AuvGusT 20, 1897. ] 
and Hlectricity, 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 associ- 
ated with the discovery 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 ele- 
ment 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 Presi- 
dential 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 scientific 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 different 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 to- 
wards 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 elec- 
tion to this important post may, in the main, 
be regarded as a recognition, by this Asso- 
ciation, of the value of archeology 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 
archeology. 
SCIENCE. 
Dial 
It is no doubt hard to define the exact 
limits which are to be assigned to arche- 
ology as a science and archeology as a 
branch of history and belles-lettres. A 
distinction is frequently drawn between 
science, on the one hand, and knowedge or 
learning, on the other; but translate the 
termsinto Latin, and the distinction at once 
disappears. In illustration of this, I need 
only cite Bacon’s great work on the ‘Ad- 
vancement 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 between archeology 
proper and what, for want of a better word, 
may be termed Antiquarianism. It may be 
interesting to know the internal arrange- 
ments of a Dominican convent in the Middle 
Ages; to distinguish between the different 
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, Saxon or Norman times. But the 
power to do this, though involving no small 
degree of detailed knowledge and some ac- 
quaintance with scientific methods, can 
hardly entitle its possessors to be enrolled 
among the votaries of science. 
A familiarity with all the details of 
Greek and Roman mythology and culture 
must be regarded as a literary rather than 
a scientific qualification; and yet when 
among the records of classical times we 
come upon traces of manners and customs 
which have survived for generations, and 
which seem to throw some rays of light 
upon the dim past, when history and 
writing were unknown, we are, I think, 
approaching the boundaries of scientific 
archeeology. 
Every reader of Virgil knows that the 
Greeks were not merely orators, but that 
