152 LESSONS FKOM NATUKE. [CHAP. VI. 



not so. An Englishman who calls a man a &quot; mon &quot; might be puzzled 

 by the written word composed of letters. He could not be puzzled by 

 a symbol which was independent of determinate sound. 



&quot; An alphabet is a grand instrument, and its powers have been 

 wonderfully exercised, but it may well be doubted whether the language 

 of thought cannot be even better expressed by symbols of some other 

 kind ; and it must, I think, be certain that this will depend largely on 

 the structure of the spoken language, and the forms of thought which 

 have become habitual. Those astronomical and other symbols which 

 Mr. Tylor regards as survivals of the rudest form of writing are 

 nevertheless retained and multiplied by the deliberate choice of modern 

 science, for the double reason that they abbreviate the record, and that 

 they can be universally understood, whatever the spoken language of 

 the reader may be.&quot; 



Another remark is important, as it puts forcibly before us 

 the hasty conclusions in favour of barbarism so often found. 

 He says : 



&quot; Nor does subsequent ignorance prove that knowledge has not been 

 possessed before. Of this the discoveries concerning ancient art con 

 tinually bring fresh evidence. The glass from Assyria and the bronzes 

 cast upon cores of iron are striking examples. The latter is especially 

 important. It shows that the use of iron was well understood by the 

 Assyrians, and that the use of bronze in ancient times was the result 

 of choice, and not of ignorance. We might, I think, have safely 

 assumed this on general grounds, and might thus have avoided much 

 misleading speculation concerning a bronze age. Archaeologists take 

 for granted far too readily that if anything valued by ourselves was not 

 used in former times, it cannot have been known, withoiit considering 

 what reasons besides mere want of knowledge may have led to its 

 neglect.&quot; 



****** 



&quot; We pick up a sunburnt brick, and treat it as a proof of ignorance 

 in the makers. It may, on the contrary, be the evidence of a most wise 

 economy, which utilised the sun s heat where it was sufficient for the 

 purpose, and where artificial heat could only be applied at too great a 

 cost. The makers of sunburnt bricks in Assyria and Egypt certainly 

 understood the use of fire as well as we do, and it may be well for us 

 if we can turn the solar rays to equally good account.&quot; 



He adds : 



&quot; And finally, our knowledge of the extent to which iron has been used 

 in the past, and of the circumstances under which the art of working 

 it may have been lost in various localities, is so limited by the perish- 



