308 
which arise from the age-long operation 
of brain and hand, we should find that 
these products are, so to say, genetic, 
and may be arranged in evolutional se- 
ries? This is the thought, I believe, 
which explains why we may group objects 
in gradational lines which give us con- 
siderable satisfaction. For everyone dis- 
likes confusion, and no little confusion can 
be dissipated by groupings of this kind. 
If, then, we examine among ancient 
arms a large collection of shafted weap- 
ons, with all their curiously outlined hal- 
berds and pikes, we find that they fall 
readily into series. If the collection con- 
tains specimens which date back through- 
out a number of centuries it becomes 
quite easy to arrange them in a “pedi- 
gree.’ In this, scores of kinds of these 
arms, which bristle at first sight in con- 
fusing array, can be reduced to half a 
dozen “types”? which are clearly “an- 
cestral.” These picture in their earliest 
forms agricultural implements, such as 
axe, pruning-hook and scythe, suggesting 
the times when common soldiers were 
farmers and fought with whatever they 
had at hand. In these early times the 
only real pole-arm (7. e. both for hunting 
and warfare) was a spear. 
Out of these simple types (generalized 
as we would call them in zoédlogy) arose 
advancing series, with new structures ap- 
pearing, culminating, disappearing, just 
as they occur in the history of shells or 
beasts. Note for example the advancing 
evolution of such a structure as the beak 
of a halberd. In the beginning it was 
not a part of the halberd blade, but a 
separate hook of metal, like the tongue 
of a buckle, which encircled the wooden 
handle of this arm. Then, too, in our 
series we find decadent lines: 'Thus the 
spontoons which sergeants carried in our 
War of Independence (and which our 
state law declares must still be carried!) 
were nothing but degenerate survivors 
THE AMERICAN MUSEUM JOURNAL 
of ox-tongue partisans; or the tiny gui- 
sarmes and dwarfed halberds of the sev- 
enteenth century were but the crudely 
made followers of the magnificent and 
serviceable arms of the preceding cen- 
tury. In these three cases degeneration 
was accompanied with reduction in size. 
In another case however, decadence was 
expressed in just the opposite way (as 
sometimes happens in animals) as in the 
doge’s ceremonial fauchard of 1650-1700, 
a titanic arm, so large that it could 
hardly be carried comfortably, let alone 
be used —even when it was formed of’a 
sheet of metal, instead of being a well- 
modeled and functional blade. These 
forms were “gerontic,”’ as a naturalist 
would say. 
It is interesting too, in such a series of 
forms to see how a structure changed its 
function and was thereby “stimulated”’ 
to great evolutional progress; just as 
we know that such a condition causes 
far-reaching effects in animals, as when a 
protective scale begins to function as a 
weapon, or a gill-cleft comes to help out 
the ear. As an example of this, observe 
the ancient spear with lappets at its 
base, which originally served to keep a 
wounded animal (or man) at a safe 
distance, so that it could not “run up” 
the spear. When these lappets were 
found of use for inflicting additional 
wounds they grew steadily in size (for 
about two hundred years) and developed 
all manner of unwholesome hooks and 
prongs, and in the latest types (feather- 
staves) could in fact be folded together 
and concealed within the handle, which 
thereupon masqueraded as a harmless 
walking staff, until the owner, swinging 
his “feather-staff,’ shot out again the 
long sharp points. Another example of 
change of function appears in the blade 
of a halberd. This was originally ax- 
shaped, with cutting margin long, heavy 
and convex; such a margin then became 
