ADDRESS ON ANTHROPOLOGY. 903 



most distinctly ponderable, and in every sense the largest, Anthro- 

 pological publication of the day. 



Archaeology, which but a short time back was studied in a 

 way which admirably qualified its devotees for being called ' con- 

 noisseurs,' but which scarcely qualified them for being called men 

 of Science, has by its alliance with Natural History and its adop- 

 tion of Natural History methods, and its availing itself of the 

 light afforded by the great Natural History principles just alluded 

 to, entered on a new career. There is, as regards Natural History, 

 Anatomy, and Pathology, nothing left to be desired for the con- 

 joint scheme represented by the periodical just mentioned, where 

 we have V. Baer for the first and Virchow for the last, and the 

 other names specified for the rest of these subjects; whilst Ar- 

 chaeology, the other party in the alliance, is very adequately re- 

 presented by Lindenschmit alone. But when I recollect that 

 Prichard published a work ' On the Eastern Origin of the Celtic 

 Nations ' ten years before the volume of ' Researches/ from which 

 I have just quoted, and that this work has been spoken of as the 

 work 'which has made the greatest advance in Comparative 

 Philology during the present century,' I cannot but feel that the 

 ' Redaction ' of the ' Archiv fiir Anthropologic ' have not as yet 

 learnt all that may be learnt from the Bristol Ethnologist; and 

 they would do well to add to the very strong staff represented on 

 their titlepage the name of some one, or the names of more than 

 one, comparative philologist. This the Berlin 'Zeitschrift fiir 

 Ethnologic ' has done. 



Of the possible curative application of some of the leading prin- 

 ciples of modern Anthropology to some of the prevalent errors of 

 the day, I should be glad to be allowed to say a few words. The 

 most important lesson as regards the future (I do not say the im- 

 mediate future) which the modern study of Human Progress (for 

 such all men who think, except the Duke of Argyll, are now agreed 

 is the study of Anthropology) teaches is the folly and impossibility 

 of attempting to break abruptly with the past. This principle is 

 now enforced with persistent iteration from many Anthropological 

 platforms; and I cannot but think it might advantageously be 

 substituted in certain portfolios for the older maxim, ' Whatever is 

 certainly new is certainly false,' a maxim which seems at first 

 sight somewhat like it, but which, as being based on pure ignorance 



