DEDICATION. Vll 



of being introduced to you, by our late lamented col- 

 league, Dr. Robert Knox, I held, as you may remember, 

 the office of Honorary Secretary to the Ethnological 

 Society of London, Most heartily did I welcome the 

 birth of your society, on behalf of that of which I was 

 then an officer, believing at that time, the Societe d'An- 

 tliTojwlogie de Paris to be merely an Ethnological So- 

 ciety under another name. In watching the develop- 

 ment of your Society and tracing the vastness of its 

 extent and objects, under the administration of yourself 

 and your illustrious colleagues, I soon perceived that 

 pure Ethnology merely formed a part of the grand science 

 then inaugurated by you. With the most intense plea- 

 sure and admiration, I witnessed the gradual establish- 

 ment and progress of your Society, endeavouring at the 

 same time with all my power to incite the Ethnological 

 Society to similar efforts. This attempt, however (truth 

 compels me to record), proved a signal failure — a circum- 

 stance which caused me disappointment at the moment, 

 but which I now consider fortunate ; for I soon became 

 aware that Anthropology and Ethnology could never be- 

 come synonymous terms, inasmuch as the latter merely 

 constitutes a part of the comprehensive science of An- 

 thropology. 



I am glad to state that, at the present time, this 

 profound distinction is fully admitted by unbiassed 

 persons in England. My failure, however, in arousing 

 the Ethnological Society from its torpor, was not attri- 

 butable to this confusion of terms, the matter not having 

 then received public attention in this country, but 

 arose entirely from the opposite views held by myself 

 and my colleagues as to the objects of the Ethnological 

 Society, and its duties as a scientific body. 



