134 
not home-born or self-evolved, but derived from Phoenicia or 
Egypt, and so you arrive at last at the primitive race in the 
plains of Shinar. 
Whilst all nations are thus unanimous in referring the 
origin of civilisation to strangers and aliens, they ought, 
according to Sir John Lubbock, to have gradually built it up 
for themselves. 
Mr. Tylor, in his work on Primitive Culture, considers that 
“The master-key to the investigation of man’s primeval 
condition is held by pre-historic archeology, that key being 
the evidence of the Stone Age, proving that men of remotely 
ancient ages were in the savage state.’’* 
All this may be fully allowed, and yet Archbishop Whately’s 
theory may be true. 
Pre-historic archeology tells at least as much on our side 
as on theirs. 
It shows how immensely the age of the world has been 
under-estimated, but in no other way alters our belief. 
The division of antiquity into stone, copper, and iron ages 
is by no means unanimously received by archeologists, but, 
even if it were, it precisely tallies with our hypothesis—that 
whilst in the centres of population and culture a portion of 
the divinely-communicated gift of civilisation was kept up, in 
the remoter countries, the more isolated communities fell into 
the depths of barbarism, only to be recovered from thence by 
contact with superior races, the introduction of metals, and 
acquaintance with the truths of Christianity, for, without the 
latter, the contact of superior with inferior aces almost in- 
var iably produces rapid extinction. 
I believe, then, the relics of the Stone aa other ages to be 
very ancient, but the civilisation and monuments of China, 
India, and Egypt to be fully as ancient, perhaps even more 
ancient still; and I am supported in this belief by a vast 
array of historical and archzeological evidence. . 
An inquiry into the antecedents of (so-called) savage races 
will often evoke clear evidence that they are not in what Sir 
John Lubbock and his friends would be pleased to call ‘‘a 
state of nature.” 
Thus the Rev. Jas. Shooter, in a work upon The Kaffirs of 
Natal, says that they are “no savages.’ 
They have a tradition of a former worship of “one god,” 
which has now almost died out. 
* Atheneum Review, May 6, 1871. 
