172 REPORT— 1872. 



repeated over and over again in the different societies. These Archaeological Societies 

 and others (which I do not particularize, because I am anxious that my remarks 

 should not appear to be directed pointedly to any one of them) collectively provide 

 libraries in the proportion of four or five libraries to one or two students who habi- 

 tually read the dooks in them. When museums form part of the establishments, 

 they succeed in collecting a stray Chinese umbrella or two, and a stuffed monkey, 

 or a few bronzed implements in a case. Each Society has separate apartments pro- 

 vided at great cost ; these are empty at least six days a week, and usually thirteen 

 days in the fortnight, dm'ing the short period in which the session is held. One of 

 these societies is in the possession of a magnificent suite of apartments, which are 

 provided at the Government expense, and furnished with rows of tables and benches 

 and a splendid throne for the chairman, in which I have occasionally had the honour 

 to sit. It is to be hoped that whenever the power of psychic force, or the influence 

 of disembodied spirits in vivifying inanimate bodies, comes to be more generally 

 established amongst anthropologists than it is at present, these chairs and tables 

 may proceed to deliberate and rap out archiBological communications to each other 

 during the weary days and hours that the embodied spirits are absent. Whenever 

 any undertaking of national interest has been set on foot, such as the Bill for the 

 Preservation of Prehistoric Monuments, proposed by Sir John Lubbock, inviting 

 the united interest of these societies to bring it forward, the first inquiry has been 

 as to which of these societies has had the credit of having originated the measure ; 

 and if found to be tainted by the support of a rival society, it has been at once re- 

 pudiated, or only adopted after its success has with great difficulty been secured by 

 other means. If we inquire what useful purpose is served by these divisions of the 

 metropolitan societies, we are told that one is a society, another is an association, 

 and a third is an institute ; and yet it does not appear that any one of these societies, 

 associations, or institutes perform any special function which cannot equally well 

 be served by the others. They constitute divisions of persons rather than divisions 

 of subjects; instead of promoting division of labom-, they serve only to promote re- 



Setition of labour ; and so ill do any of them answer the expectations of those who 

 evote themselves to the close study of any one branch of archaeology or anthro- 

 pology, that it has lately become necessai-y to establish an additional metropolitan 

 society for promoting protohistoric archaeology, under the title of the Society of 

 Biblical Archaeology, embracing subjects which fall mainly within the domain of 

 anthropology. Much as I should feel disposed to condemn the multiplication of 

 societies under existing circumstances, I cannot but think that by promoting the 

 close study of a particular branch, the establishment of this Society is a step in the 

 right direction ; and I therefore trust that it may be found to flourish at the expense 

 of those which appear to have no special function to perfomi. As a prehistoric 

 archaeologist, I can only add my humble testimony to that of others who think that 

 this branch of anthropology is very unsatisfactorily dealt with by the metropolitan 

 societies in which it is discussed. On a recent occasion, when speaking on this 

 subject, I compared the position which prehistoric archaeology now holds in the 

 London societies to that of a poor relation. I might, perhaps, extend the simile 

 further by saying that, like many poor relations, it is also the most agreeable rela- 

 tion, and though duly snubbed in accordance with the orthodox custom in like 

 cases, its services will not be willingly dispensed with, as it furnishes sensational 

 topics for not less than six societies in London at the present time. The discussions, 

 however, are for the most part conflned to the most rudimentary branches of the 

 subject, and but little importance attached to details, because the principles are not 

 understood. Quite recently this happy family has been increased by the birth of a 

 fine child, under the title of an Historic Society ; and I observe that, by way of 

 specializing the functions of this Society, it commenced life with a paper on Pre- 

 historic Man. But there are no signs of any limitation to this improvident child- 

 bearing ; it is announced that a Psychological Society is confidently expected. No 

 one would be more disposed than myself to welcome psychology as a special branch 

 of study if this family of gutter-children is to go on increasing ad Itbitmn ; but it 

 will be admitted that a Psychological Society of all others is liable to grow up 

 scatterbrained if completely severed from the influence of its more experienced 

 kinsfolk. 



