THE LANCASTER FARMER. 



[January 



be purchased, and become cultivators of the 

 soil, to become producers instead of mere 

 consumers, to raise vegetables, plants, fruit, 

 trees and shrubbery, as well as wheat, corn 

 and other products to feed those in the towns. 

 It would employ and remove the floating pop- 

 ulation of the towns into the rural districts, 

 break up selfish trades-combinations, and 

 restore peace and prosperity over the whole 

 country. It would cause two blades of grass 

 to grow where but. one, or none, is growing 

 now, and strengthen the bulwarks of the 

 nation. 



These views may seem Utopian, but a time 

 will surely come in the experimental history 

 of our country when their realization will be a 

 necessity. Men have need to see and appre- 

 ciate the handiwork of their Creator, that 

 unseen power which animates them, that 

 invisible operation which invites their visible 

 co-openition, and is ultimated in the useful 

 and beautiful products of the soil. These are 

 far superior to anything that can be produced 

 by science or art. Indeed the}' constitute the 

 essei»tial material basis upon which alone 

 science and art can be manifested. All that 

 is useful and beautiful in science and art, is 

 but the type, of which nature is the antetype ; 

 when a man is indifferent to, or scorns, 

 neglects, or contemns the bounteous produc- 

 tions of nature he becomes a moral suicide, 

 if not a willful malefactor. Amateur botany 

 is extending itself; we see it in the green- 

 house, the conservatory, tUie garden, in the 

 yard, on the lawns and in the windows of 

 mansions to an immensely greater extent than 

 it was noticed only ten years ago, and every 

 where its influence is refining; but we need to 

 have its elementary principles taught in oiu- 

 public and private schools, as a centre from 

 whence its rays may diverge until they reach 

 and vivify the very circumference of social 

 humanity. — L. S. R. 



RECENT ADVANCES IN ARCHAEOL- 

 OGY.* 



Aj-chaeology has been generally defined as 

 the acience of antiquities. The subject has, 

 however, grown beyond its title, and archae- 

 ology must now be regarded as a generic 

 term, including a number of sciences — some 

 natural and others artificial, but each of them 

 sutlicieutly comprehensive to demand the 

 labor of a life time from him who desires to 

 become familiar with all its various details. 

 With all this division and subdivision, the 

 whole subject is, however, pervaded by one 

 general idea, and archaeology, therefore, de- 

 serves to be called a science, in the liighest 

 sense of the term. 



Among all the sciences there is not one 

 which has of late years progressed so rapidly. 

 Its relations to ethnology and anthropology 

 have been fixed; the order of the subordinate 

 sciences has been established ; and under each 

 one of these, discoveries have been made of 

 which the world had never dreamed. It seems 

 hardly credible that not ten years ago the 

 President of the Board of one of our colleges 

 should have remarked, in answer to a query 

 concerning the duties of a professor of 

 history and archaeology : "The duties of a 

 professor of archaeology involve at most a 

 little instruction in flrecian and Roman 

 antiquities. It is a meaningless term, 

 expressive of history in one of its aspects. It 

 is used to round a sentence and nothing 

 more." 



It seems'strange that anyone should under- 

 value the importance of archaeologic study. 

 Apart from the fact that it furnishes a great 

 part of the materials of history, it "is a 

 constant pleasure to those who understand 

 its signs and symbols. There would bo few 

 Inducements for an American to visit the 

 old world if it were not for the remains of 

 that ancient civilization to which we can 

 trace link by link the origin of all that is 

 graceful, ornamental and beautiful in our 

 architecture, .sculpture and the arts of design. 



The archaeologic .sciences may conveniently 



"Read before the Lancaster Linnsean Society by Re?. J. 

 H. DBbbe, D. D., December 2T, 1879. 



be regarded as consisting of three widely 

 contrasted departments ; 1. Prehistoric arch- 

 aeology ; 2. Historic archaeology ; 3. The 

 minor archaeologic sciences. Unfortunately, 

 so far as I know, these separate branches are 

 nowhere treated in a single volume, so that it 

 is difficult for a beginner to obtain that com- 

 prehensive view of the whole field which is 

 necessary for the intelligent study of any one 

 of its departments. 



It is said, by some writers, that archaeology 

 naturally begins with that branch of geology 

 which is'known as paleontology, and wliich is 

 properly the natural histoi'y of the primeval 

 world. This, however, is not strictly speaking 

 correct. Paleontology is not .so much a part 

 of archaeology as a condition for its intelligent 

 stud\'. It is also very desirable to havi; some 

 knowledge of comparative anatomy, and the 

 principle of the correlation of forms, but as 

 archaeology is principally concerned with the 

 beginnings of art, it is not necessary to give 

 our attention to any period earlier tlian those 

 in whicli we first find evidences of human 

 skill. There has been much difference of 

 opinion as to the time when man ajipeared 

 on the stage. It is however, generally con- 

 ceded that he has existed in Jiuri)i)e during 

 all the past tertiary periods ; and though the 

 facts of prehistoric archaeology Ijy no means 

 indicate so extreme an antiquity for the 

 human race as was at first supposed, it is 

 also true that they cannot be made to agree 

 with the chronology ofPetavius and Arch- 

 bishop Usher. 



If, however, there is some difference of 

 opinion among archaeologists concerning the 

 antiquity of man, it must be acknowledged 

 that they have labored with reasonalile una- 

 nimity in combating the arguments of the 

 philosophers who hold that man was manifold 

 in his creation. Ihey have shown that 

 mankind consists of a single species, which 

 wherever its migrations can be traced, can be 

 derived from a single locality — they have 

 shown us that, in its earliest developments, 

 humanity was the same all over the world — 

 that in the old world and the new, primitive 

 man was in possession of weapons, imple- 

 ments and ornaments, which were at least 

 closely similar, if not precisely identical. In 

 short, all these researches go to sustain the 

 truth, asserted long ago in the sacred Scrip- 

 tures, that "God has made of one blood all 

 the nations of men. " 



A few years ago archaeologists were in- 

 clined to hold that the course of civilization 

 had everywhere been precisely the same; that 

 there had been everywhere the same succes- 

 sion of epochs, or ages, to be distinguished by 

 the kind of weapons and implements employed ; 

 and these ages, it was popularly believed, were 

 separated by a hard and fast line, so that the 

 one never encroached on the territory of the 

 other. Thus, for instance, it was supposed 

 that the rough-stone, or Palaeolithic period, 

 always jireceded tlie polished stone, or Neo- 

 lithic; and that men everywhere used bronze 

 implements for many centuries before they 

 discovered the use of iron. Recent investi- 

 gations have rendered it evident that these 

 statements must be received with consider- 

 able limitations. In this country it has been 

 found that rough and polished stone imple- 

 ments were employed contemporaneously, 

 and that where a difference in age must be 

 recognized, it is found that the polished 

 implement is older than the "palaeolith" — 

 thus indicating that the aboriginal inhabi- 

 tants of America were more skillful and 

 cultured thousands of years ago than at a 

 more recent period. So too, in Europe, it is 

 found that in some places rude methods of 

 producing iron were employed before the 

 people had learned the art of making weapons 

 of bronze. It is proliable that archaeologists 

 will continue to distinguish between the age 

 of stone and the age of metal, and that the 

 various subdivisions will be noted as a mat- 

 ter of convenience; but it has come to be 

 recognized that no such distinctions can be of 

 universal application. 

 In every department of archaeology earnest 



students are at work, and have recently 

 made gigantic progress. It is not necessary 

 that we should consider at length the recent 

 discoveries of extensive palafittes in Switzer- 

 land and Lombardy, which have added tens 

 of thousands of specimens to the great col- 

 lections of prehistoric art, and especially to 

 those which illustrate the bronze period. 

 Having enjoyed an opportunity of examining 

 tlie extensive museum of the Royal Society of 

 Antiquaries at Edinburgh, and the immense 

 collection of Dr. Ferdinand Keller, "the 

 father of prehistoric archaeology," at Zurich. 

 I venture to say that the artistic skill mani- 

 fested by these mysterious races was far in 

 advance of anything which I had ever antici- 

 pated. Engravings give us but an imperfect 

 idea of ihe beauty of many prehistoric weapons 

 and ornaments. There are -specimens of 

 bangles and orooches, representing forms of 

 animal and vegetable life, which would have 

 been no discredit to the earliest artists of 

 Greece and Rome. 



In the various departments of historic 

 archaeology progress is constant and rapid. 

 Dr. Schlieman astonishes us with a series of 

 discoveries, each one more wonderful than the 

 preceding, which will require years of study 

 before they can be assigned their proper place 

 in the domain of knowledge. George Smith, 

 just before his death, announced thiat he had 

 discovered the ruins of CarchemLsh, the 

 ancient capital of the Hittites, and prophe- 

 sied that they would prove even more inter- 

 esting than those of Nineveh and Babylon. 

 There they remain awaiting investigation, 

 and soon, no doubt, another page will be 

 added to the history of our race. 



In palaeography the recent advances have 

 been especially wondeiful. One by one the enig- 

 matic inscriptions of the orient have yielded 

 to the patient toil of European scholars. lu 

 canse(iuence of the labors of such men as 

 Champollion, and at a later period, Rawlinson, 

 Oppert, Lassen, Spiegel and others; the 

 history of the East has been entirely rewritten. 

 The Cypriote inscriptions, which were re- 

 garded as an unfathomable mystery, were 

 read by George Smith, with a degree of 

 facility which is, in a certain sense, more 

 incomprehensible than the inscriptions them- 

 selves. Recently especial attention has been 

 given to the inscriptions of Central America, 

 and they are beginning to tell their secrets. 

 In the proceedings of the Ethnographic 

 Society of France, which I have the lionor to 

 present to the Society, there is an article 

 by the great Assyriologist, Dr. Oppert, in 

 which he expresses his delight that the key to 

 the hieratic characters of Yucatan has at last 

 been discovered ' by Count Leon de Rosny. 

 Tlien follows a discourse by Count de Rosny, 

 giving an account of the process by which he 

 discovered the phonetic meaning of a number 

 of these hieroglyphics. These articles are 

 very interesting, but we cannot enter into 

 particulars. It is. not too much to say that 

 the most diiiicult part of the work is accom- ■ 

 plished, and that we may soon expect new 

 light to be thrown on the prehistoric races of 

 America. When John L. Stephens nuised on 

 the ruins of Uxmal and Copau he exclaimed, 

 "O, that some Champollion would arise to re- 

 veal the mysteries of these ancient cities, where 

 all is doubly night." The Champollion is on | 

 his way, and future generations will no doubt ' 

 study the history of nations of which we do 

 not even know the name. There is nothing 

 hidden which shall not be revealed. History 

 is approaching its final consummation, but 

 before it is reached its accounts must be 

 made up — the most remote recesses must be 

 investigated. It must be seen that human 

 history is not the blind working of unconscious 

 forces ; that nothing has occurred in vain; , 

 but that all things have conduced to the ]< 

 development of a "prehistoric" plan that will "• 

 at last stand revealed in all its symmetry and 

 beauty. Considered from this point of view, 

 every" discovery, however apparently insig- 

 nificant, acquires a new meaning and throws 

 light on the greatest of mysteries— the devel- 

 opment of the Providence of Almighty God; 



