The theory of race-origin is also not without its adherents in this country. Dr. Thurnam, who has excavated a large number of barrows in the south of England, divides them—as, indeed, they have been divided by former antiquaries—into several classes, amongst which we may chiefly distinguish two principal types, viz. the long and the round barrows. The former he attributes to the stone age, containing usually implements of that material, whilst implements of bronze are almost invariably found in the round barrows. He also gives it as the result of his researches, extending over some years of exploration—and Canon Greenwell, in so far as his experience of long barrows in the north of England goes, confirms the statement—that the long barrows are generally associated with dolichocephalic, or long skulls, whilst in the round barrows brachycephalic, or round skulls, are found, thus leading to the supposition that the long-headed people of the stone age who erected the long barrows may have been succeeded by another race with round heads importing bronze, and burying their dead in round barrows. But after having heard Dr. Thurnam’s last papers on this subject, read before the Society of Antiquaries and other societies[204], I confess, although he has no doubt established a sequence, that he does not appear to me to have determined a clear line of separation between the two classes of interments; the long barrows pass by intermediate links into the round ones, and the long skull, although no doubt it may be considered characteristic of an earlier period, and therefore connected with an earlier form of barrow, also passes by gradations into the round skull, the variations of form being considerable. Then, with respect to the implements, although the absence of bronze in the long barrows of the earlier period appears to be determined, yet it is notorious to all those who have paid attention to the subject—and is not by any means denied by the learned antiquaries whose names I have mentioned—that the transition from stone to bronze in this country was gradual, and extended over a long period, flint weapons being found in nearly all the barrows of the bronze age in such positions as to show they were used contemporaneously by the same people; and from discoveries which have been made both by myself and others[205], there seems good reason to suppose that flint weapons continued to be used by some of the inhabitants of this country even during the Roman era. This distinction of long heads in long barrows, and round heads in round barrows, is one so easily remembered, that it is liable on this account, perhaps, to receive greater attention than it really deserves as a criterion of race. The difficulty of distinguishing in all cases the primary from the secondary interments in the barrows—it being an established fact that these barrows were used as places of burial by successive generations, and even perhaps by successive races, including also the Anglo-Saxons—the possible distortion of some of the crania by time and pressure, and the other facts of the case, as I believe I have correctly stated them, are, I think, sufficient to justify us in withholding for the present our entire acceptance of the theory of the introduction of bronze into this country by intruding races, as drawn from any evidence derived from the graves.
From amongst those who have advocated the totally independent origin of bronze, the opinion of Professor Daniel Wilson may be selected, as affording a most ingenious argument derived from an analysis of the metals.[206] He quotes some experiments conducted by Dr. George Pearson, and communicated by him to the Royal Society of London in 1796, to ascertain the results of various proportions of the ingredients of tin and copper in bronze. ‘Having fused these metals in various united proportions, commencing with 1 part of tin to 20 parts of copper, which produced a dark-coloured bronze, he reduced the proportion gradually to 15 parts of copper to 1 of tin, when the colour was materially affected, and the red copper hue was no longer seen, but an alloy of greater strength was produced. The experiments were continued with 12, 10, 9, 8, and 7 parts of copper to 1 of tin, and when the last fusion of the metals was tested, increased hardness and brittleness of the metals became very apparent. The same characteristics were still more marked on successively reducing the proportions of copper to 6, 5, 4, and 3; and when alloy was made of 2 parts of copper to 1 of tin, it was, according to Dr. Pearson’s report, as brittle as glass.’
From the result of these experiments we see that the best average proportions, of about 9 parts of copper to 1 of tin, would invariably show itself by a practical experience in the use of these ingredients, and it is therefore unnecessary to assume that these particular proportions, when found in the bronzes of different countries, must necessarily have been communicated.
Dr. Wilson then proceeds to give the results of analyses of ancient bronzes discovered in Europe, America, and elsewhere, contained in the accompanying tables. And he concludes his observations on the subject as follows:—
‘From the varied results which so many independent analyses disclose, varying, as they do, from 79 to 94 per cent, of copper, or more than the total amount of the supposed constant ratio of tin, besides the variations in the nature, as well as the quantity of their ingredients’ (a proportion of lead will be seen in some of the analyses of European bronzes, the small proportion of iron being probably accidental), ‘it is abundantly obvious that no greater uniformity is traceable than such as might be expected to result from the experience of isolated and independent metallurgists, very partially acquainted with the chemical properties of the standard alloy, and guided for the most part by practical experience derived from successive results of their manufacture.’ The comparison of the two tables here given, from Professor Wilson’s work, also shows a smaller average amount of tin in the American bronze (Table I) than in that of ancient Europe (Table II).
Table I.—Analyses of Ancient American Bronzes
| Object. | Locality. | Observer. | Copper. | Tin. | Iron. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Chisel from Silver Mines | Cuzco | Humboldt | 94.0 | 6.0 | |
| 2 Chisel „ „ | Cuzco | Dr. J. H. Gibbon | 92.385 | 7.615 | |
| 3 Knife „ „ | Atacama | J. H. Blake, Esq. | 97.870 | 2.130 | |
| 4 Knife | Ditto | 96.0 | 4.0 | ||
| 5 Crowbar | Chili | Dr. T. C. Jackson | 92.385 | 7.615 | |
| 6 Knife | Amaro | Dr. H. Croft | 95.664 | 3.965 | 0.371 |
| 7 Perforated Axe | Ditto | 96.0 | 4.0 | ||
| 8 Personal Ornament | Truigilla | T. Ewbank, Esq. | 95.440 | 4.560 | |
| 9 Bodkin from Female Grave | Ditto | 96.70 | 3.30 |
Table II.—Analyses of Ancient European Bronzes
| Object. | Locality. | Observer. | Copper. | Tin. | Lead. | Iron. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Lituus | Lincolnshire | Dr. G. Pearson, F.R.S., Phil. Trans. | 88.0 | 12.0 | ||
| 2 Anglo-Roman Patellae | Ditto ditto | 86.0 | 14.0 | |||
| 3 Spear-Head | Ditto ditto | 86.0 | 14.0 | |||
| 4 Scabbard | Danish? | Ditto ditto | 90.0 | 10.0 | ||
| 5 Axe-Head | Ireland | Ditto ditto | 91.0 | 9.0 | ||
| 6 Axe-Palstave | Cumberland | Ditto ditto | 91.0 | 9.0 | ||
| 7 Axe-Head | Ditto ditto | 88.0 | 12.0 | |||
| 8 Bronze Vessel | Cambridgeshire | Professor Clark, M.D. | 88.0 | 12.0 | ||
| 9 Sword | France | Mongez, Mémoires de l’Institut | 87.47 | 12.53 | ||
| 10 Caldron | Berwickshire | G. Wilson, M.D., Prehist. Ann. Scot. | 92.89 | 5.15 | 1.78 | |
| 11 Sword | Duddingstone | Ditto ditto | 88.51 | 9.30 | 2.30 | |
| 12 Kettle | Berwickshire | Ditto ditto | 88.22 | 5.63 | 5.88 | |
| 13 Axe-Head | Mid-Lothian | Ditto ditto | 88.5 | 11.12 | 0.78 | |
| 14 Caldron | Duddingstone | Ditto ditto | 84.8 | 7.19 | 8.53 | |
| 15 Palstave | Fifeshire | Ditto ditto | 81.19 | 18.31 | 0.75 | |
| 16 Sword | Ireland | Professor Davy, Prehist. Ann. Scot. | 88.63 | 8.54 | 2.83 | |
| 17 Sword | Ditto ditto | 83.50 | 5.15 | 8.35 | 3.0 | |
| 18 Sword | Thames | J. A. Phillips, F.G.S., &c. | 89.69 | 9.58 | 0.33 | |
| 19 Sword | Ireland | Ditto | 85.62 | 10.02 | 0.44 | |
| 20 Celt | Ditto | 90.68 | 7.43 | 1.28 | ||
| 21 Axe-Head | 90.18 | 9.81 | ||||
| 22 Axe-Head | Ditto | 89.33 | 9.19 | 0.33 | ||
| 23 Celt | Ditto | 83.61 | 10.79 | 3.20 | 0.58 | |
| 24 Celt | King’s County, Ireland | Dr. Donovan, Chem. Gazette | 85.23 | 13.11 | 1.14 | |
| 25 Drinking-Horn | 79.34 | 10.87 | 9.11 | |||
| 26 Bronze Vessel | Ireland | Mr Gibbon, U.S. Mint | 88.0 | 12.0 | ||
| 27 Wedge | Ditto | 94.0 | 5.9 | 0.1 |
This argument, however, is defective when taken to determine the question of the origin of bronze in favour of independent discovery, for we have already seen, in speaking of the stone age,—and I have endeavoured to show that it is a peculiarity observable in the works of all savage and barbarous races,—that being devoid of rule or measure, and having very imperfect means of securing adherence to a uniform standard, their productions are characterized by incessant variations, even in cases where the first idea is known to have been derived from a common source. The variations here shown to exist in the composition of bronze are no greater than are capable of being accounted for by the universal prevalence of a law of variation, resulting from many causes, and amongst others from want of precision, and carelessness, which is a defect common alike to all tyros in their art, whether ancient or modern. It is a fault we have many of us to complain of almost daily in our cooks. A batter pudding is composed of milk, flour, and eggs, in proper proportions, but a careless cook will constantly vary her proportions, and will fail in adjusting her quantities to the total amount; but we must not, on that account, assume that each cook has invented the art of making batter puddings independently. So, in like manner, it is quite consistent with the facts observed even in America, to suppose that the first knowledge of bronze, and of those many features in the civilization of the Mexicans and Peruvians which present such striking analogies to the civilization of Egypt, may have been originally communicated by some casual wanderer or some shipwrecked castaway from the then centres of Eastern culture (for the theory of geographical changes is, of course, out of the question when speaking of the origin of bronze), and that they have varied in their development on American soil no more than might naturally be expected from their introduction to an entirely new and partially civilized race. Such an assumption, though difficult to account for, and wanting in evidence, is more in accordance with the well-known traditions of the Mexicans and Peruvians, who attribute their civilization to the advent of a god; or with that of the natives of Nootka Sound, on the north-west, who state that an old man entered the bay, in a copper canoe, with paddles of copper, and that the Nootkans by that means acquired a knowledge of that metal.