TRANSACTIONS OF SECTION H. 609 
that the peoples of Algiers and of the Madras Presidency evolved out of their 
inner consciousness, quite independently the one of the other, the same idea of 
a dolmen-crowned tumulus encircled with concentric rings of stone slabs? 
If one considers the details of the history of Egypt and the evolution of her 
arts and crafts and her customs and beliefs during the beginning of the third 
millennium B.C. ; and bears in mind either the chronological order of appearance 
and the geographical distribution of megalithic monuments in the various coun- 
tries on the one hand, or the general plan, the structural details and the ideas 
exemplified in the evolution of tomb construction in Egypt and the other places 
where megaliths occur, it seems to me wholly inconceivable that any other con- 
clusion can be reached but that the idea of tomb building, which was slowly 
evolved in Egypt during the fourth and third millennia B.C., was handed on 
from people to people, not only along the coast-line of the Mediterranean and 
Western Europe, but also along the whole Asiatic littoral, from that of the Red 
Sea to Southern Arabia and Persia, and thence to India, Ceylon, and Burma, to 
‘ Indo-Malaysia, Korea, Japan, and the Pacific Islands, if not beyond to America. 
The history of the spreading of cultures and religions in more recent times 
illustrates and confirms the hypothesis set forth here. For instance, the exten- 
sion of the influence of Islam from Arabia, to Spain in the West and Malaysia 
and Japan in the Kast, and the early maritime exploits of the Phenicians, Arabs 
and Indians illustrate the means by which widespread interchanges of peoples, 
cultures, and ideas are brought about. 
No doubt in each place the common idea was worked out in more or less 
independent detail; but the case I want to put before you, and, by means of this 
series of provocative questions, stimulate you to attack, is briefly that the idea 
of megalith-building originated in Egypt soon after the invention of metal 
tools, and spread from tribe to tribe, usually along coast-lines (because 
maritime habits are the most potent incentive to inter-racial intercourse) until 
the whole world was encircled by it. Such an idea would necessarily outstrip 
the culture which gave birth to it in Egypt. In other words the cult of building 
funerary monuments of great blocks of stone would be carried by these early 
missionaries to foreign lands more readily and more quickly than the skill to make 
aud use metal tools. Hence the megalithic culture, which was evolved in Egypt 
as one of the results of the discovery of metals, made its appearance in other 
lands just before the dawn of the Age of Metals. 
(ul) Are we justified in speaking of a Megalithic Race? 
By T, Eric Pest, B.A. 
Since 1872, when General Faidherbe published his observations on the dolmens 
of Algeria, the question of the origin of the megalithic monuments has been keenly 
discussed. The main point at issue is whether they were built by a single race or 
by a number of entirely different races or peoples, and, in the latter event, whether 
they arose independently among various peoples or spread from a single centre. 
The independent origin of the monuments has long had a defender in Mr. A. L. 
Lewis. But it is ad priori unlikely that the use of huge blocks of stone, where 
much smaller ones would have served the purpose equally well, should have arisen 
in many centres independently. Moreover, megalithic architecture follows certain 
definite rules. Its main principle is the use of a course of orthostatic slabs, often 
surmounted by courses of horizontal masorry. Its methods of roofing are two, 
the use of large slabs laid across from wall to wall and the employment of 
corbelling, in which the upper courses of the walls overlap successively inwards 
to form a vault or dome. It is improbable that these principles should have arisen 
in so many places independently. Bvu dings exactly similar in type, corresponding 
even in small details, are found in places far apart from each other. The dolmen 
occurs in almost every part of the megalithic area, while the curved facade, which 
sometimes occurs in the megalithic monuments, is found in Malta, Sardinia, the 
Balearic Isles, England, Ireland, Scotland, and the Isle of Man. Further simi- 
larities of detail are to be found in tthe pierced blocks so often found in megalithic 
tombs, and in the so-called ‘ cup-markings.’ The theory is also rendered unlikely 
by the fact that most of them date from much the same period, and that their 
geographical position, mainly along the edges of a vast sea route, points to 
connection rather than independence, 
1912. RR 
