It is fairly certain that about the middle of the Tertiary period the

northern hemisphere possessed a temperate climate, such that even the

polar regions were habitable. But the physical aspect of northern Europe

was very different from that of Quaternary times. North of a line drawn

roughly from southern England to St Petersburg all was sea. It was

during the latter half of the Tertiary period that the continent assumed

its present general form, though even in Pleistocene (Quaternary) times

England and Ireland formed part of it. The great change of climate from

temperate to arctic conditions during the latter half of the Tertiary

period has been interpreted in various ways, no one of which is yet

universally accepted. There can be little doubt, however, that no single

cause was responsible for so complete a change. There may have been some

alteration in the relative positions of the earth and the sun, which

would conceivably have produced it; but what is practically certain is

that the physical geography of northern Europe was affected by

considerable difference in level, and it is clear that the raising of

mountain ranges and the general elevation of the continent must

necessarily have reacted on the climatic conditions. If in the later

Tertiary time we find that the Alps, the Carpathians and the Caucasus

have come into existence, it is not surprising to find that these huge

condensers have brought about a humid condition of the continent to such

an extent that this phase has been called the Pluvial Age. The humidity,

however, was in some ways only a secondary result of the protrusion of

high mountain ranges. The primary cause of the physical conditions that

we now find in the valleys and plains was the formation of glaciers.

These rivers of ice descending far into the lower levels during the

winter months, melted during the summer, causing enormous volumes of

water to rush through the valleys and over the plains, carrying with it

masses of mud and boulders which were left stranded sometimes at immense

distances. The intensity and force of the rivers thus formed would

depend upon two factors, first the extent of the watershed, and

secondly, the height of the mountains from which the water was derived.

The result of increasing cold was that in course of time the northern

hemisphere was surmounted by a cap of ice, of immense thickness (about

6000 ft.) in the Scandinavian area and gradually becoming thinner

towards the south, but at no time does it seem to have extended quite to

the south of England. This is proved by the absence of boulder-clay

(glacial mud) in the districts south of London. These arctic conditions

were not, however, continuous, but alternated with periods of a much

less rigorous temperature during what has been called the Ice Age.

Remains both of mammals and plants have been found, under conditions

that are held to prove this alternation.

Such being the natural forces at work remodelling the surface of the

earth; forces of such gigantic power as to be almost inconceivable in

these more placid times, it can easily be understood how, in the course

of the many thousands of years before the Quaternary period, when the

surface of the globe attained its present aspect, the powerful

river-systems of Europe wore their beds deep into the solid rocks. In

some cases in Europe the erosive power of the river has worn through its

bed to such an extent that the present stream is some hundreds of feet

lower than its forerunner in palaeolithic times. From various causes,

however, the rivers did not always wear for themselves a deep channel,

but spread themselves over a wide area. This seems to have been the case

with the Thames near London: the river-bed is not of any great depth,

but at various periods it has occupied the space between Clapton on the

north-east and Clapham on the south-west. It must not be assumed that

the whole of this area of 7 m. or more was filled by the river at any

one time, but rather that during the course of the palaeolithic period

the river had its bed somewhere between these two limits. For instance,

it is probable that at one period the bank of the Thames was at a point

nearly midway between the northern and southern limits, where Gray's Inn

Road now stands. It was here that the earliest recorded palaeolithic

implement (now in the British Museum) was found towards the close of

the 17th century in association with mammoth bones. But it is safe to

say that the Thames was a very much wider and more imposing river in

palaeolithic times than it is now, when its average width at London is

under 300 yds. As, in the course of ages, it changed its bed and by

degrees lessened in size and volume, it would leave, on the terraces

formed on its banks, the deposits of brick-earth and gravel brought down

by the stream, and it is on these terraces that the relics of

palaeolithic man are found, sometimes in great quantities. It will be

obvious from the nature of the case that the highest terraces, and those

farthest apart, should contain the earliest implements; but it is by no

means easy in the present state of the land surface and with our present

knowledge, to place the remains in their relative sequence. More

accurate observation, and a better understanding of the conditions under

which these deposits were made, should solve many such problems. Much

light has been thrown upon many points by Worthington Smith, who has

excavated with great care two palaeolithic floors at Clapton and at

Caddington near Dunstable. The latter discovery was of quite exceptional

interest as confirming the geological evidence by that of archaeology.

In this case the original level at which palaeolithic man had worked was

clearly defined, and was prolific of dark-grey implements, which had

evidently been made on the spot, as Smith found that many of the flakes

could be replaced on the blocks or cores from which they had been struck

by palaeolithic man; there were also the flint hammers that had been

used in the operation. Above the floor was a layer of brick-earth, again

covered by contorted drift, in which also implements occurred, but of a

very different kind from those found below. In place of being sharp and

unabraded, and with the refuse flakes accompanying them, they were

rolled and disfigured, of an ochreous tint, and evidently had been

transported in the drift from a much higher level now no longer

existing, as the site where they occurred is the highest in the

vicinity, about 500-600 ft. above sea-level. Here then we have a clear

case of palaeolithic man being compelled to abandon his working place on

the lower level by the descent of the waters containing the products of

his own forerunners, probably then very remote. In this case the

sequence of the various strata may be considered certain, and the

remains thus accurately determined and correlated are naturally of

extreme value and importance. But even this does not enable us to

diagnose another discovery unless the internal evidence is equally clear

and conclusive. One point of importance that may be noted is that the

older abraded implements were mostly of the usual drift type, while the

more recent ones from the "floor" contained forms more highly developed

and elaborated, such as occur in the French caves. Explorations of this

kind, carefully conducted in a strictly scientific spirit by men of

training and intelligence, are the only means by which real progress

will be made in this puzzling branch of archaeology.

Although many problems yet remain to be solved in England, its small

area, and the relatively large number of workers, have together sufficed

to put the main facts of the earlier stages of man's existence on a

fairly satisfactory basis. In France, owing to the richness of the

results, a great number of trained and ardent workers have made equal,

if not better, progress. But unfortunately the real scientific spirit is

not invariably found. Not so long ago an apparently serious writer in a

well-known scientific magazine gave a detailed account of his studies in

primitive methods and explained at great length his attempts at the

manufacture of flint and stone implements. He found by the processes he

adopted that it was much more easy for him to produce a polished

implement than one merely flaked. From this fact he seriously argued

that a great mistake had been made in the relative ages of the neolithic

and palaeolithic periods, and that the former must necessarily be the

older of the two. The evidence of geological position and of the

mammalian remains accompanying the obviously older flints was entirely

disregarded, just as on the other hand it was forgotten that in regard

to neolithic remains the proofs were in every way in favour of a

relatively modern origin. Such attempts not only bring the serious study

of early man into disrepute, but tend to retard the progress of real

knowledge and are therefore to be deplored and when possible

discouraged.

Cave Period.

Caves (q.v.) have been at all periods regarded as something uncanny and

mysterious, with perhaps a tinge of the supernatural. In classical times

they were associated with semi-divine beings, with oracles, and even

with the gods themselves, while half the legends of dwarfs and gnomes

that run through the folk-lore of medieval and modern Europe are

associated with caves. They have been used as shelters or habitations at

all times, and in examining them it is fully as necessary to sift the

evidence of age as it would be in dealing with the river-gravels. Their

exploration in the first instance may well have been due to chance, but

it is fairly certain that during the 16th century the search for the

horn of the unicorn as an antidote to disease, was responsible for the

opening up of a certain number. Among the finds were no doubt the fossil

bones of Quaternary animals to which mythical names and imaginary

properties were attached, and the popular belief in such amulets

naturally gave a great impetus to the search. It is, however, only a

little more than a century ago that these investigations took anything

like a scientific turn, and even then they had only a palaeontological

end in view. The idea that archaeology entered into the matter was not

at all realized for some years. The remains of many extinct or migrated

animals, such as the hyena, grizzly bear, reindeer and bison, were found

in quantities in the now famous cave at Gailenreuth in Franconia; and

later, William Buckland explored the equally well-known hyena-cave at

Kirkdale in Yorkshire, where he demonstrated that these animals had

lived on the spot, feeding on the mammoth, rhinoceros and other

creatures that had been their prey. The remains of man, however, had not

been found, nor were they even looked for. It was not until Kent's

cavern, near Torquay, was examined by the Rev. J. McEnery, that man was

clearly proved to have been contemporary with these extinct beasts. So

contrary was this contention to the ideas prevalent in the second

quarter of the 19th century, that the pioneer in this work had died (in

1841) before the immense importance of his discovery was admitted. To

Godwin Austen in the first place and to W. Pengelley in the second, with

the aid of the British Association, was due the vindication of McEnery's

veracity and accuracy.

Several circumstances conspire to give a special interest to Kent's

cavern, and not the least is the fact that the age and appearance of the

various strata indicate that it has been the home or the refuge of human

beings at all ages even up to medieval times, and perhaps from a period

even more remote than is the case elsewhere. In the black mould that

formed the uppermost layer were found fragments of medieval pottery, and

relatively in close proximity were ancient British and Roman remains as

well as relics of the earliest days of metallurgy, in the shape of

bronze fragments. The two thousand years or more that may have separated

the oldest from the most modern of these later products, is as nothing

in comparison with the immense intervals that lie between the earliest

of them and the infinitely more remote period when gigantic mammals

first inhabited the cave. Attempts have been made from time to time to

express in years what the interval must have been: but as the

computations have differed by hundreds of thousands of years, according

to the method adopted, it is scarcely wise to do more than speculate.

Beneath the black mould, containing what may be called the recent

remains, was a layer of stalagmite, some feet in thickness; and under

this at one place was a great quantity of charcoal, which has been with

good reason assumed to show the site of fireplaces. A quantity of

implements of palaeolithic type was found, but the main layer at this

level consisted of a reddish clay known as cave-earth, and in this

deposit were implements both of flint and horn, as well as bones of

extinct animals. The flint implements were mostly of the usual

river-drift type, but some were of types generally confined to

cave-deposits of this period; while the barbed harpoon heads, and more

especially a bone needle, were definitely of the cave class, so well

represented in the caves of Dordogne. Again, below the cave-earth was a

_breccia_ formed of limestone and sandstone pebbles cemented together by

a calcareous paste. In this also were found implements and bones of

bears.

The succession of strata indicated above may be taken as typical of the

caverns used by palaeolithic man, the breccia and stalagmite flooring

being in themselves proof of a very considerable age, while the

association in the former, or under the latter, of remains of human

handiwork, with bones of extinct animals, may be safely taken to show

contemporaneous existence.

Once the mind has fairly grasped the fact that man was living at so

remote a time, it is a simple and natural conclusion that he should have

provided himself with weapons and tools more or less rudely fashioned

from the stones he found ready to his hand. The analogy of the recently

extinct Tasmanian is sufficient to show that even the meanest savage is

not without such aids. But the caves of France, of the same palaeolithic

period, and used by men theoretically in the same stage of culture,

bring before us a race of artists of first-rate capacity, who for

accuracy of observation, and for skill in indicating the character and

peculiarities of the animals around them, have never been surpassed.

Such a statement sounds like a contradiction in terms. We are dealing

with human beings whose intellect, to judge by their physical

characters, should be on a level with that of the Fuegian or the

Australian black, and far below that of the Maori or the Sandwich

Islander. Yet none of these gentle and relatively cultured brown races

produced anything in the nature of art that can in any sense be compared

with the masterly drawings or sculptures of the cave-men of France. The

best-known of the engravings, that of the mammoth on a piece of ivory,

is in the Jardin des Plantes in Paris. It is evidently intended to be

nothing more than a sketch, the lines of the finely curved tusks being

repeated several times in the desire for accuracy. But the heavy

lumbering walk of the ponderous beast, his attitude, and even the

character of the hairy hide, are all shown or suggested with a skill and

freedom that not only denotes daily familiarity with the thing

represented, but a most complete mastery of the art of translating the

idea into simple line. This mammoth-drawing is probably the most

important and monumental of its class, but there are many others that

possess artistic qualities not less remarkable, while they have in

addition a grace and beauty of line not less astonishing. One of these,

in the British Museum, the head of an ibex-like creature, is outlined

with a decision and refinement that can scarcely be surpassed, and many

other sketches in horn or stone in the same collection show a keen

appreciation of the characteristic features of the different animals as

well as a masterly deftness in the handling of the graving-tool. If we

are forced to marvel at the graphic skill of the cave-men, their

sculptures in the round are on a still higher plane, as may be seen in

the figures of reindeer in ivory in the British Museum. While they are

not highly finished, they show a complete understanding of the animal's

peculiar forms and contours, which are rendered in a direct,

unhesitating way that should betoken a long period of artistic training

and an executive power uncommon at any time. These drawings and

sculptures have always been appreciated and even regarded as being of a

much more advanced style than was to be expected among men who are

always classed in the lower grades of culture. But enough stress has not

hitherto been laid on the artistic quality of the work, which would be

considered fine at any time in the world's history. This high artistic

level was attained by a race of men whom we cannot credit with any great

intellectual equipment; men, moreover, who were engaged in a daily

struggle for the barest necessaries of life, in a trying climate and

surrounded by a fauna whose means of attack and defence were infinitely

superior to their own. There are many astonishing problems in

archaeology, but none so badly in need of solution. Had the discovery

been confined to a single drawing or even to a single site, fraud or a

misreading of the conditions might have been alleged, but the case is

very different. The drawings and sculptures have been found generally

enough in France to demonstrate that such artistic power was fairly

common, while the question of the authenticity and period of the

discoveries has long since been satisfactorily settled. It is true that

the climatic conditions in pleistocene France were more favourable to

man than was the case farther north, but even an agreeable climate does

not necessarily produce an artistic race; if it were so, the Polynesians

would probably be the greatest artists the world has ever seen. The

physical remains of palaeolithic man, even when found under

unquestionable conditions, are, however, so scanty, that it is unlikely

that the important question of the race or races inhabiting central and

northern Europe will ever be settled by their means. The evidence at

present is in favour of two very different types, one dwarfish and

brutal (Canstadt), the other more advanced and noble in physical

character (Cro-Magnon). To the latter were due the artistic productions,

and until further physical evidence is forthcoming recourse must be had

to the most minute examination of the objects themselves and to accurate

observation of the conditions under which they are found. So far as our

present materials go, these are the only means by which more light may

be thrown on the many problems of early man.

In spite of the unquestioned and unquestionable character of

palaeolithic discoveries in general, it must not be assumed that there

has been an absence of falsification, forgery, and what the French call

"mystification"; on the contrary, such attempts to meet the demand have

been common enough. Apart from Edward Simpson, who was notorious as

"Flint Jack" in the middle of the 19th century, many others, both in

England and on the continent of Europe, have devoted themselves to this

peculiar industry. Boucher de Perthes tried to conquer the scepticism of

some of his friends who doubted the human origin of the Abbeville

flints, by unwisely offering his workmen a reward for the discovery of

human bones in the same beds. The Moulin Quignon jaw was accordingly

produced, and became the subject of much controversy; but the evidence

finally showed that it had originally come from elsewhere. The cave

drawings also have found their imitators in modern times. One Meillet, a

man of education, took a special pleasure in the production of spurious

examples, and even published an account of his pretended discoveries.

But here, as in all the attempts at imitation of the cave drawings, the

modern efforts were betrayed by their poor artistic quality, and a

comparison of the new discoveries with the old was generally enough to

disclose the forgery. Two drawings on bone of a wolf and a bear,

declared to have been found in a cave at Thayingen in Switzerland, were

afterwards shown to have been copied from a child's picture-book. In

Switzerland also a brisk trade was carried on some years ago in false

antiquities said to come from the Lake-dwellings; and fantastic types of

tools and implements were placed on the market. In Italy, too, a lively

discussion has taken place of late years over the authenticity of

curiously shaped flint implements from the neighbourhood of Verona;

while America has provided similar food for discussion in the well-known

Lenape stone and the Calaveras skull. The former bears drawings of the

French cave type, while the latter if genuine would carry back the story

of man in the American continent before Pliocene times.

Mesolithic.

An apparent break in the continuity of man's history in Europe occurs at

the end of the palaeolithic period. Attempts have been made to bridge

the gap by means of a "mesolithic" period ([Greek: mesos], middle); but

it would not seem probable that the missing links will occur at all

events so far north as Britain. We leave palaeolithic man in a cold

climate, surrounded by a somewhat mixed fauna that formed his prey. We

know him as a hunter and artist, but the remains show that he had no

knowledge of pottery till towards the close of the period. Among the

humbler arts he practised at least sewing, and lived in caves or took

shelter at the base of overhanging rocks; but like the Australian, he

frequently camped in the open. His successor of the later Stone Age

(neolithic) we find to be a very different character and with very

different surroundings. The configuration of the land in which he lived

is practically the same as we now see it. The severe arctic conditions

with the appropriate fauna had entirely disappeared, and the

introduction of new arts must have radically changed his daily life. The

most important of these are the training of domestic animals,

agriculture, and the development of pottery. What were the burial rites

of palaeolithic man we have at present no means of knowing, but for his

neolithic successor we know that these were matters of great moment. The

abundance of arrowheads of flint indicate the common use of the bow and

arrow as a weapon, while the art of weaving marks an immense stride in

the direction of comfort and civilization. Of the form and construction

of his dwelling we have only a limited knowledge, derived with some

uncertainty from the analogy of the dwellings for the dead (barrows) and

more certainly from the remains of the villages found erected on piles

on the shores of lakes.

A much-debated question arises here that cannot be passed over. The

changes just mentioned are not such as would be produced by internal

causes alone. Much of the evidence is in favour of neolithic man being

an immigrant, coming into northern and central Europe long after

palaeolithic man and his characteristic fauna had disappeared. Where did

the earlier race go and who are its modern representatives, if any? The

answers to this question are many. W. Boyd Dawkins is of opinion that

the reindeer was followed by man in its journey to the north after the

retreating glaciers, and that the modern representative of palaeolithic

man is the Eskimo. His arguments are ingenious but unconvincing; they

mainly consist in the similarity of the habits of both races in using

harpoons and implements of similar form and make, their power of carving

and drawing on bone, the absence of pottery, disregard of the dead, &c.

As to the positive evidence, it is almost enough to say that the Eskimo,

like the cave-men, used the material nearest to hand that served their

purpose, and that nothing is more remarkable than the similarity of

primitive weapons used by widely separated peoples; while the negative

evidence as to the absence of pottery is of little value; their

conditions of life would allow them neither to make it nor keep it. Till

recently we had no evidence at all of the treatment of the dead by

palaeolithic man, but this is no longer the case; the discoveries in the

Grottes de Grimaldi, Monaco, show several methods of burial, near a

hearth, or in rude stone cists (see Dr Verneau in _L'Anthropologie_,

xvii. 291). A stronger argument would be furnished if it could be shown

that by his physical character the Eskimo is an intruder in his present

home, and is unrelated to his neighbours. But this has not yet been

done, and the skulls of the Eskimo do not resemble any of those hitherto

found in the caves. In fact, what evidence there is on the subject is

rather against than in favour of the wanderings northward of the

inhabitants of the caves. There are indications, on the other hand, that

in the south of France, in the Pyrenees, the reindeer was in existence,

with man, at a later period than that of the caves, while the type of

skull is that of Cro-Magnon. Here, therefore, it may be that something

like a bridging of the gap between palaeolithic and neolithic times may

be forthcoming. But it still remains to be found, and for the present we

must be content with uncertainty.

Neolithic.

The neolithic period has often been loosely called the age of polished

stone, from the fact that in no case has a polished or ground stone

implement been found in a palaeolithic deposit. The term is not only

loose but inaccurate. In the first place, there is no reason why the

cave-men should not be found to have polished a stone implement on

occasion, for they habitually polished their weapons of bone. Secondly,

neolithic man was by no means uniform in his methods; he polished or

ground the surfaces of such tools or weapons as would be improved by the

process; but to take a common instance, he found that the efficacy of

his arrow-point was sufficient when chipped only, and polishing is only

occasionally found, as in Ireland. Many other implements also are found

in neolithic times with no trace of grinding and yet with every

appearance of being complete.

The most trustworthy evidence with regard to this and the succeeding

archaeological periods is to be found in the grave-mounds. For the

earlier part of the neolithic age, however, these are by no means

fruitful of relics. From their shape they are called in England "long

barrows" to distinguish them from the round barrows which belong to a

succeeding time, though evidence is being accumulated to show that this

division is not of universal application. Long barrows are by no means

of such frequent occurrence in Britain as the round variety; they are

most common in Wiltshire, Gloucestershire and Dorset, and occur as far

north as Caithness. Some of them contain within the mound a stone

chamber, at times with a gallery leading to it, and in the chamber the

interment or interments took place. Similar barrows have been found on

the continent of Europe, and both in Britain and abroad have one feature

in common, viz. that no metal, with possibly the exception of gold, has

ever been found in them. This similarity of burial custom, though it may

conceivably indicate intercourse, certainly does not prove identity of

race, as has been sometimes claimed. The type of skulls found in the

interment is clear evidence against such an assumption.

In Britain, the burials were at times by inhumation only, and

occasionally a great number of bodies were interred in the same barrow:

at others, cremation had preceded burial. Another remarkable feature is

that in many instances it is certain from the relative position of the

bones of the unburnt burials that the corpse had been allowed to decay

before the burial took place. This curious practice is known among many

savage tribes of the present day. Its occurrence in Britain has been

adduced in favour of the prevalence of cannibalism at this time, and not

altogether without reason. While metal is entirely absent in the long

barrows (and in fact relics of any kind are very rarely found), it is

significant that in the succeeding round barrows also metal occurs but

seldom, and then always of the types attributed to the earliest part of

the Bronze Age. When, therefore, the mound pottery is of a class that

may well be anterior to metal, and no metal is found with the burial, it

is not unreasonable to assign such barrows to the Stone Age. A similar

argument may be applied to the stone implements, but in the opposite

direction. Many stone implements are found either isolated, or perhaps

with no other relics that serve to fix their period. The material alone

is often considered sufficient evidence of their being before the age of

metals; but it is at any rate quite certain that a large number of stone

axes, more particularly those with a socket for the handle, belong

really to the Bronze Age. This uncertainty makes any account of the

neolithic age difficult, unless the material is taken as the main basis.

Neolithic man, like his forerunners, still recognized that flint and

allied stones provided the best material for his cutting and piercing

implements, though he made use to a great extent of other hard stones

that came ready to his hand. The mining of flint was undertaken on a

large scale, and great care was taken to get down to the layer

containing the best quality. In Norfolk, at Grime's Graves, and in

Sussex, at Cissbury near Worthing, the flint shafts have been carefully

explored by William Greenwell, General Pitt-Rivers and others. The

system was to sink two shafts some little distance apart and deep enough

to reach the desired flint-bed, and the two shafts were then joined by a

gallery at the bottom. At Grime's Graves large numbers of deer's horns

were found, which had evidently been used as picks, as is proved by the

marks found in the chalk walls; and the horn had been trimmed for the

purpose. Cups of chalk were also found in the galleries and were

believed to have been used as lamps. At Cissbury great quantities of

unfinished and defective implements were found in the work, as well as

horn tools, as in Norfolk. At such factories the primitive appliances

correspond very closely with those in use among existing savages. The

pebble was used as a hammer or an anvil, and the more delicate flaking

was done by pressure with a piece of horn rather than by blows.

Naturally enough the number of completed implements found in these

factories is small; the finished tools would be bartered at once and

carried away from the factory. All the animal remains found in these

pits belong to present geological conditions, thus emphasizing what has

been stated above, that the absence of polished implements is no

evidence for great age. Many other factories have been found in Britain,

in Ireland and on the continent of Europe: at Grovehurst in Kent, at

Stourpaine near Blandford, at Whitepark Bay, county Antrim, and in

Belgium at Spiennes. Among the North American Indians the method would

seem to have been somewhat different. After journeying to the site of a

suitable quality of stone, they did not always complete the implements

on the spot, but made a number of oval chipped disks of good stone which

they carried away and worked up into the required implements at their

leisure. These disks bear a strong likeness to some of the ovate

implements from the Drift in Europe; in fact, but for the difference of

surface condition or patina, they would be identical.

[Illustration: PLATE I.

PALAEOLITHIC PERIOD

1. French Drift

2. English Drift.

3. French transition (Le Moustier).

4. French Cave Period.

5. English Cave Period.]

[Illustration: PLATE II.

SCULPTURE AND ENGRAVINGS OF THE CAVE PERIOD. FROM DORDOGNE, FRANCE.]

[Illustration: PLATE III.

WALL PAINTINGS OF THE CAVE PERIOD CAVERN OF ALTAMIRA, SANTANDER,

SPAIN.

OUTLINE OF WALL-PAINTINGS, ALTAMIRA, LENGTH ABOUT 45-1/2 FT (_cf_

PAINTING, Plate 1.)

By permission, from _La Caverne d'Altamira_ by Cartaulhac and Breuil

Monaco 1906.]

[Illustration: PLATE IV.

NEOLITHIC PERIOD.

1. Flint and stone implements, England.

2. Flint arrow-heads, England.

3. Arrow-heads, Ireland.

4. Flint and stone implements, Denmark.

5. Flint implements, France.

6. Flint implements, Egypt.]

While the severe climatic conditions that preceded the neolithic age

restricted the presence of man to the more temperate parts of the globe,

it may be assumed that in neolithic times there was nothing to prevent

him from occupying the greater part of the earth's surface, short of the

neighbourhood of the two poles. Thus it may be expected that an age of

stone will be found, if looked for, in every part of the globe. So far

as our present knowledge goes, all is in favour of the use of stone

before metals, in all countries. The one material requires no special

treatment before being adapted to man's use, while the other demands

considerable knowledge, even if reasoning power have but little place in

the process. Thus the probabilities are here borne out by the facts. In

the extensive "kitchen-middens" of Japan are found great numbers of

chert implements mixed with pottery of a primitive type, recalling that

of European early Bronze Age barrows, while the succeeding periods of

metal are equally clear. Even in the Far East, therefore, the same

sequence is to be observed. In China, the conditions are more obscure.

The superstitious regard for ancestors has prevented the exploration of

ancient tombs in that country, and thus systematic search has been

impossible, while the precise details of the discovery of such relics as

have come to light are difficult to obtain. In spite of the assertion

that China had no Stone Age, it is surely more probable, in the absence

of exact knowledge, that she followed the normal course. Modern

territorial divisions, more especially if they are independent of the

natural physical conditions of the land, such as mountain ranges, great

rivers and the like, have but little value in considering the race

problems of remote ages. If, therefore, we find that, in the countries

bordering on what is now the Chinese empire, the ancient inhabitants

followed the same broad lines of culture that are evident elsewhere, it

is easy to believe that China too was normal in this respect. The

negroes and Bantu races of Africa also were thought to have passed

direct to the use of iron, perhaps owing to the existence on the Nile of

a civilization of great antiquity, which enabled them to pass over the

intervening stages. Inherently improbable, this is now known not to have

been the case. Stone implements, whether ground or merely chipped, have

been discovered on the Congo, and more recently on the Zambezi. It is

quite true that in both cases they are found in superficial deposits,

and may be of any age. But here again the probabilities are greatly in

favour of their having been in use before iron was known. While stone

tools, such as knives or arrow-heads, may possess qualities that render

them superior to bronze or copper, it is certain that once the working

of iron was understood, its superiority to stone would at once be

perceived, and the stone tools be discarded. There can be little doubt

that investigations in Central Africa will demonstrate that the same

course was followed there as elsewhere. In South Africa, in Egypt and in

Somaliland large quantities of stone implements have been discovered,

and of the great age of most of them there can be no doubt. Some from

the banks of the Nile have even been claimed as "eolithic"; but here, as

in Europe, We can only say that the case is not proven: General

Pitt-Rivers did good service in Egypt by discovering among the

stratified gravels near Thebes a number of rude flints bearing

unmistakeable signs of human workmanship, but he described them merely

as of "palaeolithic type," and deplored the absence of mammalian remains

in the gravels. At the same time he pointed out that the bulk of the

implements claimed as palaeolithic (and, it may be, correctly) are found

on the surface, and therefore cannot be dissociated from the surface

types; hence form alone cannot be trusted to determine age. Further, we

are by no means well informed as to the value of patination in flints

found on the surface in Egypt. The depth and intensity of the patination

would no doubt have a direct relation to the age of the implement, if

only it could be proved that all of them had been equally subjected to

the conditions that produced the discoloration. But this is clearly

impossible. Some implements may conceivably have been continuously on

the surface of the desert from the time they were made, and have been

acted upon by the sun and air for many thousands of years, while others,

though of equal age, may have been covered by sand or otherwise

protected for a large part of the intervening centuries. Patination,

therefore, like form, can only claim a conditional value. It is at the

best an uncertain indication of age, as great age may be possible

without it. Similarly, in Somaliland, the condition of the implements is

very curious, and in some respects puzzling, while their forms resemble

those from the Drift in Europe. But as to the climatic conditions we

know nothing, and it is therefore useless to speculate on the condition

of the stones; as to the geology we know next to nothing, and no

mammalian remains give us a helping hand, while the form alone is a

dangerous foundation for argument.

Europe and America.

Investigations in the more remote parts of the world, though they may

occasionally produce some startling novelty in the history of mankind,

can scarcely be expected to furnish the same trustworthy continuous

story as is to be found in the European area. Here history provides us

with a fairly truthful account of what has happened for a period varying

from two to three thousand years, or in some places even longer, and we

are thus able to judge whether particular discoveries come into the

historical stage or not. In more primitive lands where history (if there

be any) partakes more of the character of mythical tradition, the task

of defining the period to which particular discoveries belong is

rendered much more difficult. In America, where history may be said to

have begun five hundred years ago, such a feat is of course impossible,

until a great deal of work on comparative lines has been accomplished.

The accounts of the civilization of Mexico and Peru at the time of the

Spanish conquest show a state of culture which in some respects must

have put the Spaniards to shame, while in others it was primitive in the

extreme. As regards internal communications, the working of gold and

copper, and the manufacture and decoration of pottery, these American

kingdoms were on a level with all but the most advanced nations; but of

history in the true sense of the word they have none. In spite of this,

it is by no means a hopeless task to disentangle the apparent confusion

of their archaeology. It is now fairly well known what were the races or

tribes that inhabited particular districts, and it is thus easy to make

a _corpus_ of the types adopted by the various peoples. This is the

first certain step in the application of archaeological method. By

degrees, as these types become familiar to the trained eye, it will not

be difficult to arrange them in a progressive series, from the earliest

in style to the latest. That this will be done by the archaeologists of

the American continent, even with the present scanty materials, there

can be little doubt. Numbers of young and enthusiastic workers have now

had a good training in exploration in historical lands, and will

usefully employ their experience on the antiquities of their own

country. But if once a key be found to the ancient Mexican inscriptions,

so plentifully scattered through the ancient monuments, it may be that

enlightenment will come even more suddenly and more surely. The one

problem that is of the greatest interest still awaits solution, viz.

whether there is any relation, in culture or more remotely in race,

between the inhabitants of ancient America and those of Europe or Asia.

One thing is certain, that if there be any connexion, it is of infinite

remoteness. But it is at any rate noteworthy that the same designs,

patterns and even games are found in ancient Mexico and in India or

China; and whether these resemblances arise from relations between the

peoples using them or from accident, is a problem well worth

investigation.

In countries like Scandinavia or Switzerland, the story of the early

ages is clear and comparatively free from complications. The one by its

remoteness was left to develop with but little help from the rest of

Europe up to historical times; the other, protected on so many sides by

its mountain ranges, seems to have enjoyed a peaceful existence during

the Stone and Bronze Ages. A community of fishermen and agriculturists,

they led a calm domestic life on the edges of their many lakes where

they constructed dwellings on piles with only a gangway to the shore, to

prevent the attacks of predatory animals. The practice of building

houses in lakes was a common one not only in Switzerland, but also in

Britain and in Ireland, as in modern times among the natives of New

Guinea. Besides securing the safety of the inhabitants, it had the not

unimportant advantage of being more healthy; all refuse of food and

other useless matter could at once be thrown into the water where it

would be harmless. A similar form of dwelling is the Irish "crannog,"

constructed on an island or shoal in a lake, in some cases artificially

heightened so as to bring it above water. These crannogs were probably

inhabited in Ireland up to comparatively recent times, if one may judge

by the remains found on the sites.

It must not be forgotten that although the neolithic period had many

phases, yet its duration is in no way comparable to the incalculable

length of the palaeolithic age. For a variety of reasons it is thought

that one of the earliest stages of neolithic times is represented by the

now well-known kitchen-middens (refuse-heaps) of Denmark. These heaps

are often of great size, sometimes reaching 10 ft. in height, and nearly

350 yds. in length. Here along the coast line the natives of Denmark

lived, apparently building their huts upon the mounds and cooking their

food upon hearths of stone. The conditions of their daily life would

seem to have resembled those of the natives of Tierra del Fuego. Their

implements of flint seem to have been chipped only, and it is

conjectured that the few polished and more highly finished implements

that have been found in the middens are importations from more cultured

tribes living inland. Their food was in very great part composed of

shell-fish, though they evidently caught and ate various kinds of deer,

boar and a variety of carnivorous animals. The race which made these

mounds is believed to have been akin to the Lapps, and their dwellings

can hardly have been anything more than the rudest protection from the

weather. The Swiss lake-dwellers were far more advanced, even in the

Stone Age; their dwellings were elaborately planned and constructed, and

remains of them have been plentifully found in the various Swiss lakes.

Various forms of construction were adopted: in one the foundations

consisted of poles driven into the bed of the lake; in others a kind of

framework simply rested on the bottom, and in a third, the substructure

was formed of layers of sticks reaching from the bottom of the lake up

to the surface. The walls were of wattle, closed up with clay to keep

out the weather; the hearths were of stone slabs, and the floors of clay

well trodden down. Practically the same type of dwelling seems to have

continued through the Stone and Bronze Ages, though on some sites no

metal whatever is found and it is therefore assumed that these are of

the earlier period. These people cultivated the land, growing wheat and

barley; they were also hunters and fishermen, capable of manufacturing

pottery without the aid of the wheel, which had not yet come into use so

far north; and they wove mats and garments, while ropes and netting are

plentiful. Their tools and weapons were made of stone, and to a great

extent of deer's horn. Human remains are hardly ever found on the sites

of the lake-dwellings, and it is therefore uncertain what were the

social affinities of the people; but the evidence of the sites is in

favour of the same race being continuous into the Bronze Age, when their

condition was more comfortable, as is shown by the abundant remains of

domesticated animals.

Stone Age relics.

Among the most notable and obvious relics of prehistoric times, both in

Britain and in many other countries such as Spain, Portugal, France and

even India, are gigantic circles and avenues of stone and dolmens (see

STONE MONUMENTS). These enduring monuments have excited the wonder of

countless generations, and lent themselves to superstitious practices

down to modern times. But the precise purpose for which they were

erected and even the period to which they belonged, had never been

definitely settled. They had been called burial places of great chiefs,

and not unnaturally had been thought by others to have been temples or

places of primitive worship used by the Druids, who moreover were often

credited with their erection. Obviously such a question called for

settlement, and the British Association in the year 1898 appointed a

committee to investigate these stone circles with a view to ascertaining

their age. Operations were begun at the well-known circle of Arbor Low,

south of Buxton in Derbyshire; careful excavations were made through the

ditch and the encircling mound and also within the circle, and although

the evidence was not of the most complete kind, yet the committee came

to the conclusion that the circle belonged to the end of the neolithic

age. At Arbor Low all the stones are now lying on the ground (although,

to judge from the other circles in England, they were certainly once

upright), and the opportunities for surveying were thereby much

diminished. It is a fortunate circumstance, therefore, that the fall of

one of the stones at Stonehenge (q.v.) at the end of the 19th century,

and the increasingly perilous state of some of the others, caused the

owner, with the advice of the Society of Antiquaries of London, to

undertake the raising of the great leaning stone in the interior of the

circle. The work was superintended by W. Gowland, F.S.A., who made

special investigations during the necessary digging, for the purpose of

recovering any remains of man's handiwork that had been left by the

builders of the monument. In this he was very successful, finding in the

course of the very limited excavation at the base of the monolith, a

great number of stone mauls or hammers that corresponded so nearly with

the bruised surfaces of the monoliths, that there can be no doubt of

their having been used to dress the standing stones.

From a review of all the evidence of an archaeological nature that was

to be obtained, Gowland came to the conclusion that the construction of

Stonehenge belonged to the latter part of the neolithic age. No trace of

a metal implement occurred in any of the debris. This would of itself be

an interesting fact, but it became infinitely more interesting from

researches in quite another direction, which brought corroborative

evidence of a curious kind. For many years Sir Norman Lockyer and Prof.

Penrose were engaged in examining the orientation of temples in Egypt

and Greece, with a view to determining on what astronomical principle,

if any, the plans had been laid down. With a rectangular plan, and with

portions of the interior still well defined, they were able by elaborate

calculation to determine that the temples had been definitely planned

with relation to the rising or setting of the sun or of a particular

star. Having been successful in these investigations they proceeded to

apply the test to Stonehenge. The experiment was made on the longest day

in the year 1901. Owing to a gradual change in the obliquity of the

earth's orbit, the point of sunrise on corresponding days of each year

is not constant; and though the difference is hardly perceptible from

year to year, in the course of centuries it becomes great enough for use

as a measure of time. Enough remains of the monument to show the

direction of sunrise at the time that Stonehenge was erected, it being

always assumed that the coincidence of the main axis with the central

line of the Avenue was designed with reference to sunrise on the longest

day of the year. At the date of the experiment it was found that the sun

had shifted nearly two diameters in the interval, and this variation

gives a date of about 1680 B.C., which practically confirms the verdict

of archaeology and seems to prove, moreover, that Stonehenge was a

temple of the sun.

Stonehenge therefore may be taken as marking for Britain the close of

the neolithic period and heralding the dawn of a new era, in which the

inhabitants of the British Isles first acquired the art of working

metal.

Bronze Age.

There is reason to believe that the transition from the use of stone to

that of bronze was not due to the peaceful advance of civilization, but

rather to the irruption of an Aryan race from the south-east of Europe

into the countries to the west and north. Of these people the Celts are

to some extent the representatives at a somewhat more recent period.

Here, however, we are dealing with terms the precise meaning of which is

not yet generally admitted, and which, moreover, have too intimate a

relation to the problems of philology to be fully discussed here (see

INDO-EUROPEAN). The term Aryan (q.v.) itself is not free from

objections. It was held by Max Muller to relate to a language and a

civilization that took its rise in Central Asia, while others now

contend that, although it is the mother language of the Sanskrit, Greek,

Latin, Teutonic and Celtic languages, it might equally well have

originated in Europe. However this may be, and even this brief statement

shows how wide a field the arguments would cover, there can be little

doubt that the Bronze Age Celts were of this stock, and that in course

of time they gradually spread their language and culture over a large

part of Europe. Whether or no the knowledge of bronze started from one

or more centres, it gradually spread from the south-east of Europe until

it reached Scandinavia; the dates being roughly in Crete, 3000 B.C.; in

Sicily, 2500 B.C.; in central France, 2000 B.C.; in Britain and in

Scandinavia 1800 B.C. The appearance of the Celts in Britain is

indicated by the presence of the round barrows. They were a fairly tall,

short-headed race, using cremation and also inhumation in their burials,

skilful in the manufacture of pottery and of the simpler forms of bronze

implements, and freely using bone, jet, and at times amber, while gold

was well known and evidently greatly esteemed. In the early centuries of

the Bronze Age, swords, spears and shields were apparently quite

unknown, the principal metallic products being flat axes, simple knives

or daggers, and small tools or ornaments. In the burial places the

bodies, if unburnt, are nearly always found in a crouching position, as

if in the attitude of sleep; if cremated, the burnt bones are generally

enshrined in an urn under the tumulus, the burial being sometimes in a

cist formed of large stones. The pottery vessels are remarkable in more

ways than one. In the first place they would seem to have been specially

made for the burial rites, for whenever domestic pottery has been found,

it is of quite a different character, unornamented and simple in

outline. It must be confessed, however, that this latter is by no means

common. The sepulchral vessels are at times highly decorated, and

sometimes of great size. They are invariably hand made, and though they

are by no means well fired they are never sun-dried, as is often said to

be the case. A common kind of decoration is produced by impressing

twisted cords in the damp clay, and this is believed with some reason to

have had its origin in the practice of winding cords round the unbaked

vessel to prevent distortion before or during the process of firing.

That operation would of course burn away the cord and leave only its

impression on the urn. Other forms of ornament are also used, incised

lines in rudely geometrical designs, impressions of the end of a stick,

and at times rows of hollows produced by the finger or thumb. The method

of the burial, beyond giving an insight into the art of the period, also

helps us to realize to some extent the ideas of primitive man. The

underlying reason for careful and ceremonial burial is not always

readily understood, apart from a knowledge of the ritual, such as

existed in ancient Egypt. But in the Bronze Age in Britain it was the

custom to bury with the dead not only carefully made vessels which

doubtless contained food for the journey to the lower world, but also

the ornaments and weapons of the deceased. Often the bonea of a pig have

been found in the grave, doubtless representing part of the provender

which could not conveniently be placed in the so-called food-vessel.

Such practices indicate with a fair amount of certainty a belief in a

future life in another world, where probably the conditions were thought

to be much the same as in this. The burial of the weapons and other

property of a dead man is, however, not always due to the belief that he

may need them in some future state. The reason may well be that it would

be thought unlucky for a survivor to use them.

Just as the neolithic age was immeasurably shorter than the

palaeolithic, but was notable for great improvements in the arts of

life, so the Bronze Age in its turn was shorter than the neolithic age,

and again witnessed even more marked advance in culture. It is in fact

an illustration of the truism that each step in knowledge renders all

that follow less laborious; but it is not easy to understand how the

transition from stone to metal came about, nor why bronze came to be the

chosen metal rather than iron. Bronze, in the first place, is a

composite metal, a mixture of copper and tin, while iron can be at once

reduced from its ores; indeed, in the form of meteoric iron, it is

already metallic, and needs but a hammer to produce whatever form may be

wanted. From the archaeological point of view, there is, however, good

reason for believing that bronze preceded iron. The forms of axes that

are without doubt the earliest, are in outline much the same as the

stone prototype, being only thinner in proportion. Then again, iron

implements are never found on the earlier sites, and if they had been in

existence some of them certainly would remain: further, at the end of

the Bronze Age it is found that the forms of weapons in that metal are

exactly copied in iron, as, for instance, at Hallstatt (q.v.) in the

Salzkammergut, the famous cemetery which best illustrates the passage

from the use of bronze to that of iron. It has been claimed that bronze

was preceded by copper, a sequence which seems inherently probable; and

whether or no it was general enough or enduring enough to constitute a

period, there can be no reasonable doubt that in the Mediterranean area,

and in central Europe, as well as in Ireland, great numbers of

implements were made of copper alone without any appreciable admixture

of tin. The casting of pure copper presents certain difficulties, in

that the metal is not adapted for anything but a mould open to the air,

and this would limit its utility, until the discovery that tin in a

certain proportion (roughly 1:9) not only made the resulting metal much

harder and better fitted for cutting-tools and weapons, but at the same

time rendered possible the use of closed moulds.

There are thus two problems in connexion with the history of the Bronze

Age. How was the metal discovered? And by whom or where? As to the

first, it must be remembered that in some parts of the world, e.g. in

China and in Cornwall, copper and tin are found together, and it may

well be that tin was first accidentally included as an impurity, which,

had it been noticed, would have been eliminated. Once it was found to

produce a more useful metal, the blend would be deliberately made, and

repeated trials would eventually demonstrate the most suitable

proportion of one metal to the other. The question of where it was first

discovered is one that is not likely to be answered with certainty, but

the one essential is the presence of the two metals in one and the same

locality. Tin does not exist in either Egypt or Mesopotamia, although

bronze articles from the fourth and third millennium respectively B.C.

have been found in these countries. The tin to produce the mere metal

must have come from some foreign country; and the choice seems to be

very small. Spain at the other end of the Mediterranean is unlikely, and

Britain still more so; central Asia, Asia Minor, or China again seem too

remote; for the spread of metallurgy from these centres would imply a

trade connexion nearly 4000 B.C. In later times, later perhaps by 3000

years, Spain and Britain were undoubtedly among the chief sources of the

tin supply of Europe and of the Mediterranean generally; but it will

long remain a problem where bronze was first produced. There is indeed,

no real necessity for confining its origin to a single locality; it is

easily conceivable that the invention occurred independently in more

places than one.

The history of early metallurgy has been carefully studied by W.

Gowland, who communicated the results of his researches to the Society

of Antiquaries of London in 1899. In his opinion the ores from which

copper was first obtained by smelting were originally found as pebbles

or boulders in the beds of streams, where man in the Stone Age had been

accustomed to search for stones to convert into implements; and in the

same way the beds of rivers were for a long subsequent period the only

sources of tin. Actual mining belongs in his opinion to a far later

period, and naturally had its origin in the discovery of outcrops of the

metal on the surface. By the simple application of fire, lumps of ore

were reduced to a smaller size, and were then prepared for smelting by

further reduction to the condition of a coarse powder. This latter

process was carried out in the same way that grain was crushed between

two stones; and stone-mills, doubtless used for the purpose, have been

found in ancient workings in Wales. The next stage would be the furnace,

and there can be little doubt that this would be of the simplest kind,

merely a hole in the ground with the fire covering the metal, and with

nothing but a natural draught. But Gowland holds that even with these

singularly inadequate appliances, copper could be smelted from the

surface ores, though the output would naturally be of the most uncertain

and intermittent character, depending, as it must have done, on the

wind. And until the discovery of bellows or some other method of

increasing the draught of air, no progress could be made in this

direction. With regard to the resulting metal, viz. copper, we have

certain knowledge. From time to time there are found in the earth in

Britain and elsewhere, hoards of fragmentary or imperfect bronze

implements, portions of axes, swords, rings, &c., all of which have been

failures in castings. These hoards are assumed to have been gathered

together by the bronze founders to be recast into perfect and useful

implements. Now, frequently associated with these hoards are portions of

cakes of pure copper, originally circular in shape, flat on one face and

convex on the other, like a lens with one flat face. The form of these

cakes is in itself a fair proof of the prevalence of the method of

smelting described above, as it is quite clear that the convex face of

the cake followed the contour of the hole in the ground above which the

fire was placed. The cakes are generally found broken up into small

handy blocks. This can only be done in one way, viz. by watching the

cake, after the fire and slag has been raked off it, until it is on the

point of becoming solid, when it is quickly pulled out of the hole and

broken up. It will be noted that while the implements in these founders'

hoards are invariably of bronze, the cakes are as invariably of copper.

This is at first sight puzzling, until it is realized that these

founders probably carried the tin necessary for forming bronze in the

form of ore, and that tin ore in its pure state is a snuff-coloured

powder very easily overlooked when lying on the earth, which it might

very nearly resemble in colour, though it would be much heavier. Thus it

is probable that in many such discoveries the tin ore has accompanied

the copper cakes and bronze fragments, but has hitherto eluded the eyes

of the finder. Not only have we this conclusive evidence of the methods

by which Bronze Age man produced his raw material, but the discovery of

crucibles and moulds takes us a step further towards the finished

implements. The crucibles are generally simple bowls of thick clay with

an extension of the lip at one side to pour out the molten metal.

Several of these, with plentiful traces of metal still remaining in

them, were found by the brothers Siret in the Bronze Age settlement at

El Argar in Murcia. In the same place also were found moulds of stone

for the casting of simple triangular axes. These were of the class known

as open moulds, one stone being hollowed to the desired form, the other

half being simply a flat cover, with no relation to the form of the

implement to be produced. From the nature of the metal, such a mould is

the only kind in which the casting of an efficient copper implement

would be possible; and among the objects discovered by the Sirets were

articles in plenty of pure copper.

Much has been written in support of the theory that the bronze tools and

implements found in this or that country must have been importations

from southern and more highly civilized lands. More particularly has

this been alleged with regard to Britain, which, lying as it did on the

extreme limit of the ancient world, was regarded as being dependent on

the continent for the more complex weapons. The constant discovery,

however, of these hoards of rough metal, as well as of moulds of the

highest finish for casting swords, daggers, celts, and almost every kind

of ancient bronze implement and weapon known to us, provides a

conclusive proof of the contrary. The occurrence of a foreign type of

implement is so rare as to be a source of especial gratification to the

collector who secures it; and it may be taken that, in general terms,

all the bronze swords, daggers and spears found in Britain were of home

manufacture. Relations with the continent, however, did exist, as is

shown by the occurrence of an Irish type of gold ornament in France and

Scandinavia, and by the similarity of ornamental motives in the British

Isles and elsewhere. Among the continental races it is natural to find

intercommunication more common, owing to the absence of natural

barriers. The weapons of the Bronze Age were swords, spears, daggers and

axes (celts), though the last would be equally well adapted for more

peaceful purposes. The swords were usually of a narrow leaf shape, cast

with the handle in one piece, the mounting of the grip and the pommel

being added. For perfection of workmanship the weapons of this period

have never been surpassed, and the skill of adjustment in the moulds,

the fine and equal quality of the metal, and the flawless condition of

the surfaces still excite wonder among the most expert of modern

founders. The cutting edges of swords and "celts" were often, if not

always, hammered to serve the double purpose of hardening that part of

the weapon and sharpening the edge. In the case of the axe-heads

(celts), this hammering had a distinct influence on the evolution of the

form of the implement. The earliest celts, whether of copper or bronze,

were in form, copies of their stone prototypes, and curiously enough

exactly like the ordinary woodman's axe of to-day, but of course without

the socket for the handle. Hammering rendered the cutting edge both

broader and thinner, giving it at the same time a curved outline. This

widened curve eventually became an ornamental feature, the two ends of

the cutting edge becoming curved points and adding greatly to the

elegance of the outline. Later, the other edges were finished by

hammering also, at times in a simple ornamental fashion; and whether for

greater rigidity or for some other reason, flanges were produced in the

same way on those edges, which again affected the ultimate form of the

celt. The early flat celt was no doubt simply fixed in a perforated

wooden handle, which would naturally tend to split if wielded with any

vigour. The side-flanges were in course of time utilized to prevent

this, by allowing the use of a different form of handle. In place of the

simple straight handle, a branch was cut with an elbow-joint, and its

shorter limb then divided into two prongs, between which the metal

passed, while the flanges, beaten up from the edges, overlapped the two

forks; and no doubt a lashing of sinew was added to render the whole

secure. This made a good serviceable tool or weapon, and prevented the

splitting of the handle; but still another step was taken. The flanges

on the edges met over the prong of the handle on either side, while the

upper end of the celt itself eventually became a mere septum dividing

the two openings. This septum was finally judged to be useless, and done

away with; and the celt was cast with one hollow only for the reception

of the ends of the handle; thus the flat celt became, by a natural

process of evolution and improvement, a socketed celt. It is a curious

fact, however, that the modern form of axe where the handle passes

through a socket in the metal itself does not seem to have been much in

favour in the Bronze Age, although it was a stone form that certainly

survived into the succeeding period.

This and other shortcomings in what must have been the universal weapon

and implement of the race, were remedied from time to time by various

improvements in the form of the bronze axe-head and the method of

hafting; and the various stages of development, from the flat blade of

copper or bronze to the socketed implement and even to a pattern now in

use, can still be traced in the Bronze Age specimens that have come down

to us.

[Illustration: PLATE V.

SEPULCHRAL POTTERY, BRITISH ISLES (BRONZE AGE).

1-3, Drinking cups or beakers. 4-9, Food vessels. 10-12, Cinerary

urns.

SEPULCHRAL POTTERY FROM THE CONTINENT OF EUROPE (NEOLITHIC, BRONZE,

AND IRON AGES).

STAGES IN THE EVOLUTION OF THE CELT OR IMPLEMENT OF CHISEL FORM.

(1) From stone to metallic form.

(2) Growth of the stop ridge to palstave.

(3) Growth of the wings to socket-celt.

By permission, from the British Museum _Guide to the Bronze Age._]

[Illustration: PLATE VI.

1. Bronze shield with red enamel ornaments, found in the Thames near

Battersea; about 31 in. long.

Chariot burial of a Gaulish chief, Somme Bionne, Marne, France.

Bronze mounted wooden bucket found in a pit burial at Aylesford.

Early Iron Age.

Horned bronze helmet with traces of enamel ornament, found in the

Thames near Waterloo Bridge.

The objects here represented are all in the British Museum.

By permission, from the British Museum _Guide to the Early Iron Age._]

Iron age.

With the discovery of iron as the ideal metal for cutting implements and

weapons, we enter into the millennium before the Christian era; for

roughly speaking, the development of the civilization associated with

the gradual substitution of iron for bronze began about 1000 B.C. Again

we look towards the south-east of Europe for the earliest evidence of

this great advance; from that quarter it gradually spread over the whole

continent, reaching the more northern parts about five hundred years

later. In Egypt, the home of a marvellous civilization at a very early

time, the conditions were different, and there is reason to suppose that

iron was known there long before it was in use on the northern side of

the Mediterranean. Our knowledge of the dates at which iron was first

known in parts of Asia is still very limited, and further discoveries

must be awaited.

Ireland.

The archaeology of Ireland presents features in many respects different

from those of the rest of the British Islands in the Stone and Bronze

Ages. Such affinities in style as are traceable connect it rather with

Scotland than with any part of the south, a fact doubtless due to

proximity as well as in part to race connexions. A special feature is

the astonishing quantity of gold that was produced in Ireland during the

early Bronze Age. The frequent discovery of gold ornaments of this time

has enriched to a surprising degree the museum of the Royal Irish

Academy in Dublin, while many private and public collections both in

Ireland and elsewhere contain a considerable number of similar relics.

If these represented the total wealth of gold of the Bronze Age the

amount would probably exceed that of any ancient period in any country,

except perhaps the republic of Colombia in South America. But the known

remains can only be a small proportion of the original wealth. Vast

quantities must have been discovered from medieval times onwards, nearly

all of which would be melted down, owing to the ignorance of the finders

or to the uncertainty of ownership. Further, it may be taken as certain

that there still remains in the earth a great mass of the metal which

may or may not be discovered at some future time. If it were by any

means possible to estimate what these united categories would amount to,

the result would scarcely be credited. It is well known that gold has

been, and still is, found in Ireland; but it is hard to believe that

there were no richer deposits than are now known. It is at any rate

certain that the rivers were worked as late as the opening centuries of

our era. In the Bronze Age the most characteristic ornaments were

penannular objects of all sizes from a small finger ring up to an

armlet, generally known as "ring money" from the difficulty of assigning

a definite use to the whole series; and the flat, crescent-shaped,

diadem-like objects called "lunulae," which are perhaps even more

definitely characteristic of Ireland. Such objects of gold, if

ornamented at all, are, like some of the flat axe-heads, engraved with

simple geometrical patterns, lozenge-shaped chequers and the like, a

type of decoration in itself easily determined as being of the Bronze

Age, but bearing at the same time an interesting and very curious

analogy to remains of the same period from the Iberian Peninsula, more

especially from Portugal. If any overland culture-relations existed

between the two countries, it would be only reasonable to expect the

occurrence of the objects in question in the intervening districts. But

so far nothing of the kind has been discovered. Moreover, had it been an

isolated instance of resemblance it might be negligible, but an equally

odd similarity is found in the fact that the Irish were in the habit of

grinding the faces of their flint arrow-heads, an apparently useless

refinement, while the Portuguese of the early Bronze Age did the same.

Again, the dolmens of Ireland bear a distinct resemblance to those of

Spain and Portugal, while the French dolmens, with few exceptions in the

north, have a different character. These curious points are in favour of

the tradition that the original inhabitants of Ireland were of Iberian

origin, and further, that they did not come overland but by sea, and

there are indeed signs of extensive navigation in the Bronze Age of

northern Europe. It was perhaps in the middle of our Bronze Age, say

about 1000 B.C., that this Iberian race was supplanted by the Celts, who

took a considerable time to emerge from their native barbarism. It is,

at any rate, fairly certain that for some hundreds of years previous to

this Celtic invasion, Ireland was an enormously rich country, supplying

not only herself, but also Britain and part of the Atlantic seaboard

with gold. The fact became eventually an ingrained tradition in the

history of the country, subsisting in Irish literature for centuries

after the Christian era. Such natural wealth must have produced in these

early times a marked effect on the relations and culture of these

Iberian Irish, and one might reasonably expect a much higher level of

luxury and wealth than is indicated by the remains commonly found. With

the opportunities provided by communication with the continent, and the

interchange of goods, with all the chances of benefiting by ideas

current among other races, it is astonishing that Ireland did not play a

more prominent part in Europe, more than a thousand years before the

Christian era.

Mediterranean area.

While gold as a metal was known in Europe, even before copper, it is a

curious fact that silver was almost unknown, and hardly ever used. One

of the most interesting sites for the metal, at about the same period of

which we have just been speaking in Ireland, was the Mediterranean coast

of Spain. Here in the neighbourhood of Almeria have been found remains

of a large and apparently prosperous population ranging from the Stone

Age to the end of the Bronze Age, with houses and tombs, besides the

fortifications rendered necessary, in the later period, by their

possession of the rare and precious metal, silver. Rare it certainly

was, for the quantity found was exceedingly small, tiny slender rings

for the fingers or the ears, and rivets to hold the axe-blade in its

handle; but nothing to compare with the lavish richness of the American

mines. The interesting race who occupied these dwellings and finally

were laid to rest in the adjoining graves were evidently connected more

or less closely with the peoples inhabiting the eastern coasts of the

Mediterranean.

Recent discoveries in the central Mediterranean area not only furnish

new and trustworthy (though none the less surprising) dates in ancient

history, but may also bridge the distance between the Levant and the

Pillars of Hercules. The results achieved by Arthur Evans and other

distinguished explorers in Crete (q.v.) opened a new chapter in the

history of European civilization, and may fitly be compared with the

excavation of Troy, Mycenae and Tiryns by Schliemann some thirty years

before. The progress of archaeology in the interval can be well tested

by a comparison of the discussions to which the two series of

discoveries gave rise. The mistaken attributions and unfortunate

animosities in connexion with earlier excavations are almost forgotten,

while the brilliant discoveries in the island of King Minos have not

only themselves been made on scientific principles, but are illumined by

the splendid revelation of the civilizations of the Mycenaean and the

pre-Mycenaean era.

Classical.

A great change indeed took place in the methods of classical study

during the last decade of the 19th century, a change which affected the

entire character of future classical research. It was formerly the

common habit among students and professors of archaeology to confine

their attention and their interests entirely to classical texts and even

to classical sites, rejecting as outside the scope of their studies

anything that was not manifestly beautiful as art. Whatever was

primitive in its aspect, or wanting in the familiar characteristics that

had for centuries been associated with Greek art, was either rejected

entirely or at any rate relegated to a second place, as having but a

poor claim to be classed with objects of the finer periods. The result

was necessarily misleading. The uninstructed majority very naturally

regarded the art of Pheidian times as a thing of supernatural growth,

which had been bestowed by divine favour upon a chosen spot on the

earth, without a human parentage, and almost without leaving any

descendants. The evolutionary methods of other branches of science,

however, were by degrees brought to bear upon the sacred precincts of

pure Greek art. It was found that the crude products of the second

millennium B.C., the formless images evolved by the uncultured dwellers

in the Mediterranean area more than a thousand years before the time of

Pheidias, were in truth the prototypes of the creations of himself and

his contemporaries. This step being taken, the rest became easy. The

most commonplace and ordinary relics were collected with as much avidity

as they had formerly been rejected, in the belief that their simple

forms would aid in the elucidation of their more complex and highly

elaborated descendants. This minute attention, moreover, was not only

given to the works of man, but even the remains of humanity received the

attention they merited. It has been rightly thought, during recent

years, that the question of race was a factor that deserved treatment in

dealing with works of art of early times; and that natural evolution due

to man's tendency to change with time, might not be sufficient to

account for the differences of type observed in human remains from the

same country. For this reason, not only the objects associated with the

burial have been preserved, but also the skeleton itself. This has been

examined, measurements taken and recorded for comparison, and inferences

made, sometimes of a surprising character. For example, if a cemetery be

found with a preponderance of tall, long-headed skeletons in a district

where the prevailing type of skeleton is short and brachycephalic

(short-headed), the observer may reasonably expect a different kind of

burial-furniture, and suspect an intruding race. In this particular

respect, archaeology owes a signal debt to physical anthropology and to

anthropological methods in general. The combination of the two is far

more likely to lead to a reasonable and satisfactory conclusion than

would be possible if the one branch of science had been pursued alone.

Value of ethnology.

When once the existence of abundant remains of prehistoric man had been

admitted, and their study had received recognition as a branch of

science, the evidence supplied by the relics themselves and by their

relation to extinct or existing animals would have sufficed to give a

considerable insight into the conditions of primitive life. But,

fortunately, corroborative evidence of the most useful kind was at hand,

and has been of the greatest service in solving what might otherwise

have been insoluble problems. Though the progress of civilization, and

more especially the ever increasing rapidity of communication are

rapidly changing the habits of life among the primitive peoples in

various parts of the world, yet till past the middle of the 19th

century, a certain number of tribes, if not races, were still in the

Stone Age. Even at the present day stone-using tribes still exist,

although by chance metal may be known to them. The importance of the

study of their conditions of life and their technical processes, and of

the collecting of their implements for the express purpose of

illustrating prehistoric man, was recognized by Henry Christy

(1810-1865), who had made extensive investigations and collected relics

in conjunction with Edouard Lartet in the now famous caverns of the

Dordogne, at a time when such explorations were somewhat of a novelty;

and concurrently he formed a large collection of the productions of

existing savage peoples, both collections after his death passing to the

British Museum, his intention being that the one should elucidate the

ether. (It is only fair to his memory, however, to state here that, by

his express wish, the most important of the relics that he had obtained

from the Dordogne caves were returned to France where they now are. Such

instances of international courtesy are rare enough to deserve mention.)

The value and interest of such a series can scarcely be over-rated.

Almost till the 20th century, the Indians of North America, the

Australian and Tasmanian natives, as well as those of New Zealand and

the many archipelagoes of the Pacific, were, if not ignorant of the use

of metals, at least habitually using stone where civilized man would use

metal. The Maori made his war club of jade and the pounders for

preparing his food of stone. The Australian had his stone axe-blade; and

low as he stands in the culture scale, his spear-heads are chipped with

an exquisite precision. The Papuan of inland New Guinea is still making

his weapons of stone and wood; while until quite recently the North

American Indian was making his delicate stone arrow points, and the

Solomon islander his beautiful polished stone axe-blades. The knowledge

gained by the study of a large series of such objects enables us to fill

up very many gaps in the story of early man as told by his own remains.

In fact, in this respect, the value of the comparison is much greater

than could reasonably be expected; for, whatever may be the reason,

nothing is more marked than the extraordinary similarity of stone

implements at all times and over the whole world. An arrow-point made by

a Patagonian Indian, one from a Japanese shell mound, and a third of the

Stone Age from Ireland, are found to be practically identical. Whether

it is that the same material and the same necessity naturally produce a

like result, or whether there has existed throughout a continuity of

type, is a question that will never be satisfactorily answered. The

results, however, are of eminently practical value. The arrow-heads of

neolithic man, which are found by hundreds all over Europe, may be seen

fixed in their shafts in the hands of an American Indian; rude pieces of

quartz, which unmounted would escape notice as implements, are seen to

make excellent tools when mounted in a handle by the Australian black,

while flakes of slate find a use when mounted as skinning knives by the

Eskimo.

Organized study.

Now that the narrower conception of archaeology as a minor branch of

classical studies has been given up, the new science has gradually won

its way to universal recognition; and anthropology, a still wider

subject but in many points closely allied to the scientific study of

ancient remains, has still more recently found favour at all the leading

universities, and practical measures have been taken to establish the

study on a firm and scientific basis. Apart from this official

encouragement, much has been done towards the systematization and

teaching of archaeology by practical excavators, whose pupils have

attained considerable numbers and celebrity. Something has been done,

too, in the national and provincial museums, to present the relics of

past ages in an intelligible manner, so that the collections no longer

consist of curiosities but of documents rich in instruction and interest

even to the general visitor. The progress of photography, as well as the

improvement and cheapening of methods of illustration, have also

assisted enormously in the advance of archaeology; and similarly, the

antiquities exhibited in museums and private collections to illustrate

and amplify written records, have in the last generation received much

attention on their own account, and have reacted in various ways on the

teaching of ancient history. In some countries a further step in general

education has been taken, and the lamentable waste of archaeological

material arrested to some extent by the distribution of pictures and

diagrams among schools and institutions, to call attention to the more

ordinary local types, and to encourage those who are likely to discover

them in the soil to save them from destruction and render them available

for scientific study. A certain familiarity on the part of the young

with the mere appearance of antiquities that come to light continually

and are almost as often discarded or destroyed, would probably result in

valuable additions being made to the available data.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The most useful general works are the

following:--Salomon Reinach, _Epoque des alluvions et des cavernes_

(Musee de St Germain); Hoernes, _Der diluviale Mensch in Europa;_ Sir

John Evans, _Stone Implements of Great Britain_, and _Bronze

Implements of Great Britain;_ Boyd Dawkins, _Cave-hunting_, and _Early

Man in Britain;_ Greenwell, _British Barrows;_ W.G. Smith, _Man the

Primeval Savage;_ James Geikie, _Prehistoric Europe;_ Mortillet, _Le

Prehistorique;_ Robert Munro, _Lake Dwellings of Europe;_ Ridgeway,

_Early Age of Greece;_ Jos. Anderson, _Scotland in Pagan Times;_ the

works of Oscar Montelius and Sophus Muller; _L'Anthropologie,

Materiaux pour l'histoire primitive de l'homme;_ Christy and Lartet,

_Reliquiae Aquitanicae;_ A. Michaelis, _A Century of Archaeological

Discovery_ (Eng. trans., 1908). See also ANTHROPOLOGY, and authorities

mentioned there; STONE AGE; BRONZE AGE; IRON AGE, &c.; GEOLOGY; and

the articles on different countries and sites. (C. H. Rd.)

ARCHAEOPTERYX. The name of _Archaeopteryx lithographica_ was based by

Hermann von Meyer upon a feather (Gr. [Greek: pteryx], wing) found in

1861 in the lithographic slate quarries of Solenhofen in Bavaria, the

geological horizon being that of the Kimmeridge clay of the Upper Oolite

or Jurassic system. In the same year and at the same place was

discovered the specimen (figs. 1 and 3) now in the British Museum,

named by Andreas Wagner _Griphosaurus._ Sir R. Owen has described it as

_A. macroura._ Stimulated by the high price paid by the British Museum,

the quarry owners diligently searched, and in 1872 another, much finer,

preserved specimen was found. This was bought by K.W. v. Siemens, who

presented it to the Berlin Museum. The late W. Dames has written an

excellent monograph on it.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.--The British Museum specimen.]

[Illustration: FIG. 2.--The specimen in the Museum fur Naturkunde,

Berlin. After a photograph taken from a cast.]

_Archaeopteryx_ was a bird, without any doubt, but still with so many

low, essentially reptilian characters that it forms a link between these

two classes. About the size of a rook, its most obvious peculiarity is

the long reptilian tail, composed of 20 vertebrae and not ending in a

pygostyle. The last dozen vertebrae each carry a pair of well-developed

typical quills. Upon these features of the tail E. Haeckel established

the subclass Saururae, containing solely Archaeopteryx, in opposition to

the Ornithurae, comprising all the other birds. Herein he has been

followed by many zoologists. However, the fact that various recent birds

possess the same kind of caudal skeleton, likewise without a pygostyle,

although reduced to at least 13 vertebrae, shows that the two terms do

not express a fundamental difference.

[Illustration: FIG. 3.--Tail of British Museum specimen.]

The importance of _Archaeopteryx_ justifies the following descriptive

detail. Vertebral column composed of about 50 vertebrae, viz. 10-11

cervical, 12-11 thoracic, 2 lumbar, 5-6 sacral, and 20 or 21 caudal,

with a total caudal length of the Berlin specimen of 7 in. The cervical

and thoracic vertebrae seem to be biconcave; the cervical ribs are much

reduced and were apparently still movable; the thoracic ribs are devoid

of uncinate processes. Paired abdominal ribs are doubtful. Scarcely

anything is known of the sternum, and little of the shoulder-girdle,

except the very stout furcula; scapula typically bird-like. Humerus

about 2-1/2 in. long, with a strong crista lateralis, which indicates a

strongly developed great pectoral muscle and hence, by inference, the

presence of a keel to the sternum. Radius and ulna typically avine, 2.1

in. in length. Carpus with two separate bones. The hand skeleton

consists of 3 completely separate metacarpals, each carrying a complete,

likewise free, finger; the shortened thumb with 2, the index with 3, the

third with 4 phalanges; each finger with a curved claw. The whole wing

is consequently, although essentially avine, still reptilian in the

unfused state of the metacarpals and the numbers of the phalanges. The

pelvis is imperfectly known. The preacetabular portion of the ilium is

shorter than the posterior half. The hind-limb is typically avine, with

intertarsal joint, distally reduced fibula, and the three elongated

metatarsals which show already considerable anchylosis; reduction of the

toes to four, with 2, 3, 4 and 5 phalanges; the hallux is separate, and

as usual in recent birds posterior in position. Skull bird-like, except

that the short bill cannot have been enclosed in a horny rhamphotheca,

since the upper jaw shows a row of 13, the lower jaw 3 conical teeth,

all implanted in distinct sockets.

The remiges and rectrices indicate perfect feathers, with shaft and

complete vanes which were so neatly finished that they must have

possessed typical radii and hooklets. Some of the quills measure fully 5

in. in length. Six or seven remiges were attached to the hand, ten to

the ulna.

It is idle to speculate on the habits of this earliest of known birds.

That it could fly is certain, and the feet show it to have been well

adapted to arboreal life. The clawed slender fingers did not make

_Archaeopteryx_ any more quadrupedal or bat-like in its habits than is a

kestrel hawk, with its equally large, or even larger thumb-claw.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--H. v. Meyer, _Neues Jahrb.f. Mineralog._ (1861), p.

679; Sir R. Owen, "On the Archaeopteryx von Meyer..." _Phil. Trans._,

1863, pp. 33-47, pls. i.-iv.; T.H. Huxley, "Remarks on the Skeleton of

the Archaeopteryx and on the relations of the bird to the reptile,"

_Geol. Mag. i._, 1864, pp. 55-57; C. Vogt, "L'Archaeopteryx macrura,"

_Revue scient. de la France et de l'etranger_, 1879, pp. 241-248; W.

Dames, "Uber Archaeopteryx," _Palaeontol. Abhandl._ ii. (Berlin,

1884); _Idem_, "Uber Brustbein Schulter- und Beckengurtel der

Archaeopteryx," _Math. naturw. Mitth._ Berlin. vii. (1897), pp.

476-492. (H. F. G.)

ARCHAISM (adj. "archaic"; from Gr. [Greek: harchaios], old), an

old-fashioned usage, or the deliberate employment of an out-of-date and

ancient mode of expression.

ARCHANGEL (ARCHANGELSK), a government of European Russia, bounded N. by

the White Sea and Arctic Ocean, W. by Finland and Olonets, S. by

Vologda, and E. by the Ural mountains. It comprehends the islands of

Novaya-Zemlya, Vaygach and Kolguev, and the peninsula of Kola. Its area

is 331,505 sq. m., and its population in 1867 was 275,779 and in 1897,

349,943. The part which lies within the Arctic Circle is very desolate

and sterile, consisting chiefly of sand and reindeer moss. The winter is

long and severe, and even in summer the soil is frozen. The rivers

(Tuloma, Onega, Dvina, Mezen and Pechora) are closed in September and

scarcely thaw before July. The Kola peninsula is, however, diversified

by hills exceeding 3000 ft. in altitude and by large lakes (e.g.

Imandra), and its coast enjoys a much more genial climate. South of the

Arctic Circle the greater part of the country is covered with forests,

intermingled with lakes and morasses, though in places there is

excellent pasturage. Here the spring is moist, with cold, frosty nights;

the summer a succession of long foggy days; the autumn again moist. The

rivers are closed from October to April. The inhabitants of the northern

districts--nomad tribes of Samoyedes, Zyryans, Lapps, and the Finnish

tribes of Karelians and Chudes--support themselves by fishing and

hunting. In the southern districts hemp and flax are raised, but grain

crops are little cultivated, so that the bark of trees has often to be

ground up to eke out the scanty supply of flour. Potatoes are grown as

far north as 65 deg. Shipbuilding is carried on, and the forests yield

timber, pitch and tar. Excellent cattle are raised in the district of

Kholmogory on the Dvina, veal being supplied to St Petersburg. Gold is

found in the districts of Kola, naphtha and salt in those of Kem and

Pinega, and lignite in Mezen. Sulphurous springs exist in the districts

of Kholmogory and Shenkursk. The industry and commerce are noticed below

in the article on the town Archangel, which is the capital. The

government is divided into nine districts, the chief towns of which

are--Alexandrovsk or Kola (pop. 300), Archangel (q.v.), Kem (1825),

Kholmogory (1465), Mezen (2040), Novaya-Zemlya (island), Pechora, Pinega

(1000) and Shenkursk (1308).

See A.P. Engelhardt, _A Russian Province of the North_ (Eng. trans.,

by H. Cooke, 1899).

ARCHANGEL (ARCHANGELSK), chief town of the government of Archangel,

Russia, at the head of the delta of the Dvina, on the right bank of the

river, in lat. 64 deg. 32' N. and long. 40 deg. 33' E. Pop. (1867)

19,936; (1897) 20,933. As early as the 10th century, if not earlier, the

Norsemen frequented this part of the world (Bjarmeland) on trading

expeditions; the best-known is that made by Ottar or Othere between 880

and 900 and described (or translated) by Alfred the Great, king of

England. The modern town dates, however, from the visit of the English

voyager, Richard Chancellor, in 1553. An English factory was erected on

the lower Dvina soon after that date, and in 1584 a fort was built,

around which the town grew up. Archangel was for long the only seaport

of Russia (or Muscovy). The tsar Boris Godunov (1598-1605) threw the

trade open to all nations; and the chief participants in it were

England, Holland and Germany. In 1668-1684 the great bazaar and trading

hall was built, principally by Tatar prisoners. In 1691-1700 the exports

to England averaged L112,210 annually. After Peter the Great made St

Petersburg the capital of his dominions (1702), he placed Archangel

under vexatious commercial disabilities, and consequently its trade

declined. In 1762 it was granted the same privileges as St Petersburg,

and since then it has gradually recovered its former prosperity. It is

the seat of a bishop, and has a cathedral (1709-1743), a museum, the

monastery of the Archangel Michael (whence the city gets its name), an

ecclesiastical seminary, a school of navigation and a naval hospital.

Linen, leather, canvas, cordage, mats, tallow, potash and beer are

manufactured. There is a lively trade with St Petersburg, and the

sea-borne exports, which consist chiefly of timber, flax, linseed, oats,

flour, pitch, tar, skins and mats, amount in value to about 1-1/2

millions sterling annually (82-1/2 % for timber), but the imports

(mostly fish) are worth only about L200,000. A fish fair is held every

year on the 1st (15th) of September. Archangel communicates with the

interior of Russia by river and canal, and has a railway line (522 m.)

to Yaroslavl. The harbour, deepened to 18-1/4 ft., is about a mile below

the city, and is accessible from May to October. About 12 m. lower down

there are a government dockyard and merchants' warehouses. A new

military harbour, Alexandrovsk or Port Catherine, has been made on

Catherine (Ekaterininsk) Bay, on the Murman coast of the Kola peninsula.

The shortest day at Archangel has only 3 hrs. 12 min., the longest 21

hrs. 48 min. of daylight.