill set up in a little house similar to the one we saw it in and I have found near here an old ... [word illegible] in a frame with apparatus for grinding fine & coarse like the Scotch ones.

I have been much amused by the papers on Genesis between Gladstone Huxley and others. [insert illegible] Nothing better than Huxley's papers ever appeared in Punch. But what are we to think of a leader of men like Gladstone allowing himself to be squashed and quizzed about like an indiarubber doll in the iron hands of a Huxley simply by [word illegible] to realize his own ignorance, was ever [word illegible] so punished before. As to Professor Drummond's theology we must have been theologists all our lives without knowing it. I dont see how by his philosophy the Bible differs from other good books or why parts of Shakespeare should not be taken out & [word illegible] with it, parts of the Bible expunged & burnt or sold in Holly... St with french letters & the new book brought out as an improved version of the Bible. If the Bible is only part of the evolution of human ideas there is the evidence of inspiration in the class of ideas beyond another why are not the arts & sciences [3 words illegible] all inspired I believe that Professor Drummond when he has done with his [word illegible] theology will come [word illegible] a collection of primitive locks & keys odds & ends of [2 words illegible] like some other [word illegible] & respected people. I hope Mrs Tylor is well & that you are none the worse for the barbarous ordeal you underwent in my company at Caldermouth

Yours very truly
A Pitt Rivers

Transcribed by AP as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, 2011

L106 Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Pitt-Rivers papers

4 Grosvenor Gardens | 5 Feby 83

Dear Mr Tylor,

Thanks for your note. If I were going to lecture about my collection, I should draw attention to the value of the arrangement, not so much on account of the interest which attaches to the development of the tools, weapons in themselves, but because they best serve to illustrate the development that has taken place in the branches of human culture which cannot be so arranged in sequence because the links are lost and the successive ideas through which progress has been effected have never been embodied in material forms, on which account the Institutions of Mankind often appear to have developed by greater jumps than has really been the case. But in the material arts, the links are preserved, and by due search and arrangement can be placed in their proper sequence.

The psychological continuity can therefore be better demonstrated by means of them than by means of the Institutions and Religions of Mankind they should therefore serve as a preliminary study for the Anthropologist who will by that means have to appreciate the gaps that are to be found in the latter and avoid the errors which the apparent absence of continuity may in some cases engender, and show how in studying the Institutions of Mankind those missing links must be supplied by conjecture which in the material arts can be arranged in rows so obvious that those who can run may read.

This is what I consider to be the main use of my collection for educational purposes. Each object must be regarded as the representative of an idea or a combination of ideas. The continuity is not in them, but in the human mind that begets them and have hence the analogy that exists between the development of the arts and the development of species: both follow the operation of physical laws.

As regards the details, a selection might be made from any of the following points:- the development of the shield from the parrying stick, the development of the boomerang by the selection of natural forms of bent sticks, the division of the bow into two classes, the simple and the composite, possible origin of the latter and of the former from the bow trap, the bow trap suggested by two hunters pressing through the jungle, the foremost letting the branches spring back in the face of the hindmost, as every sportsman knows. The development of clubs of natural origin, of the ornamentation upon them, ornamentation as derived from from [sic] disused appliances. The distribution of iron corrugated blades in India, Africa and Europe, the distribution of the double bellows, of skins, and its development. The origin of the Greek "kopis" blade in the bronze leaf-shaped sword. The cases of realistic representations of the human form and the cases of conventionalized ornamental forms, the development of bronze axes and gradual formation of a socket; Primitive drawings, those of savages compared to those of European children, drawing power of savages under European influenced; the distribution of the outrigger canoe, the development and distribution of loop, coil and fret ornaments and their connection; the transition of form in ornament New Ireland, New Guinea block (pulley) ornament, & transition, European peasant wood carving. The development of door locks; the changes of the impressions on coins, the way in which the arts of savages may be made to illustrate those of prehistoric or non-historic times, notably the quiver of the Assyrians explained by that of the American Indian hunter, primitive clothing, weaving and basket making, and distribution of spindle whorls, the substitutes for pottery, personal ornaments, its derivation from armour and copies of natural forms, primitive bagpipes, origin of wind and vibrating musical instruments, conch-shell trumpets, their distribution; Jew's harp, nose flutes, sounding boards, wooden drums, parallel development of the body of a fiddle from a gourd in India and Africa, use of a separate bow for each string in Africa; similar forms of the votive offerings in Europe and the East, distribution of emblems of maturity, Isis and Horus, Virgin & child, India, Peru &c; use of crow's feet in the various countries, development of agricultural implements, origin of money and of objects used as a a means [insert] medium [end insert] of exchange, distribution of fire sticks and lamps, Games, origin of the Hookah in a Coconut, and gradual transition of its form in brass.

I should be glad if you would kindly mention that I look upon my Museum as being in no way an exception from the ordinary laws affecting all human affairs in regard to development, and that so far from considering it perfect as it is, I cannot conceive any idea of finality in a Museum of the kind. It might embrace all the arts of Mankind, but all that can be done is to keep on perfecting certain typical series which shew the sequence best. In doing this an arrangement to shew the distribution of like objects must necessarily precede an arrangement to show developments. I have on one or two occasions had to carry on the first arrangement for some years before the course of development became apparent, and then a new arrangement commences, so that a collection of this kind must necessarily be in a constant state of transition. The difficulty of collecting links is of course very great as one only tumbles upon them accidentally but I believe that any traveller who had previously obtained an idea of the course of development in a Museum of this kind might add enormously to the number of links and varieties in the country from which they come and so add largely to the Museum. There has however been no instance as yet of any traveller who has systematically collected on this plan, and one can therefore form an idea of the great increase which may become necessary hereafter, and the necessity of allowing space for it, either by a larger building than is necessary to contain the present collection, or by building it in such a situation that an extra room can be added to it at some future time. If you would like to have any large diagrams showing the sections of the tombs in which the Egyptian flints were found I shall be happy to send them to Oxford.

Yours very truly
A. Pitt Rivers.

Transcribed by AP as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, 2011

L79 Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Pitt-Rivers papers

[Answered 6.II.83]

Linden | Wellington Somerset | Feb. 4. 1883

Dear Genl Pitt Rivers

I am to give two lectures on Anthropology at Oxford in the Museum* Lecture-Room on Thursday 15th & Wednesday 21st at 2.30. In saying something of your Collection, I am thinking of the following as points one may mention intelligibly without having the specimens to show - viz. parrying-stick & shield; spring-trap & bow; survivals of armour. Also your stone implement in wall of Egyptian tomb. Is there any other topic connected with the educational use of the Collection which you think should be brought forward if there is opportunity?

I am glad to hear that the Oxford arrangements for the Museum seem in a fair way of settlement, but sorry to learn that you had been unwell lately. Hoping to have a better account now I am

[illegible salutation]
Edward B. Tylor

L80 Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Pitt-Rivers papers

Linden | Wellington Somerset | Feb. 5. 1883

Dear Genl Pitt Rivers

I thought I had somewhere in print the account how you were led by serving on an Arms Commission to find that improvements could only be made by small successive stages. If you have printed it anywhere could you send me the passage or reference to it, or if not, will you kindly tell me what it is lawful to say about it in a lecture when mentioning the collection

[illegible salutation]
Edward B. Tylor

L83 Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Pitt-Rivers papers

Linden | Wellington Somerset | Mar. 1. 1883

Dear General Pitt Rivers

I have looked at the figures of daggers &c in my little book & see that the spear-dagger art ** requires correction. Will you send me a sketch of the line of development as it seems to you to have come about. You will find in Wilkinson the art ** (perhaps from Rosellini as most are) of soldiers with spears & daggers  of similar form of blade. Also, I should be much obliged if you would make an ideal line of development for the sabre, for I do not think I quite understand your view. It will be sometime before I can do anything as to a new edition, but I should like to get the evidence straight.

Will you take the trouble to go to the Athenaeum Club on Monday next March 5. My brother-in-law Alfred Harris is one of those up for election, and I am sure you would vote for him if you knew him

[illegible salutation]
Edward B. Tylor

* That is, the lecture room in the Oxford University Museum [of Natural History] where Tylor was Keeper.

** Word illegible but looks like art or cut

Transcribed by AP May 2011 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

L70 Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Pitt-Rivers papers

Copy

Rushmore, Salisbury | 15. Jan. 83

Sir

In reply to your letter of the 5th inst, in which you ask me to lend some Ethnographical objects from my Museum at South Kensington for the forthcoming Exhibition at Amsterdam, I beg to inform you that at the present moment the removal of the entire collection to, and its acceptance by the University of Oxford is under consideration. Until a decision has been arrived at with reference thereto, I regret to be unable to offer any loans of objects.

As soon as this matter is settled I will [insert] if possible [end insertion] endeavour to comply with your wishes.

I am
Sir
Your Obedient Servant
Fredk James

[Frederick James was one of Pitt-Rivers' assistants.]

----

L71

Answered 20 Jany

Free Public Museum, Liverpool | Mayer Museum 16 January 1883

Dear General Pitt Rivers

I dare say you have forgotten me, but I take the liberty of reminding you of my existence, & of my visit to you when staying with Lord Wolverton last year, in order to ask you to look at the enclosed proof [still with letter] of a circular we are going to issue, & to ask whether you think you could lend us your collection of Early Navigation things, now at South Kensington?

They would be of real service here, & as much appreciated in a collection of this kind as in London, if not more. We should want them for 2 or 3 months only. I believe they only fill 3 or 4 cases, & would not involve a very serious moving.

Hoping you will consider us favourably, & with kind regards to yourself and Mrs Pitt Rivers

I am very truly yours
Charles I. Gatty
Curator

P.S. I hope your excavation on the downs has repaid you for your trouble.

Transcribed by AP as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, 2011

Private

Linden | Wellington Somerset | Sep. 24. 1882

Dear Gen'l Pitt-Rivers

Before long I suppose we may hear of your Museum being settled at Oxford. I am not only interested in this on public grounds, but the University establishing your Collection may affect a scheme suggested to me by Rolleston years ago, as to a Readership at Oxford which might help to bring Anthropology into the University course. If all goes right with your Museum, it is likely that I may be asked to give on or two lectures at Oxford with a view to some permanent appointment coming afterwards. All this is in the clouds as yet, but some months ago Max Müller asked me to drop on my way and see Moseley as Rolleston's successor, and some other men whose voices would be important in the matter. It looks as if something may come of it, thanks to the impulse given by you to Anthropology at the University. It is true that the appointment if made will be by no means a lucrative one, but I think I could do more effective work in such a position than anywhere else, while there is work left in me. Since I was at Oxford I have been expecting to meet you somewhere and talk to you about the idea, but as there seems no immediate prospect of seeing you I write instead, only adding that the people interested at Oxford are anxious that nothing should be said further at present, as to make it known would complicate matters

[L8 Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum Pitt-Rivers papers]

Transcribed by AP as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, 2011

{joomplu:646 detail align right}

[Draft] Letter from Balfour to Pitt-Rivers dated 4.3.91. I am presuming this is a draft as it is addressed to 'Dear General P.R.', given the recent tenor of correspondence between Pitt-Rivers and Balfour it seems unlikely that such a casual approach would have been used! In the days before electronic copies, carbon copies or earlier drafts were often kept by the sender as aide memoires. This is either a follow-up letter to the one shown here, or another draft reply (possibly never sent), or else the actual reply sent to Pitt-Rivers letter of 28 November 1890.

11 Norham Gardens 4.3.91

Dear General P.R.

On receiving your letter I went to the Vice Chancellor and he agreed that it would be best to arrange a day next term for your lecture, as the present term expires on Saturday week, and we are unwilling to press you unduly so as to have the lecture this term, if you prefer a longer time for the preparation of diagrams etc. I hope that the date fixed will be perfectly convenient to you. I have sent off the roll of diagrams of New Ireland paddles and hope they will reach you safely.

I am sorry that I must put off the publication of my essay on 'Decorative Art', as I had hoped to have got it out soon after this term, had your lecture been delivered this term, and a certain number of scientists are expecting it. I am afraid that it is of little use to reckon upon issuing it after your lecture next term as I have no doubt that Haddon's paper

Page 2

will appear by then, and I daresay the Americans will have something out as they seem to be in the field. Your work in the subject will of course be always referred to by any one who writes upon 'Art Evolution', and Haddon will no doubt give a list of your papers & some of the series at least; but I hoped that the first general account for the public might emanate from Oxford, in connection with your collection, embodying all your original series, and using as far as possible the material now in the collection; in order to emphasize the educational value of the collections as much as possible, & keep it before the public, and also to popularize the subject. To write an essay upon the 'Growth of Decorative Art' without embodying your series and remarks would be by no means fair to the public, or to yourself, as, apart from excluding some of the

{joomplu:647 detail align right}

Page 3

most striking examples which have become classical, it would practically mean suppressing the history of enquiry in this branch, and it would be no satisfaction to me to suppress in any way the credit due to you for your most valuable work. Although I have the material the material [sic] to hand & ready for writing up, it would be useless for me to write it in any final form until I have some definite idea of what you wish done with regard to your series. I have therefore practically given it up & put aside the work, as it is practically useless for me to continue though I much regret dropping an interesting subject.

I have been thinking of writing a small book on the Phylogeny of Musical Instruments, as I think this subject would prove interesting to the public, and Sir John Stainer and others tell me that such a book is much wanted. Would you kindly tell me if you have written papers about musical instruments. The series were so completely disarranged in the journey to Oxford that I have no means (except in cases like the bow - harp series) of knowing your views upon the subject which is to me very unfortunate. Also, do you wish the materials in your original collection used in illustration, or would you prefer that I should use that in other Museums and collections. I should naturally vastly prefer to use the specimens under my care, and no doubt this would be appreciated in Oxford; but at the same time I do not wish to do so if you prefer otherwise & will rest by your decision. I hope you will excuse my troubling you with so long a letter, I am particularly anxious to emphasize to the public to the best of my ability the great claims of your collection.

Hoping that I can be of service to you in connection with your lecture.

Believe me

Yours truly

Henry Balfour

Transcribed by AP, March 2011, as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project

This is the letter that Balfour actually sent to Pitt-Rivers, compare to the unsent letter in reply to Pitt-Rivers letter of 28 November, and also note the different handwriting, this might have been written by someone else as it does not resemble Balfour's normal hand, maybe it was the suggested draft by the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford (to whom the unsent draft was sent for comment) which Balfour copied out? An alternative is that the letter shown here was actually the letter sent.

11, Norham Gardens, Oxford [1]  | 3.12.90 [2]

Dear Gen. Pitt Rivers

I hear from the Vice Chancellor that you are going to give your public lecture up here early in next term and am very glad that this is to be so, as it will be an important event. I will readily defer writing upon subjects which touch upon your series until you have given this lecture & have explained the

Page 2

principles illustrated by your collection. I cannot help thinking that you will be pleased with the work which has been done. I have at last devoted myself to the work, in which I am greatly interested, and I shall hope to be able to do something to advance the branch of Anthropology, with which your name is chiefly connected. I do not think the collection has been kept in the background except to an unavoidable extent. The court of the building was

Page 3

very soon thrown open to the public and the upper gallery has been open about two years. The lower one is waiting for a building for work and can be opened as soon as this is ready. I have always done all that I can, as has Dr. Tylor, to illustrate the points of the collection & its educational value, by demonstration to visitors, & I fancied with some success, as very great interest has been shewn in the collection. It only remains for me to say that if I can be of any

Page 4

assistance to you with regard to our lecture, I shall be extremely happy to do everything in my power.

Believe me
Yours truly
Henry Balfour

The series of diagrams illustrating your series of New Ireland paddles is here. I thought I would mention this in case you should want them.

Notes

[1] presumably Balfour's home address at this time.

[2] Even the date is not written in Balfour's normal manner

Transcribed by AP, March 2011, for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

and PRM ms collections PRM papers Box 1 86-87

Unsent reply from Henry Balfour to Pitt-Rivers, to the letter dated 28 November 1890 to be seen here. The detailed catalogue of this box of manuscripts suggests that this draft reply was sent by Balfour to the Vice-Chancellor at Hertford College 'for comment' as requested in the Vice-Chancellor's letter to Balfour dated 2 December 1890 [Box 1, 93]. A further letter from the V-C on the same day [Box 1, 94] suggests that the V-C felt the Balfour draft to be extremely unwise, although he acknowledges that Pitt-Rivers' original letter was brusque, he feels that Balfour's draft reply will not 'mend matters'. He suggests that Balfour comes to have 'a chat' before he sends any reply. There therefore must be a chance that the actual reply sent was in fact drafted by another, more remote and diplomatic, person.

PRM ms collections PRM papers Box 1 84-85

[Insert in pencil] Letter not sent [end insert]

Anatomical Department, Museum, Oxford. | 2nd Dec. 1890

Dear Sir

Your letter of the 28th inst has troubled me not a little, and I would ask you to be kind enough to read this answer to it, as I feel very hurt to find that you so greatly depreciate the work which I have done in connection with your collection. First allow me to correct a slight error; I have been five, and not six, years in charge of the collection; having commenced the work towards the end of 1885, never till then having seen the collection or studied Ethnography. The building was even then not finished and the systematic work of arranging etc did not commence till some time after the year (1886) had turned. The collection, when it came into my hands, was in very great confusion, [illegible writing over] was distributed in different parts of Oxford, many of the series were completely disarranged & the component elements scattered. In undertaking the work of rearranging and adapting the collection to its new home, I did not dream that it would be intended that the collection, as it existed at S. Kensington, complete though many of the series were, was to be considered complete and its arrangement final. I gathered from reading your papers,

[Page 2]

as I have since further been led to suppose by your own statements, that the collection was to be progressive even as it illustrates progress; I had all endeavours were to be made to render it as complete as possible, and to increase its educational value, that it should always maintain itself among museums as one of paramount importance.

The field of work seemed to offer great attractions, and I entered it thinking that, besides the great benefits that I must derive from a careful and detailed study of your collection (both from an Ethnographic and a Curator's point of view), I should find an opening for research, for possibly advancing a little a most important branch of science, increasing the educational value of this department, for endeavouring to do the collection the justice it so richly deserves.

Had I supposed that the work was to be of a purely mechanical nature, to be finished and done with, I should never have undertaken it, but should have continued to pursue the study of animal morphology in which I was then engaged, & which offers a wide scope.

Fortunately my circumstances render me independent of the small salary which I have drawn from the University, so that pecuniary considerations have influenced me but slightly.

You say that you 'consider 6 years an unreasonable time

Page 3

for it to have been kept in the background in Oxford? I am afraid that I do not fully understand the meaning of this, as I fail to see how I has been kept in the background. The Court of the building was very soon thrown open to the public, and the upper gallery has been open nearly two years. I have already explained to your that the lower gallery (the only remaining closed portion) can be opened as soon as a building has been provided for the work of the department. I have always, as has Dr. Tylor, endeavoured to emphasize the points of the collection & its educational value, by demonstrations to visitors, & have done my best to keep it as much in the foreground as possible, and I imagined with some success, as the interest shewn by people has been great. I should have thought that by writing I could have done something more towards increasing the knowledge of the subject & helping to advance the particular branch of Anthropology with which your name will always be associated. By writing from time to time the collection, and the fact of its progressing & not remaining at a standstill, is kept constantly before the scientific public, and the interest is kept up amongst people abroad (of the importance of this I have had many proofs). But now you wish nothing written about which touches upon your series, and this important method of keeping the collection in the foreground is cut off.

Page 4

As regards my paper upon the "Composite Bow". the raison d'être of that paper was, as was clearly shewn, to describe the "complex structure of the higher types" by means of dissection, a question not dwelt upon in your catalogue. It was not intended as a paper upon your series, though in order to shew the importance of the various structures, I found it necessary to deal with the subject from a wider standpoint, and recover the ground already so admirabley described by you. The fact of your work being mentioned in a footnote was due to my having so inscribed it when my paper was a very short one dealing only with the anatomy of a few forms, before I developed it to cover a wide field; and I had fully intended, had I read the paper myself, to make full mention of your work. As it was, my health failed me, and I had to hurry off at a few hours notice to avail myself of an invitation to join the Channel Squadron for a month's cruise. So it happened that the paper was hurriedly sent in without being revised, a misfortune which I have only too great cause to deplore. I added a very full acknowledgement for publication, & thought that you would [insert] then [end insert], as you said, allow the matter to drop, but I am doomed to disappointment I give you the above facts concerning the paper, if you have followed me thus far.

I have devoted practically the whole of my time (without help from the Curator since Prof. Moseley's illness) [here the draft concludes on these pages]

PRM ms collections PRM papers Box 1 86-87

to your collection - either to the mechanical management of the department or to such a study of Anthropology as I have thought would benefit it and advance the principles illustrated by it, and have constantly studied how I could advance this particular branch of Anthropology. I do the work because I take great interest in it & it is a pleasure to me to do it, not because it is a necessity. I should have thought that these facts would have rendered me proof against the expressions of want & of confidence & dissatisfaction with which you favour me. So long as I hold a post connected with your collection, it will, as it always has, receive my first thoughts, but if my position as curator is to hamper rather than to give me scope for useful work, & on that account I am not to publish such results as I may from time to time arrive at, in order to advance the science where I can - if this is to be so my only course is to disolve [sic] my connection entirely with the collection, and to

Page 2

assume an entirely independent position, a course which I should be extremely sorry to adopt as my interests are so completely centred in the collection.

It was purely for your own sake that I suggested the postponement of your lecture until the entire building could be opened. I thought that you would naturally prefer to see the public admitted everywhere; personally I feel that I should be only too pleased personally if the lecture could be given at once, as I regard it as a most important event. I understand from Dr. Tylor that you contemplate giving it next term, & of that I can only say I am very glad.

I am sorry to trouble you with so extremely long a letter, but I have no opportunities of seeing you. It is because I feel keenly the manner in which you regard myself and my efforts to advance the interests of your collection, that I have gone into such detail. Nothing could send more to dishearten me from the work than the strained relations which seem to exist between us, & I greatly deplore that the collection & the science should suffer from this cause. Apologizing for the great length of this letter

Believe me
Yours faithfully
Henry Balfour

General A. Pitt Rivers D.C.L | Rushmore, nr Salisbury.

Note

There is a letter in Box 1, 90 from Balfour to the Vice-Chancellor dated 1.12.91 (but which the curator of the ms collections believes to be an erroneous date, with the date 1.12.1890 being suggested as an alternative) where Balfour asks for the right to resign at any time, citing as some of the reasons, '... The management of the department is so anomalous, & the provision for the permanent maintenance of the collection nil, & the attitude assumed by Gen. Pitt-Rivers so strange ...'. A further letter from Balfour a day later (again dated erroneously 1891) [Box 1, 92] says, '... on Saturday I received a letter from Gen. P.R. [presumably the letter of 28 November] which shewed me that it would be extremly unwise for me to bind myself [to the job at the Pitt Rivers Museum] for any time. The attitude assumed by him has astonished me greatly, & I can only see that harm to the interests of the colln. can come of it if he maintains it. The fact that his views are based on entirely erroneous notions does not diminish the present difficulty. I hope that General P.R. will soon change his views & that there will be no need for me to avail myself of my power to resign.'

Transcribed by AP, March 2011, for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

Letter from Augustus Pitt-Rivers to Henry Balfour, this letter appears to be a typed carbon copy [it appears to be purple ink, though it could have just faded over time]. It is known that towards the end of his life Pitt-Rivers did employ a typewriter in his correspondence. It is signed by hand in ink though.

Rushmore, Salisbury. | November 28th, 1890.

Dear Mr. Balfour,

In reply to your letter of the 20th inst., asking if I have any objects to your publishing the series of evolution of ornamental patterns contained in the collection, I of course object to anything whatever being published about the Museum or any part of it by any of the officers charged with the arrangement of it, until I have had the opportunity of describing the collection and explaining to the University its principles of collection, arrangement and history.[1] It is one thing to originate a Museum of that kind and a very different thing to extend and develop it upon the lines already laid down. You have been 6 years in charge of it or assisting Professor Moseley, during which time you have had ample opportunity of adding to the series, and I do not doubt have availed yourself of the opportunity, as I should have wished you to do, with all the advantages of a University connection that the Museum has had; but during that time I have not had access to it, and it is necessary I should speak upon the original series before you do anything. Your paper on my series of composite bows, as at first submitted to the Anthropological Institute, was not at all flattering to the original collection or to me, and I have to guard against a recurrence of anything of the kind. When I have done, I shall be glad that you should publish anything relating to the Museum that may be consistent with your position as the Curator of it. When it was removed from Bethnal Green to Kensington it took 3 months to do it, and I consider 6 years an unreasonable time for it to have been kept in the background at Oxford, making all due allowance for the different circumstances of the case.

I am much obliged to you for your very kind invitation. If I go anywhere at Oxford, I shall be most happy to accept it, but I am rather an invalid in some ways, and always prefer putting up at an Hotel if possible.

Yours very truly,
A Pitt-Rivers

See here for an unsent reply to this letter from Balfour.

Notes

[1] Pitt-Rivers was awaiting a date to be arranged, once 'the arrangement' had been completed, for him to give a formal lecture at Oxford. This finally took place on 30 April 1891. There was never a formal opening of the Collection, perhaps because it was at this time still nominally part of the Oxford University Museum, and this lecture formed the only 'opening ceremony' that seems to have occurred. See here for a paper from the Journal of Museum Ethnography on this topic by Petch, 2007.

Transcribed by AP, March 2011, for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

{joomplu:642 detail align right}

This report was drawn up by Henry Balfour, the first Curator of the Pitt Rivers Collection at Oxford (as it was then known, as it was still under the general control of the Oxford University Museum). It was enclosed in a letter dated 3 May 1891 from the Linacre Professor to Professor Price. The Linacre Professor says that the report has the approval of himself and Edward Burnett Tylor, the Reader in Anthropology. He points out that the Statue IV par 3 Particular regulations IVd enacts that the Linacre Professor is the Curator of Ethnological Collections of the University Museum. However, he quotes Professor Moseley's opinion that it is impossible for the Linacre Professor to do the double duty, and feels it is essential that a working curator be appointed. He urges the claims of Henry Balfour to this post, whose work has been beyond praise.

The Pitt Rivers Collection
Special Report

Note: The collection was accepted as a gift from General Pitt Rivers by the University in Convocation on Mar. 7, 1883. and a grant of a sum not exceeding £7500 was voted for building, cases and fittings.

- The form of decree as regards the acceptance of the offer of the collection was published in the University Gazette for May 30, 1882; and an account of the nature, bearing, & value of the collection appeared in the Univ'y Gazette for Feb. 6, 1883.

- The form of the deed of gift was published in the Gazette for May 20, 1884, on which day the University seal was affixed to the deed

- An additional grant of a sum not exceeding £1600 was voted on Dec. 2, 1884.

- On Nov. 29, 1887 the Curators of the University Chest were authorized to expend a sum not exceeding £1200 within three years from January 1, 1888, for the further continuance of the work. The reasons for this grant were published in the Gazette for Nov. 22m 1887.

Page ii

{joomplu:643 detail align right}

Present conditions

- At the end of the present year [insert] (1890) [end insert] the period of three years, and the use of the grant of a sum not exceeding £1200, which were allotted for the continuation of the arrangement of the collection, will expire, and I venture therefore to suggest that the very important question of the permanent maintenance of the collection, should be discussed [insert] considered [end insert] as soon as possible.

- As the matter now stands, at the expiration of the present grant no provision whatever has been made for maintaining and improving this department of the Museum, or of providing it with an efficient staff, and unless a sum of money is annually set apart for this purpose the very valuable collection must inevitably fall into a state of decay.

- At the end of this year the material will be classified [insert] into the different series [end insert], and arranged so far as is possible without a more detailed and exhaustive treatment, but it is hoped that the [insert] whole [end insert] collection may from time to time be gone over more and more carefully, in order to develop further its resources and illustrate more completely the important scheme of arrangement of which General Pitt-Rivers was the founder.

Page iii

Owing to the great interest taken in the collection, and in the system upon which it is arranged, valuable additions have constantly been coming in, and, by a proper use of this new material, it [insert] has been and [end insert] would be [insert] in the future [end insert] possible to greatly improve the existing series by filling up gaps in their continuity, or to add new series, and so to advance greatly the educational value of this unique collection.

Labels, drawings and maps are still greatly needed for the better explanation of the series, as well as a hand catalogue for the general public.

- [insert] The Curatorship vested by Statute in the Linacre Professorship of Human & Comparative Anatomy ([in different hand] Statute IV, I, §3, Particular regulation 4 [illegible mark]) [end insert] During the absence, due to illness, of Prof. Moseley The management and responsibility for the arrangement of the collection has practically fallen entirely upon the Sub-curator.

The present executive staff consists of a sub curator, and two servants the latter receiving 22/6 and 15/- per week respectively in wages.

- The Building, though defective in some points of construction, is well adapted to the present needs of the collection,

{joomplu:644 detail align right}Page iv

though many of the series are much cramped for want of supplementary glass cases, which should relieve the larger ones.

In the original plan, however, no provision was made for any extra rooms in which the work of the department might be carried on, after the building was ready to be thrown open throughout to the public.

The work has hitherto been carried on in the building itself; and, so long as one gallery can be shut off completely from public access, this is feasible though extremely inconvenient. Until proper work rooms are added it will be impossible to throw open the lower gallery.

Required provisions for permanent maintenance of the collection

- Staff. For the proper conduct of so large & important a department, in which the method of arrangement is so special, (involving a constant reference to the current & past literature) it is absolutely necessary that there should be a working curator, who should have control over the specimens and be responsible for them; who should

Page v

moreover be able to give his entire attention to the department, as the work of maintaining & improving the collection is far too great not to require undivided interest.

Two servants are required in order to keep the department and its specimens clean, & free from insects pests, & to prevent decay, as well as to carry on the varied work entailed in a department of this kind. Many specimens require constant attention, & much time is occupied in checking the inroads of insect pests, which have already proved a very serious hindrance.

- Building:

The necessary additions are:

(1) A Curator's room adjoining the building & leading from it, in which specimens could be labelled, classified & catalogued, & correspondence carried on.

(2) A working room in which the servants of the department could carry on their work at fittings, carpentry etc. This room should also be fitted out as a store room for duplicate specimens, and for materials & fittings.

An expensive building would by no means be required, the chief requisite being absolute dryness.

There appears to be no space in the Natural History [insert] Main Building of the [end insert] Museum which could be devoted to the purpose. [insert on verso of page iv] It will also be desirable to fix a permanent door to each of the galleries so that either one can be closed at any time to the public, during the conduct of special work.

Page vi

- Cases etc: There must always be a certain demand for new cases and fittings, created greatly by the acquisition of new specimens, & for this a small annual sum would be necessary.

- Specimens: A small reserve fund for the purchase of specially desirable specimens when occasion offered, would greatly assist the rendering of the collection as complete as possible.

Transcribed by AP as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, 2011

{joomplu:654 detail align right}

Letter from Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt-Rivers to Henry Balfour [1]

Rushmore, Salisbury | Dec 13 '87

Dear Mr Balfour

My original arrangement was to have arrows & spears separate as to darts as you say it is difficult to separate them from the spears. I dont think it is very important. I have 32 4to [sic, quarto] plates of the collection done of which 28 are already lithographed I had proposed to bring them out when the arrangement was completed but I think it must be done sooner Sir Henry Acland has written to me about it I have been so busy in "bringing out" my excavation series here thus I have had no time to attend to the Museum things.

If you could manage to come over here on a visit at some time soon we should be very glad & we could arrange about it.

Yours very truly
A. Pitt Rivers

----

{joomplu:656 detail align right}

Rushmore, Salisbury

Jan 21. 88.

Dear Mr Balfour

I have received your letter about the Collection and will write to you in a day or two full particulars about the drawings I fear I did not show you a tenth part of the drawings I have my clerks are away & I could not find them. Nearly everything is in fact drawn more than can be published in 2 or 3 years. I am so busy now with my Rotherley book that I havent time to attend to it but about March I will bring the whole down to Oxford & go with the thing thoroughly. If any one was to be put on to draw now they would be drawing things that are already done. I think the great thing now is to get on with the arrangement as fast as possible that will show whether there is anything to be added to the several series here & there a few links will have to be put in but as a rule I think my series of drawings seem very complete.

However I will look over this whole [word illegible] in a day or two & write to you again. It seems a pity to lose the services of your draughtsman but I dont see how he could be put on unless I were to come to Oxford at once which I cannot do.

Yrs very truly
A Pitt Rivers

Notes

[1] Henry Balfour (1863-1939) was the first curator of the Pitt Rivers Museum. He was first employed to instal the transferred displays of the founding collection when it arrived at Oxford. See here for his biography in the Dictionary of National Biography

Transcribed by AP, March 2011, for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, with help in deciphering from Jeremy Coote and Philip Grover.

{joomplu:655 detail align right}

{joomplu:657 detail align right}

{joomplu:658 detail align right}

{joomplu:659 detail align right}

{joomplu:660 detail align right}

{joomplu:648 detail align right}

Letters from Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt-Rivers to Sir Henry Acland [1]

Rushmore, Salisbury. | Dec 3rd 87

Dear Sir Henry

Many thanks for your note and for having done so much to explain the object of my collection. I hope that some day they will understand the matter better. I quite think that Mr. Balfour might be the means of giving some useful demonstration in aid of Mr Tylor's lectures, he seems to be thoroughly imbued with the spirit of it.

Yours very truly
A. Pitt Rivers

---------

{joomplu:649 detail align right}

Rushmore, Salisbury | Dec 13 '87

Dear Sir Henry

Excuse the delay in answering your letter I had to write to London to ascertain what plates I had already done of my collection. I dare say you do not know that I have already 32 Plat 4to [sic - quarto] plates of the series in my collection done of which 28 are already printed & also lots of drawings made from the plates can be made up at short notice this of course is quite independent of the catalogue printed by the South Kensington Museum. I had intended keeping this for when the collection was finally arranged, but I agree with him that it would not do to delay and must be done soon I will endeavour to come over to Oxford again and arrange with Mr Balfour to whom I am writing today as to what is to be done or if he would come here for a day or two we could arrange the matter much better. I am so dreadfully busy in getting out my 2nd vol of excavations thus I have very little time for the Museum things but I see it must be done soon. I should like to confer with him [sic, last three words illegible could also be 'employ ... ar...'!] if I could in addition but dont see how I could get over to Oxford just at present [sic, note last sentence is particularly difficult to read]

Yours very truly
A Pitt Rivers

Notes

[1] Sir Henry Wentworth Dyke Acland, first baronet (1815-1900) physician, academic and prime mover in the establishment of the University Museum at Oxford (and contributor to getting the Pitt Rivers collection donated to Oxford). See here for his Dictionary of National Biography entry.

See here for a web artlcle on the relationship between Acland and Pitt-Rivers

Transcribed by AP, March 2011, for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, with help in deciphering from Jeremy Coote and Philip Grover.

{joomplu:650 detail align right}

{joomplu:651 detail align right}

{joomplu:652 detail align right}

{joomplu:653 detail align right}

{joomplu:635 detail align right}

This is a transcription of a document, possibly written by Pitt-Rivers himself (though the reference to Col. Fox ie himself, suggests otherwise), which shows which objects were placed in which order in the series of firearms in the founding collection. The numbers in square brackets are the related Pitt Rivers Museum accession numbers added by the transcriber. This is a list which is duplicated in the so-called Black book (see end), a book said to have been compiled between 1874 and 1885 at Bethnal Green and South Kensington Museums which lists some series not included in the original 1874 catalogue. The reason why this list, and the black book listing were compiled is unknown. As firearms are one of the types of artefacts not covered by the published catalogue of 1874 for the Bethnal Green displays this list adds new information about another series put together by Pitt-Rivers before 1884.

The original can be found in the Miscellaneous papers, number 5a, in the PRM ms collections. The black book forms part of the primary documentation for the objects in the founding collection, access to it can be obtained by contacting objects.colls@prm.ox.ac.uk

First page

Specimens illustrating development in the form of hand fire-arms

1113. Hand cannon, centre touch-hole 14th Cent'y [1884.27.1]

1114 A. Hand cannon, side touch hole & pan 15th Cent'y [1884.27.2]

1114 B. Rampart gun with side pan & rings India [1884.27.3]

1115. Match lock with rest attached side touch hole & pan. Fired by hand without any lock [1884.27.5]

1116. Match lock European 16th Cent'y [1884.27.17]

1117. Match lock European 16th Cent'y. Stock of later date. [1884.27.16]

1118. Musket rest [1884.140.34. Note that this item was only found and entered into the Pitt Rivers Museum's accession books in the later twentieth century]

1119-21. Chinese match locks, serpentine trigger in one piece with spring. [1884.27.7 is 1120, the others no longer seem to be accessioned at the PRM]

1122. Match lock barrel inlaid with silver, India. [1884.27.14]

1123-6 Indian matchlocks [1884.27.10-1884.27.13]

1127. Indian matchlock carbine [1884.27.15]

1128. Match lock of peculiar form found in digging the foundations of a house in Edinburgh. Probably oriental. [1884.27.6]

{joomplu:636 detail align right}

First page verso

1131-1132 Burmese matchlocks, serpentine constructed to cock. Fire with trigger [1884.27.18 and 1884.27.46]

{joomplu:637 detail align right}

Second page

1129-32. Japanese matchlocks, serpentine constructed to cock, Fire with trigger. [1884.27.19-20 and see above]

1133. Wheel-lock musket. First introduced at the siege of Parma 1521. Wheel outside the lock. Rifle 6 grooved [1884.27.21]

1134. Wheel lock musket. Temp. James 2 Rifled, 7 grooved. Wheel inside [1884.27.22]

1135. Wheel lock musket. Temp. James 2, Rifled. 8 grooved [1884.27.23]

1136. Double action lock of wheel lock Wheel outside. [1884.27.26]

1138. Wheel lock, latest form. [1884.27.25]

1139. Snap haunce musket, constituting the link between the wheel lock & flint lock musket. From the Meyrick Collection. Fig. in Plate C XIV Fig 3 & 4. Vol II [1884.27.27]

1140. Snaphaunce pistol introduced into Germany about 1603. [1884.27.76]

1141 Moorish Snaphaunce lock same as 1140 Still used. [1884.27.28]

[Note 1137 appears to have been missed out, no item in the founding collection is associated with that number]

{joomplu:638 detail align right}

Third page

1142 Turkish fire lock Early form of lock, introduced into Spain about [insert] in [end insert] 1630 [1884.27.29]

1143. Spanish fire lock. Lock of same form as 1142, but the piece over the pan is only furrowed at bottom. [1884.27.31]

1144. Flint lock gun, ship's swivel gun Early form. [1884.27.32]

1145. Flint lock from swivel [1884.27.33]

1146. Flint lock adapted to an early form of stock usually applied with the wheel lock. Rifled the bore hexagonal. [1884.27.37]

1147. Flint musket, land service. Regulation pattern for Foot Guards Time of George III & IV with bayonet [1884.27.36]

1148. Flint musket. Line pattern. Time of George III & IV. With bayonet [1884.27.35]

1149. Flint musket. Light infantry. Time of George III & IV. With bayonet [1884.27.38]

1150 Flint rifle. 7 grooved. English regulation With sword bayonet. [1884.27.39]

{joomplu:639 detail align right}

Fourth page

1151. Flint carbine to throw grenades [1884.27.43]

1152. Flint blunderbuss, brass barrel. [1884.27.41]

1153. Flint rifle, oval bore. [1884.27.34]

1154. Flint firelock, German, double barrelled to revolve [1884.27.40]

1155. Flint lock, Spanish. [word illegible] & the pan, full [illegible] [1884.27.30]

1156. Lock adapted to either flint or percussion. Marks the transition period. [1884.27.45]

1157 & 8. Russian infantry, back action, percussion locks. Used in the Crimea. [1884.27.50-51]

1159. English Brown Bess, with spring bayonet. Percussion. [1884.27.56]

1160. Russian Infantry percussion musket, used in the Crimean War. With bayonet. [1884.27.41]

1161. Russian Light Infantry percussion musket. Used in the Crimea. [1884.27.48]

1162. French Infantry small bore musket lock use just before the introduction of the rifle muskets. With bayonet. [1884.27.52]

1163. Belgian infantry percussion small bore musket. In use immediately before the introduction of the rifle musket. [1884.27.53]

{joomplu:640 detail align right}

Fifth page

1164. French Artillery Carbine. With sword bayonet. [1884.27.54]

1165. French carbine "à tire" Hammer missing [1884.27.55]

1166. Rifle muskeet constructed for Col. Fox on the pattern of the French Minie Rifle Musket in 1852. This was the first rifle musket made in England. [1884.27.57]

1167. Rifle small bore. Bayonet made by Wilkinson for experiment in 1852. [1884.27.58]

1168. Short Enfield Rifle made by Lancaster for experiment [1884.27.60]

1169. Rifle, Lancaster, smooth oval bore, made for Experiment. [1884.27.59]

1170. Rifle German, ? square bore. Percussion. [1884.27.61]

1171. Rifle self priming, percussion, 1729. Used by the Hungarians in their revolution in 1848. [1884.27.68]

1172. Percussion for piercing discs used by the Hungarians in their revolution in 1848. [1884.27.67]

1173. Needle gun, 3 barrelled (one rifled) German [1884.27.69]

1174. Needle gun, 2 barrelled muzzle-loader, German [1884.27.70]

1175. Needle gun, 2 barrelled muzzle loader. French Made by Pauly & Co. Paris. [1884.27.71]

{joomplu:641 detail align right}

Sixth page

1176. Russian Infantry needle gun, breech loader, from 51 Exhibition. With bayonet. [The Great Exhibition] [1884.27.72, sic it is now described as a Chassepot rifle French]

1177. United States percussion breech loader 1845. [1884.27.65]

1178 Experimental breech loader constructed for Col. Fox, 1852. [1884.27.66]

1179. Gun. 6 barrelled revolver. Lock missing. [1884.27.75]

1180. Breech loader. Robin & Lawrence, N. Yorks. Patented, 1849. [1884.27.62]

1181. Musket, self-priming, percussion, English [1884.27.63]

1182. Musket, breech loading, hammer beneath [1884.27.74]

1183. Musket, breech loading. French [1884.27.64]

1183 A. Japanese needle gun, sword bayoneet. Copy of an English gun. [1884.27.73]

1184-6. Air guns [1884.27.89, 90, 92]

1187. Pump for air gun [1884.27.91]

1188. Flint lock rocket gun. [1884.27.44]

Transcribed by AP, March 2011 for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

Black book entries for firearms and firearm accessories including bayonets.

Black book entries transcribed by 1998 during first Leverhulme Trust funded Pitt Rivers project by AP.

To find another view of the firearm series, by Pitt-Rivers in 1889-90 see here.

Page compiled March 2011 by AP.

Address of Colonel A. Lane Fox, F.G.S., F.S.A. to the Anthropology Department of Section B [Biology]
at the British Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in 1872 at Brighton

{joomplu:488 detail align right}

When the Council of this Association did me the honour of naming me one of the Vice-Presidents for this Section, and the duty of opening the proceedings of this Department was committed to my charge, I had before me two alternatives, which, I suppose, must have suggested themselves to most of those who have occupied the Chair which I so unworthily fill upon the present occasion. I had to consider whether I should prepare a communication upon some special branch of study to which I had devoted my attention, or taking a broader and more general view of anthropological science as a whole, I should endeavour to offer a few remarks which might be useful in clearing the ground for the valuable and interesting papers which will be presented to you in the course of the session.

In partly adopting the latter or more general course, which I may say is the one that is least congenial to me, on account of my conscious inability to deal satisfactorily with so large a subject, and also because I think that in the present state of our knowledge we are better employed in collecting evidence than in generalizing, I have been influenced chiefly by a consideration of the many and great defects which have been acknowledged to exist in our method of proceeding in this department of science - defects which are, I believe, the natural concomitants of the early stage of development through which we are passing, but which we must set our faces seriously to encounter before we can hope that anthropology will be fairly admitted to the brotherhood of established sciences which are recognized under the auspices of this Association.

When towards the conclusion of the last Meeting in Edinburgh one of the ladies present drew attention to the generally unscientific character of the papers which had been read, she, I believe, said no more than was strictly applicable, not only to that particular Meeting, but to upwards of two thirds of the papers which are included under the head of anthropology elsewhere; and here I may observe that if no other benefit were recognized from the participation of the other sex in our discussions, we should find in it a source from which home truths of this nature can emanate without their setting our backs up. In making these remarks I am conscious that I am hafting the lash which may perhaps with some justice be applied to your Chairman on the present occasion. I cannot, however, claim any special exemption, but must share with my brother anthropologists any censure which may be justly due to our shortcomings.

The ladies must not, however, be too severe upon us in this department, but must make allowance for the empiricism which is naturally attendant upon a new study; for the anthropology of to-day bears, I believe, about the same relationship to the anthropology of the future that alchemy and astrology did to the chemistry and astronomy of our own times. We have established none of the landmarks, the classifications, or the nomenclature which in other sciences serve to keep the discussions within bounds, and direct the thoughts of the workers into useful channels. Anthropology is such a vast field of study, it is so impossible for any single mind to comprehend the whole with the precision that is necessary for scientific purposes, that it demands more than any other the subdivisions that are recognized in the sister sciences, but which at the present time are absent in ours. Hence the random range of our discussions; each speaker naturally wanders into the path that is most familiar to him, and there is no sufficient discipline to bring him back into the line of march.

Moreover, in dealing with anthropological subjects we are met with difficulties arising from their closeness relatively to ourselves. The same impediment which in the eye of the law incapacitates a man from judging or even from giving an impartial evidence in his own case meets us at every turn. It is comparatively easy to generalize when dealing with external nature; but when the materials on which we have to work are drawn from the reservoir of human thoughts and actions, we cannot disengage ourselves sufficiently to take a comprehensive view of the subjects we are studying. I presume that even the ablest amongst us must labour under a sense of incapacity in dealing with anthropological speculations. We may be said to stand in the position of molecules of paint upon the surface of a picture striving to catch the artist's design. Is it surprising there should be confusion of tongues in such a Babel as we are building?

Since, then, our anthropological field of vision is so extremely limited, it behoves us all the more in this branch of study to concern ourselves with the arrangement of our subdivisions, in order that they may bear an harmonious relation to each other, and whilst giving full vent to individual thought and action, and limiting the sphere of inquiry in each branch to such matters as may fall within the easy grasp of finite minds, they may at the same time be rendered subordinate to those great general objects which it is the intention of anthropological science to serve; for it cannot be proclaimed too often that in this country and in this Association we have not adopted the term anthropology out of deference to any particular dogmas or sets of opinions, or out of regard for any particular party or society, but because that term appears to be etymologically the most accurate for embracing the whole of those many studies which are included in the science of man. As one of those who for some years past have taken part in those practical measures which have been as yet only partially and feebly instrumental in promoting the union of the anthropological sciences, it occurs to me that the present occasion may be a fitting one for expressing some of the views which have suggested themselves to me in the course of my experience whilst so engaged. I propose, therefore, after considering briefly the existing phases of one or two of the more important questions with which anthropology has to deal, and saying a few words on the relative value of certain classes of evidence, to speak of the anomalies and misadjustments in what may be called the machinery of anthropological science, defects in the existing constitution of some of the societies which either are or ought to be included amongst the branches of our great subject. In the remarks which I shall offer upon this subject it is not my wish that any undue weight should attach to the particular suggestions which I may be called upon to make as in any way emanating from this chair. My object is rather to draw the attention of anthropologists to the urgent necessity which exists for better organization than to propound any particular schemes of my own; indeed, so rapidly do our views change in the infancy of a science, that I should be sorry to bind myself over to accept many of my own opinions in a couple of years hence; for there is, perhaps, no branch of study to which we may more truly apply the dictum of Faraday, that "the only man who ought really to be looked upon as contemptible is the man whose ideas are not in a constant state of transition."

Amongst the questions which anthropology has to deal with, that of the descent of man has been so elaborately treated, and at the same time popularized by Mr Darwin, that it would be serving no useful purpose were I to allude to any of the arguments on which he has based his belief in the unbroken continuity of man's development from the lower forms of life. Nor is it necessary for one to discuss the question of the monogenesis or polygenesis of man. On this subject also Mr Darwin has shown how unlikely it is that races so closely resembling each other, both physically and mentally, and interbreeding as they invariably do, should on the theory of development have originated independently in different localities. Neither are we now, I think, in a position to doubt that civilization has been gradually and progressively developed, and that a very extended, though not by any means uniform period of growth, must have elapsed before we could arrive at the high stage of culture which we now enjoy. The arguments of our sectional President, Sir John Lubbock, on this subject may, I think, be accepted generally as those of the best exponent of these views in our own time; such was the opinion, as we learn from various authorities, that was held by most of the ancient authors, and it tallies in all respects with the phenomena of progress now observable in the world around us, or which have been recorded in history. Indeed it almost appears probable that had it not been for certain dogmas inculcated in our youth, and from the influence of which in biasing our judgment it is difficult to disengage ourselves in after years, we should never for a moment have thought it possible that civilization could have arisen through any other causes than those by which we actually see it developing in our own times.

... [Lane Fox discusses the psychical powers of humans and animals] Be that as it may, there is, I believe, nothing in the constitution of our own minds which can lead us to doubt that the progress of our first parents must have been extremely slow, or that the slight improvement observable in the implements of the neolithic over those of the palaeolithic age did actually correspond to the continuous progression of human culture during enormous periods of time.

Now, if it is true that during the countless ages included in the palaeolithic and neolithic periods (which we know to have been marked by great geological changes, by the union and separation of great continents, by great changes in climate, and by the migration of various classes of fauna into distant parts of the earth) the progress of mankind was as slow and gradual as we are warranted in supposing it to have been by the relics which have been left us, considering how short the period of history during which the rapid development of civilization has taken place is in comparison with the long periods of time of which we have been speaking, and that progress is always advancing at a rapidly increasing ratio, we need find no difficulty in supposing that where savages are now found in the employment of implements corresponding to those of the neolithic age, they present us with fairly correct pictures of neolithic culture, being really in point of time only a little behind us in the race of improvement. It is reasonable also to suppose that the use of such tools by savages, and the culture associated with them, was also, like that of our neolithic parents, inherited from lower conditions of life, and that, being slow and continuous, it was sufficiently stable to enable us to trace connexions between people in the same stage now widely separated, and between them and our own neolithic ancestors.

The most remarkable analogies are in reality found to exist between races in the same condition of progress; and it is to the study of these analogies, with the view of ascertaining their causes and histories, that the attention of anthropologists has of late been especially drawn; and on this subject I propose to make a few observations.

There are two ways in which it has been attempted to account for these analogous coincidences; one by the hypothesis of inheritance, to which I have already referred; the other by the view of the independent origin of culture in distant centres, assimilated in consequence to the similitude of the conditions under which it arose. It is said that the wants of man being identical, and the means of supplying those wants by external nature being alike, like causes would produce like effects in many cases. There can be little doubt that many remarkable analogies have arisen in this manner, especially amongst the very variable myths, customs, religions and even language of savage races, and that it would be dangerous to assume connexion to have existed except in cases where a continuous distribution of like arts can be traced. On the other hand, we should commit a grave error if we were to assume the hypothesis of independent origin, because no connexion is found to exist at the present time; for we are as yet almost entirely ignorant of the archaeology of savage and barbarous races. It is but fifteen years since we began to study the prehistoric archaeology of our own race, which has already carried us so far on the road towards connecting us with savages; and can we say what further connexions may be brought to light when the river-drifts of such rivers as the Niger or the Amazons come to be studied? Nor can it fairly be said that the wants of mankind are alike in all cases; for if we adopt the principle of evolution, it is evident that the wants of man must have varied in each successive stage of progress, diminished culture being associated with reduced wants, thus carrying us back to a condition of man in which, being analogous to the brutes, he could scarcely be said to have any wants at all of an intellectual or progressive character.

It would be an error to apply either of these principles exclusively to the interpretation of the phenomena of civilization. In considering the origin of species, we are under the necessity of allying ourselves either on the side of the monogenists or that of the polygenists, but in speaking of the origin of culture, both principles may be, and undoubtedly are, applicable. There is, in fact, no royal road to knowledge on this subject by the application of general principles; the history of each art, custom, or institution must be diligently worked out by itself, availing ourselves of the clue afforded by race as only the most probable channel of communication and development. We may be certain, however, that in all cases culture was continuously and slowly developed. Wherever we find an art or institution in an advanced or a conventionalized state, we may be certain that it did not originate and was not invented in that condition, but was the result of slow growth; and if the evidence of such growth is wanting in the locality, or amongst the people with whom it exists, it is rational to look for it elsewhere. Where, on the other hand, the arts are in a low stage of development, closely allied to each other in their objects, forms, or appliances, and largely dependent on the unaltered productions of nature, we may assume that they are indigenous.

There is but one existing race the habits of which are sufficiently well known, which can be said to present in any great degree the characteristics of a primaeval people, and that is the Australians. As I have elsewhere noticed, all the weapons and tools of the Australians, whatever the uses to which they are applied, are closely allied to each other in form. The spear, the club, the malga, the boomerang, and the heileman, or rudimentary shield, all pass into each other by subvarieties and connecting links, and all consist of the but slightly modified natural forms of the stems of trees and other natural productions. The Australian in his arts corresponds the most closely of any people now living to those of the palaeolithic age. His stone axe is sometimes held in the hand when used, and, like the palaeolithic man, he has not yet conceived the idea of boring a hole through it for the insertion of a handle. In some cases he cannot without instruction even understand the use of such a hole when he sees it in the axes of European manufacture. A most remarkable instance of this was brought to my notice no long ago by Mr Grimaldi, who found on the site of a deserted native camping-ground a European axe having a hole for the handle, which the natives, unable to conceive the use of this part, had filled up with gum, and hafted by means of a withy bent round the outside of the hole, in accordance with their traditional custom. Through the kindness of the owner, I have here exhibited a drawing of this most instructive specimen of the primaeval arts of the Australians. In the temporary museum established here during the meeting of the Association, you will see a case containing knives of stone, glass, and iron, all of exactly the same form, and hafted, if one may use such a term for the attempt to form a handle, precisely in the same manner, showing with what tenacity these people retain their ancient forms, even after they have been supplied with European materials.

Now it has been shown in some cases; and here I especially refer to the account lately published by Mrs Millet, of the Native School established, under conditions only partially favourable to its success, in the interior of Western Australia. [Footnote: Australian Parsonage, or the Settlers and the Savage, by Mrs E. Millet, chap. vii] The Australians are found in some cases to be not only capable, but even quick in receiving instruction. It is evident, therefore, that we should be wrong if we were to attribute the extraordinary retardation of culture on the Australian continent to racial incapacity alone, racial incapacity is one item, but not the only item to be considered in studying the development of culture.

The earliest inhabitants of the globe, as they spread themselves over the earth, would carry with them the rudiments of culture which they possessed, and we should naturally expect to find that the most primitive arts were, in the first instance, the most widely disseminated. Amongst the primaeval weapons of the Australians I have traced the boomerang and the rudimentary parrying shield (which latter is especially a primitive implement) to the Dravidian races of the Indian peninsula and to the ancient Egyptians; and although this is not a circumstance to be relied upon by itself, it is worthy of careful attention in connexion with the circumstances that these races have all been traced by Prof. Huxley to the Australoid stock, and that a connexion between the Australian and Dravidian languages has been stated to exist by Mr Morris, the Rev. R. Caldwell, Dr Bleek, and others. [Footnote: Journal of the Anthropological Institute, No. 1, vol. I July 1871) And here I must ask for one moment to repeat the reply which I have elsewhere given to the objection which has been made to my including these weapons under the same class, viz. "that the Dravidian boomerang does not return like the Australian weapon." The return flight is not a matter of such primary importance as to constitute a generic difference, if I may use the expression: the utility of the return flight has been greatly exaggerated; it is owing simply to the comparative thinness and lightness of the Australian weapon. All who have witnessed its employment by the natives concur in saying that it has a random range in its return flight. Any one who will take the trouble to practise with the different forms of this weapon will perceive that the essential principle of the boomerang (call it by whatever name you please) consists in its bent and flat form, by means of which it can be thrown with a rotary movement, thereby increasing the range and flatness of the trajectory. I have practised with the boomerangs of different nations. I made a facsimile of the Egyptian boomerang in the British Museum, and practised with it for some time upon Wormwood Scrubs, and found that in time I could increase the range from fifty to one hundred paces, which is much further than I could throw an ordinary stick of the same size with accuracy. I also succeeded in at last obtaining a return flight, so that the weapon, after flying seventy paces forward, returned to within seven paces of the position in which I was standing. This settles the question of the identity of the Egyptian boomerang; in fact it flies better than many Australian boomerangs; for they vary considerably in size, weight, and form, and many will not return when thrown. The efficacy of the boomerang consists entirely in the rotation, by means of which it sails up to a bird upon the wing and knocks it down with its rotating arms; very few of them have any twist in their construction. The stories about hitting an object with accuracy behind the thrower are nursery tales; but a boomerang when thrown over a river or a swamp will return and be saved. In tracing the connexion between the arts of a people it is as necessary to study the principles of construction, as in tracing the connexion of languages or any other of the productions of the human intellect. To deny the affinity of the Australian and the Dravidian boomerang on account of the absence of a return flight would be the same as denying the affinity of two languages whose grammatical construction was the same because of their differing materially in their vocabularies.

Implements characteristic of the neolithic stage of culture have been found in all parts of the world, and the identity of their forms in regions remote from one another has attracted the notice of archaeologists. By degrees some of the most primitive weapons would be superseded by others, and the improved forms would be rapidly disseminated. Community of goods, which is characteristic of a primitive state of society, woud be a means of disseminating these improvements far more rapidly than afterwards, when the idea of personal property has been introduced, and before trade has been established. It has been found that in Western Australia, where no individual is able long to retain any thing as his own, and where members of another tribe are supposed to have a special claim on the possessions of an individual, this custom has been the means of conveying articles of European manufacture far inland into districts where the white man is unknown. We have also proof, in the migration of the Malays into Madagascar and the spread of the Polynesian race over the Pacific Ocean, that oceanic boundaries are not sufficient to prevent intercommunication between distant countries, and that intercourse between people in a comparatively low state of culture must frequently have taken place in prehistoric times. The earliest improvements would thus in time become the most widely disseminated and therefore the most difficult to trace by their distribution at the present time.

Amongst the earliest improvements upon the primitive arts of man would be the substitution of the throwing-stick by the bow as a means of accelerating the flight and force of the javelin. So decided an advance in the employment of missile force would lead to the discontinuance of the throwing-stick for ordinary purposes wherever the bow was introduced. The throwing-stick is now found only in distant and unconnected regions, viz. in Australia, amongst the Esquimaux and the Purus Purus Indians of South America, and it has been assumed, on account of the isolated positions in which it is found, that it must be indigenous. On the other hand, the use of the bow is almost universal; and it has equally been assumed, on account of its world-wide distribution, that it must be indigenous in different localities, and not derived from a common centre. Geographical distribution, however, although affording the best evidence obtainable, cannot be relied upon with certainty in the case of so early an invention as the bow appears to have been. I cannot concur in thinking that we have any sure evidence that the bow originated in different places; on the contrary, what evidence we have appears to me to be a contrary tendency.

In tropical and temperate regions the elastic properties of wood and its applicability to the purposes of offence would force itself upon the notice of the aboriginal man as he pushed his way through the underwood of the primaeval forest. He would perceive that by tying his lance to the end of an elastic stem, and by a simple contrivance for retaining it in a bent position until the proper time arrived for releasing the spring, it might be made to pierce other animals as they passed through the wood; hence the spring-lance or trap, which we find widely distributed in parts of Africa and Southern Asia, and which in later years has been carried by the negroes into South America. By degrees he would see that,  with the addition of a string, the trap might be made to project the lance with great force and accuracy; and the power thus afforded of wounding a wild animal or an enemy at a distance would at once commend it to his adoption. Where suitable spring wood existed, the construction of the bow was simple enough; but when the use of this weapon penetrated into northern climes, where an arctic flora did not supply wood of sufficient elasticity for the purpose, it would become necessary to supplement the stiff pine-wood or bone with some suitable material. It would be found that the sinews of animals fastened along the back would supply the elasticity that was wanting. By this means he would be led to the use of the composite bow, which is the bow peculiar to the northern hemisphere. A comparison of the modern Persian composite bow with those figured on the Greek vases proves that this was the form of bow used by the Scythians and others in ancient times. In Lapland we find the same form. It was carried by the northern immigrants into India, but it is not indigenous in that country. By the Tartars it was introduced into China. We find it also on the east coast of Siberia. Across Behring Strait it reappears amongst the Esquimaux in its most primitive form; but the returns at the ends prove it to be unmistakably the same weapon as the Tartar bow. It is found also in British Columbia, and down the west coast of America as far as California.

Here, then, we have the continuous distribution across two entire continents of a particular class of bow, of a more complex form than the southern bow, and one, therefore, which is not likely to have been adopted except by a people to whom the simpler but equally effective form was known, but who did not possess the material necessary for its construction. It would not, perhaps, require a very wide stretch of imagination to suppose that this class of bow may have originated at a time when an arctic flora similar to that existing amongst the Esquimaux may have been more widely distributed in the northern hemisphere than at present, and its advantages for employment on horseback would be a cause for retaining it. Be that as it may, we have proof that this composite bow is of great antiquity, and that it has been carried by intruding races into distant countries. May not the use of the simpler and earlier bow have been spread in the same manner? It may have been, but we cannot say that it was. The resemblance between the South American bows and arrows and those from New Guinea are so close that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish them. Even the ornamentation upon them is much alike and it is well know to all Prehistorians that the arrow-heads found on the American continent present all the four types of leaf-shaped, lozenge-shaped, triangular, and barbed, that are found in Europe.

As by degrees the use of the bow spread over the world, that of the throwing-stick would tend to disappear. We have some grounds for supposing that the latter instrument was formerly in use in the Pelew Islands; and Mr Franks has found it amongst some Mexican relics probably preserved in a tomb. May it not also have existed formerly in other localities where it has not been preserved in tombs, and where no trace of it now exists? If this were the case, where should we now expect to find it retained? In such localities as the Arctic seas, where lack of suitable materials still renders the construction of the bow a work of great difficulty, as is shown by the manner in which several pieces of hard bone as sometimes fastened together to form one, or in Australia, where the knowledge of the use of the bow has never penetrated.

Closely connected with the bow, the harpoon may be instanced as an example of early origin and wide distribution. The harpoon is found in some of the French caves, amongst the earliest bone relics of human workmanship that have been brought to light. Its present distribution is almost universal, being found in Australia, North and South Africa, North and South America and in all regions where its use has not been superseded by more suitable contrivances.

In proportion as our investigations are carried into the higher phases of civilization, we find our areas of distribution more limited, and of more and more value to us is tracing the continuity of culture; and when we come to the distribution of the metallurgic arts, we find them defined by marked geographical boundaries which are not the boundaries of the great primaeval races of mankind.

If we draw a line across the globe from Behring Strait in a south-westerly direction through Wallace's line, leaving Australia on the east, and take for our period the date of the first discovery of America, we shall find that (putting aside the metallurgic culture of Mexico and Peru, which, it may be observed, is grouped around a single centre) this line separates the area of stone culture on the east from the area of metallurgic culture on the west; but it passes straight through the primaeval racial boundaries. Turning to the ethnological map of the world, we find in the southern hemisphere the black races of man occupying a continuous area, extending from Australia on the east to Africa on the west; of these, the eastern portion are in the area of stone culture, whilst the western have long become acquainted with the use of metals. Or if we divide these black races, as Prof. Huxley has divided them, into Australoid and Negroid stocks, including amongst the latter the Negritos, we find equally that with each of these primaeval stocks the eastern half are in the stone area, while the western are acquainted with the use of metals. In the northern hemisphere we also find the great Mongoloid stock, which includes the inhabitants of northern and eastern Asia and the two continents of America, divided by our line in two portions, of which the eastern are in the stone area, while the western have made considerable advance in metallurgic culture. Here, then, we see that the distribution of the metallurgic art had, at the time we speak of, spread over three continents, and been brought to a stand by great oceanic boundaries, beyond which it had not penetrated, unless, indeed, it had been carried by some vessel to the coast of Peru.

If we now take what we may call the metallurgic area more in detail, and endeavour to trace the distribution of the implements of the bronze period, we find that the same class of weapons and tools extends over a continuous area, including the whole of the northern, western, and central parts of Europe, as far as Siberia on the east; these implements, including palstaves, leaf-shaped swords, and socket celts, with the moulds for casting them, are of a character to prove that the diffusion of the bronze culture throughout this area must have been connected and continuous. In Egypt, Assyria, India, and China we have also bronze; but the forms of the implements do not, as a rule, correspond to those of the area above mentioned: our knowledge of the bronze weapons of India and China is, however, extremely limited as yet. I have elsewhere given my reasons for believing that the knowledge of the use of iron in Africa must have been derived from a common centre; not only is the mode of working it the same throughout that continent and in India, but the forms of the weapons fabricated in this metal, and especially the corrugated blades, are the same in every part, and appear to have been copied and retained through habit wherever the use of iron has penetrated. I have lately traced this peculiar form of blade in several parts of the Indian peninsula and Burmah, and I have no doubt it will eventually be found further to the north, so as to connect the area of its distribution continuously with those of the same identical construction that are found in the Saxon and Frankish graves.

The distribution of megalithic monuments extends in a continuous belt, as has been repeatedly shown, from western Europe to eastern and southern India; and however little disposed some of us may be to agree with Mr Ferguson [1] as to the age to which he refers these monuments, for my part I concur with him in thinking that their distribution denotes intercommunication on the part of the constructors of them. The art of enamelling, which was known to the Celts and Romans, as well as to the Chinese, will, I have no doubt, be shown hereafter to have been derived from the east, or at least to have spread from a single source. It is worthy of notice that the present distribution of filigree work, which is closely connected with enamelling, and which may be regarded as a survival of that antique art, is now found to be practised in a continuous belt from China on the east to Spain on the west; and with the exception of some rough Scandinavian work of the same character, it is not, I believe, found out of this channel. This, indeed, appears to have been the high road of communication in non-historic times, and indicates the route through which many of the so-called early European discoveries may have been derived.

I have thus briefly alluded to the distribution of some of the arts associated with early culture, with the view to showing that as our knowledge increases we may expect to be able to trace many connexions that we are now ignorant of, and that we should be careful how we too readily assume, in accordance with the theory which appears popular among anthropologists at the present time, that coincidences in the culture of people in distant regions must invariably have originated independently because no evidence of communication is observable at the present time. Owing, perhaps, to a praiseworthy desire to refute the arguments of Archbishop Whately [2] and others, who have erroneously, as I think, assumed that because no race of existing savages has been known to elevate itself in the scale of civilization, therefore the first steps in culture must have resulted from supernatural revelation, we have now had a run upon the theory of what may be called the spontaneous generation of culture; and the pages of travel have been ransacked to find examples of independent origin and progress in the arts and customs of savage tribes. Owing to this cause, we have, I think, lost sight in a great measure of the important fact which history reveals to us, that, account for it as we may (and it is one of the great problems of Anthropology to account for it if we can), the civilization of the world has always advanced by means of a leading shoot; and though constantly shifting its area, it has within historic times invariably grouped itself round a single centre, from which the arts have been disseminated into distant lands or handed down to posterity. In all cases a continuous development must be traced before the problem of origin can be considered solved; the development may have been slow or it may have been rapid, but the sequence of ideas must have been continuous, and until that sequence is established our knowledge is at fault. As with the distribution of plants, certain soils are favourable to the growth of certain plants, but we do not on that account assume them to be spontaneous offspring of the soil, so certain arts and phases of culture may flourish among certain races or under certain conditions of life. But it is as certain that each art, custom, and institution had its history of natural growth; it is that each seed which sprouts in the soil once fell from a parent stem. The human intellect is the soil in which the arts and sciences may be said to grow; and this is the only condition of things compatible with the existence of minds capable of adapting external nature, but possessing no power of originality.

If I am right in supposing that it is one of the primary objects of Anthropological Science to trace out the history and sources of human culture, a consideration of the relative value of the various classes of evidence on which we rely for this purpose will be admitted to be a question of no slight importance in connexion with our subject. We must distinguish between those branches of study which we are apt to look upon as intrinsically the highest, and on that account the most attractive, and those which are of most value as evidence of man in a low condition of culture. To the religions, myths, institutions, and language of a people we are naturally drawn, as affording the best indications of their mental endowments; but it is evident that these carry us no further back in time than the historic period; and however necessary to be studied as branches of our science, they fail to afford us any direct evidence of those vast ages during which our species appears to have gradually taken upon itself the characteristics of humanity: every age has, however, left us the relics of its material arts, which, when studied comprehensively in connexion with the geological record, may be taken as evidence of mental development from the earliest period of time. Nor is it in point of time alone, but also by reason of their stability, that the material arts afford us the surest evidence on which to reconstruct our social edifice. The tendency to constant variation within narrow limits is a psychical characteristic of the uncultivated man; but the material arts are not subject to those comparatively abrupt changes to which, prior to the introduction of writing, all branches of culture are liable which are dependent for their transmissions on the memory, and which are communicated by word of mouth.

... [a section on languages is omitted] Mr Tylor also, in his interesting and valuable work on primitive culture, has stated his inability, by means of myths and religions, to trace in the majority of cases the connexion between early races; and this circumstance, fairly and rationally as he has placed it before us in all his writings, has, I venture to think, led many to rely mainly on this class of evidence to incline too strongly towards the hypothesis of independent origin (more so at least than I should be disposed to do), and to make insufficient allowance for the rapidly recurring changes produced by the imperfect transmission of ideas, through the operation of which all trace of the channels of communication would be rapidly obliterated, and those myths which, from being best suited to the mental condition of the people, had survived in distant countries would present the appearance of spontaneous and independent origin. In all this class of anthropological evidence Mr Tylor has shown that the invention of writing and other concomitants of improved culture have been the means of introducing an element of stability and permanence, so that we are presented with the phenomena of progress in the direction of unity and simplicity as opposed to diversity and complexity. On the other hand, the language of the arts may be said to have been a written language from the time of the first appearance of man upon the earth; less liable to variation in transmission, the links of connexion between lower and higher forms have been preserved and handed down to us from the remotest period of time, and by testifying to the comparatively steady and continuous development which has taken place, encourage us to hope that by diligently prosecuting our studies into this department of anthropology, every relic of prehistoric ages may eventually be made to mark its own place in sequence, if not in time.

The greater stability of the material arts as compared with the fluctuations in the language of a people in a state of primaeval savagery is well shown by a consideration of the weapons of the Australians and the names by which they are known in the several parts of that continent. As I have already mentioned, these people, by the simplicity of their arts, afford us the only living examples of what we may presume to have been the characteristics of a primitive people. Their weapons, respecting the distribution of which we have more accurate information than we have of their vocabularies, are the same throughout the continent; the shield, the throwing-stick, the spear, the boomerang, and their other weapons differ only in being thicker, broader, flatter, or longer in different localities; but whether seen on the east or the west coast each of these classes of weapons is easily recognized by its form and uses. On the other hand, amongst the innumerable languages and dialects spoken by these people, it would appear that almost every tribe has a different name for the same weapon. ... [Lane Fox gives examples of different names for parrying shields, throwing stick, boomerang] Between the majority of these names it will be seen that it is impossible to trace the faintest resemblance of sound. Yet no one, it is presumed, would be so irrational as to suppose that so peculiar a weapon as the boomerang, for example, could have been invented independently in as many different localities as there are different names for it; nor is it reasonable to suppose that such extremely simple weapons as those in use by the Australians should have spread from a common centre, subsequently to the establishment of various languages as they are now spoken. The weapons of the Australians, as I have shown in my paper on Primitive Warfare, published in the 'Journal of the Royal United Services Institution,' are all traceable, like the languages, to primitive forms, which are the natural forms of stumps and stems of trees; like the languages they have also varied and diverged; but whilst the names for them have changed so completely as to present no signs whatever of connexion in the different tribes, the weapons themselves have varied so slightly as to be recognized at a glance in all parts of the Continent. Even in modern times, since the introduction of writing has given permanence to the languages and ideas of the people amongst whom it has been introduced, we find instances of the comparative stability of the material emblems and forms of things in the retention of pagan emblems in our own religions and those of other countries, and notably the employment of fire and water in our religious ceremonies, which have survived with so much vitality as to be living sources of controversy amongst parties, one and all of whom would utterly repudiate the ideas with which these emblems were associated at their birth.

If, then, it is evident that much of the history of our prehistoric ancestors has been for ever lost to us, we may console ourselves with the reflection that in their tools and weapons and other relics of their material arts the most reliable source of evidence as to their intellectual condition has continued to our time. As to the myths, religions, superstitions, and language with which they were associated, we may content ourselves by devoutly thanking Providence that they have not been preserved. As it is, anthropological studies are said to have their fair share in the creation of lunatics; and we can easily believe that no sane intellect would have survived the attempt to unravel such a complex and tangled web of difficulty as the study of these subjects would have presented to our minds.

Two other examples, with your permission, I would give for the purpose of illustrating the principle of variation and continuity as applied to the customs and arts of savage races, and the relative superiority of material evidence in tracing the changes effected by these means. The customs associated with the practice of human sacrifice among the Konds of India have received prominent notice of late years, owing to the steps which have been taken by the Government to put them down. From the reports presented to the Government of India by various officers, we learn that these customs vary considerably in minor points in different localities. Amongst those who have written on the ethnology of India, there is no one from whose accurate and scientific observation of the habits of the aborigines we have derived more valuable information than Sir Walter Elliot.[3] From him we learn that similar customs prevail in every village in Southern India. The village customs, however, differ from the Kond rites in this important particular,which we can easily understand is the reason why the resemblance between them has never been noticed by former writers namely, that the practice of human sacrifice has been abandoned, and a buffalo is substituted for a human victim; in the mode of sacrificing and disposing of the flesh and other matters connected with the rites, we see that these village customs are in reality the modern representations of the more ancient Kond sacrifices, and that whilst an immense step has been made in the civilization of the people by the abandonment of the barbarous practice of human sacrifice, the parallel to which is probably seen in the account of Abraham's sacrifice in the Old Testament, the continuity has been kept up  by the preservation of some of the minor customs which are associated with the more ancient rites. Now Sir Walter Elliot tells us that these modified village sacrifices, like the older human sacrifices, vary in the details of every village of Southern India. I need hardly say how much the value and accuracy of these studies would be promoted if we could obtain detailed accounts of the varieties of these customs as they are now practised in the several villages, with the causes of variation in each case; we should by this means obtain an insight into the process of development of these customs as they are now seen actually on the move at the present time. Hereafter, in all probability, as they continue to vary by the omission of some portions of the ceremonies and the substitution of others, some one village, more advanced and more powerful than its neighbours, in the natural course of things will obtain the ascendancy, and will impose its peculiar and greatly modified version of these rites upon the neighbouring villages, by which means the links of connexion will be completely lost. I believe the time is at hand when we shall make as much ado over a variety of custom or form of implement as naturalists now do over a new moth or a beetle, and then anthropology will become a science.

{joomplu:186 detail align right}

My next illustration is taken from the ornamental paddles of the New-Irelanders, one of the Papuan group of islands adjoining the one in which Bishop Patteson was lately murdered. In none of the productions of savage art is the tendency to continued variations within narrow limits more strongly shown than in these ornamental patterns. Whilst the form of a club or paddle appears to remain unchanged for many generations, the form of ornament upon it will be subject to variations, which, however, are not the less found to be continuous and connected when a sufficient number of specimens are collected, so as to enable their history to be traced. The continuous looped coil and its varieties, and its ultimate development into the continuous fret pattern, may be traced in its migrations through distant regions. Sometimes a particular variety of these patterns will establish itself in a tribe or a nation, and whilst subject to an infinity of subvarieties, it will be found to be repeated over and over again in all the weapons and implements belonging to this tribe. The ornamentation employed by the tribes on the N.W. coast of America consists entirely of the representation of a bird's head, the eyes and beak of which have been subject to such variations in copying as completely to have lost all trace of the original design. The New-Irelanders ornament their paddles with the figure of a man painted in red and black, carved upon the face of the blade. Fig. 2 is a good example of this conventionalized mode of representing the human figure in full; fig. 11 is another ornament upon the paddle of the same people; and between these two figures it would not at first sight appear possible that any connexion could be traced.

Ingenious theories might, perhaps be based upon the occurrence of such a figure as that represented in fig. 11 amongst the Papuan Islands, it might be assumed that Mahomedanism had once penetrated that region, and they had adopted the symbol of the crescent, or the advocates of spontaneity would find no difficulty in at once assuming that they had copied the new moon. No one who had not by previous experience been impressed with the continuity pervading all savage ornamentation would dream of connecting two such widely different forms as those represented in these two figures. Those, however, who are familiar with the pictographic changes which marked the origin of the Phoenician and Scandinavian alphabets, or who have studied Mr Evans's work on Ancient British Coins, or the researches of Mr Edward Thomas into the Coins of India, will be prepared for the marvellous transformations to which human and other forms are subjected when they are copied and recopied by the inaccurate and uninstructed eyes of savage imitators. They will remember how the chariot and horses on the Greek coins of Philip of Macedon, in the hands of the Gaulish and British artists, gradually lost, first the body of the chariot, then the body of the charioteer - how the wheels of the chariot became mixed up with the body of the horse, and the head of the driver appeared floating like a cherubim over the horse's ears - and how, on the obverse of the coin, the nose and features of the head gradually disappeared, until nothing but the wreath converted into a cruciform ornament remained to connect it with the original figure of the Greek king. Impressed with the idea of the physical identity of people in the same condition of culture, I determined to collect New-Ireland paddles, and see whether a connexion would be found to exist between the peculiar patterns with which they are ornamented. The result is the series now before you, which I have obtained at different times during the last seven years as they turned up in curiosity-shops or were brought over by travellers from the South Seas; and it must be understood that these particular specimens are not selected to serve my purpose. I have here given the whole of the collection of patterns which have fallen into my hands. Let us see how far they serve to support our views as to variation and continuity now that they are put together. Fig. 1, it will at once be seen, represents both on the handle and on the face of the blade, the head of a Papuan; the large black mass on the head, like a grenadier-cap, is the Papuan head-dress peculiar to these parts; the ears are elongated according to the custom of these people, and pierced with an ear-ornament; the eyes are round black dots, the nose a triangular red mark, and the same colour is spread over the forehead. Fig. 2 represents the full figure of a Papuan sitting; the ears are drawn down towards the hands, the head is somewhat conventionalized, the line of the nose is carried round the eyes in a scroll, and there is a lozenge-shaped pattern on the forehead. Fig. 3 is nearly the same figure represented as sitting sideways, simply by lopping off an arm and a leg on one side. In fig. 4 we have two arms, but no legs, and the head continues much the same as in the two preceding figures. In fig. 5 the whole body is gone, and the scroll-pattern round the eyes is modified in form. In fig. 6 we see a great change in the form of the head, which is much more conventionalized than in the preceding figures; the eyes are reduced to small dots, and are rendered subordinate to the scroll formed by prolongation of the line of the nose; the sides of the face are concave, and conform to the line of the nose; the sides of the face are concave, and conform to the line of the nose; the chin and mouth are enlarged; the head is surmounted by the Papuan head-dress as before; there is a lozenge pattern, as before, on the forehead; the elongated ears are there, but the ear ornament has disappeared; in this face the nose has become the prominent feature, and the other features are subordinate to it. In fig. 7 a still greater change has taken place; the greater part of the face and head are gone. In the last figure we saw that the nose was becoming the prominent feature, here it is nearly the only feature left; the elongated ears are drawn down the sides of the nose; the lozenge-pattern on the forehead still remains; but the lines, which in the previous figures led to the head-dress and to the scroll-pattern, have been turned into a kind of leaf-shaped ornament, resembling what appears to have been the upper lobe of the ear in the previous figures; the eyes are brought down on to the nose. In fig. 8 we have nearly the same figure as the last; the nose is divided in two; the elongated ears are drawn out square with the line of the nose; the lozenge-pattern on the forehead is still preserved. In fig. 9 we see the same figure as in the last example, except that the triangular nose has merged into what, judging by the  previous figures, appears to be the chin, or it may be merely an enlargement of the base of the nose. Fig. 10 represents a further change in this direction; the lozenge-pattern and the ears are now gone, and the leaf-pattern is much reduced; the nose also has almost disappeared into the chin. Lastly, in fig. 11, we come to our Mahomedan emblem, or copy of the new moon. What is it? Who would have believed it was the chin of the human figure? Yet so it is. It is the last vestige of a human face, copied and recopied until all trace of the original has been completely lost. We have here a complete parallel to the transformations observable on the British coins, showing with what close analogy the minds of men in the same condition of culture, though of widely differing races, obey the same laws and are subject to the same causes of variation and continuity in the development of their arts. Now, if we suppose the connecting-links which are exhibited in these figures to represent the connecting-links of myths, customs, religions, or languages, or any other productions of human ingenuity which are not embodied in material forms or committed to writting [sic], it is evident they would have been lost; they would not have turned up in curiosity-shops, or been brought together side by side in an instructive series. The theory of the spontaneous adoption of crescent-shaped patterns, by copying the moon, would have become established as an almost self-evident fact in our minds, and no one could have for a moment have seen reason to doubt it.

In omitting all mention of Psychology and Comparative Anatomy, it must not be supposed that I am unmindful of the services which these studies may be expected to render to our science hereafter. Nor is it unimportant to remember that Anthropology has its practical and humanitarian aspect, and that as our race is more often brought into contact with savages than any other, a knowledge of their habits and modes of thought may be of the utmost value to us in utilizing their labour, as well as in checking those inhuman practices from which they have but too often suffered at our hands. These are branches of the subject into which I have no time to enter on the present occasion. I believe, however, that for some time to come prehistoric archaeology, and the comparative study of the arts of races in different conditions of culture, must continue to hold a prominent place amongst the researches of anthropologists, not on account of the greater importance or interest attached to the investigation of these subjects, but on account of the superior quality of the evidence which these studies afford.

The consideration of the value of evidence naturally leads us to the third part of my subject - namely, the mode of collecting it and of digesting it after it has been brought together; and as this is, I believe, the most defective part of our organization, or, to speak more properly, the part of our existing institutions in which our want of organization is most conspicuous, I had intended to have spoken at greater length on this subject; but as I have already trespassed upon your time so long, I am under the necessity of curtailing what I had to say on the subject of organization. If I am wrong, as I have heard it suggested by some anthropologists, in supposing that the greatest difficulties under which we labour are attributable to the absence of reliable evidence, and if we already possess as much information about savages and about prehistoric men as we require, and we have nothing to do but to read the books in our libraries, and write papers calculated to promote discussion and fill journals with interesting controversies and speculations - if, as I gravely heard it asserted not long ago at a public meeting, it would be a pity to explore Stonehenge for fear so remarkable a monument should be divested of that mystery which has always attached to it, owing to our entire ignorance as to its origin and uses,[4] then to those who entertain such views the few remarks I shall venture to offer on this subject must appear not only superfluous but mischievous. But if, on the other hand, I am right in supposing that our existing evidence is lamentably deficient, and in many cases false - that it has been collected by travellers many of whom have had but little knowledge what to look for and observe - and if, this being the state of our knowledge, the evidence which we desire to obtain is now rapidly disappearing from the face of the earth (the Tasmanians have been swept away before we know anything about them; the New-Zealanders and all the Polynesian-Islanders are fast changing their habits; and it is now difficult to find a North-American Indian in a state of unadulterated savagery; whilst at home our prehistoric monuments are broken up and ploughed down day by day in the construction of buildings and railroads), it is evident that a set of societies which provide no organization whatever for promoting exploration at home or abroad can only be regarded as fulfilling very imperfectly the functions which institutions established for the purpose of anthropological investigation might reasonably be expected to serve. Beyond the limits of this Association there is but one Society in this country which has the funds necessary for promoting explorations, and that is the Geographical Society. Every expedition which goes out under the auspices of that Society is necessarily brought in contact with the races inhabiting the districts which are explored; but it can hardly be expected that the Geographical Society should do as much as could be desire in the way of promoting anthropological investigations, as long as Anthropology and Ethnology are excluded from the functions of that Society. A Geographical Society should be regarded as the eyes and ears of an Anthropological Society abroad, in the same way that the Archaeological Societies should fulfil the functions of eyes and ears directed to the past history of man, and the most intimate alliance ought to exist between them. A step in the right direction has lately been taken, at the suggestion of Mr Clements Markham, [5] by the establishment of a joint committee of the Geographical Society and Anthropological Institute, to draw up questions for travellers whom it is proposed to send to the Arctic seas; [6] and this, it is to be hoped, will be the first step towards a more intimate alliance in the future. As to the Archaeological Societies, whose name is legion, and the functions of which are necessarily anthropological in a great degree, they are as a rule the most impotent and unprogressive bodies, living from hand to mouth, with funds barely sufficient to maintain a secretary and to produce a small volume of Transactions annually; without the means of promoting exploration, they are dependent entirely upon the casual communications of members, the substance of which is sometimes repeated over and over again in the different societies. These Archaeological Societies and others (which I do not particularize, because I am anxious that my remarks should not appear to be directed pointedly to any one of them) collectively provide libraries in the proportion of four or five libraries to one or two students who habitually read the books in them. When museums form part of the establishments, they succeed in collecting a stray Chinese umbrella or two, and a stuffed monkey, or a few bronzed implements in a case. Each Society has separate apartments provided at great cost; these are empty at least six days a week, and usually thirteen days in the fortnight, during the short period in which the session is held. One of these societies is in the possession of a magnificent suite of apartments, which are provided at the Government expense, and furnished with rows of tables and benches and a splendid throne for the chairman, in which I have occasionally had the honour to sit. It is to to be hoped that whenever the power of psychic force, or the influence of disembodied spirits in vivifying inanimate bodies, comes to be more generally established amongst anthropologists than it is at present, these chairs and tables may proceed to deliberate and rap out archaeological communications to each other during the weary days and hours that the embodied spirits are absent. Whenever any undertaking of national interest has been set on foot, such as the Bill for the Preservation of Prehistoric Monuments, proposed by Sir John Lubbock, inviting the united interest of these societies to bring it forward, the first inquiry has been as to which of these societies has had the credit of having originated the measure; and if found to be tainted by the support of a rival society, it has been at once repudiated, or only adopted after its success has with great difficulty been secured by other means. If we inquire what useful purpose is served by these divisions of the metropolitan societies, we are told that one is a society, another is an association, and a third is an institute; and yet it does not appear that any one of these societies, associations or institutes perform any special function which cannot equally well be served by the others. They constitute divisions of persons rather than divisions of subjects; instead of promoting division of labour, they serve only to promote repetition of labour; and so ill do any of them answer the expectations of those who devote themselves to the close study of any one branch of archaeology or anthropology, that it has lately become necessary to establish an addition metropolitan society for promoting protohistoric archaeology, under the title of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, embracing subjects which fall mainly with the domain of anthropology. Much as I should feel disposed to condemn the multiplication of societies under existing circumstances, I cannot but think that by promoting the close study of a particular branch, the establishment of this Society is a step in the right direction; and I therefore trust that it may be found to flourish at the expense of those which appear to have no special function to perform. As a prehistoric archaeologist, I can only add my humble testimony to that of others who think that this branch of anthropology is very unsatisfactorily dealt with by the metropolitan societies in which it is discussed. On a recent occasion, when speaking on this subject, I compared the position which prehistoric archaeology now holds in the London societies to that of a poor relation. I might, perhaps, extend the simile further by saying that, like many poor relations, it is also the most agreeable relation, and though duly snubbed in accordance with the orthodox custom in like cases, its services will not be willingly dispensed with, as it furnishes sensational topics for not less than six societies in London at the present time. The discussions, however, are for the most part confined to the most rudimentary branches of the subject, and but little importance attached to details, because the principles are not understood. Quite recently this happy family has been increased by the birth of a fine child, under the title of an Historic Society; and I observe that, by way of specializing the functions of this Society, it commenced life with a paper on Prehistoric Man. But there are no signs of any limitation to this improvident child-bearing;  it is announced that a Psychological Society is confidently expected. No one would be more disposed than myself to welcome psychology as a special branch of study if this family of gutter-children is to go on increasing ad libitum;  but it will be admitted that a Psychological Society of all others is liable to grow up scatterbrained if completely severed from the influence of its more experienced kinsfolk.

But I have said nothing as yet about the country cousins. If the heads of the families are such as I have endeavoured to describe them, what must the country cousins be? I have spoken of the gutter-children of the metropolis; but we must follow the gutters into the sewers before we can form a just estimate of the condition of the local societies; and yet I believe that with a very small amount of organization the local societies are capable of performing the most important functions in regard to at least one branch of our science. It is hardly necessary for me to observe that my remarks apply exclusively to the question of organization, and cannot for a moment be supposed to have any bearing on the abilities of the individual members, amongst whom are included many very able men; but we all know that the best army in the world may be rendered impotent through defective organization. The conditions under which local societies are established are incompatible with a very high standard of efficiency in any special department of science; owing to the very various qualifications of a small body of members, their proceedings must necessarily be miscellaneous; but they are usually supported by local interests, which may be of the utmost value, and are often indispensable in promoting the exploration of local prehistoric antiquities, and they only require the prestige derivable from a national organization to render them efficient in this respect. As it is, local societies have often reason to complain of the metropolitan societies, which draw some of the best correspondence from the counties and give but little in return.

I trust that I have made it apparent that anthropology in its various branches includes some of the most popular and widely disseminated scientific interest of the country, and that the loss of power is enormous; not only is there no means of organized exploration, but the information which is published is either repeated over and over again in the different societies, or it is so scattered as to be beyond the reach of the majority of the students. They labour also under the disadvantage of being supported chiefly by men of small means; for the well-to-do classes in this country do no, as a rule, take any interest in either scientific or anthropological investigations. During the past year a single American has done more in the way of anthropological exploration than the whole of the English societies, institutes and associations together.[7]

I will now briefly state my views as to the remedies for the evils of which I have spoken. I am averse to the principle of amalgamation: the most active members are not always the most enlightened; narrow views are often the most pronounced, and if they become dominant are liable to bring down the standard of an amalgamated society instead of enlarging its sphere of usefulness; besides, this amalgamation necessarily entails a certain loss of income by the loss of double subscriptions.

If my experience as a member of the council of most of the societies of which I speak does not deceive me, it should be the object of those who have the progress of anthropological studies at heart to induce the metropolitan societies to specialize their functions. The following might then become the titles of the various societies included under the term anthropology; and they would represent not only the natural divisions of the science, but practically the divisions which are most consonant with the organization of the existing societies. Setting history and historic archaeology aside as beyond our province, we should have:- (1) Proto-historic archaeology; I adopt the term proposed by Mr Hyde Clarke for this branch, [8] which practically includes all that comes under the head of Biblical Archaeology at present; (2) Prehistoric Archaeology; (3) Philology; (4) Biology, including Psychology and Comparative Anatomy, in so far as it relates to Man; (5) Descriptive Ethnology, viz. original reports of travellers on the races of man, conducted in association with geographical exploration. Under these heads we should, I believe, include all the various classes of special workers. These should constitute independent, but associated societies - that is to say, the members of one should be privileged to attend the meetings ad take part in the discussions of the others, but not to receive the publications of any but their own society. By this means each would profit by the experience of the other societies, but the funds necessary for the maintenance of each would be secured. As branch sections of anthropology they would be under the control of a general elected council only in so far as would be necessary to prevent their clashing with each other, and for the control of any measures which it might be necessary for the several sections to undertake in concert; under the auspices of the general council might also be held the anthropological meetings devoted to such general subjects as either embraced the whole or were not included in the sections. By this means the standard of anthropological science as a comprehensive study of the science of man in all its branches would be secured, and the possibility of its becoming narrowed under the influences of any dominant party would be obviated. It is hardly necessary to say that the chief advantage of such an arrangement as I suggest would consist in the employment of a single theatre and library for these cognate societies; they would employ a single printer, and the arrangements might include one or more artists, lithographers, and map-drawers, by which a great increase, and at the same time economy,  would be effected in the illustrations. The saving effected by the union of these societies in a single establishment might be applied to conducting explorations, either at home or abroad, in connexion with the Geographical Society. The question of the utilization of apartments is one which commends itself especially to the notice of Government in regard to those societies for which apartments are provided at the public cost. It should be made a sine quâ non that the societies so favoured should fairly represent all the branches of their subject.

As regards the local societies, it has been proposed to republish a selection of their papers under the auspices of this Association. It is to be hoped that some arrangement, such as that proposed by the committee of which Sir Walter Elliot is secretary, may be carried out. I have only one suggestion to make on this point; republication is simply a repetition of cost and labour, if the desired object of bringing the papers together can be accomplished by other means. As to selection, I have no faith in it. If local and metropolitan societies could be induced to adopt a uniform size for their publications, not necessarily a uniform type, the papers relating to the same subjects might be brought together without the cost of reprinting. It would only be necessary to establish a classification of papers under various headings, such as, for example, those which constitute the sections of this Association. The societies might then print additional copies of their papers under each heading, in the same manner that additional copies are now struck off for the use of authors. A single metropolitan society might be recognized as the representative of each branch, and under its auspices the whole of the papers of the local and metropolitan societies relating to its branch might be brought together and printed in a single volume. Time does not allow me to enter into the details of the arrangements which would be necessary to carry out such a measure. I believe the difficulties would not be so great as might at first sight appear, especially as the evils of the existing arrangements are much complained of; but it should be a primary object of any arrangement that may hereafter be made that the independence of the several branches should not be sacrificed unnecessarily; it should be endeavoured to stimulate them and train them into useful channels rather than to bring them too much under central control.

My object in making these remarks has been not so much to bring forward any special recommendation of my own as to ventilate the matter amongst those of the public who taken an interest in these studies, but who are not so intimately connected with the present working of the societies as to have any personal interest in them; and I trust that the importance of the subject will be thought to justify me in having brought it to the notice of the meeting.

It is to be hoped that whenever, as anthropologists, we parade for Dr Livingstone's inspection (without, I trust, adhering too closely to the costume which he has suggested for that occasion)[9], it may be found that if we cannot compete with his friends the anthropophagi in point of bone and muscle [10], in all that relates to organized division of labour and mutual cooperation we may not be found wanting in that superiority to our betters which might naturally be expected from the advanced civilization which we enjoy.

Endnotes [added by transcriber]

[1] Mr Ferguson: Possibly James Fergusson (1808-1886), a Scottish writer on architecture, author of 'Rude Stone Monuments in all Countries', a study of megaliths, published in 1872 (the year of this paper). See here for DNB entry. He argued that Stonehenge was a post-Roman creation.

[2] Archbishop Whately: Richard Whately (1787-1863) Church of Ireland archbishop of Dublin and philosopher. See here for his DNB entry.

[3] Walter Elliot: (1803-1887) East Indian Company civil servant and archaeologist, see here for DNB entry.

[4] This may have been at the BAAS meetings at the end of the 1860s when an investigation of Stonehenge was proposed and discussed. [See Pearce, 2007: Visions of Antiquity page 287]

[5] Clements Markham: (1830-1916) Geographer, see here for his DNB entry.

[6] This is a reference to Notes and Queries, see Petch, 2007 [a] in Bibliography

[7] American anthropologist: probably a reference to Henry Morton Stanley (1841-1904), in 1871 he had travelled into central Africa to 'find' David Livingstone, a missionary. This would have been uppermost in Lane Fox's listeners minds as Stanley had only returned to the UK on 1 August 1872 but as the DNB entry for him states, 'His descriptions of his travels at the geographical section of the British Association in Brighton were reported to have been described as ‘sensational stories’ by Francis Galton' this was the very meeting that Lane Fox gave this address. The second option, suggested by Peter Rivière is that the American anthropologist referred to was Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-1881). 'Morgan was in England in the summers of 1870 and 71; Consanguinity and Affinityhad just been published and had been taken much notice of by Lubbock in his 1872 Presidential address to the Anthropological Institute. Furthermore, in 1871 Morgan met McLennan, Maine, Lubbock et al. Unfortunately we don't know whether he also met E.B. Tylor and Pitt-Rivers but it seems quite probable'. [Peter Rivière, pers. comm.]

[8] Mr Hyde Clarke: (1815-1895) English engineer, philologist and author, he was expelled from the Anthropological Society of London on 22 August 1868 (4 years earlier than this paper) in the wake of allegations of mismanagement of funds. See his wikipedia entry here.

[9] This presumably alludes to some message which Stanley brought to the BAAS meeting from Livingstone, though this is not confirmed just speculation?

[10] Anthropophagi: Man-eaters, presumably a jocular reference to the African 'cannibals' Livingstone was said to be living with.

Comments

1. This address seems largely to be an overview of Lane Fox's views of anthropology and archaeology (as we would see them) at this time, the remarks at the end regarding the future shape of learned societies should be seen in the context that the (Royal) Anthropological Institute had been founded the previous year by an amalgamation of the Ethnological and Anthropological Societies of London. Lane Fox had been a member of those two societies and was a founder member, and member of the Council of the Anthropological Institute.

2. Please note that the first illustration on this webpage shows Edward Burnett Tylor demonstrating the 'witches' ladder' at the Oxford meeting of the BAAS. See here for the information about this.

3. Full details: British Association for the Advancement of Science, Transactions of Sections, 1872, from page 157-174 [please note that all the italics are in the original, as stresses presumably, except for those that mark the footnotes which have been added by the transcriber].

4. For contextualising information about 1872 and Lane Fox, see here.

Transcribed by AP, as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, October 2010.

{joomplu:645 detail align right}

Please note that these have been transcribed and not edited, all misspellings or mis-punctations are in the original and are not sic'd.

PRM ms collections PRM papers Box 1, 1-33: 31

10. Ethnographical Department. The Pitt-Rivers Museum

The formation of the large Anthropological Collection, recently presented to the University by Gen. Pitt-Rivers, was begun by him in the year 1851. In selecting specimens for his collection, Gen. Pitt-Rivers (then Col. Lane-Fox) endeavoured to form series to show, as far as possible, the developmental history of the various material arts. His main object was, to quote his own words, 'so to arrange his collection of ethnological and prehistoric specimens as to demonstrate, either actually or hypothetically, the development and continuity of the material arts from the simpler to the more complex forms; to explain the conservation of savage and barbarous races, and the pertinacity with which they retain their ancient types of art; to show the variations by means of which progress has been effected, and the application of varieties to distinct uses; to exhibit survivals or the vestiges of ancient forms which have been retained through natural selection in the more advanced stages of the arts, and the reversion to ancient types; to illustrate the arts of prehistoric times as far as practicable by those of existing savages in corresponding stages of civilization; to assist the question of the monogenesis or polygenesis of certain arts, whether they are exotic or indigenous in the countries in which they are found. To this end objects of the same class from different countries have been brought together in the same collection, but in each class the varieties from the same localities have been placed side by side.'

In July, 1874, the bulk of the collection was placed in the Bethnal Green Museum. In 1878 it was removed to the South Kensington Museum, whence it was transferred in 1885 to the University Museum, as a gift from Gen. Pitt-Rivers. A special Annexe to the Museum has been built for its accommodation.

The collection has since been enriched by the transference of important specimens from the Ashmolean Museum, as well as by many donations from private individuals, and additions from other sources. Its educational value is constantly increasing as links in the evolutionary history of the arts are added. The Curator is Henry Balfour, M.A.

[Note added: The Students Handbook - Institutions']

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project July 2010

Please note that these have been transcribed and not edited, all misspellings or mis-punctations are in the original and are not sic'd. Warning: this report has not been proofread except by the transcriber

PRM Box 1, 1-33: 12-13

The Pitt-Rivers Collection

The following brief account is intended to enable Members of the University to form some idea of the nature and value of the Collection which Major-General Pitt-Rivers, F.R.S., has generously offered to present to the University.

The Collection, which at present occupies three large rooms in the West Galleries of the Exhibition-buildings at South Kensington, has been gradually formed by General Pitt-Rivers (late Lane-Fox) during twenty-seven years of constant devotion to anthropological studies. Two years ago it was estimated to contain 14,000 objects, and since that time many additions have been made.

The purpose of the Collection is to throw light on the history of all the various arts, on the successive stages in their growth, on the extent to which nations or tribes haves borrowed one from another, and on the independent development of similar forms in different countries and times. With this view the Collection has been arranged on a new plan, and in this its distinctive value consists. The arrangement is neither chronological nor geographical, but objects belonging to different peoples and ages have been grouped together in series, so as to illustrate the probable order of development. In this respect the Collection stands almost alone, its only rival being that in the Museum of Modern Antiquities in Copenhagen; and what has there been done for one or two branches of the subject, has been done here on a far wider and more comprehensive scale. But it is not only for the general student of anthropology that the Collection is of value. To both archaeologists and historians it contributes not only single objects of great interest and rarity, but much material for the solution of such problems as the effect upon barbarous art of contact with civilised peoples, the growth of ornamentation, the survival of rude forms of art among civilised peoples, the recurrence of similar forms in different localities, and the dependence of art upon physical conditions.

The following rough summary of the contents of the Collection may serve to illustrate what has been said:—

(1) A collection of prehistoric weapons and instruments, including a specially valuable series of Palaeolithic weapons from Acton. A fine series of Neolithic weapons from Denmark. A series of stone and bronze weapons from Ireland. A series of stone hammers. A series showing the gradual conversion of the simple bronze celt into the socketed form. Lastly, series of bronze hammers, of spear-heads and swords, and of implements of bone and ivory.

(ii) A collection of objects belonging to historic times.

A. Collection of weapons (of this a printed catalogue already exists) including—

(a) Defensive Armour :— Series of parrying sticks and shields from Australia, India and Polynesia. European shields of fifteenth century. Series of circular shields. Body armour from Polynesia, Japan, and China; Mogul scale and chain armour. Series of helmets, including bronze Greek and Etruscan helmets.

(b) Offensive weapons :— Series of boomerangs from Australia, India and North Africa. Throwing sticks. Bows. Cross-bows and quivers. Series of clubs, maces, and wooden battle-axes. Series of paddles, spears, javelins, and arrows. Series illustrating the development of the axe, halberd, glaive, and other cognate weapons. Several series illustrating the development and geographical distribution of various forms of swords, daggers, slings, lassoes, &c. A series of fire arms. A series showing the growth of the bayonet.

B. Collection of objects connected with domestic life, &c.

(a) Series illustrating modes of kindling fire :— Savage fire-sticks, flints, tinder-boxes, &c. Series of lamps (Babylonian, Roman, Egyptian, modern Algerian). Collections of mirrors, spoons, knives, &c.

(b) Valuable series of pottery and of bronze, silver, and glass vessels, illustrating especially the development of the various forms, and of the decorative patterns. This series comprises, besides a remarkably fine stand of Cypriote [sic] vases, Greco-Etruscan pottery, Samian ware, specimens from Mexico, Peru, India, Africa, Algeria, Japan &c; and also a collection of decorated gourds, and of basket-work.

(c) A collection of personal ornaments, necklaces, armlets, clasps, fibulae, &c, illustrating the development of particular forms. Especially valuable are the various series of gold and bronze ornaments (Cypriote [sic], Greek, Roman, Etruscan, Celtic, and Mexican).

(d) A collection showing the development of musical instruments (drums, stringed instruments, shell, horn, ivory, and bronze trumpets, &c.).

(e) A collection of objects of religious worship, and of charms, votive offerings, relics, divining-rods, &c. The series of votive offerings is very interesting. It ranges over a wide field, from ancient Cyprus to modern Brittany, and exhibits the most instructive coincidences of belief and ritual.

(f) A series illustrating the growth of the art of writing, including savage marks, Oghams, Runic inscriptions, &c.

(g) Series illustrating the realistic representation of human and animal forms (including some very fine terra cottas from Cyprus and Tanagra, Roman and Etruscan bronzes, Japanese masks of the sixteenth century, &c.). Series illustrating the conventionalised treatment of animal forms in decoration.

Series of mediæval panels illustrating the development of leaf-patterns out of architectural designs (to this the history of mural paintings at Pompeii offers an exact parallel, in the gradual transformation of the architectural designs into ornamental borders).

(h) A collection of harness, horse-shoes, spurs, and stirrups, ancient and modern.

(i) A series illustrating the history of boat and ship-building, comprising many beautifully-executed models of savage canoes.

It only remains to be said that this rough sketch will have served its purpose, if it succeeds in conveying some idea not only of the great intrinsic value of this Collection but of its inestimable scientific interest, and of its direct bearing on our ordinary lines of study here. It is no mere miscellaneous jumble of curiosities, but an orderly illustration of human history; and its contents have not been picked up haphazard from dealers' shops, but carefully selected at first hand with rare industry and judgment. In one respect, moreover, General Pitt-Rivers has done a work which is never likely to be done again, for a collection of weapons, tools, &c., belonging to savage races is becoming a more difficult matter every year as the number of tribes untouched by civilisation decreases, while at the same time we are only just beginning to appreciate the importance of such collections for the interpretation of the early life of civilised peoples.

OXFORD, January 1883.’

The same report was circulated in the University Gazette of 6 February 1883

Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, July 2010.

Please note that these have been transcribed and not edited, all misspellings or mis-punctations are in the original and are not sic'd. Warning: this report has not been proofread except by the transcriber

PRM Box 1, 1-33: 8-11

(For the Hebdomadal Council only)

Report to the Hebdomadal Council of the Committee of Members of Convocation appointed to consider the Offer of Major-General Pitt-Rivers, F.S.A., F.R.S., etc., of his Anthropological Collection to the University, and to advise thereon.

Present - The Regius Professor of Medicine, Professor Smith, Professor Prestwich, Professor Westwood, Professor Moseley, Mr Pelham.

The Committee having examined the Collection on several occasions, and having had its contents and purposes explained to them by Major-General Pitt-Rivers in person, are thoroughly convinced of its great importance, and, believing that its presence in Oxford could not but prove of great assistance to students in almost all branches of study, and of great value in aiding general education, strongly urge the Hebdomadal Council to take such steps as shall enable the University to become possessed of it.

Major-General Pitt-Rivers having expressed a wish that the Committee should themselves draw up the terms on which the Collection should be received from him by the University, the Committee having suggested the following, which have been ascertained to be satisfactory to him:

1. That in the event of the acceptance of the Collection the University shall build a separate annex to the present University Museum to receive the Collection.

2. That the annex shall be used solely for the Collection, and for additions to be made to it from time to time, and that an inscription designating the Collection as 'The Pitt-Rivers Collection', be affixed over the entrance to the annex, and that the title be permanently retained as that of the Collection.

3. That the general mode of arrangement at present adopted in the Collections be maintained; that no change be made in details during the lifetime of General Pitt-Rivers without his consent; and that any change in details to be made subsequently shall be such only as are necessitated by the advance of knowledge, and as do not affect the general principle originated by the donor.

4. That the University undertake from time to time to expand and complete by the addition of further specimens such of the series of objects in the Collection as are at present more or less imperfect. Such specimens will bear on their labels the names of their donors or of collections from which they may have been derived.

The Committee, having obtained the permission of the Vice-Chancellor, employed an expert recommended by the Department of Science and Art at South Kensington to prepare an estimate of the dimensions of a building suitable to the reception of the Collection. This gentleman, Mr. Gilbert R. Redgrave, having received full instructions, has drawn out a sketch plan of the structure most suitable for the purpose, and has prepared a rough estimate of the cost of the building and cases required. His report and plans accompany the present document.

The Committee has further prepared a short general account of the contents of the Collection, which has been printed for the information of members of Convocation.

[Last 2 items not transcribed, last item not included with this report but elsewhere, see here for transcription]

Transcribed by AP July 2010 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

Please note that this has been transcribed and not edited, all misspellings or mis-punctations are in the original and are not sic'd. Warning: this report has not been proofread except by the transcriber

1. PRM Box 1, 1-33: 7

VIII

Decree

In a CONVOCATION to be holden on a day to be named hereafter, a Decree to the following effect will be submitted to the House.

E. Evans [1]

Vice-Chancellor

Delegates Room

May 29, 1882.

That the offer of Major-General Pitt-Rivers, F.R.S. to present his Anthropological Collection to the University be accepted; and that the University undertake to expend such sum as may be requisite for a building and cases to receive the Collection, providing that an agreement to be approved by the Hebdomadal Council as to the arrangement and maintenance of the collection be arrived at by General Pitt-Rivers on the one part and the Delegates of the University Museum on the other.

It is suggested that an annexe with a gallery all round it should be constructed at the east end of the Museum, so as to be a prolongation of the northern half of its width; the dimensions to be 80 feet in length by 70 in width and 20 in height, the floor to be on the level of the Museum court, with a well-lighted basement underneath. Quantities have been taken out for this building, and the estimate amounts to a little over £5000. The space on walls and floor at present occupied by the Collection has been measured, and the cost of cases, screens, &c. has been estimated roughly at between £2000 and £3000.

The Collection of General Pitt-Rivers is designed to illustrate the gradual development of the various branches of the arts and sciences in all parts of the world, by means of series of authentic objects arranged in such a manner as to exhibit the successive growth of more highly specialised forms from the most primitive types. It contains, for example, a general series of great extent intended to illustrate the development of weapons of all kinds, offensive and defensive, from the simplest appliances of prehistoric man; and this general series includes (amongst many others) special series in which the student can trace the history of the modern bayonet, of the ancient Greek kopis, of the shield, of bows, arrows, and crossbows of all kinds &c., &c. Other general series are devoted to the arts of writing, of ship-building, of weaving, of painting, sculpture, and ornamentation.

It will be seen that the Collection, besides having great intrinsic value, which from the scarcity of the objects themselves must necessarily increase as time goes on, is of very wide interest, and cannot but prove most useful in an educational point of view to students of Anthropology, Archaeology, and indeed every branch of history.

The Collection is at present on view at South Kensington Museum, in the old Exhibition building. A catalogue of the series of weapons, including above 1200 objects, is placed for the inspection of Members of Convocation in the Radcliffe Library at the University Museum, where also a fuller account of the Collection, published in Nature, 23rd September, 1880, may be consulted.

The following extracts of letters from A.W. Franks, Esq., F.R.S. of the British Museum, John Evans, Esq., D.C.L., Treasurer R.S., and E.B. Tylor, Esq., D.C.L., F.R.S., express the opinions of these high authorities as to the value of the Collection.

From A.W. Franks, Esq., F.R.S. [2]

I have been long acquainted with this Collection, and was a member of the Committee appointed by the Committee of Council on Education to consider the offer of the Collection to Government, which Committee unanimously recommended its acceptance.

The Collection is a very instructive and valuable one: the system on which it is arranged is different from that which I have adopted in arranging the national collection of ethnography, but it seems to me very desirable that collections should be arranged on different principles from each other, as each system brings out special points of information, and enables a student to see the various aspects of a subject.

I should be very glad to see the Collection safely housed at Oxford, and I consider it would be a very desirable addition to the means of teaching of the University.

It will day by day become more difficult to bring together specimens of this nature. The continental museums are pushing forward in this direction, as are also those of America, and excepting a very few parts of the world, authentic ethnographical objects, free from European influence, are almost unattainable.

From John Evans, Esq., F.R.S. [3]

I am very glad to hear that General Pitt-Rivers has so generously offered his Collection to the University of Oxford. It would be a most lamentable loss if the Collection were to leave this country, and I sincerely hope that there will be no difficulty in finding accommodation for it at Oxford. It has been considerably augmented since last I saw it, but even then the Collection was such as it would be almost if not quite impossible to get together again. As a school for studying development in form and in art it is unrivalled, and the mere fact of its peculiar arrangement, with the view to illustrating development, does not at all detract from the value of the Collection from an ethnological or anthropological point of viw. The arrangement and collocation of forms which shade off the one into the other are just the means of attracting the attention of a student, whether of nature or art, and setting him to make use of his eyes and of his brains, while to those who already know what an important factor development has been in all our surroundings, such a Collection will always be supplying fresh topics of interest. Placed at Oxford by the side of a good natural-history collection it will be of great value as a means of training future naturalists and anthropologists, of whom there is room for plenty more in this country.

From E.B. Tylor, Esq., F.R.S. [4]

My opinion of the Pitt-Rivers Collection has always been that it is invaluable for study of the stages of development of civilisation, and for teaching purposes.

Oxford would I think do a very important service to Anthropology and History by taking and housing the Collection, which would not only do its own work, but would enhance the value of the Ashmolean by making it intelligible.

Notes

[1] Evan Evans (1813-1891), vice chancellor from 1878-1882. See here for more information.

[2] Augustus Wollaston Franks, Museum keeper, British Museum.

[3] John Evans, archaeologist and paper manufacturer, father of Arthur John Evans

[4] Edward Burnett Tylor, the first Anthropologist appointed to a formal academic position in the UK as a result of the Pitt-Rivers collection coming to Oxford. See here for more information

Transcribed by AP July 2010 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

Please note that this has been transcribed and not edited, all misspellings or mis-punctations are in the original and are not sic'd. Warning: this letter has not been proofread except by the transcriber

1. PRM Box 1, 1-33: 5-6

Pencil note at top in unknown hand: Letter sent to me by C.H. Read [1]

Little Hampton Sussex | March 30. 81.

My dear Franks

I am here for a couple of days fresh air with my wife. I do not know whether you have heard that at the suggestion of Westwood [2] Gen. Pitt Rivers has offered his collection to the University of Oxford. He has authorised me to make the offer on his behalf on the condition that the University funds a building &c. The offer will come before the Council about the second or third week in April.

I think the collection would be a splendid gain to Oxford and would do much in the way of letting light into the place and would draw well. Besides of course it would act as an introduction to all the other art collections & about to be made and would be of extreme value to students of anthropology in which subject we hope to allow men to take degrees very shortly.

I should be extremely obliged if during the next fortnight you could write me a letter which need not be long expressing an opinion as to the value of the collection and its usefulness at Oxford, such a letter could be read to the Hebdomadal Council of course absolutely ignorant of the collection and all connected with it. Such a letter from you would be of the greatest assistance. I have asked John Evans [3] to write one also but not any-one else. Pray excuse my troubling you. I do it in the interests of the University. What a splendid lot of New Ireland carvings Pitt Rivers has got

Yours ever

H N Moseley [4]

Note

[1] Charles Hercules Read, (1857-1929), British Museum keeper. See here for more information

[2] John Obadiah Westwood, 1805-1893, entomologist, first Hope professor of zoology at the University of Oxford. See here for more information about him.

[3] John Evans (1823-1908), archaeologist, numismatist and paper manufacturer. See here for more information

[4] Henry Nottidge Moseley (1844-1891), naturalist, Linacre Professor of Human and Comparative Anatomy, University of Oxford. The first Curator of the Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford. See here for more information.

See here for an article about Pitt-Rivers and Moseley

Transcribed by AP July 2010 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

Please note that these have been transcribed and not edited, all misspellings or mis-punctations are in the original and are not sic'd. Warning: these letters have not been proofread except by the transcriber

1. PRM Box 1, 1-33: 1-4

Letter 1

19 Penywern Road | South Kensington | June 27 1880

My Dear Franks [1]

It is as well to consider the future in relation to any action that is taken now about my Museum. Of course having collected for 28 years and being as much interested as ever in the subject I am not likely to give it up now that my means of collecting are greater. My wish is to serve a useful purpose if I am permitted to do so and as continuity has been the object of my collection all along. I have confined myself mainly to the commoner forms in which chiefly continuity can be traced, and have avoided giving large sums for rare things because such things do not fit into my series generally. for the same reason I have nor purchased entire collections as a rule because [1 word illegible] specimens spoil the series. I mean to go on upon the same plan if space is given me. So far from its being antagonistic to the B.M. it will be a most useful adjunct, the very wealth of the national collections precludes the possibility of their being arranged in subordination to Educational purposes. As a means of Education for the public the B.M. is useless. I shall supply that want. If you could give me the space I require with a life interest in the management of it I should be very glad, but you cannot and South Kensington can.

If I cant get more space at South Kensington to enable me to develop my museum on the plan I have adopted hitherto then the course I shall take will be this. I shall build a museum in or close to London about the size of the room I have at present. Keep the bulk of the collection in trays & drawers & exhibit only a few things in cases but I shall not have space enough to continue the series and I must make the Museum valuable in other ways I shall become a collector of ethnological gems and when I die. I shall have received no encouragement to leave anything to the nation. If the nation will not accept my offer now on account of a dog in the manger rivalry between the two departments I shall take good care it never gets anything from me. Science is cosmopolitan and I had rather leave everything to the United States. Meanwhile I am waiting for the decision of the Authorities to know whether I build a house at Queens Gate or elsewhere and if I lose the summer season I lose a year which I cannot afford to do at the age of 53. I hope you will change your mind and support my plan it is clearly the best thing you can do under the circumstances

Yrs ever

A Pitt Rivers

Letter 2

July 1 '80

My dear Franks

I am very glad you are going to be on the committee. there are one or two points I might as well mention! I see there is a suggestion that my museum, remaining at South Kensington, should be attached to the British Museum rather than to the science & art department. Of course to me it is a matter of indifference what the department is called if the conditions remain the same. I should prefer the B.M. in this way that I should be associated with officials who have a thoroughly scientific knowledge of the subject whereas South Kensington is more artistic than scientific. I have experienced the inconvenience of this and have expected it. On the other hand will the British Museum adapt itself to the peculiar conditions and accept the museum subject to my having the control of it during my life. I consider this a sine qua non. It would not be possible to carry out my view in any other way. My object is, more space with a view to increase the collection, and as the accommodations will be made with a view to a special arrangement the management in so far as the arrangement of the objects is concerned must be in my hands. Moreover the advantage I have over all government [1 word illegible] is that, having only one head, I can do as I please. Whilst in a museum under government fifty different views and interests would have to be reconciled before any step could be taken. I should never think of giving up that advantage. I am most anxious that my collection should be carried on in harmony with the British Museum and I consider that the utility of my museum would depend in a great measure upon its being in harmony. I have no doubt that I should receive a good deal of valuable assistance from the officers of the Museum if [4 words crossed out by Pitt-Rivers] my collection were attached to there and that it might very likely become desirable to modify my system in some measure to meet their views. but it would be essential that freedom of action should be retained. Hazelius's Museum at Stockholm is a case in point, what he has done is quite marvellous, but if he had been fettered by the government he could never have carried it out. I should not propose in leaving my collection to the Nation at my death to make any special stipulations. If my system were accepted by men of science it would be continued if it was not, there would be no object in continuing it. Moreover, views become so much changed as knowledge accumulates that it would be mischievous to hamper the future with the ideas of the present.

I should prefer the upper galleries at South Kensington to the lower ones as they suit my arrangement better. some of the cases I have now are not suitable they do very well as show cases for beautiful things but are, not adapted to a continuous series

Yours ever

A Pitt Rivers

---

Notes

[1] Augustus Wollaston Franks, (1826-1897), collector and museum keeper, British Museum. See here for more information about him.

Transcribed by AP July 2010 as part of the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project.

Gifting the founding collection of the Pitt Rivers Museum to the University of Oxford

This is a transcription of Pitt-Rivers' deed of gift, a copy of which is held in the Pitt Rivers Museum's manuscript collections, Pitt Rivers Museum papers, Box 2: 20.

'This Inderture [sic] made the twentieth day of May one thousand eight hundred and eighty four Between Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers a Major General in Her Majestys Army F.R.S. on the one part and The Chancellor Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford of the other part Whereas the said Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers has agreed to give to the said Chancellor Masters and Scholars the Specimens Objects Articles and things hereinafter mentioned or referred to and forming his Anthropological Collection And whereas by a Decree of the Convocation of the said University holden on the seventh day of March one thousand and eight hundred and eighty three it was agreed that the said Gift should be accepted Now this Indenture witnesseth that the said Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers in consideration of the agreements on the part of the said Chancellor Masters and Scholars hereinafter mentioned and contained Doth hereby assign to the said Chancellor Masters and Scholars and their successors All those the several Specimens Objects Articles and things forming the Anthropological Collection of the said Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers now lately deposited and on exhibition at the Department of Science and Art at South Kensington as described in the Catalogue thereof a Copy of which is intended to be annexed to these presents and signed by the Vice Chancellor of Oxford and the said Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers Except that part of the Collection styled "Collection of Agricultural Implements and Peasant Collection and other Carvings" To hold the same premises unto the said Chancellor Masters and Scholars and their successors upon trust for the purposes and subject to the Regulations hereinafter declared and contained concerning the same And this Indenture further witnesseth that it is hereby agreed and declared between and by the parties hereto that the said Chancellor Masters and Scholars do and shall stand possessed of the said several Specimens Objects Articles and things hereinbefore expressed to be assigned and which are hereinafter referred to as "The said Collection" and of all other Specimens Objects Articles and things which shall hereafter be added thereto in accordance with the provision for that purpose hereinafter contained upon trust for the purposes and subject to the Regulations hereinafter declared and contained that is to say:-

1. The said Chancellor Masters and Scholars shall build a separate Annexe to the present University Museum for the purpose of receiving maintaining and keeping in Oxford the said Collection and such Annexe shall be used solely for the said Collection and the additions to be made thereto from time to time as hereinafter mentioned and a Lecturer shall be appointed by the University who shall yearly give Lectures at Oxford upon Anthropology.

2. The Inscription designating the Collection as the "Pitt Rivers Collection" shall be affixed over the Entrance to such Annexe both on the Outside and Inside thereof and the Title "Pitt Rivers Collection" shall be permanently retained as the Title of the said Collection and all future additions to the said Collection shall be acknowledged as additions to the Pitt Rivers Collection and the Donor and his Agents shall have the right at all reasonable times of using and making Drawings of the Objects in the Collection for the purpose of illustration description or publication

3. The general mode of arrangement at present adopted in the said Collection shall be maintained and no changes shall be made in details during the lifetime of the said Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers without his consent and any changes in details which may be made after the death of the said Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers shall be such only as shall be necessitated by the advance of knowledge and as shall not affect the general principle originated by the said Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers

4. The said Chancellors Masters and Scholars shall from time to time as occasion shall arise and as they may deem desirable expend [sic] and complete by the addition of further specimens such of the Series of Objects in the said Collection as are at present more or less imperfect or incomplete such Specimens shall bear on their labels the names of their respective Donors or of the Collections from which they may have been derived

In witness whereof the said Parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first above written

Signed sealed and Delivered by the above named Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers [signature] in the presence of Edw W. Faner [?] and G. Vickerstaff 66 Lincolns Inn Fields London Gent'n

----

PRM papers Box 1, 1-33: 17: Gazette 13 May 1884:

Note that a version of the above was also published in the University Gazette of 13 May 1884 when it was titled 'Affixing the seal May 20' and introduced 'In the same CONVOCATION it will be proposed to affix the University Seal to the following amended form of a Deed of Gift and Declaration of Trust on behalf of the University in respect of the Anthropological Collection offered to the University by Major-General Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers, F.R.S., and accepted by the University in Convocation on Wednesday, March 7, 1883.

B. Jowett

Vice-Chancellor

Delegates Room

May 12, 1884.

----

[Transcribed by AP for the Rethinking Pitt-Rivers project, July 2010]

Note: the boldenings above match sections which appear to be stressed in the handwriting of the original. There appear to be two misspellings and they are sic'ed in the above paragraph. The whole is written in Gothic handwritten script and is not easy to read.