Et lapides, et item sylvarum fragmina rami,
Et flamma atque ignis postquam sunt cognita primum
Posterius ferri vis est aerisque reperta,
Et prior aeris erat quam ferri cognitus usus,
Quo facilis magis est natura, et copia maior.--V. 1282.
[210] Strabo, b. iii. c. iii. 6, p. 154.
[211] Max Müller, _Science of Language_, 2nd Series (1864), pp. 229-37.
[212] Nilsson, _The Primitive Inhabitants of Scandinavia_ (Lubbock, 3rd
ed., 1868), p. 257.
[213] Sir Richard Colt Hoare found four of these celts in the Wiltshire
barrows, with rudimentary flanges along the side edges of the blade
that had been formed by beating, and similarly formed flanges have
also been noticed upon celts from Ireland, thereby leading to the
supposition that Class B may have been converted into Class D in this
way, before the casting process was applied to the formation of the
flanges.--_The Ancient History of South Wiltshire_ (London, 1812), p.
203, pl. xxi, xxvi, xxviii. 2, xxix.
[214] (The greatly reduced scale of these figures makes exact
verification of the references impracticable in all cases.--ED.)
[215] I have been enabled to take drawings of these celts in the
British Museum, through the kind permission of Mr. A. W. Franks.
[216] The forms included in Classes D, E, F, and G, are commonly known
under the name of _paalstab_ or _palstave_, a word of Scandinavian
origin, said to have designated the weapons employed by some northern
tribes for battering the shields of their enemies. Iron implements like
the Irish _loy_, and called _paalstabs_, are still used in Iceland,
either for digging in the ground or breaking the ice.--_Catalogue of
the Museum of the R. I. Academy_, ‘Bronze,’ p. 361.
[217] Lubbock, _Prehistoric Times_ (1869), p. 9.
[218] Read in 1869, published in _Archaeologia_, xliii. p. 443: for
Plumpton Plain, see _Sussex Arch. Coll._ ii. p. 268: for Arras, _Arch.
Journ._ xviii. p. 156.
EARLY MODES OF NAVIGATION[219]
(1874)
In the paper which I had the honour of reading to this Institute at
Bethnal Green (pp. 1-19), 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.[220]
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_[221], 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._
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._
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. 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 ναῦς; 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_,
1862, vol. i. p. 147).
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_, Pl. 2).
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_ (vol. ii. p. 7), speaks of some canoes which
he saw in North Australia as being ‘mere logs of wood, capable of
carrying a couple of men’. 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.
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 (Kitto, _Pictorial Bible_). 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.
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 fireplace. 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.
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 that, 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.
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.
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. Symes, in
1800, speaks of the Burmese war-boats, which were excavated partly by
fire and partly by cutting. Nos. 1276 and 1277 of my collection are
models of these boats. 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.
The New Zealanders, and probably the Australians also, employ fire for
this purpose [Cook]. The canoes of the Krumen in West Africa are also
excavated by means of 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 on p. 87 of my
_Catalogue_ (Parts i and ii), when speaking of the methods employed by
the Esquimaux and Australians in straightening their wooden spears and
arrow-shafts. 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_, vol. ii. p. 732. 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 _anato_. For boring holes the Ahts use a drill formed by
a bone of a bird fixed in a wooden handle.
A precisely similar process to this is employed in the formation of
the Burmese dug-out canoes, and has thus been described to me by Capt.
O’Callaghan, who witnessed the process during the Burmese 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.
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), 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 (p. 203). Wilkes speaks of it in
Samoa, at Manilla, and the Sooloo Archipelago. De Guignes in 1796 and
De Morga 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. In the India Museum there is a model of one from
Assam, used as a mail boat, and called _dâk nao_. In Burmah, Symes, in
1795, 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. At Ferhabad, in Persia, Pietro della Valle, in 1614,
describes the canoes as being flat-bottomed, hollow trees, carrying ten
to twelve persons.
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.
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.
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. Kalm, in
1747, gives some details respecting their construction on the Delaware
river already referred to (p. 191), 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 (p. 192).