1867.] Archaeology and Ethnology. 519 



Dr. Thumam also endeavours to draw a distinction as to the 

 relative ages of the two forms of barrows, and states that no well 

 authenticated instance of the finding of metal, or of the finer de- 

 corated pottery, with the primary interments in long barrows was 

 known to him; but only objects of stone, bone, or horn, and a 

 peculiar coarse kind of pottery. In the round barrows, on the con- 

 trary, " objects of bronze (very rarely of iron) and richly decorated 

 pottery are often found, with or without objects of stone." The 

 author therefore referred the long barrows to the Stone-age and the 

 round ones to the Bronze-age, and the period of transition from 

 that to the Iron-age. 



In a paper " On the Natives of Madagascar," Mr. Thomas 

 Wilkinson shows the existence in that island of two distinct races 

 of men — one inhabiting the sea-coast and the other the interior of 

 the island. " The former have woolly hair, brown or black skins, 

 strong white teeth, and in fact all the characteristics of a superior 

 order of Negroes. Within the last few years this race has been 

 conquered by the people inhabiting the interior of the island, who 

 are called Hovas, and are generally slender, often small, with, in 

 many cases, long, straggling, unsound, and ugly teeth, straight 

 coarse hair, and light-brown skins, with faces resembling those of 

 the Chinese or of other Mongolian races." 



In a paper entitled "On Physio- Anthropology, its Aim and 

 Method," Dr. Hunt endeavours to divide his science into two por- 

 tions, namely " Physio-Anthropology," or the doctrine of the 

 functions of mankind, and " Physical Anthropology," or the doc- 

 trine of the forms of mankind ; just as in Zoology and Botany we 

 have the divisions of Morphology and Physiology. Still, from 

 the tenour of the paper, this comparison, which is instituted by 

 Dr. Hunt himself, does not seem to be quite parallel, otherwise 

 Physio- Anthropology is simply Human Physiology. What then is 

 this new department of the science of man ? Dr. Hunt says, " By 

 physio-anthropology I mean, not the philosophy of the human 

 mind, but the science of the functions of mankind ;" and he further 

 illustrates his meaning and rescues it from obscurity by remarking, 

 " I have quoted from Mr. Spencer chiefly to show that the term I 

 have employed, . . . differs in no essential respect from what 

 that writer understands by human psychology generally." Apart 

 from this subject, Dr. Hunt's paper is a resume of opinions on the 

 subject of Psychology, such as the question whether the size of the 

 brain has any direct relation to intellectual power and capacity ; the 

 doctrines of phrenology ; and many other kindred subjects of con- 

 siderable interest, which are, we presume, the chief portions of 

 Physio-Anthropology. It should be mentioned that Dr. Hunt 

 partially justifies his classification and division of Anthropology by 

 the action of the British Association last year. It is therefore un- 



vol. iv. 2 m 



