H.— ANTHROPOLOGY 165 



positive evidence of trade and intercourse. The most perfect example 

 of this kind is furnished by amber, which in one form of its composition 

 is pecuUar to the Baltic. It is found at hundreds of stations all across 

 Europe, from Jutland to Italy and Greece — a fact which proves beyond 

 all possible doubt the existence of a trade route, of which every step and 

 deviation can be traced. 



Raw materials, then, are better evidence than manufactures, especially 

 in the earlier stages of man's life. When we are dealing with the works 

 of man, logical processes of real value only begin to be applicable as 

 handicrafts become more complicated and as the arts begin to emerge. 

 Between art-styles, if we are sufficiently discriminating, it is possible to 

 institute sound contrasts and comparisons. To take an extreme instance, 

 we should no doubt recognise a Greek statue even if it were found in 

 West Africa. Thus an unprincipled person knew that we should recognise 

 an Egyptian faience figure if it were found in South Africa, and produced 

 a very passable forgery from South Africa in that reasonable confidence. 

 There are, of course, traps for the untrained, and there is such a thing as 

 expert criticism even of the most primitive painting in the world. But 

 if the criticism is sufficiently good it ought to be able to arrive at quite 

 positive results. No two schools of art can possibly coincide in the 

 united peculiarities of technique, convention and artistic style. I am 

 confident, therefore, that in due time we shall have our palaeolithic painters 

 as neatly ticketed by schools as those of pre-Raphaelite Italy. 



When therefore we find, as we very frequently find in all ages, either 

 very highly specialised implements or very complex manufactures or 

 highly stylised decorations, then we may and must concede that they 

 originate from a single source. The hammer-axes of Troy and the Danube, 

 the polygonal battle-axes so widely spread over Southern Russia and 

 Northern Europe, the lunulae of Irish gold, the decorated situlae of Iron 

 Age Italy, the painted vases of pre-Corinthian style, may stand as instances 

 of highly specialised products which unquestionably denote commerce 

 and reciprocal influence wherever they occur. To measure the intensity 

 of the influence and the direction of the commerce is another and scarcely 

 less difficult task, but the contact itself is beyond all doubt. No one has 

 so ably and scientifically used evidence of this kind as Prof. Childe. 



But we have to be on our guard against many cases in which the style 

 is hardly developed enough to be a convincing criterion, or in which 

 the style has become so confused owing to cross influences that it gives 

 an ambiguous answer. Most of all does this occur in the sphere of 

 pottery. There is no study that is more necessary to the archaeologist, 

 more fruitful in its potentialities or more fascinating to pursue than that 

 of pottery. It is very often approached, however, with the utmost 

 light-heartedness and with an absence of technical knowledge which 

 can only provoke scepticism and irritation in a critical reader. How 

 often have I read suggestions for pottery manufacture which any potter 

 knows to be technically impossible ! And how entirely subjective and 

 arbitrary seem many of the assertions commonly made as to derivation 

 and influence ! There is more bad reasoning in regard to pottery than 

 in regard to any other part of our subject. 



