LECT. v.] PREHISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGY. 139 



If this apply to nations as well as to individuals if 

 our knowledge of the past be confined to that which 

 has been handed down to us in books then is Archaeo- 

 logy indeed restrained within fixed and narrow limits ; 

 it is reduced to a mere matter of criticism, and almost 

 unworthy to be called a science. 



My object in the present address is to vindicate the 

 claims of archaeology ; to point out briefly the light 

 which has, more particularly in the last few years, been 

 thrown upon the past ; and, above all, if possible, to 

 show that the antiquaries of the present day are no 

 visionary enthusiasts, but that the methods of archaeo- 

 logical investigation are as trustworthy as those of any 

 natural science. I purposely say the methods, rather 

 than the results ; because while I believe that the progress 

 recently made has been mainly due to the use of those 

 methods which have been pursued with so much success 

 in geology, zoology, and other kindred branches of 

 science and while fully persuaded that in this manner 

 we must eventually ascertain the truth I readily admit 

 that there are many points on which further evidence is 

 required. Nor need the antiquary be ashamed to own 

 that it is so. Biologists differ about the Darwinian 

 theory ; until very lately the emission theory of light 

 was maintained by some of the best authorities : 

 Tyndall and Magnus are at issue as to whether aqueous 

 vapour does or does not absorb heat ; astronomers have 

 recently admitted an error of nearly 4,000,000 miles 

 in their estimate of the distance between the earth and 

 the sun ; nor is there any single proposition in theology 

 to which an universal assent would be given. Although, 

 therefore, there are no doubt great diversities of opinion 



