386 



NATURE 



[M. 



1911 



ver>' usefully illustrated, and the translator's work 



is exccllcntlv done. 



On one important point the author ^ives the 

 avi-raj^'c nader moro than the latter luijiht expect. 

 He takes us into the laboratory, with thi- usual result 



^^ 



^6V<> 



^ 



^ 



C^ <^ 



^6¥6]l 



^I^S 



1$ 



f 



>^ 



C^ib 



^b^^l 



^>U[^ 



4^ 



-^ 



6 



M 



b%\®^ 



^n 



h\\^ 



fi^il 



^ 



f 



Ti 



^>1(1 



<> 



4\i 



Face B. 



Fig. a.— Transcription of the Inscription on the Phasios Disk. From " The Dawn of Mediterrmnean 



Civilisation." 



of nialving us a little uncomfortable. I refer espe- 

 cially to a section entitled "Dr. Evans's Chrcnolotr^- '' 

 (pp. 98-102). We have lauly l>een in the haltitOf 

 accepting without hardly a question the opi'iion^ . \- 



NO. 2168, VOL. 86] 



pressed by experienced explort-rs r. sj.<Ttiiij4 per^od^. 

 and stajjes of culture based on the depth and stratifi- 

 cation of de|X)sits. The author's remarks on this 

 point are so important and disconcertint* that his con- 

 clusion as re>,'ards the deposits at Fharstos should Ik- 



cited here in full. 



" Dr. M.ickensie has already 

 expressed :i doubt that a stratum 

 may l>e missing at the end of the 

 neolithic jHTiod in the sf)il of 

 Knossos. My own conclusion 

 w«)uld Ik- to fix the duration of 

 the neolithic occupation of Phaes- 

 tos at about j^cki years, while 

 for a complete estimate of the 

 whole perio<l up to the Christian 

 era — the dejifh of neolithic strata 

 in a pit at Knossos li«'ing seen to 

 exceed 8 metres — Dr. Kvans being 

 i.f opinion that at a moderate 

 otimate a period of 14.000 years 

 Torn the first neolithic stratum at 

 Knossos must be reckoned, in my 

 ..|)inion it should be estim-it.rl ;ii 

 not more than 7000 years. 

 siblv less. 



■ With every respect for t'n. 

 -rcat authority of Dr. Evans. I 

 should jjive a provisional char- 

 acter to these critical remarks 

 until the doubtful points 1 have 

 alluded to are cleared up. The 

 ( hronolo^ical computation of the 

 rajjiditv with which the level of 

 the soil rises on sites of human 

 habitation in the neolithic atje 

 and during later periods is a com- 

 plex problem which depends on 

 coefficients which are not con- 

 stant, but variable. I am con- 

 vinced that in the case of Knossos 

 the quota of i metre for even*' 

 io<x) years, as fixed bv Dr. Evans. 

 is too small " (pp. 101-2). 



It is passing strange that a' 

 explorer with such a deep convic- 

 tion of the variability of archaeo- 

 logical coefficients has never a 

 word to say of the results of a 

 search for constant coefficients in 

 .-istronomical data. Surely one- 

 half of the archaeological world 

 knows nothing of the other half: 

 at anv rate, one would rather risk 

 such a reckless statement than to 

 suggest that such a fair-minded 

 critic of archa'ological methods 

 should, for no conceivable reason, 

 suppress any evidence whatever. 

 Anv suppression of the kind \\ auiltl 

 tmiv intensify a retribui 

 action. 



Here in Britain astronomical 

 archaeology is now so much in 

 evidence that every archaeologist 

 seems to have formed a definite 

 opinion of its worth. The 

 majority, perhaps, would prefer 

 pointing out its worthlessness. 

 but it happens that a majority in 

 such a case might mean next to 

 nothing, especially as I have not yet seen any demon- 

 stration of the worthlessness of the astronomical 

 method involving sufficient technical knowledge to use 

 the method itself. Round condemnatorv stnl»'"-"'- 



^2^6 



^ 



i\ 



IL 



