PART IV.--THE CHRISTIAN PERIOD.

117. Standing Stone, Hawkhill, Alloa, 496

118. Dunnichen Stone, Angusshire, 497

119. Silver Scale-plate, Norrie's Law, 499

120. Meigle Stone, Angusshire, 502

121. PLATE IV.--ST. ANDREW'S SARCOPHAGUS, 503

122. Celtic Brooch, 504

123. Celtic Dirks, 505

124. Inscribed Standing Stone, Newton in Garioch, 506

125. Bishop Patrick's Tomb, Iona, 507

126. Cross of Lauchlan M'Fingon, Iona, 509

127. Silver Bodkins, Norrie's Law, 516

128. Silver Ring Fibula, Norrie's Law, 517

129. Silver Ornament, Norrie's Law, 518

130. Primitive Gold Coins, Cairnmuir, 520

131. Oval Brooch, Pict's House, Caithness, 523

132. Sculptured Stone, Invergowrie, 524

133. Dunipace Brooch, 530

134. Runic Inscription, St. Molio's Cave, 531

135. Large Runic Inscription, St. Molio's Cave, 533

136. Runic Inscription, Greenland, 537

137. Kirk Michael Cross, Isle of Man, 540

138. Runic Inscription, Kirk Michael Cross, 541

139. Kirk Braddan Cross, Isle of Man, 542

140. Inscription on the head of Kirk Braddan Cross, 542

141. Bronze Ring-Pin, Sandwick, Orkney, 551

142. 143. Oval Brooch, Links of Pier-o-waal, Orkney, 554

144. Comb, Pier-o-waal, 554

145. Bronze Ring-Pin, 555

146. Animal-shaped Liquor Decanter, 556

147. Acus of Dunipace Brooch, 559

148. Glasgow Brooch, 560

149. Table-stones, 562

150. Lewis Chess-Piece, King, 568

151. Lewis Chess-Piece, Queen, 568

152. Lewis Chess-Piece, Warden, 573

153. Lewis Chess-Piece, Knight, 576

154. Chess-Piece, Museum of Scottish Antiquaries, 578

155. Chess-Piece, Queen, Penicuick Collection, 579

156. Ancient Seal, Abbey of Holyrood, 582

157. Doorway, Round Tower of Donaghmore, 587

158. St. Magnus's Church, Egilshay, 590

159. Doorway, Round Tower of Brechin, 596

160. Abbot Crawfurd's Arms, Holyrood Abbey, 611

161. Section of Arch Mouldings, St. Rule's Church, St. Andrews, 612

162. Section of Pier, St. Rule's, 612

163. Chancel Arch, St. Rule's, 613

164. Window, Corstorphine, 622

165. Corbel, Trinity Church, Edinburgh, 624

166. Chantry Door, Bothwell Collegiate Church, 627

167. Window, Dunkeld Cathedral, 628

168. Window, St. Michael's, Linlithgow, 628

169. Bishop Kennedy's Arms, St. Giles's, Edinburgh, 629

170. Boss of St. Eloi's Chapel, St. Giles's, 631

171. Rothesay Chapel, St. Giles's, 632

172. Ambry, Kennedy's Close, 637

173. Ambry, Guise Palace, 637

174. Monogram, Blyth's Close, 638

175. Masons' Marks, Roslin Chapel, 640

176. PLATE VI.--KILMICHAEL-GLASSRIE BELL AND DUNVEGAN CUP, 652

177. Bell of St. Columba, 654

178. Clog Beanuighte, or Blessed Bell, 656

179. Perthshire Bell, 658

180. Clog-rinny, or Bell of St. Ninian, 660

181. Quigrich, or Crosier of St. Fillan, 664

182. Ancient Episcopal Crosier, Fortrose Cathedral, 666

183. Oaken Crosier, Cathedral of Kirkwall, 667

184. Mazer, Castle of Merdon, near Hursly, 672

185. Mazer of the Fourteenth Century, 673

186. Gold Ring, Flodden Field, 677

187. Medieval Pottery, North-Berwick Abbey, East-Lothian, 678

188. Pottery, Penicuick House, 679

189. Celtic or Elfin Pipes, 679

190. Ancient Stone Tobacco Pipe, Morningside, 681

191. Two-handed Scottish Claymore, 682

192. Hawthornden Sword, 683

193. Scottish Two-Handed Sword, 684

194. Battle-Axe, Bannockburn, 685

195. Lochaber Axes, 686

196. Sculpture, Edinburgh Castle, Mons Meg, 686

197. The Scottish Maiden, 689

198. Thumb-Screws, 690

199. Jougs, Applegirth, 691

200. The Branks, Moray House, 693

201. Witch's Bridle, Forfar, 693

PREFACE.

The zeal for Archæological investigation which has recently manifested itself in nearly every country of Europe, has been traced, not without reason, to the impulse which proceeded from Abbotsford. Though such is not exactly the source which we might expect to give birth to the transition from profitless dilettantism to the intelligent spirit of scientific investigation, yet it is unquestionable that Sir Walter Scott was the first of modern writers "to teach all men this truth, which looks like a truism, and yet was as good as unknown to writers of history and others, till so taught,--that the bygone ages of the world were actually filled by living men."[1] If, however, the impulse to the pursuit of Archæology as a science be thus traceable to our own country, neither Scotland nor England can lay claim to the merit of having been the first to recognise its true character, or to develop its fruits. The spirit of antiquarianism has not, indeed, slumbered among us. It has taken form in Roxburgh, Bannatyne, Abbotsford, and other literary Clubs, producing valuable results for the use of the historian, but limiting its range within the Medieval era, and abandoning to isolated labourers that ampler field of research which embraces the prehistoric period of nations, and belongs not to literature but to the science of Nature. It was not till continental Archæologists had shewn what legitimate induction is capable of, that those of Britain were content to forsake laborious trifling, and associate themselves with renewed energy of purpose to establish the study on its true footing as an indispensable link in the circle of the sciences.

Amid the increasing zeal for the advancement of knowledge, the time appears to have at length come for the thorough elucidation of Primeval Archæology as an element in the history of man. The British Association, expressly constituted for the purpose of giving a stronger impulse and a more systematic direction to scientific inquiry, embraced within its original scheme no provision for the encouragement of those investigations which most directly tend to throw light on the origin and progress of the human race. Physical archæology was indeed admissible, in so far as it dealt with the extinct fauna of the palæontologist; but it was practically pronounced to be without the scientific pale whenever it touched on that portion of the archæology of the globe which comprehends the history of the race of human beings to which we ourselves belong. A delusive hope was indeed raised by the publication in the first volume of the Transactions of the Association, of one memoir on the contributions afforded by physical and philological researches to the history of the human species,--but the ethnologist was doomed to disappointment. During several annual meetings, elaborate and valuable memoirs, prepared on various questions relating to this important branch of knowledge, and to the primeval population of the British Isles, were returned to their authors without being read. This pregnant fact has excited little notice hitherto; but when the scientific history of the first half of the nineteenth century shall come to be reviewed by those who succeed us, and reap the fruits of such advancement as we now aim at, it will not be overlooked as an evidence of the exoteric character of much of the overestimated science of the age. Through the persevering zeal of a few resolute men of distinguished ability, ethnology was at length afforded a partial footing among the recognised sciences, and at the meeting of the Association to be held at Ipswich in 1851, it will for the first time take its place as a distinct section of British Science.

It has fared otherwise with Archæology. Rejected in its first appeal for a place among the sister sciences, its promoters felt themselves under no necessity to court a share in popular favour which they could readily command, and we have accordingly its annual congresses altogether apart from those of the associated sciences. Archæology, however, has suffered from the isolation; while it cannot but be sooner or later felt to be an inconsistency at once anomalous and pregnant with evil, which recognises as a legitimate branch of British science, the study of the human species, by means both of physiological and philological investigation, but altogether excludes the equally direct evidence which Archæology supplies. It rests, however, with the archæologist to assert for his own study its just place among the essential elements of scientific induction, and to shew that it not only furnishes valuable auxiliary truth in aid of physiological and philological comparisons, but that it adds distinct psychological indices by no other means attainable, and yields the most trustworthy, if not the sole evidence in relation to extinct branches of the human family, the history of which possesses a peculiar national and personal interest for us.

Meanwhile the close relations which subsist between the researches of the ethnologist and the archæologist, and the perfect unity of their aims, have been recognised by Nillson, Eschricht, and other distinguished men in various countries; and while the two sciences have advanced together, in harmony and with mutual advantage, Scandinavian archæologists have given an impetus to the study of Primitive Antiquities, which has already done much to establish its value as the indispensable basis of all written history. The facilities afforded to the Scandinavian archæologist by the purity of his primitive remains, and the freedom of his ethnographic chronicles from those violent intercalations of foreign elements which render both the ethnology and the historical antiquities of Central Europe so complicated and difficult of solution, peculiarly fitted him for originating a comprehensive yet well-defined system. The comparatively recent close of the Scandinavian primitive periods has preserved in a more complete form those evidences by which we recover the knowledge of the first rude colonists of Europe, whose records are distorted and nearly effaced within the wide pale of Roman sway. The isolation, moreover, of these northern kingdoms preserved them from being the mere highway of the first Asiatic nomades. Whatever traces of early wanderers they retain are well-defined, so that to them we may look for clear and satisfactory evidence in illustration of one portion at least of the primal north-western tide of migration from which the origin of all European history dates. It chances, however, from various accidental causes, that the revival of archæological research in Britain, influenced by canons directly supplied from Scandinavian sources, has a tendency to authenticate some of the most favourite errors of older British antiquaries. Based, as nearly all antiquarian pursuits in this country have heretofore been, on classical learning, it has been accepted as an almost indisputable truth, that, with the exception of the mysteriously learned Druid priests, the Britons prior to the Roman Period were mere painted savages. Hence, while the artless relics of our primeval Stone Period were generally assigned to native workmanship, whatever evinced any remarkable traces of skill distinct from the well-defined Roman art, was assumed of necessity to have a foreign origin, and was usually ascribed to the Danes. The invariable adoption of the latter term in preference to that of Norwegians or Norsemen, shews how completely Scottish and Irish antiquaries have abandoned themselves to the influence of English literature, even where the appropriation of its dogmas was opposed to well-known historical facts. The name of Dane has in fact for centuries been one of those convenient words which so often take the place of ideas and save the trouble and inconvenience of reasoning. Yet this theory of a Danish origin for nearly all native arts, though adopted without investigation, and fostered in defiance of evidence, has long ceased to be a mere popular error. It pervades both the Scottish and English Archæologiæ, and the great majority of works on every department of British antiquities, and has till recently proved a perpetual stumblingblock to the Irish antiquary. It is, moreover, a cumulative error,--certain Scottish relics, for example, found in Argyleshire, as well as others in the Isle of Man, being assumed in the Archæologia Scotica to be Scandinavian,[2] an able writer in the Transactions of the Cambridge Camden Society, taking these assumptions as indisputable facts, employs them in proving that other equally undoubted native works of art are also Scandinavian.[3] So, too, a writer in the Archæologia Scotica, ascribing a similar origin to the monolithic structures of the Orkney and Shetland Islands,[4] is quoted by Danish antiquaries[5] as referring to an established truth, and as proving, accordingly, that similar structures in the Hebrides are also the work of the Northmen! Pennant, Chalmers, Barry, Macculloch, Scott, Hibbert, and a host of other writers might be quoted to shew how this theory, like a snow-ball, gathers as it rolls, taking up indiscriminately whatever chances to lie in its erratic course. Even the poets have lent their aid to propagate the same prevalent error. Cowper, for example,--no uneducated or superficial writer,--thus strangely postdates Britain's birth-time:--

"Now borne upon the wings of truth sublime, Review thy dim original and prime,-- This island, spot of unreclaimed rude earth, The cradle that received thee at thy birth, Was rocked by many a rough Norwegian blast, And Danish howlings scared thee as they past."[6]

Similar examples of the influence of this predominant theory might be multiplied from the most diverse sources; nor are even the recently established archæological periodicals free from it. It is obvious, therefore, that such opinions must be sifted to the utmost, and either established or got rid of before any efficient progress can be made in British Archæology. In Scotland this theory is much more comprehensive in its effects than in England, where the Anglo-Saxon element is recognised as the predominating source of later changes; and now that the character of genuine Roman antiquities is well ascertained, nearly the whole of our native relics have latterly been assigned to a Scandinavian origin. It is altogether unnecessary, I trust, to disclaim any petty spirit of national jealousy in the rigorous investigation of such theories which will be found pursued in the following pages. The error is for the most part of native growth; but whencesoever it be derived, truth is the end which the archæologist has in view; and the enlightened spirit in which the researches of the Northern antiquaries have already been pursued, is the best guarantee that they will not be less ready to co-operate in overturning error than in establishing truth. It is not a mere question between Northman or Dane and Celt or Saxon. It involves the entire chronology of the prehistoric British periods, and so long as it remains unsettled any consistent arrangement of our archæological data into a historical sequence is impossible.

The following work, embracing within its plan such a comprehensive scheme of Scottish Archæology as has not been hitherto attempted, has been undertaken under the conviction that this science is the key to great truths which have yet to be reached, and that its importance will hereafter be recognised in a way little dreamt of by those students of kindred sciences, who, while busied in investigating the traces of older but inferior orders of being, can discern only the objects of an aimless curiosity in relics pertaining to the human species. That such, however, should still be the case, is far more the fault of the antiquary than of the student of other sciences. It is his misfortune that his most recondite pursuits are peculiarly exposed to the laborious idling of the mere dabblers in science, so that they alternately assume to the uninterested observer the aspect of frivolous pastime and of solemn trifling. I cannot but think that a direct union with the associated sciences, and an incorporation especially with the kindred researches of the ethnologist, while it might, perchance, give some of its present admirers a distaste for the severer and more restricted study, would largely contribute to its real advancement, and free its truly zealous students from many popular trammels which at present cumber its progress. Meanwhile the archæologist may derive some hope from the remembrance that astronomy was once astrology; that chemistry was long mere alchemy; that geology has only in our own day ceased to be a branch of unreasoning antiquarianism; and that ethnology has scarcely yet passed the jealously guarded porch, as the youngest of all the recognised band of sister sciences.

In nothing is the want of the intelligent cooperation of the kindred sciences which bear on the study of antiquities more apparent than in the present state of our public collections. The British Museum contains the elements of a collection which, if arranged ethnographically and chronologically, would form the most valuable school of popular instruction that Government could establish; and no other country rests under the same manifest duty to form a complete ethnological museum as Britain: with her hundred colonies, and her tribes of subject aborigines in every quarter of the globe, losing their individuality where they escape extinction, by absorption and assimilation to their European masters. Were an entire quadrangular range of apartments in the British Museum devoted to a continuous systematic arrangement, the visitor should pass from the ethnographic rooms, shewing man as he is still found in the primitive savage state, and destitute of the metallurgic arts; thence to the relics of the Stone Period, not of Britain or Europe only; but also of Asia, Africa, and America, including the remarkable primitive traces which even Egypt discloses. To this would then fitly succeed the old monuments of Egyptian civilisation, the Nimrud marbles, the sculptures of India, and all the other evidences of early Asiatic arts. The Archaic Greek and Colonial works should come after these, followed by the master-pieces of the age of Pericles, and these again by the monuments of imperial Rome. Thus by a natural sequence we return to British remains: the Anglo-Roman relics piecing on like a new chapter of European history, at the point where our island first appears as a part of the old Roman world, and followed in succession by our native Anglo-Saxon, Scandinavian, Norman, and Medieval antiquities. The materials for all this, if we except the primitive British relics, are already acquired; and while to the thousands who annually throng the Museum, in idle and profitless wonder, this would at once convert into intelligible history, what must now be to the vast majority of visitors a confused assortment of nearly meaningless relics, even the most profound scholar might derive from it information and pleasure, such as would amply repay the labour of re-arrangement. The immense practical value of collections to the archæologist renders their proper arrangement a matter of grave importance, and one which cannot be allowed to rest in its present extremely imperfect state.[7]

In Scotland no national collection exists, though a small body of zealous men have struggled to maintain an Archæological Museum in the Scottish capital for the last seventy years, in defiance of obstacles of the most harassing nature. Not the least of these is the enforcement of the law of treasure-trove, by which all objects of the precious metals are held to be the property of the Crown. Notwithstanding the earnest zeal for the preservation of national relics which has actuated both Sir Henry Jardine and John Henderson, Esq., the late and present Crown and Lord Treasurer's Remembrancers for Scotland, and the liberal construction of the law by its administrators, as shewn in their offer of full value for all objects of the precious metals which may be delivered up to them, its operation has constantly impeded researches into the evidences of primitive art, and in many cases has occasioned the destruction of very valuable relics.

In a letter on this subject with which I have been favoured by the distinguished Danish antiquary, Mr. J. J. A. Worsaae, he remarks: "In Denmark, in former times, all hidden treasures, when found, belonged to the king. They were called _Danefa_. The finder had to give them up to the Crown without any remuneration. The effect of this was that very few or no antiquities of gold or silver were preserved for the Museum, [of Northern Antiquities at Copenhagen,] as the finders secretly sold the antiquities. For the purpose of putting an end to this, a law was passed in the middle of last century, in which the king declared himself willing to give the full value to the finders, and in some cases still more than the value; but, at the same time, he ordered all such things to be given up to the public museums, and in case of concealment the finders were to be tried and punished.

"This law is still in operation. It is the rule that _the finder_, in the strictest sense of the word, gets the remuneration, as the king--the real owner--has renounced his rights to him. The owner of the soil only gets the value if he has ordered a servant expressly to dig for any such thing, or, of course, if he is the finder himself. This has proved most effective. Another measure which has secured a good many objects for the Museum is the payment of the finder _as soon as possible_. Poor people, as the finders generally are, do not like to wait for money. They get easily anxious, and prefer to sell the things for a smaller price, if they only get the money without delay. It has now come to this here, that very few antiquities of gold or silver are lost. The peasants and workmen are perfectly well aware that they get more for the things dug up, at the Museum in Copenhagen, than in the shop of a goldsmith. This has been effected by publication in the almanacs, newspapers, &c., of the payments given to finders of valuable antiquities."

Some of the wretched fruits of the different system still pursued in this country are referred to in the following pages;[8] yet with the earnest desire of the officers of the Scottish Exchequer, to whom the enforcement of the present law is committed, to avert, if possible, the destructive consequences which it has heretofore operated to produce, it is manifest that nothing more is needed than to adopt the essential practical feature in the Danish plan, which gives the actual finder the sole claim to reward, and also holds him responsible and liable to punishment. Until this indispensable change is effected, the Scottish archæologist must continue to deplore the annual destruction of national treasures, not less valuable to the historian than the chartularies which are being rescued with so much labour and cost from their long-neglected repositories.

In attempting to arrange the elements of a system of Scottish Archæology, as a means towards the elucidation of prehistoric annals, I have had frequently to regret the want of any national collection adequate to the object in view. That the Museum of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland is one of considerable value must I think be apparent, even from the materials it has furnished for this volume. Some private collections, it will be seen, add a few more to the rescued waifs of Scottish national antiquities; but the result of an extensive correspondence carried on with a view to obtain the necessary facts which no books at present supply, has forced on me the conviction that, even within the last dozen years, such a number of valuable objects have been destroyed as would alone have formed an important nucleus for a complete Archæological Museum. The new Statistical Accounts, along with some periodicals and other recently published works, contain references to discoveries made within that period in nearly every district of Scotland. From these I selected upwards of two hundred of the most interesting and valuable examples, and the result of a laborious correspondence is, the establishment of the fact that scarcely five per cent. of the whole can now be ascertained to be in existence. Some have been lost or broken; some thrown away, sold, or stolen,--which in the case of objects of the precious metals involves their absolute destruction; in other cases, the proprietors themselves have disappeared--gone to India, America, Australia, or no one knows where. Of the few that remain, the jealous fear which the operation of the present law of treasure-trove excites has rendered a portion inaccessible, so that a sufficiently meagre handful of so prominent a harvest was left to be reaped.

When it is considered that in Scotland we have no such treasuries of the facts on which an archæological system must be built, as the Archæologia, the Vetusta Monumenta, the Nenia Britannica, the Ancient Wiltshire, and a host of other works supply to the English antiquary, I have a right to expect that some forbearance be shewn in contrasting this first attempt at a comprehensive treatment of the subject, with the works which other countries possess. I do not desire to offer it to the reader with an apology, or to seek to deprecate criticism by setting forth in array a host of difficulties surmounted or succumbed to. It has been the work of such leisure time as could be snatched from less congenial but engrossing pursuits, and will probably be found to contain some recurrence to the same ideas, to which a writer is liable when only able to take up his theme at intervals, and to pursue it amid repeated interruptions. Nevertheless, I have aimed at treating the subject as one which I esteem a worthy one ought to be treated, and if unsuccessful, it is not for want of the zeal which earnest enthusiasm commands. Some new ground I believe has been broken in the search after truth, and as a pioneer I am fully prepared to see my footsteps erased by those who follow me. It will be found, however, that truth is the goal which has been aimed at; and if it be but as a glimmering that light appears, it is well, so that its streaks are in the east, and the clouds which begin to break make way before the dawn.

It only remains for me to acknowledge some of the many favours received in the progress of the Work; though it is impossible to mention all to whose liberality I have been indebted during the extensive correspondence into which I was led while collecting needful materials for substantiating the positions assumed in the following argument. The want of such resources as in other countries supply to the Archæologist the means of constructing a system based on trustworthy evidence, has compelled me to draw largely on the courtesy of private collectors; and with very few exceptions, the cordial response returned to my applications has rendered the otherwise irksome task a source of pleasure, and even in some cases the beginning of valued friendships.

The Council of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland have afforded the utmost facilities in regard to their important national collection, and have accorded to me an equal freedom in the use of the extensive correspondence preserved in their Library, from which it will be found that some curious information has been recovered, not otherwise attainable. From my fellow Associates in the Society I have also received the most hearty sympathy and cooperation. To the kind services of Sir James Ramsay, Bart., I am indebted for obtaining from Lady Menzies one of the beautiful gold relics figured in the work. To my friend Professor J. Y. Simpson, M.D., I owe the contribution of one of the illustrations, and to Albert Way, Esq., and George Seton, Esq., others of the woodcuts, presented to me as the expression of their interest in my labours; while I have to thank my friend James Drummond, Esq., A.R.S.A., for drawings from his faithful pencil of several of the examples of ancient Scottish arms, as well as of other relics figured in the work. The many obligations I owe to the freedom with which Charles Kirkpatrick Sharpe, Esq., has long permitted me to avail myself of the treasures of his extensive collection, will appear in some degree from the use made of them in the following pages; while John Bell, Esq. of Dungannon, has obviated the difficulties which would have prevented my turning his no less valuable archæological treasures to account, by forwarding to me drawings and descriptions, from which some portions of this work derive their chief interest. Others of the objects selected for illustration are from the collection of W. B. Johnstone, Esq., R.S.A., the whole rare and costly contents of which have been placed completely at my disposal.

Nor must I omit to acknowledge the kind assistance I have received in various ways from David Laing, Esq., William B. D. D. Turnbull, Esq., W. H. Fotheringham, Esq., the Rev., James Mather, J. M. Mitchell, Esq., William Marshall, Esq., as well as from other Fellows of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland.

The Council of the Archæological Institute, with a liberality altogether spontaneous, offered, in the most gratifying and flattering terms of cordial sympathy with the object of my work, the beautiful series of engravings of the Norrie's Law silver relics, which illustrate the account of that remarkable discovery.

The Council of the British Archæological Association have placed me under similar obligations in regard to the woodcuts which illustrate the sepulchral discoveries at Pier-o-waal in Orkney.

To Sir George Clerk, Bart., I owe the privilege of access to the valuable and highly interesting collection of British and Roman antiquities at Penicuick House, formed by the eminent Scottish antiquary Sir John Clerk.

The very great obligations I am under to Lieutenant F. W. L. Thomas, R.N., are repeatedly noticed in the following pages, though in no degree adequately to the generosity with which the knowledge acquired by him during his professional exploration of the Orkney Islands, while engaged in the Admiralty Survey, has been placed at my disposal.

I have also to acknowledge the contribution of valuable information from my friend Professor Munch of Christiania, and from George Petrie, Esq. of Kirkwall; as well as kind services rendered me in various ways by Charles Roach Smith, Esq., J. C. Brown, Esq., William Nelson, Esq., by my indefatigable friend and correspondent, John Buchanan, Esq. of Glasgow, and others referred to in the course of the work.

My special thanks are due to Robert Hunter, of Hunterston, Esq., for his courteous liberality in forwarding to me the valuable Scottish relic found on his estate--engraved as the frontispiece to this volume--after I had despaired of making anything of its remarkable Runic inscription from various copies obligingly furnished. Whatever opinion may be formed as to the value of the interpretation of its inscription offered here, the archæologist and philologist may both place the utmost reliance on the fidelity of the engraved fac-simile of this interesting monument of the palæography, and, as I believe also, of the language of our ancestors. Besides putting into the engraver's hands a carefully executed drawing, he had the advantage of having the brooch itself before him while engraving it; after which I went over the copy in his presence, comparing it letter by letter, and checking the minutest deviations from the original. It is justly remarked in the "Guide to Northern Archæology," that "in copying Runic inscriptions great accuracy is required; for a point, a small, scarcely perceptible line, changes the value of the letter, or occasionally adds a letter, which may easily escape notice." When, however, it is added that "one of the best helps in copying Runic, and indeed all other inscriptions, is a knowledge of the language in which they are written," I am inclined to question its strict justice. Most authors, I believe, who have had any experience of the matter, would much prefer a compositor entirely ignorant of the language for setting up Latin, or any foreign tongue, at least to one short of being a perfect master of it. Where there is the total absence of knowledge of it, the imagination is entirely at rest; and the patient copying of letter after letter ensures the accuracy which often surprises the young author when revising his first proofs. Even so I would, in most cases, place more faith in the version of an inscription by an engraver accustomed to accurate copying, though entirely ignorant of the language, than in that of the ablest philologist, with his head full of speculations as to its meaning. A direct example in point is found in the Cardonell or "Thorkelin" print of the Ruthwell inscriptions, where the Scottish antiquary has given a more faithful version of the Runic than of the Latin legends. Notwithstanding the extravagant flights which Professor Finn Magnusen permitted his imagination to take relative to the supposed personages named on the Hunterston brooch, little blame can attach to him for having missed its true meaning with nothing but imperfect copies to guide him; but the fact that this inscription should have been copied from the original brooch by two Scandinavian scholars familiar with the Runic alphabet, without either of them detecting the name _Maolfridi_, so palpably engraved on it, proves how completely, though unconsciously, they were blinded by their knowledge of the old Norse language, and their belief that it must contain the word _Dalkr_, a brooch. The recognition, indeed, of this proper name proved to me the key to the whole inscription, as it immediately suggested the probability of the ᛚᚴ of former translators in the first line being also an ᛉ, and so led to a new and intelligible reading of the remainder. The word _dìol_, which I have rendered according to its significance as a substantive, is also employed as the verb _to avenge_. One Gaelic scholar to whom I shewed the inscription, accordingly suggested as a more characteristic old Celtic interpretation of the Runes: _O Malbritha, thou friend, avenge Malfridi!_ "The difference," he adds, "between the ancient and modern orthography is not greater than frequently exists between the present spelling of familiar terms, as written or pronounced in two contiguous Highland districts."

It is a customary conclusion to a preface to crave the forbearance of the reader for all faults and shortcomings: the which, as readers and critics make an equally general custom of paying no attention to it, may as well be omitted. I can only say, that while writing this work with an honest and earnest desire for the discovery of truth, I have done it no less under the conviction that anything I could now set forth on the subject must be modified by more extended observations, and superseded, ere long, by works of a more complete character.

EDINBURGH, _January 1851_.

Lightward aspire: nor think the utmost height Of an attainable success is won; Nor even that the mighty spirits, gone With the bright past, in their enduring flight So won their passage toward the infinite, That they may stand on their far heights alone, A distant glory, dazzling to the sight, In which all hope of mastery is o'erthrown. No height of daring is so high, but higher The earnest soul may yet find grace to climb; Truth springeth out of truth; the loftiest flyer, That soareth on the sweep of thought sublime, Resteth at length; and still beyond doth guess Truth infinite as God toward which to press.

SCOTTISH ARCHÆOLOGY.

INTRODUCTION.

"Large are the treasures of oblivion. Much more is buried in silence than recorded; and the largest volumes are but epitomes of what hath been. The account of Time began with night, and darkness still attendeth it."--SIR THOMAS BROWNE.

History which is derived from written materials must necessarily begin only where civilisation has advanced to so ripe a state, that the songs of the bard, and the traditions of the priest, have ceased to satisfy the cravings of the human mind for mastery over the past and the future. It has been too generally assumed that history is an inconceivable thing independent of written materials. Historians have accordingly, with a transient and incredulous glance at the fabulous infancy of nations, been too frequently content to leave their annals imperfect and maimed of those chapters that should record the deeply interesting story of their origin and rise. This mode of dealing with history is happily no longer sanctioned by the example of the ablest of its modern investigators. They are at length learning to analyze the myths which their predecessors rejected; and the results have already rewarded their toil, though much still remains obscure, or utterly unknown.

Gifted with an inspired pen, Moses has recorded in briefest words the story of the world's infancy: that, therefore, is rendered independent of myth or fable. But quitting that single illuminated spot, how shall the investigator recover the annals of our race during the dubious interval between the era of the dispersion of the human family and the earliest contribution of written materials? Job, we know, was no Hebrew, but a man of Uz, in the land to which Edom succeeded. Could we fix his era, it would be of interest; for we know that he lived in a literate age; and his desire against his adversary was, _that he had written a Book_! But Biblical students are disagreed as to this epoch. A recent German critic brings it down to the period of the Exodus, while the great majority of commentators have heretofore placed it some 700 years nearer Creation. We must, meanwhile, be content to receive this as one pregnant scene of primitive social life incorporated into the Book of Books, while all the rest are swallowed up with the old centuries to which they belonged. It has to be intercalated as best may be, into its place in the first chapters of human history, ere we grope our way onward or backward, seeking amid the darkness for that historic oasis--the first establishment of the human race on the banks of the Nile.

Wilkinson places the era of Menes, the founder of Egyptian monarchy, and probably one of the earliest wanderers from the eastern cradle of our race, some 2200 years B.C. Bunsen, aiming, in his "Ægyptens Stelle in der Weltgeschichte," at fixing the exact year, assigns that of 3643 B.C., or, in other words, 1295 years before the commonly accepted era of the Deluge. Yet even this has not satisfied all the requisites of newly discovered data. Fleury, in his "L'Egypte Pharaonique," carries back the Menean age some 1600 years farther into the past; and Böckh, following out an independent series of investigations, fixes the same era, in his "Manetho und die Hundssternperiode," for the year B.C. 5702. The world's early historic chronology, it is now universally admitted, has been misinterpreted. The last date is just 1698 years before the creation of the world, if we are still implicitly to accept Archbishop Usher for our guide. But even this it is possible may yet be revised, as too scanty for the events which it must comprehend; unless, following the example of one distinguished archæologist, Mr. S. Sharpe, we consign all Egyptian history prior to the era of Osirtesen I. to the same order of fabulous or mythic inventions as the crude traditions of our own chroniclers, and esteem Menes as no more than the classic Saturnus, or the Scandinavian Odin. It is not our province here to do more than indicate the fact, that all early chronology is liable to correction by the contributions of new truths, its most accredited data being at best only approximations to the desired end. "Oblivion is not to be hired. The greater part must be content to be as though they had not been: to be found in the register of God, not in the records of men. Twenty-seven names make up the first story before the Flood, and the recorded names ever since contain not one living century. The number of the dead long exceedeth all that shall live. The night of time far surpasseth the day; and who knows when was the Equinox?"[9]

Similar necessities and difficulties meet us when we would investigate the beginnings of younger nations. The oldest intelligible inscription known in Scotland is that graven in Anglo-Saxon Runes on the Ruthwell Cross, Dumfriesshire, and dating not earlier than the ninth century. The oldest written historic documents are probably the charters of Duncan, engrossed about the year 1035, and still preserved among the muniments of Durham Cathedral. Prior to these the Romans furnish some few scanty notes concerning the barbarian Picti. The Irish annalists contribute brief but valuable additions. The northern sagas, it is now certain, contain a still richer store of early historic notes, which the antiquaries of Copenhagen are busily digesting for us into available materials. Yet, after all these are ransacked, what shall we make of the long era which intervenes between the dispersion of the human family and the peopling of the British Isles? When did the first rude prow touch our shores?--who were its daring crew? Whence did language, manners, nationality, civilisation, and letters spring? All these are questions of the deepest interest; but on nearly all of them history is as silent as on the annals of Chaos. With reverential piety, or with restless inquisitiveness, we seek to know somewhat of the rude forefathers of our island race. Nor need we despair of unveiling somewhat of the mystery of their remote era, though no undeciphered hieroglyphics, nor written materials, preserve one solitary record of the MENES of the British Isles.

Human intelligence and research have already accomplished so much, that ignorance alone can presume to resign any past event to utter oblivion. Between "_the Beginning_," spoken of in the first verse of the Book called Genesis, and the creation of man, the most humble and devout of Biblical students now acknowledge the intervention of ages, compared to which the whole era of our race is but as the progression of the shadow one degree on the dial of time. Our whole written materials concerning all these ages are comprehended in the few introductory words of the Mosaic narrative, and for well-nigh 6000 years no more was known. But all the while their history lay in legible characters around these generations who heeded them not, or read them wrong. At length this history is being deciphered. The geologist has mastered the characters, and page after page of the old interleaved annals of preadamite existence are being reduced to our _enchorial text_--to the writing of the people. The dislocated strata are being paged, as it were, and re-arranged in their primary order. The palimpsests are being noted, and their double readings transferred to their correct places in the revised history. The whole accumulations of these ages between Chaos and man are, in fact, being dealt with by modern science much in the same way as the bibliographer treats some monkish or collegiate library suddenly rescued from the dust and confusion of centuries.

Returning to the same book of Moses, called Genesis, we find in it another record of things since the Beginning, thus noted in a passing parenthesis of the sacred narrative: "And God made the stars also." Very brief words; yet these are all our written materials about worlds and suns so filling the azure vault, that the astronomer, scarcely conscious of using figurative language, speaks of nebulous spaces as _powdered with stars_. Science has added somewhat to our knowledge of these also, without written annals. The Chaldean shepherds, who had never travelled beyond the central plain of Asia, where we recognise the cradle-land of the human race, began the work of unriddling these mysterious records. Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, and Kepler, added largely, with unassisted vision, to the accumulated observations of astronomy. Galileo supplied a new key that unlocked many secret stores. Huygens, Newton, Herschel, Dollond, Lord Rosse, have each given us others wherewith many more are being opened. Astronomy and geology have both accomplished much, and have yet to accomplish far more ere their scattered leaves can be bound up, or their thousand lacunæ filled in. Nevertheless, histories, it seems, may be based on other than written materials--may, indeed, be all the more sure and incontrovertible because their evidence is traceable to no such doubtful records.

It is in curious consistency with human nature that we find the order of its investigations in the inverse ratio of their relation to itself. In the infancy of our race men studied the stars, bringing to the aid of their human sympathies the fancies of the astrologer to fill the void which Astronomy could not satisfy. The earth had grown older, and its patriarchal age was long past, when Cosmogony and Geology had their rise. Now at length when the studies of many generations have furnished materials for Astronomy, and the history of the earth's crust is being patiently unravelled by numerous independent labourers, some students of the past have inquired if the annals of our own race may not also be recoverable. Men with zeal no less earnest than that which has done so much for Astronomy and Geology, have found that this also lay around the older generations, recorded in characters no less intelligible, and containing the history of beings no less interesting to us than the Saurians or Mammoths, to whose inheritance we have succeeded. Bacon has remarked, in treating of the vicissitudes of things,[10] "The great winding-sheets that bury all things in oblivion, are two--deluges and earthquakes." But the weft of our historic winding-sheet is of a feebler texture, and its unnoted folds envelop an ampler oblivion, which also will yield secrets worth the knowing. Not a day passes that some fact is not stored in that strange treasury, some of them wittingly, but far more unwittingly, as the chronicles of man. To decipher these and to apply them as the elements of a new historic chronometry, are the legitimate ends of Archæology.

Slowly and grudgingly is its true position conceded to the study of the archæologist. The world has had its laugh at him, not always without reason. The antiquary, indeed, in our own day, has taken the first of the laugh himself, feeling that it was not unmerited, so long as he was the mere gatherer of shreds from the tattered and waste leaves of the past. Now, however, when these same shreds are being pieced together and read anew, it is found that they well repay the labours both of collector and decipherer. But Archæology is yet in its infancy. Little more has been done for it than to accumulate and classify a few isolated facts. We are indeed only learning the meaning of the several characters in which its records are engrossed.

The history of one of the oldest and most faithfully studied branches of the science, may afford an example, as well as encouraging assurance, for the whole. In 1636 the learned Jesuit, Father Kirchner, published his "Œdipus Ægyptiacus," a ponderous treatise on Egyptian hieroglyphics, completed in six folios, containing abundance of learning, and no lack of confident assurance, but never a word of truth in the whole. It is a fair specimen of the labours of hieroglyphic students down to the year 1799, when M. Bouchard, a French officer of Engineers, in digging the foundation of Fort St. Julien, on the western bank of the Nile, between Rosetta and the sea, discovered a mutilated block of black basalt, containing three versions of one inscription graven in the year B.C. 196, or 1995 years prior to its discovery. Inscribed in this late era of hieroglyphic literature, Epiphanes, whose accession it records, had decreed it to be graven not only in the hieroglyphic or sacred characters, but also in the enchorial or popular Egyptian writing, and in the Greek character and language. Here then seemed to be the long-coveted key to the mysterious records of Egypt. Casts of it were taken, fac-similes engraved and distributed throughout Europe; and expectation, roused to the utmost pitch of excitement, paused for a reply. But eighteen years elapsed before Dr. Thomas Young, one of the greatest scholars of his age, mastered the riddle of the key, established beyond doubt the alphabetic use of hieroglyphics, and demonstrated the phonetic value of five of its characters. It seems, perhaps, a small result for so long a period of study, during which the attention of many of the first scholars of Europe had been directed to the critical investigation of the inscriptions of the Rosetta stone, and the comparison of their diverse characters. Nevertheless it was the insertion of the point of the wedge. All that followed was easy in comparison with it. What has since been accomplished by the scholars of Europe in this old field of archæological investigation, where they dealt with written though unread materials, is now being attempted for the whole compass of its legitimate operations by a similar union of learning and zeal, and Archæology at length claims its just rank among the inductive sciences.

The visitor to the British Museum passes through galleries containing fossil relics of the secondary and tertiary geological periods--the gigantic evidences of former life, the tropical fauna of the carboniferous system, and all the organic and inorganic proofs by which we are guided in investigating the physical changes, and classifying the extinct beings, that pertained to the older world of which they speak. Thence he proceeds to galleries filled with the inscribed sarcophagi and obelisks, the votive tablets, the sculptured altars, deities, or historic decorations of Assyria, Egypt, India, Greece, and Rome, relics which belong no less to extinct, though newer systems and orders of being. "The antiquities," says an eminent geologist, when instituting a nearly similar comparison, "piece on in natural sequence to the geology; and it seems but rational to indulge in the same sort of reasonings regarding them. They are the fossils of an extinct order of things newer than the tertiary; of an extinct race, of an extinct religion, of a state of society and a class of enterprises which the world saw once, but which it will never see again; and with but little assistance from the direct testimony of history, one has to grope one's way along this comparatively modern formation, guided chiefly, as in the more ancient deposits, by the clue of circumstantial evidence."[11] Such are the reflections of an intelligent geologist, suggested by a similar combination of geological and historic relics to that which offers itself to the visitor of our great National Museum. But it is even in a more absolute sense than the geologist dreams of that the antiquities piece on to the geology, and show the researches of the archæologist to follow up the closing data of the older systems without a pause. He labours to build up that most important of all the branches of palæontology which pertains to ethnological investigations, and which when brought to maturity will be found not less valuable as an element in the elucidation of the history of nations and of mankind, than the grammatical construction and the affiliations of languages, which the ethnologist now chiefly favours. The archæologist applies to the accumulated facts of his own science the same process of inductive reasoning which the geologist has already employed with such success in investigating still earlier states of being. Both deal with unwritten history, and aim at the recovery of annals long deemed irretrievably erased. Nor is it merely in a parallelism of process, or a continuity of subject, that the affinity is traceable between them. It will be found that they meet on common ground, and dispute the heirship of some of old Time's bequests. The detritus records archæological as well as geological facts. The more recent alluvial strata are the legitimate property of both; while above these lie the evidences of still later changes on the earth's surface--the debris of successive ages, the buried ruins, the entombed works of art, and "the heaps of reedy clay, into which chambered cities melt in their mortality"[12]--the undisputed heirlooms of the archæologist. The younger science treats, it is true, of recent periods, when compared with the eras of geological computation, and of a race newer than any of those whose organic remains are classified in the systems into which the strata of the earth's crust have been grouped. But this race which last of all has peopled the globe, once teeming with living beings so strangely diverse from all that now inhabit it, is the race of man, whose history embraces nobler records, and has claims to a deeper interest for us than the most wonderful of all the extinct monsters that once

"Prone on the flood, extended long and large, Lay floating many a rood."

Among the recent contributors to archæological science, the Danish antiquaries have surpassed all others in the value and extent of their researches. Occupying as they do a comparatively isolated seat of early northern civilisation, where the relics of the primeval and secondary archæological periods escaped to a great extent the disturbing influences of Roman invasion, they possess many facilities for its study. Notwithstanding this, however, the mute but eloquent relics of antiquity which abound there, excited, until a very recent period, even less notice than they have done among the archæologists of Ireland and Scotland, where also aboriginal traces have been little modified by the invading legions, whose memorials nearly superseded all others in the southern part of the British Isle. The Scandinavian countries, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, held the chief power among the races of the remote north in early times. Rome scarcely interfered with their growing strength, and left their wild mythology and poetic traditions and myths untinctured by the artificial creed which grew up amid the luxurious scepticism of the conquerors of the world. When the flood-tide of the legionary invaders had given back, and left the scenes of their brief occupation like the waste lands of a forsaken shore, the Scandinavians were the first to step into their deserted conquests. Fearlessly navigating seas where no Roman galley dared to have sailed, the Scandinavian warriors conquered the coasts of the Baltic and the German Ocean, occupied many parts of the British Isles, and especially established permanent settlements in the north of Scotland, and the isles on its northern and western coasts. Their power was felt on the shores of France and Spain, and they retaliated even on Italy the unavenged wrongs of the north. America was visited and partially occupied by them fully three centuries before Columbus steered his venturous course across the Atlantic. Greenland was colonized by them, and Iceland became the central point in their system of maritime operations. In that remote island the old northern language still lives, dialects of which were anciently spoken among the Scandinavian races, including the Anglo-Saxons of the south, and the Norsemen of the Scottish mainland and the Northern Isles.

Enduring traces of these hardy colonists still remain to furnish evidence of the source of much of our national character and hereditary customs. The religion of the Angles, the Saxons, the Scottish Norsemen, the Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish Scandinavians, was similar. Christianity, which supplanted so much else, could not root out the memorials of their wild creed, which preserve in the names of the days of the week those of Tyr, Woden, Thur, and Frea, favourite deities of the Scandinavian mythology. In Iceland a large portion of the literature of this northern race still survives, in the form of mythic songs, sagas, laws, and other historic treasures. To this the attention of Danish and Norwegian antiquaries is now devoted with untiring enthusiasm, and already we are possessed of some of its fruits. These are of immense value to all the nations allied to the common stock, and among them Scotland ranks more directly than any other portion of the British Isles. The promised contribution by the antiquaries of Copenhagen to the written materials of history, of the "Antiquitates Britannicæ et Hibernicæ," cannot fail to add a historic era to early Scottish annals, richer in suggestive interest even than the romantic chronicles of the long lost "Vinland," by which, in their "Antiquitates Americanæ," they have added three centuries to the history of the new world.

A mingled race now occupies Britain, diverse in name, and still distinct in blood. The names of England and Scotland, however, contradict the character of the races. While the natives of the South retain the name of Angul, the father of the Scandinavian colonists, long since nearly superseded by Germano-Teutonic races, the Celtic Highlanders, and the Lowlanders of the North, alike take that of the Irish Scoti, the conquerors of the older Celtæ; though there is not wanting evidence to show, that the peculiar characteristics of the hardy Lowland race, including those of the whole north-eastern mainland, and the Northern Isles, are chiefly derived from the mingled Norse and Saxon blood of a Teutonic ancestry. But older races than the Scandinavian Vikings were colonists of the British Isles. Christianity has failed to obliterate the traces of the creed of Woden. Still less influential have been the modifications of Teutonic and Scandinavian dialects in supplanting the older Celtic names which cling to every hill, valley, and stream, though the Celtic race has, for nearly eight centuries, ceased to occupy aught but the north-western Highlands of Wales and Scotland. The ethnologist has yet to solve the problem as to whether there exist not among these traces of still older tongues, pertaining to races who have left other but no less certain memorials of their former presence. From the remotest era to which historical tradition points, the Celtæ are found in possession of the north-west of Europe, whither they appear to have been gradually driven, by successive migrations of younger races from the same eastern centre, to which we refer the origin of the whole human family. We can trace, by unmistakable indications, the gradual western migration of this people, until we find them hemmed in between the younger races and the sea, on the north-west coasts of France, and along the mountainous regions of the west in the British Isles, where the invaders of the more fertile regions of the low countries have not cared to follow them. Modern philologists discover a clear affinity between the Celtic dialects and the languages known by the general title of Indo-European, affording confirmation of that eastern origin assigned to them, both by tradition and history, but which is no less true of the newer races which supplanted them. The essential differences between these remain markedly distinguishable after centuries of peaceful intercourse, and a common interchange of rights and privileges. The Scottish Gael, though by no means to be now regarded as sprung from a pure Celtic stock, scarcely differs more widely in language than in moral and intellectual characteristics from the race that peoples the fertile Lowlands. Yet the names of the most remarkable Lowland localities prove their possession by a Celtic race, whom therefore we cannot doubt to have been the prior, if not the aboriginal, occupants of the soil.

Of late years the direct evidence of the character of the primitive races of Europe, furnished by their sepulchral remains, has been made the subject of careful investigation by distinguished ethnologists, both of Denmark and Sweden. Eschricht, Nillson, and Retzius, have all aimed by this means to recover the traces of the colonists of the north of Europe, and have discovered different physical types, apparently corresponding to the successive stages of advancement in civilisation, which the more direct archæological evidence establishes. Arguing from these results, Professor Nillson arrives at the conclusion that the northern relics of the Stone Period are not the memorials of the Celtæ, but of a much older and unknown race, which in the course of time has disappeared before the immigration of more powerful nations. Similar ideas are now generally gaining ground among ethnologists. "Within their own pale," Dr. Latham remarks, "the Celts were the encroaching family of the oldest, the Romans of the next oldest, and the Anglo-Saxons and Slavonians of the recent periods of history."[13] On like grounds to those by which Professor Nillson arrives at the conclusion that the Celtæ were preceded in the north by other races, Danish and Swedish ethnologists concur in rejecting the idea of the Fins having been the aboriginal race of Scandinavia. The earliest people, whose remains are found accompanied with the primitive class of implements, prior to the introduction of metals, appear to have belonged to a family of different physical character from those of any of the Arian races, and have been supposed to present features of greater affinity to the nations of Northern Asia. Professor Nillson, who has carefully examined the skeletons of the aboriginal Swedish colonists, and especially noted the conformation of their crania, states that they are readily distinguished from all the subsequent inhabitants of Scandinavia. They present the same peculiar form of cranium which has been recognised as existing among several ancient peoples, such as the Iberians or Basques of the Pyrenees, the Lapps and Samoyedes, and the Pelasgi, some traces of whom are still found in Greece.[14] The last noted coincidence is of considerable interest, both from the ancient prevalence there of cyclopean architecture, and other traces of primitive arts of unknown antiquity, and also from its vicinity to the Asiatic centre of aboriginal emigration. Dr. Latham remarks, in reply to the question, "Is there reason to believe that any definite stock or division of our species has become either wholly extinct, or so incorporated as to be virtually beyond the recognition and analysis of the investigator? With the vast majority of the _so-called extinct_ stocks, this is not the case; _e.g._, it is not the case with the old Gauls of Gallia, who, though no longer extant, have extant congeners--the Welsh and Gaels. To an extinction of this kind among the better known historic nations of Europe and Asia, the nearest approach is to be found in the history of the Pelasgi."[15] It will be of no slight interest if we can trace the congeners of this ancient people among the extinct aborigines of the north of Europe.

Two later races are supposed to have succeeded each other in Scandinavia prior to its colonization by the true Swea race, the first settlement of which in Scandinavia Professor Nillson assigns to a much more recent date than has been commonly supposed--probably some time in the sixth century. Mr. Worsaae justly remarks, in his "Primeval Antiquities of Denmark,"--"It is a vain error to assume that certain races must incontestably be the most ancient, because they are the first which are mentioned in the few and uncertain written records which we possess."[16] Unfortunately extremely little attention has been hitherto paid to the size and form of the crania found in British tumuli. Some few examples, however, have been preserved, and will furnish the elements of a brief inquiry into this interesting department of Physical Archæology, in a subsequent chapter. To this branch of evidence it is probable that much greater importance will be attached when it has been thoroughly investigated, since to it we may look, with considerable confidence, for a distinct reply to the inquiry, which other departments of archæological evidence suggest as to the existence of primitive races in Britain prior to the Celtæ. So far as our present limited data admit of general conclusions being drawn, we find traces of more than one race, differing greatly in physical characteristics from any of the successive colonists of Britain within the era of authentic history. Professor Nillson is of opinion that the type of the old Celtic cranium is intermediate to the true dolicho-kephalic and brachy-kephalic forms, a conclusion in which Dr. Thurnam and others concur. Such is not the form of cranium of either of the races of the Scottish tumuli, and in so far, therefore, as such forms may be assumed to be permanent, we are necessarily led to the conclusion, that in these we recover traces of the Allophylian pioneers of the human family in Britain.

The infancy of all written history is necessarily involved in fable. Long ere the scattered families have conjoined their patriarchal unions into tribes and clans, acknowledging some common chief, and submitting their differences to the rude legislation of the arch-priest or civil head of the commonwealth, treacherous tradition has converted the story of their birth into the wildest admixture of myth and legendary fable. To unravel the complicated skein, and recover the pure thread divested of all its extraneous acquisitions, is the impossible task of the historian. This period past--so momentous in the influence it exercises on all the years that follow--the historian finds himself among materials more manageable in some respects, though not always more trustworthy. He reaches the era of chronicles, records, and, still better, of diplomas, charters, deeds of gift, and the like honest documents, which being written with no thought of posterity by their compilers, are the only really trustworthy chronicles that posterity has inherited. This historic epoch of Scotland is involved in even more obscurity than that which clouds the dim and fabulous morning of most nations. We have indeed the few but invaluable allusions of Roman authors supplying important and generally trustworthy data. But it is only a momentary glimpse of sunshine. For the era succeeding we have little better than the perplexing admixture of traditions, facts, and pious legends of monkish chroniclers, furnished with a copiousness sufficiently characteristic of the contrast between the literary legionary of imperial Rome, and the cloistered soldier of her papal successor. Amid these dusty acres of parchment must we glean for older dynasties and monarchical pedigrees--not seldom tempted to abandon the weedy furrows in disgust or despair. It is with no lack of zeal or courage, however, that these soldiers of the Church have encountered the oblivious past into which we still peer with no less resolute inquisitiveness. Bede, Fordun, Wyntoun, Boece, and the other penmen of the cloisters who, more or less accurately, chronicled contemporary history, all contributed their quota to the thick mists of fable which obscure the earlier annals of the country. Wyntoun, the best of our Scottish chroniclers, following the example of other monkish historians, begins his work as near _the beginning_ as may be, with a treatise on angels, before proceeding to "manny's fyrst creatoune!" In the sixth chapter he gets the length of "Ye Arke of Noe, and of the Spate," and after treating of _Ynde_, _Egype_, _Afryk_, and many other lands with an enviable and leisurely composure, he at length reaches the threshold of his legitimate subject, and glances, in the thirteenth chapter of his Scottish Chronicles, at "how Bretanne and Irlande lyis." This, however, is a mere passing notice; nor is it till after the dedication of many more successive chapters of his first five books to the general history of the world, that the author of the "Orygynale Cronykil of Scotland" quits his ample theme, and devotes himself exclusively to the professed object of his investigation, with only such occasional deviations as might be expected from an ecclesiastical historian.

With such laborious chroniclers peering into the past, which lay fully five centuries nearer them than it does to us, there might seem little left for the men of this older generation to do. But unhappily the very best of monkish chroniclers must be consulted with caution even as contemporary historians, and scarcely at all as the recorders of what passed any length of time prior to their own day; their information being nearly as trustworthy in regard to Noah and his _spate_, as to the traditions of generations immediately preceding their own. Lord Hailes begins his annals with the accession of Malcolm Canmore, "because the history of Scotland previous to that period is involved in obscurity and fable." Tytler, with even less courage than Lord Hailes, commences only at the accession of Alexander the Third, "because it is at this period that our national annals become particularly interesting to the general reader."

Till recently, the never-failing apology for all obscurities and deficiencies in Scottish history, has been the rape of our muniments by Edward and Cromwell. The former spoliation supplied for some centuries an excuse for all degrees of ignorance, inconsistencies, or palpable blunders; and the latter came most conveniently to hand for more recent dalliers in the same pleasant field of historic rambling. Edward and Cromwell both contributed a helping hand to the obscurity of Scottish history, in so far as they carried off and destroyed national records which could ill be spared. The apology, however, has been worth far more to maundering manufacturers of history than the lost muniments were ever likely to have proved. Not a few of these irrecoverable national records, so long deplored, it begins to be shrewdly suspected, never had any existence. Many more of them, it is found, were not sought for, or they might have been discovered to have never left their old repositories. Diligent Scottish antiquaries, finding this hereditary wail over lost muniments a very profitless task, have of late years betaken themselves to the study of what remained, and have been rewarded by the recovery of chest-loads of dusty charters and deeds of all sorts, of the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries, containing mines of historic information. The Scottish chartularies, now printed by various Clubs of literary antiquaries, disclose to us information scarcely open to a doubt, concerning old laws, feudal customs, servitude, tenure of property, ecclesiastical corporate rights, the collision of lay and clerical interests, and the final transference of monastic lands to lay proprietors. The old apology, therefore, of muniments lost or destroyed, will no longer serve the Scottish historian. Imperfectly as these treasures have yet been turned to account, medieval history is no longer obscure. Many fallacies are already exploded, and many more must speedily follow. The legends of the old chroniclers must be tried by the tests of documents written sometimes by the same authors, but with no thought that history would ever question them for the truth.

Yet ample as is the field thus open to the literary antiquary, these will only partially satisfy earnest longings after a knowledge of the past, and a clue to the old ancestral chain whereof they are but the middle links. Ritson has already carried back the supposed limits of authentic Caledonian history fully a thousand years before the _obscurity_ that daunted Lord Hailes. Chalmers, Gregory, Skene, and other zealous investigators, have followed or emulated him in the same bold inquiry. But neither do they reach the BEGINNING which we still desiderate. Much obscurity indeed vanishes. We begin to discover that the Northern and Southern Picts, so long the subject of mystery and fable, were no other than the aboriginal Celtæ; while the Scots who founded the kingdom of Dalriada, in Argyleshire, and ultimately conferred their name on the whole races occupying ancient Caledonia, were probably, if not indeed certainly, only another branch of the same Celtic race, who so readily amalgamated with the older occupants of Caledonia, that the change which is known as the "Scottish Conquest" long puzzled the historian, from the absence of any defined traces of a progress at all commensurate with its results. This is somewhat gained on the medieval _beginning_ which could alone be previously held tenable. But this also begins in the wake of much progression, and glances at a period which likewise had its old history full of no less interest to us, could its annals be recovered.

In one of the few records of Sir Isaac Newton's reflections which he has left for the help of others, the following comprehensive thought occurs:--"It is clearly apparent that the inhabitants of this world are of a short date, seeing that all arts, as letters, ships, printing, needle, &c., were discovered within the memory of history." The reflection is surely a very pregnant one. The data it suggests to us as the landmarks of time are well worth extending and turning to account, if so be that with their aid we can arrive at some trustworthy system of chronology, whereby to travel back towards that date which we reckon to be the beginning of things.

In this inquiry the labours of the literary antiquary, however zealously pursued, will but little avail us in reaching the desired point. The antiquary, nevertheless, has been long familiar with the elements of this older history, though turning them to very much the same profitable account as, till a very recent period, he did the hieroglyphic records graven on the granite tablets along the Nile. The first of arts mentioned by Newton is letters; justly first in point of dignity and universal value. Far homelier arts, however, sufficed the primitive races of mankind. Humble were their wants, and limited their desires; and if we are justified by the records of creation preserved to us in the Mosaic narrative, in assuming that man, beginning with the woven garment of fig-leaves and the coat of skins, has slowly progressed through successive stages to the knowledge of nobler arts, and the higher wants of an intelligent being, then we have only to establish evidence of the most primitive arts, pertaining to the primeval race, in order to be assured that we have reached the true beginning at which we aim. In the general investigation, indeed, allowance must be made for the speedy loss of antediluvian metallurgic arts which would follow almost of necessity on the exodus of the primitive nomades from their Eastern birthland, though preserved perhaps by the founders of the first Asiatic kingdoms, and probably practised by the earliest colonists of the Nile valley. Such at least we shall find to have been the case with the primeval colonists of Britain.

This point it is at which the modern archæologist now directs his inquiries, not altogether without the anticipation that these same primitive arts, the product of the beginning of things, may also prove to contain a decipherable alphabet, which may be resolved into definite phonetics, and furnish the key to many inscriptions no less curious and valuable than the parchments of medieval charter-chests, or even the tablet of Abydos and the Rosetta Stone.

It is long since the evidences of a primitive state of society, still abounding in the midst of modern civilisation, attracted the attention of the antiquary. It was indeed almost a necessary consequence of the accumulation of large collections of antiquities. The private hoards of "nick nackets,"--including in general a miscellaneous assortment of relics of all ages, only sufficient to produce a confused notion of useless or obsolete arts, without creating a definite idea of any single era of the past,--may be aptly compared to the _disjecta membra_ of some beautifully-proportioned and decorated vase. Hoarded apart, the pieces are nearly without value, and to new possessors become even meaningless. But should the whole, by some fortunate chance, be re-assembled in a single collection, it becomes possible for a skilful manipulator to piece the fragments together, and replace them with an elegant and valuable work of art. Thus it has proved with more than one archæological museum. In 1780 the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland was established, and its collection of national antiquities begun. A brief but most suggestive paper, read at one of its meetings in 1782, and published in the first volume of its Transactions, shews the speedy results of such valuable reconstructions, by means of an intelligent comparison of the primitive relics of Scotland.[17] But the resources of private zeal proved inadequate to the effective pursuit of these researches into Scottish Archæology, and the national funds found other, though not always more valuable objects for their expenditure. The hint was lost, but the accumulation of materials for future students was happily not altogether abandoned.

"About forty years ago," says J. J. A. Worsaae, the eminent Danish antiquary, writing in 1846, "the general character of scientific pursuits was in our country (Denmark) much the same as in most other parts of Europe. Great pains were spent in collecting all sorts of objects illustrating the changes of the globe upon which we live, and the distribution and habits of animals and plants--in short, all the departments of Natural History; whilst, strange to say, people for the most part neglected _traces of men_, the remains not only of their own ancestors, but also of all the different races who have been spread over the world. The antiquities, with the exception of those of Roman and Greek origin, were regarded as mere curiosities, without any scientific value."[18] Notwithstanding all the zeal of British archæologists of late years, so much of this spirit still remains among us, that it would be easier, perhaps, even now, to secure the purchase by the Trustees of the British Museum, of a Roman statue or an Egyptian tablet, than of valuable relics of British antiquity.

One man has within the last thirty years accomplished, not for Denmark only, but for Europe, what the whole united labours of earlier archæologists failed to do. About the year 1815, the present Danish Councillor of State, C. J. Thomsen, the son of a merchant of Copenhagen, was appointed Secretary of a Royal Commission for the preservation and collection of national antiquities. It had then been in existence some seven or eight years, and the whole result of its labours was a few miscellaneous articles, unclassified and uncared for, lying in a small room of the University Library. His enthusiasm in the study of the antiquities of his country surmounted all obstacles. He had to contend alike with the theories of the scholar and the prejudices of the unlearned. But he had succeeded to a position of the utmost value to a man of energy and enthusiasm. From the first he had grants (though exceedingly small ones) of public money at his disposal. He soon enlisted the more important element of public sympathy, and nationality of feeling, in his pursuits. His little room became too small for accumulating purchases and donations. A suite of apartments was yielded, at his intercession, in the Royal Palace of Christiansborg; and as the varied collection increased in his hands, he found himself possessed at once of the space and the elements for systematic classification.

The Royal Museum of Northern Antiquities of Copenhagen now numbers between three and four thousand specimens of stone weapons and implements, some hundreds of bronze swords, celts, spear-heads, armillæ, torcs, &c., and a collection of native gold and silver relics unequalled in all the museums of Europe. To it we owe the valuable suggestion of the system of classification now universally adopted in the nomenclature of archæological science--the _Stone_, _Bronze_, and _Iron_ periods, which, simple as it may appear, was first suggested by Mr. Thomsen, and is justly esteemed the foundation of Archæology as a science. By means of it the whole materials of antiquarian study at once arrange themselves according to an intelligible chronology of universal acceptance, and adapted in an especial degree to Northern antiquities. This, therefore, is the system on which the following data are arranged, subject only to such modifications as seem naturally to arise from national or local peculiarities.

It is not necessary here to enter on the question, of curious interest and value, as to whether the primeval state of man was essentially one of barbarism, from whence he progressed by slow degrees to social union, arts, civilisation, and political organisation into communities and nations. The investigations of chronologists the further they are pursued, seem only the more certainly to confer on primitive civilisation a more remote antiquity. At the same time, they confirm the idea, that the long accepted chronology of Archbishop Usher, still attached to our English Bibles, cheats the world, at the lowest computation, of fully 1400 years of its existence--a trifle perhaps in the age of worlds, but no unimportant element in the history of human civilisation, when we remember that between the era of the Mosaic deluge and the accession of the Egyptian Menes, we must account for the peopling of Egypt, the establishment of its social and political constitution, and the founding of a civilisation, the monuments of which are still among the most wonderful that human intellect and labour have produced. Not the least important branch of this inquiry relates to the primeval inhabitants of our own quarter of the globe; of whom as yet we know only with any degree of certainty of the Celtæ, occupying a transitional place in the history of the human family--at once the earliest known intruders and the latest nomades of Europe. It seems probable, from all the traces we can recover of the original condition of this race, that it was more their deficiency than their excess in the energy which we expect to find in the colonists of new regions, that drove them onward in their north-western pilgrimage, until their course was arrested by the Atlantic barriers. They seem to have fled ever forward, like night before the dawn, carrying with them knowledge sufficient to cope with the savage occupants of the wilds they invaded, yet bearing into these few arts but such as still pertain to the primitive races of mankind. In older literary notices of this people, whose language, manners, and arts are still traceable in our own land, we have only a secondary interest, believing that some records of them are recoverable, noted for us long before they had excited foreign interest. But, still more, we doubt not that similar records also preserve the history of older British tribes, in comparison with which the ancient Celtæ must be regarded as of recent origin. "The antiquities of the earlier periods," says a distinguished English antiquary, "including all remains which bear no evident stamp of Roman origin or influence, claim our most careful investigation. Exceedingly limited in variety of types, these vestiges of the ancient inhabitants of Great Britain are not more interesting to the antiquarian collector on account of their rarity, than valuable to the historian. They supply the only positive evidence in those obscure ages, regarding customs, warfare, foreign invasions, or the influence of commerce, and the advance of civilisation amongst the earliest races by which these islands were peopled."[19] Perhaps when we have bestowed on these primitive remains the degree of careful investigation which they merit, we shall find the variety of types less limited than is now conceived to be the case. The archæologists of Denmark justly value the absence of all relics of Roman art and civilisation, from the confidence it has given to their researches into the true eras to which their own primeval antiquities belong. Such gratulations, however, can only be of temporary avail. The influence of Roman arts and arms furnishes an element in the civilisation of modern Europe too important not to be worthy of the most careful study. When the distinctive characteristics of Roman and primitive art have been so satisfactorily established as to admit of their separate classification without risk of error or confusion, the British collections, with their ample store of Anglo-Roman relics, will furnish a far more comprehensive demonstration of national history than those northern galleries, which must remain destitute of any native examples of an influence no less abundantly visible in their literature and arts, than in that of nations which received it directly from the source. In this respect the Scottish antiquary is peculiarly fortunate in the field of observation he occupies. While he possesses the legionary inscriptions, the sepulchral tablets, the sculptures, pottery, and other native products of Roman colonists or invaders, he has also an extensive and strictly defined field for the study of primitive antiquities, almost as perfectly free from the disturbing elements of foreign art as the most secluded regions of ancient Scandinavia.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Carlyle's Miscellanies, second edition, vol. v. p. 301.

[2] Archæol. Scot., vol. ii. p. 506; vol. iv. p. 119.

[3] Trans. Camb. Camden Soc., vol. i. pp. 76, 91, 176.

[4] Archæol. Scot, vol. iii. p. 103.

[5] Report by the Royal Society of Northern Antiquaries, Copenhagen, 1836, p. 61.

[6] Expostulation.

[7] I should regret if I were thought, by the above remarks, to reflect on the present official staff of the British Museum, including as it does men no less distinguished for their learning than for their intelligent zeal for archæological investigation. One evil attendant on the present defective system of management of the Museum by a body of Trustees, composed, for the most part, of irresponsible _ex officio_ members, is, that the Keepers are converted into mere custodiers, responsible for the safety of the collection, but altogether destitute of the powers of an efficient curatorship, such as in the hands of Councillor C. J. Thomsen of Copenhagen led to the development of the entire system which has given to Archæology the character of a science. Wherever the fault lies, however, it is indisputable that the departments of ethnography and antiquities, in the British Museum, are arranged almost without an attempt at systematic classification: one consequence of which is, that in nearly every town of any importance throughout the kingdom we see local museums established, containing a confused jumble of antiquities, natural history, and foreign curiosities, but without any single characteristic of a scientific collection. The present popular idea of a museum, in this country, differs, indeed, in no degree, from the estimate of an exhibition of giants and dwarfs, or any other vulgar show; nor is this grave error likely to be discarded till the great model museum in London sets the example of a systematic arrangement, devised on some other principle than that of merely pleasing the eye.

[8] One instance, though by no means a solitary one in my own experience, will suffice to shew the pernicious effects of this antiquated relic of feudal claims, even in impeding research. Some considerable space is devoted, in the last section of this volume, to Runic relics; but one of considerable interest is omitted to be noticed,--a bronze finger ring inscribed in Anglo-Saxon Runes with the word _Æikhi_, probably the name of the original owner. It was found in the Abbey Park, St. Andrews. But its possessor, a gentleman of considerable antiquarian zeal, refused to permit of its being engraved or more distinctly referred to here, on the sole ground of his apprehension of exposing himself thereby to the claims of the Crown.

[9] Sir Thomas Browne. Hydriotaphia, or Urn Burial.

[10] Bacon's Essays, LVIII.

[11] Hugh Miller's First Impressions of England and its People.

[12] Ruskin's Seven Lamps of Architecture, p. 66.

[13] Natural History of the Varieties of Man, by Robert Gordon Latham, M.D., p. 528.

[14] British Association for the Advancement of Science, Report for 1837, p. 31.

[15] Natural History of Varieties of Man, by R. G. Latham, M.D., p. 553.

[16] Primeval Antiquities of Denmark, by J. J. A. Worsaae, translated, and applied to the illustration of similar remains in England, by W. J. Thoms, F.S.A., &c., p. 133.

[17] "An Inquiry into the Expedients used by the Scots before the Discovery of Metals," by W. C. Little, of Libberton, Esq. Archæologia Scotica, vol i. p. 389.

[18] "The Antiquities of Ireland and Denmark; being the substance of two communications made to the Royal Irish Academy at its Meetings, Nov. 30, and Dec. 7, 1846."

[19] Albert Way, on "Ancient Armillæ of Gold."--Archæological Journal, vol. vi. p. 55.