COMPARATIVE ARCHEOLOGY. 163 
a local or in the National Museum, good and well, as the local 
antiquary’s function may then be said to come to a legitimate 
end. But if no standard of comparison can be found for the 
chronological arrangement of his treasures further proceed- 
ings of a more drastic character become necessary, which may 
entail special knowledge beyond the capacity of any single 
individual to supply. Henceforth the inquiry comes under the 
control of a number of experts in different departments of 
science. Human bones are submitted to a_ professional 
anatomist who has paid some attention to fossil remains of 
man. Bones and teeth of other animals, horns, shells, seeds, 
‘and other organic remains go to appropriate specialists. The 
site has also to be examined by the geologist, especially if the 
debris has assumed a stratigraphical arrangement, as the pre- 
cise position of a fossil object may determine the date of the 
site, as well as that of its occupation by man. 
The finding of a skeleton of an extinct animal having a 
stone implement embedded in its skull would be as valid evi- 
dence that man was contemporary with and hunted these 
extinct animals, as if the fact had been recorded by an eye- 
witness in a written document. 
Again, the exploration of a great mound in France whose 
history was long lost in the mists of post ages has disclosed a 
central burial, consisting of the body of a warrior, arrayed in 
the full panoply of a splendid armour and laid on his war 
chariot, with the horses. in their place and harnessed, as if 
ready for battle. Every manufactured object discovered in 
that mound reveals by its form, structure, and decoration an 
unwritten story of bye-gone days, the tout ensemble of which 
conveys to the skilled antiquary a fair account of the culture 
and cilivization of the period in which this warrior lived. 
Worked objects found in surface soil and water-worn 
gravels may disclose a confused mixture of relics of different 
ages, especially the latter, owing to the frequent shifting of 
deposits by storms and floods. Relics found in such circum- 
stances are, for chronological purposes, unreliable, because 
they may have been previously more than once shifted and re- 
deposited. 
In regions abounding in sandhills, where extensive dis- 
