palæolithic is not in much better case, the later palæolithic or
reindeer age can now be shown to be relatively modern, while the
_hiatus_ between that period and the neolithic age has disappeared.
Thanks to the work of Baron de Geer[516] we have some foundation for a
chronology of this period, and the results of this work have long been
made known to English readers by Professor Sollas.[517] There seems to
be little doubt but that the pause in the retreat of the Scandinavian
ice by Lake Ragunda, which de Geer has dated at 5000 /B.C./, may be
equated, as has been shown by Brooks,[518] with the Daun stadium of
Penck.[519] The Fenno-Scandian moraines, on the other hand, can only
be equated with the Bühl advance which took place towards the close
of Magdalenian times, and this gives us a date of 7000 to 7500 /B.C./
for Magdalenian. The Goti-glacial moraines seem to indicate the second
Würm maximum, and Sollas’ estimate for the interval seems eminently
reasonable and has been adopted here; the first maximum of the Würm
seems represented by the Dani-glacial line.
The later dates depend, by a series of synchronisms, on those
ascertained from the Egyptian monuments, and it is unfortunate
that on this point authorities differ. The difference between the
various schools of thought has been well and fairly summarised by
Dr. Hall;[520] the two great protagonists are Professor Flinders
Petrie[521] and Dr. Edouard Meyer,[522] whose system has been adopted
with slight modifications by Professor Breasted.[523] For this reason
there are alternative systems in vogue for the period preceding 1580
/B.C./
Since so many great authorities, well acquainted with the facts and
well able to interpret them, differ as to the result, one, who is
not an Egyptologist, can decide between them only by testing the
application of both systems in his own field of study. Having applied
this test to both schemes, I have no hesitation in accepting the
latter or shorter chronology, for by the former I find that the earlier
periods would be more prolonged than the evolution of the culture
warrants. I have therefore, throughout this work used dates based on
those given for Egypt by Professor Breasted. This, of course, does not
apply to Mesopotamian dates.
Dr. Hall would like to add another century or two to this shorter
chronology,[524] and there is much to be said for such a step. I have
not, however, ventured to do so here, but if such an amendment should
prove generally acceptable, it would only be necessary to add the
required figure to all my dates, other than Mesopotamian, prior to 1580
/B.C./, as far back as the beginning of the neolithic age.
/Appendix II/
MATRILINEAR SUCCESSION IN GREECE
Bachofen[525] was the first to draw attention to the existence of
mother-right in Greece, and he was followed in 1886 by M’Lennan.[526]
Both these authors claimed support from evidence which will not now
stand investigation; a more judicious statement of the case was issued
last year by Dr. Hartland.[527] In 1911 Professor Rose[528] set out
to prove the case, but found that his evidence led him to a contrary
conclusion, and he argued that such customs were unknown in Hellenic
Greece. If by Hellenic he means “Achæan” and Dorian, that is to say
Wiro Greece, I am in full agreement with him, but he includes also
Minoan Crete, “because it is just possible that the population was in
some sense Hellenic.”[529]
Rose argues that the existence of the worship of a mother goddess must
not be taken as evidence of matrilinear succession, and were this the
only detail on which we could rely, I would readily admit that the
evidence was too slight. But we have some support from pedigrees.
Rose dismisses the evidence from traditional genealogies, because
“many of these are late, and a large part of them is doubtless pure
invention.”[530] I do not feel confident that we must dismiss these
genealogies, even if late, so summarily. Much of the detail contained
in them occurs in the tragedians, who gathered it from the legendary
matter current in their day. That there was much more such legendary
matter, and that it was for long after kept alive in the minds of the
people, is clear from the pages of Pausanias. Still doubtless there
were some inventions, in fact it is obvious from internal evidence that
this was so, but such interpolations can usually be detected, and by no
means vitiate the pedigrees for our purpose. Often the interpolation
is but the substitution of a fictitious name for an unnamed son or
daughter, or when tradition states that C is the grandson of A, a name
B has been invented to fill in the missing intermediate ancestor.
I propose, therefore, to examine some of these pedigrees, and will
choose those of undoubted Minoan origin. Ridgeway[531] has suggested
that the Minoans traced their descent from Poseidon, as the “Achæans”
did from Zeus or Ares. There are three well-known families that do so,
the Neleids of Pylos, the Danaans of the Argolid and the Cadmeians of
Bœotia; in the two former cases there is ample evidence that those
places received a population from Crete either in the first or early in
the second Late Minoan period.
The Neleid pedigree is meagre and does not help us, but those of the
Danaans and Cadmeians are fuller, and it is claimed by later writers
that the families were connected. The first part of the genealogy is
unquestionably fictitious, and designed to show a connection between
the two families, but it is worth looking at.
/Poseidon/=_Libya_.
|
__________________________|____________
| |
Belus=_Anchinoe_. Agenor
| =_Telephassa_.
_______|_____ _____________|_______________
| | | | | |
Danaus= Ægyptus= Cadmus Phœnix Cilix _Europa_
| | =_Harmonia_ =/Zeus/.
__|_______ |______________ |
| | | | ________________________|
49 daus. | | | | | |
| | | Minos. Rhadamanthus. Sarpedon.
_Hypermnestra_--Lynceus 49 sons.
Here we find the late genealogist inventing a pedigree to connect
the traditional families of the Argolid, Thebes and Cnossos with the
eponymous heroes of Phœnicia, Cilicia and Egypt, and tracing them
all from Poseidon. This seems to indicate that popular tradition
believed all these families and peoples to have been connected, and
that they were worshippers of the sea-god.
Let us now turn to the Danaan pedigree. That the fifty daughters of
Danaus were mythical admits of no doubt, and the same is true of
their fifty cousins, but it is possible that tradition is correct
in claiming that one of them, Hypermnestra, married her cousin and
succeeded her father. They are succeeded by Abas, who is followed by
Acrisius, and then again we get a daughter Danaë, who is succeeded
by her son Perseus. This hero is said to have left many sons, but
here the pedigree gets mixed. It seems more likely to my mind that
Perseus was succeeded by Electryon, whose daughter Alcmene married
her cousin Amphitryon, though later writers, accustomed to a more
strictly patrilinear succession, made Amphitryon succeed his father
Alcæus as king of Mycenæ. But the times were troubled, the Pelopids
were conquering the Peloponnese and the succession failed. It is well
to remember, though, that Perseus is said to have had a daughter
Gorgophane, whose name may well be fictitious and that her son or
grandson Tyndareus was father of Clytemnestra. It would seem that both
Agamemnon and Ægistheus claimed to reign not only by right of conquest
but jure uxoris.
Hartland has well cited from the _Eumenides_ that “when Orestes,
pursued by the Erinyes for his mother’s death, pleads that he is not
of kin to her and wins by the casting vote of Athena, the Erinyes are
startled and shocked on finding that even the gods decide against them,
declaring that these, the younger gods, have over-ridden the old laws
and unexpectedly plucked Orestes out of their hands.”[532]
Cadmus is said to have married Harmonia, daughter of Ares, again a
fictitious name for a Thracian maiden. He had four daughters and one
son, but it is not the latter who succeeds him, but the son of his
fourth daughter Agaue. The Bacchæ of Euripides seems to show a struggle
between the claims of the priestly or divine son of Semele, the eldest
daughter, and the more mundane and regal son of Agaue, the youngest.
The claim of Polydorus, the only son, does not arise until Dionysus has
been banished and Pentheus slain.
While these genealogies, much garbled by writers accustomed only to
patrilinear succession, show the frequent succession of a daughter or
a daughter’s son, it may well be urged that there is no evidence of
the importance of the maternal uncle, or of the _avunculi potestas_
of Sir James Frazer. This is undoubtedly true, and no reasonable
claim can be made that this particular form of matrilinear succession
obtained in Minoan Greece. But are we sure that there is only one type
of matrilinear succession? The forms of patrilinear succession are not
all alike. The laws on this subject varied between the Ripuarian and
the Salic Franks, the British crown passes by a rule which differs
from that governing the descent of a peerage, and peerages granted by
letters patent differ from those dependent upon a writ of summons. I
submitted the point recently to the late Dr. Rivers, who told me that
it was his opinion that several types of matrilinear succession had
probably existed and that he had found evidence of two in Melanesian
society.
I do not suggest that the evidence which I have cited shows the typical
matrilinear succession as it is commonly understood, or that among
pre-Hellenic peoples “the father did not count,”[533] but it seems to
hint that the succession was in the process of passing from some form
of matrilinear to some form of patrilinear descent. Perhaps it may only
indicate that the eldest child succeeded regardless of sex, but in
any case there appears to be sufficient evidence for assuming that in
Minoan cities an heiress counted for more politically than she did in
“Achæan” households. It is well, too, to remember in this connection
that these Minoan tyrants were probably Prospectors and that among
another group of Prospectors, the Etruscans, “it is, of course, agreed
on all hands that such a system did exist.”[534]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The following abbreviations have been used:--
A. L’Anthropologie.
A.A. Archäologischen Anzeiger.
A.A.A. Annals of Archæology and Anthropology. Liverpool.
A.A. & E. Archivo per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia.
A.d.P. Annales de Paléontologie.
A.f.A. Archives für Anthropologie.
A.J. The Antiquaries’ Journal.
A.J.P.A. American Journal of Physical Anthropology.
Washington, D.C.
A.M. Atlantic Monthly.
A.R. Asiatick Researches.
A. & R. Atene e Roma.
Arch. Archæologia.
Arch. Camb. Archæologia Cambrensis.
B.P. Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana.
B.S.A. British School at Athens.
B.S.A.L. Bulletin de la Société d’Anthropologie de Lyon.
B.S.A.P. Bulletin de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris.
B.S.R. British School at Rome.
C.G.I. Congrès Géologique International.
C.I.A.P.A. Congrès International d’Archéologie Préhistorique
et d’Anthropologie.
C.M.H. Cambridge Mediæval History.
Έφ. Άρχ. Έφημερὶς Άρχαιολογικὴ.
G.J. Geographical Journal.
G.R. Geographical Review.
J.A.I. Journal of the Anthropological Institute.
J.E.A. Journal of Egyptian Archæology.
J.E.S. Journal of the Ethnological Society of London.
J.I.S.I. Journal of the Iron and Steel Institute.
J.R.A.I. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute.
J.S. Journal des Savants.
K.A.W. Kaiserlich. Akademie der Wissenschaften.
K.D.A.I. Kaiserlich. Deutschen Archäologischen Institut.
K.P.A.W. Königlich. Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
M.A.N. Mémoires de la Société Royale des Antiquaires du Nord.
M.P.K.K.A.W. Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission der
Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Wien.
M. & P.M.L.& P.S. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and
Philosophical Society.
N.H. Natural History. New York.
N.S. Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità.
P.A. & A.S.U.A. Proceedings of the Anatomical and Anthropological
Society of the University of Aberdeen.
P.S.A. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of London.
P.S.E.A. Prehistoric Society of East Anglia.
Q.J.G.S.L. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London.
Q.J.R.M.S. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society.
R.C. Revue Celtique.
R.B.A. Report of the British Association.
R.E.A. Revue d’École d’Anthropologie.
R.E.S. Revue d’Ethnologie et de Sociologie.
R.L.P.C. Revue de Linguistique et de Philologie Comparée.
R.R.C.S.A. Reports of Research Committees of the Society of
Antiquaries of London.
S.H.P.F. Stockholms Hogskolas Populära Föreläsningar.
S.H.S. Society for Promoting Hellenic Studies.
S.P. Science Progress.
S.R. Smithsonian Report.
T.L.S. Times Literary Supplement.
T.P.S. Transactions of the Philological Society.
W.M.B.H. Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen aus Bosnien und der
Herzogowina.
Z.f.Æ.S. Zeitschrift für Ægyptische Sprache.
Z.f.E. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie.
- - - - -
Abercromby, The Hon. John: A study of the bronze age pottery of Great
Britain and Ireland. Oxford (1912).
Aberg, N.: Die Steinzeit in dem Niederland. Upsala (1916).
Adelung, J. C.: Mithridates. 5 vols. Berlin (1806-17).
Armstrong, E. C. R.: Guide to the collection of Irish antiquities.
Catalogue of Irish gold ornaments in the Royal Irish Academy. Dublin
(1920).
Ashby, T., Bradley, R. N., Peet, T. E., and Tagliaferro, N.:
Excavations in 1908-11 in various megalithic buildings in Malta and
Gozo. Papers of the B.S.R. VI., No. 1.
Bachofen, J. J.: Das Mutterrecht; eine Untersuchung über die
Gynaikokratie der alten Welt nach ihren religiösen und rechtlichen
Natur. 2nd. Ed. Basel (1897).
Beddoe, John: The races of Britain. Bristol (1885).
Bogdanov, A.: Quelle est la race la plus ancienne de la Russie central?
C.I.A.P.A. Moscow (1892).
Bopp, F.: Vergleichende Grammatik. Berlin (1833).
Bopp, F.: A comparative Grammar. Trans. Lieut. Eastwick. 3 vols. London
(1845-50).
Bopp, F.: Grammaire comparée. Trad. Michel Bréal. 5 vols. Paris
(1866-74).
Borlase, W. C.: The Dolmens of Ireland. London (1897).
Bosanquet, R.: The obsidian trade in Phylakopi. S.H.S. Supp. Pap. iv.,
ch. viii. London (1904).
Boule, M.: L’homme fossile de la Chapelle-aux-Saints. A.d.P. (1911-13).
Boule, M.: La paléontologie humaine en Angleterre. A.xxvi. (1915).
Bourguignat, M. J. R.: Histoire des monuments mégalithiques de Roknia.
Souvenirs d’une exploration scientifique dans le Nord de l’Afrique. Pt.
iv. Paris (1868).
Boyd, H. A., and Hawes, C. H.: Gournia, Vasiliki and other prehistoric
sites on the isthmus of Hierapetra, Crete. Philadelphia (1912).
Brace, C. L.: The Races of the Old World. London (1863).
Breasted, J. H.: A History of Egypt. 2nd. Ed. New York (1912).
Broca, P. P.: Mémoires d’anthropologie. 5 vols. Paris (1871-8).
Brooks, C. E. P.: The evolution of climate in north-west Europe.
Q.J.R.M.S., xlvii. (1921), 173-194.
Bulleid, A., and Grey, H. St. G.: The Glastonbury Lake Village.
Glastonbury (1911, 1917).
Burkitt, M. C.: Prehistory. Cambridge (1921) 1.
Burkitt, M. C.: Congress at Liége. P.S.E.A., iii. 453-7. Ipswich
(1921). 2.
Bushe-Fox, J. P.: Excavations at Hengistbury Head, Hampshire.
R.R.C.S.A., iii. Oxford (1915).
Cara, C. A. de: Gli Hethei-Pelasgi. 3 vols. Rome (1894-1902).
Casson, S.: Herodotus and the Caspian. Annual of the B.S.A., xxiii.
(1918-9), 175-93.
Casson, S.: The Dorian Invasion in the light of some new evidence.
Man., xxi. (1921), 39. 1.
Casson, S.: The Dorian Invasion in the light of some new evidence.
A.J., i. (1921), 199-221. 2.
Catalogue of an important collection of Bronze Arms and Implements
formed by Dr. S. Egger of Vienna. Sold by Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge,
25th June, 1891.
Chadwick, H. M.: The Cult of Othin. London (1899).
Chadwick, H. M.: The Heroic Age. Cambridge (1912).
Chamberlain, Houston Stewart: Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jarhunderts.
(1899).
Chamberlain, Houston Stewart: The Foundations of the Nineteenth
Century. Trans. John Lees. 2 vols. London (1911).
Chantre, R.: Recherches anthropologiques dans le Caucase. Paris and
Lyons (1885-7).
Chvojka: Arch. Chron. S. Russia (1904).
Clark, E. Kitson: A prehistoric route in Yorkshire. P.S.A. 2nd ser.,
xxiii. (1911), 309-25.
Clark, W. E. le Gros: On a series of ancient Eskimo skulls from
Greenland. J.R.A.I. l. (1920), 281-98.
Cook, O. F.: Milpa agriculture, a primitive tropical system. S.R. for
1919. Washington (1921), 307-26.
Conway, R. S.: The Italic Dialects, edited with a grammar and glossary.
Cambridge (1897).
Cordier, Henri: Histoire Générale de la Chine. Paris (1920).
Corréa, A. A. Mendes: Origin of the Portuguese. A.J.P.A., ii. (1919),
117-45.
Crawford, O. G. S. C.: The distribution of early bronze age settlements
in Britain. G.J., Aug. and Sept. (1912). =1=.
Crawford, O. G. S. C.: On a gold torc. P.S.A., xxiv. (1912), 39-49.
=2=.
Crawford, O. G. S. C.: Man and his past. Oxford (1921).
Crawford, O. G. S. C.: A prehistoric invasion of England. A.J., ii.
(1922), 27-35.
Cunnington, M. E.: A village site of the Hallstatt period in Wiltshire.
A.J., ii. (1922), 13-9.
Cuno, J. G.: Forschungen im Gebiete der alten Völkerkunde. Berlin
(1871).
Dawson, C., Woodward, A. Smith and Smith, G. Elliot: On the discovery
of a palæolithic human skull and mandible in a flint-bearing gravel
overlying the Wealden (Hastings Beds) at Piltdown, Fletching (Sussex).
Q.J.G.S.I., lxix. (1913), 117-51.
Déchelette, J.: Manuel d’archéologie. Paris (1908-14).
Deniker, J.: The Races of Man. London (1900).
Dennis, G.: The Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria. 3rd. Ed. London
(1883).
Dionysius Halicarnensis. _Antiquitatum Romanorum._
Dörpfeld, W.: Troja und Ilion. Athens (1902).
Douglas, Robert K.: China. London (1899).
Duckworth, W. H. L.: The problem of the Galley Hill skeleton, in Essays
and Studies presented to William Ridgeway. Cambridge (1913).
Dussaud, R.: Les civilisations préhelleniques dans le basin de la mer
Egée. Paris (1910), 2nd Ed. (1914).
Ersch, J. S., and Grüber, J. C.: Allgemeine Encyklopädie der
Wissenschaften, &c. Leipzig (1840).
Evans, J.: Ancient Stone Implements. 2nd Ed., London (1897).
Fergusson, James: Rude Stone Monuments. London (1872).
Fick, A.: Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der Indo-germanischen Sprachen.
Göttingen (1868).
Fleure, H. J.: Human Geography in Western Europe. London (1918). =1=.
Fleure, H. J.: The racial history of the British people. G.R., v.
(1918). =2=.
Fleure, H. J.: Some early neanthropic types in Europe and their modern
representatives. J.R.A.I., i. (1920), 12-40.
Fleure, H. J.: The Peoples of Europe. London (1922).
Fleure, H. J., and James, T. C.: The geographical distribution of
anthropological types in Wales. J.R.A.I., xlvi. (1916), 35-153.
Gardiner, Alan H.: The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage, from a hieratic
papyrus in Leiden. Leipzig (1909).
Gardiner, Alan H.: New literary works from ancient Egypt. J.E.A., i.
London (1914), 20-36, 100-6.
Geer, Baron de: Om Skandinaviens Geografiska Utreckling. S.H.P.E.
Stockholm (1896).
Geer, Baron de: Die Veranderungen des Klimas, and A geochronology of
the last 12,000 years. C.G.I., 11th sess. Stockholm, 1910. Stockholm
(1912).
Giles, P.: Articles in Encyclopædia Britannica, 11th Ed. _Aryan_ in
vol. ii., _Indo-European_ languages in vol. xiv. London (1910, 1).
Giles. P.: The Aryans, in Cambridge History of India, ch. iii., 65-76.
Cambridge (1922).
Giuffrida-Ruggeri, V.; Antropologia e archeologia in taluni riguardi
della preistoria Europea. A.A. & E., xlvi. (1916).
Giuffrida-Ruggeri, V.: The hybrid origin of the Mediterraneans. Man.,
xxi. (1921), 107.
Gobineau, A. de: Essai sur l’inégalité des races humaines. Paris
(1853-5).
Gowland, W.: The early metallurgy of copper, tin and iron in Europe.
Arch., lvi. (1899).
Gowland, W.: The metals in antiquity. J.R.A.I., xlii. (1912), 235-87.
Grant, Madison: The Passing of the Great Race. New York. 1st Ed.
(1916), 4th revised Ed. (1921).
Grey, J., and Tocher, J. F.: J.R.A.I., xxx. (1900).
Hall, H. R., The Ancient History of the Near East. London (1913).
Hall, H. R.: in P.S.A. 2nd ser., xxxii. (1920) 22-44.
Hampel, J.: Trouvailles de l’age de bronze en Hongrie. Buda-Pest (1886).
Harrison, J. E.: Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion. 2nd Ed.
Cambridge (1908).
Hartland, E. S.: Primitive Society. London (1921).
Hawes, C. H., and H. B.: Crete, the Forerunner of Greece. London and
New York (1909).
Heger, F.: Ausgrabungen und Forschungen auf Fundplatzen aus
vorhistorischer und römischer Zeit bei Amstetten in Niederösterreich.
M.P.K.K.A.W. Wien (1903).
Hehn, V.: Kulturpflanzen und Haustiere. Berlin (1874).
Hildburgh, W. L.: Notes on some pottery objects and on an Iberian
dagger with engraved handle. Man. xxii. =52=. (1922).
Holmes, T. Rice: Ancient Britain and the Invasions of Julius Cæsar.
Oxford (1907).
Hoops, J.: Waldbäumer und Kulturpflanzen im germanischen Altertum.
Strasburg (1904).
Hoops, J.: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Strasburg
(1911-19).
Hooton, E. A.: The Mundus, the Palatine and the Terramara. R.E.S., iv.
(1913), 238-47.
Hrozný, F.: Die Sprache der Hethiter, ihr Bau und ihre fügehörigkeit
zum indo-germanischen Sprachstamm. Leipzig (1917).
Huntington, Ellsworth: The Pulse of Asia. Boston (1907).
Huntington, Ellsworth: Palestine and its transformations. London (1911).
James, W.: The Varieties of Religious Experience. London (1902).
Jastrow, Morris, junr.: Aspects of Religious Belief and Practice in
Babylonia and Assyria. New York (1911).
Johansen, K. Früs: Une station du plus ancien âge de la pierre dans la
toubière de Svaedborg M.A.N. (nouvelle serie). Copenhagen (1918-9).
Jones, J. Morris: Pre-Aryan syntax in insular Celtic. App. B. in Rhys
and Brynmor-Jones (1900).
Jones, Sir William: The third anniversary discourse delivered 2nd
February, 1786, by the President. A.R., i., 415-31. Calcutta (1788).
Jubainville, H. Arboïs de: Les Celtes depuis les temps les plus anciens
jusque a l’an 100 avant notre ère. Paris (1904).
Karo, G.: Archäologische Funde im Jahre 1915, Griechenland. In A.A.,
138-166 in Jarbuch des K.D.A.I., xxi. (1916).
Keane, A. H.: The World’s Peoples. London (1908).
Keith, Arthur: The Antiquity of Man. London (1915). =1=.
Keith, Arthur: The bronze age invaders of Britain. J.R.A.I., xlvi.
(1915). =2=.
Keller, F.: The Lake-dwellings of Switzerland. Trans. J.E. Lee. London
(1866).
Kiepert, H.: Atlas antiquus. 7th Ed. Berlin (1882).
King, L. W.: A History of Sumer and Akkad. London (1910).
King, L. W.: A History of Babylon. London (1915).
Klaproth, J. von: Asia Polyglotta. 1st Ed. (1823), 2nd Ed. Paris (1831).
Kovalevsky, M.: Modern Customs and Ancient Laws of Russia. London
(1891).
Lacouperie, A. E. J. B. Terrien de: Languages of China before the
Chinese. London (1887).
Lacouperie, A. E. J. B. Terrien de: Western Origin of Early Chinese
Civilisation. London (1894).
Lane-Fox, Col. A.: remarks on a paper by H. Westropp, “cromlechs and
megalithic structures.” J.E.S. (new ser.), i. (1869), 53-67.
Langdon, S.: Sumerian origins and racial characteristics. Arch., lxx.
(1920), 154-54.
Lapouge, G. Vacher de: L’Aryen, son role social. Paris (1899).
Latham, R. G.: The Germania of Tacitus, with ethnological dissertations
and notes. London (1851).
Latham, R. G.: The Native Races of the Russian empire. London (1854).
Latham, R. G.: Descriptive Ethnology. London (1859).
Lavisse, E.: Histoire de France. I., i. Paris (1896).
Leaf, W.: Troy; a study of Homeric geography. London (1912).
Leaf, W.: Homer and History. London (1915).
Leeds, E. Thurlow: The dolmens and megalithic tombs of Spain and
Portugal. Arch lxx. (1920), 201-32.
Leeds, E. Thurlow: Problems of megalithic architecture in the western
Mediterranean. A.A.A., ix. (1922), 29-40.
Lissauer, E.: Die Typenkarte der Flach- und Randäxte &c. Z.f.E. Berlin
(1904).
Loth, J.: La première apparition des Celtes dans l’ile de Bretagne et
en Gaule. R.C., xxxviii. Paris (1920), 259-88.
Lovett-Cameron, M.: Old Etruria and Modern Tuscany. London (1909).
Lowe, A.: On the contents of short cists found in Aberdeenshire and
neighbouring counties. P.A. & A.S.U.A. (1901-4).