ADDRESS. ? 



Mathematics, Lord Rayleigh. In his address he dealt mainly with topics, 

 such as Light, Heat, Sound, and Electricity, on which he is one of our 

 principal authorities. His name and that of his fellow-worker. Professor 

 Ramsay, are now and will in all future ages be associated with the dis- 

 covery of the new element. Argon. Of the ingenious methods by which 

 that discovery was made, and the existence of Argon established, this is 

 not the place to speak. One can only hope that the element will not 

 always continue to justify its name by its inertness. 



The claims of such a leader in physical science as Lord Rayleigh to 

 occupy the Presidential chair are self-evident, but possibly those of his 

 successor on this side of the Atlantic are not so immediately apparent. 

 I cannot for a moment pretend to place myself on the same purely scien- 

 tific level as my distinguished friend and for many years colleague, Lord 

 Rayleigh, and my claims, such as they are, seem to me to rest on entirely 

 difierent grounds. 



Whatever little I may have indirectly been able to do in assisting to 

 promote the advancement of science, my principal efforts have now for 

 many years been directed towards attempting to forge those links in the 

 history of the world, and especially of humanity, that connect the past 

 with the present, and towards tracing that course of evolution which plays 

 as important a part in the physical and moral development of man as it 

 does in that of the animal and vegetable creation. 



It appears to me, therefore, that my election to this important post 

 may, in the main, be regarded as a recognition by this Association of the 

 value of Archreology as a science. 



Leaving all personal considerations out of question, I gladly hail this 

 recognition, which is, indeed, in full accordance with the attitude already 

 for many years adopted by the Association towards Anthropology, one of 

 the most important branches of true ArchiBology. 



It is no doubt hard to define the exact limits which are to be assigned 

 to Archaeology as a science, and Ai'chseology as a branch of History and 

 Belles Lettres. A distinction is frequently drawn between science on 

 the one hand, and knowledge or learning on the other ; but translate the 

 terms into Latin, and the distinction at once disappears. In illustration 

 of this I need only cite Bacon's great work on the ' Advancement of 

 Learning,' which was, with his own aid, translated into Latin under the 

 title ' De Augmentis Scientiarum.' 



It must, however, be acknowledged that a distinction does exist be- 

 tween Archseology proper, and what, for want of a better word, may be 

 termed Antiquarianism. It may be interesting to know the internal 

 arrangements of a Dominican convent in the middle ages ; to distinguish 

 between the difierent mouldings characteristic of the principal styles of 

 Gothic architecture ; to determine whether an English coin bearing the 

 name of Henry was struck under Henry II., Richard, John, or Henry 

 III., or to decide whether some given edifice was erected in Roman, 



