« PreviousContinue »
casting a curious light on the discoveries made by the Swiss archæologists. Similar necessity produces everywhere a resort to the same methods: people who, for purposes of defence or nourishment, take to dwelling in the middle of the waters, must live in many respects alike; and no reasonable antiquarian would infer from thence a family connexion between the several cases, or imagine that he had under his eyes the relics of some primitive and universal practice. So with regard to the most curious parallel instance of all those cited in M. Troyon's book: the description given by Herodotus of certain Pæonians on Lake Prasias, in Thrace. We quote from Mr. Rawlinson's translation:
" Their manner of living is the following: platforms supported upon tall piles stand in the middle of the lake, which are approached from the land by a single narrow bridge. At the first, the piles which bear up the platforms were fixed in their places by the whole body of the citizens; but since that time, the custom which has prevailed about fixing them is this. They are brought from a hill called Orbelus, and every man drives in three for every wife that he marries. Now the men have all many wives apiece, and this is the way in which they live. Each has his own hut, wherein be dwells, upon one of the platforms, and each has also a trap door giving access to the lake beneath ; and their wont is to tie their baby children by the foot with a string, to save them from rolling into the water. They feed their horses and their other beasts upon fish, which abound in the lake to such a degree, that a man has only to open his trap door, and let down a basket by a rope into the water, and then to wait a very short time, when up he draws it quite full of them.'
We shall see presently that the Father of History has here sketched for us, in his graphic way, the very outlines of that Lacustrine life which M. Troyon supposes to have been led by his pre-historical fellow-countrymen. But we cannot infer from thence a common · Turanian' origin for the dwellers on Lake Leman and Lake Prasias, as Mr. Rawlinson seems inclined to do, any more than from the fact that there is salmons in both.'
With these few preliminary remarks, we will proceed at once to consider, by themselves and without further efforts at generalisation, the facts communicated by M. Troyon.
The boatmen on the Swiss lakes, when navigating close to the shore, had, from time immemorial, observed in various places, under the calm transparent water, the heads of numberless wooden stakes just protruding through the deposit of soft silt which is generally found at the bottom. Here and there, along with these, large blocks of wood were visible, stags' horns of great size, bones, and fragments of pottery. There still lived
among them* a traditional belief, that these were the remains of dwellings, occupied by people of ancient times, who built on the lakes in order to shelter themselves from wild beasts. And yet century after century elapsed, and no one had the curiosity to look closer into these scattered fragments of a forgotten world, until the season had ripened for the final discovery.
But it so happened, that in 1853 and 1854, a period of unusual dryness set in. The higher mountains did not receive their usual supplies of winter snow, and the lakes, scantily fed by the glacier streams, fell far below their ordinary level
. In the Lake of Zurich, the lowest level hitherto marked on the socalled 'stone of Stäfa’ had been attained in 1674. In 1854, the water was a foot lower. In a small bay between Ober Meilen and Dollikon, the inhabitants † took advantage of the recession to increase their gardens, by building a wall along the new low-water line, and filling up
up the space thus acquired with earth obtained by dredging the lake. During this operation, they “found great numbers of piles, of deer
horns, and also some implements. The attention of Dr. F. Keller, of Zurich, was called to the discovery; and the result of his investigations (described by him in three memoirs, presented to the Antiquarian Society of Zurich in 1854, 1858, and 1860), was to establish the existence of a submerged • lake 'village, in this part of the Lake of Zurich. This discovery was rapidly followed by others. In the Lake Constance, Geneva, Neufchatel, Bienne, Morat, Sempach, and in many smaller ones (Inkwyl, Pfäffikon, Moosseedorf, Luissel), similar sites have been traced. They seem, indeed, now to multiply in the note-books of archæologists with almost inconvenient rapidity. Two years ago, twenty-six such village sites had already been traced and described in the Lake of Neufchatel alone; twenty-four in that of Geneva; sixteen in that of Constance, and we cannot tell how many more the zeal of local inquiry, stimulated by rivalry, may have since disinterred. And the amount of ancient objects recovered from their débris acquires a magnitude still more formidable. Twenty-four thousand of these have been raised from the single locality of Concise, in the Lake of Neufchatel. We are still very far,' says M. Troyon, ' from having recovered all the relics imbedded ' in the silt of the lakes and peat of the valleys. Nevertheless, we are by this time acquainted with a sufficient number of
* On the shores of the Lake of Geneva, between Yvoire and Hermance, M. Troyon found this notion prevailing. (p. 128.)
† See · Natural History Review' for January 1862.
* points of remarkable richness, to enable us to give, by their • description, an idea of that ancient population which had the • habit of living on these waters.'
At first sight, indeed, the systematio texture of facts said to be established seems to contradict strangely with the slight and fragmentary nature of the indications on which they are grounded. But the process of investigation in this, as in analogous cases, is in reality by safe deduction from a multitude of inferences, in themselves slight, in conjunction overwhelming. Cuvier at first astonished the ignorant, and made more sceptics than believers, when he reconstructed extinct animals from single fossil bones So did his disciples, when, from a shell or two, or the remains of a single animal, they established the age of a mineral deposit extending over a province. But these things no longer surprise us now. The irresistible force of induction has conquered unbelief. Our trained eyes have become enabled to see with comparative clearness through the mists of geological antiquity; and our inferences, though very far from infallible, are hardly subject to any greater risk of error than is incident to ordinary speculations, founded on premises apparently more obvious and more extensive. The very same process inaugurated by Cuvier and his followers in the science of palæontology is now carrying on in that branch of archæological research which we have under our eyes. And it is perhaps rather a curious circumstance, that the inductive, or Baconian, method of inquiry seems to have come into general use in antiquarian study much later than in scientific. Antiquarian investigation, until within a very recent period, was certainly all • deductive.' That is, it was the habit to adhere in a general way to some ethnological or other theory, and then to search for evidence to support it. The inductive * philosopher,' says Mr. Buckle, is naturally cautious, patient, • and somewhat creeping; while the deductive philosopher is * remarkable for boldness, dexterity, and often rashness.'* Certainly the latter were the commoner characteristics of the enthusiastic F.S.A. of the last century. Nay, to borrow the words of the same author when speaking of David Hume :
We cannot cite this name without adding the expression of no transitory regret. Every student of social history must feel it as a personal loss, that he is no more to grapple with that vigorous and self-sustained intellect, to feel the edge of that trenchant style. Whatever judgment posterity may form of the value of so much as Mr. Buckle was permitted to accomplish, we of the present day cannot but recognise that we have lost in him one whose originality of thought was great, but who was still more remarkable for reproducing and marshalling with extraordinary distinctness a class of thoughts very prevalent in the minds of this generation.
* He not only believed with perfect justice that ideas are more important than facts, but he supposed that they should hold the first place in the order of study, and that they should be developed before the facts are investigated.'
We shall see, by examining the method adopted by our Swiss and other inquirers of the new school, in 'first collecting the * facts, and then proceeding to the ideas,' how much of new life can be imparted into what seemed an almost worn-out study, by the introduction of the truer process.
It is, indeed, difficult to do justice to this part of our subject, and of M. Troyon's work, by mere analysis or extract; it can only be appreciated by a careful investigation of details. But a mere summary will,
at all events, illustrate our meaning, and serve as an index. The antiquarian observes a number of heads of piles or stakes (often in vast profusion, one site, it is said, has 40,000) disposed in some sort of arrangement, slightly protruding above the silt in the manner already described, at a small distance from the shore, and in shallow water; say four, six, or eight feet beneath low-water level. These stake-heads mark out the sites, and the extent, of villages. Now it need not be said that stakes of solid wood under water last a very long time; but they perish at last. Those in question have doubtless been wasted by the action of the water down to the point at which their further decay is arrested by the casing of silt. But the wood wastes more rapidly in the upper and agitated, than in the lower and more tranquil, stratum of water. If, therefore, the piles have been worn down to the actual silt, these are the most ancient. If they still project a foot or two above the silt, then the destructive action of the lower stratum of water has not yet completed its work. These, therefore, are the remnants of comparatively modern ‘pile-buildings;' ages, it may be, posterior to the former. And, if we understand our authorities aright, but this is a point of extreme delicacy and importance, on which we do not feel qualified to speak except under reserve'—the respective character of the objects of antiquity found in these different places correspond with the indications of comparative antiquity afforded by the length of the stakes. In the next place : a double range of stakes is often found in a straight line from the mass of stakes to the shore. This denotes the bridge which connected the settlement with the main land. Scattered on the silt, among the stakes, or close to them, lie fragments of wooden beams, roughly squared. These must have been part of the platform, raised on the stakes, which supported the houses. They are in many cases partially charred by fire. The village was, therefore, destroyed by fire. Buried in the silt, by their side, are quantities
VOL, CXVI. NO. CCXXXV.
of wattles, twisted into such shapes as to form part of a concave framework; together with bits of clay casing, similarly concave. These were portions of the walls, with their lining, of the circular huts which we must conceive perched on the platforms. Among these lie lumps of matted foliage and moss, huge stags' horns, and other miscellaneous articles. These probably formed part of the rude furniture of the cabins. There are also trunks of trees, partially hollow; these people, therefore, used canoes. From the concavity of the wattles and casings we arrive at a notion of the ordinary size of the cottages (generally, says M. Troyon, from three to four yards in diameter). By the number of piles we calculate the size of the platform. Putting the two together, we arrive at the probable number of cottages. Adding an estimate of the probable number of dwellers in every such cottage, we have the probable population.
The objects' made of durable materials, found in silt among these ruins, are, as we have said, almost innumerable. In many of the villages these are of stone exclusively, or mixed only with fragments of wrought bone and earthenware. The stone is commonly serpentine, or other similar native rock. But a kind of flint is also largely used. This is not found nearer than in France or Germany. The people, therefore, had some slight traffic with these neighbouring parts. They comprise knife-blades, arrow- and lance-heads, saws, hammers, borers, needles, above all, axes and hatchets of most various size and shape, and prepared to be fitted to handles by sundry ingenious devices. Now where these alone are found, the conclusion is, that the villages belonged to a people unacquainted with the use of metals, that they are of what is now familiarly denominated the age of stone. But, here and there, amidst the multitude of stone and bone objects, there is some fragment of an implement of metal, or an ornament of coral or amber. Ergò, the inhabitants had some traffic with distant parts. They, or their neighbours, from whom they could obtain these things by exchange, were visited by the traders of the Mediterranean.
But we next examine the remains of another village, in which these objects of metal are multiplied. Weapons and domestic implements of bronze are mingled with those of stone. These are chiefly warlike-sword and hatchet blades, and so forth,— arrows in less quantity than in the stone villages; but they are also, in great part, domestic, together with a singular abundance of personal ornaments and baubles — hair-pins, buttons, chains, and the like. Therefore, a race of superior acquirements to the former was, at one time, established in the same localities, and (as we shall see) remained there long. But might not these have