(21) "Primitive Man," p. 171.
(22) Lubbock"s "Prehistoric Times," p. 219.
(23) Dawkins"s "Early Man in Britain," p. 268.
(24) These heaps are generally called "kjokken-moddings"--meaning kitchen refuse.
(25) One mound is spoken of as being one thousand feet long, two to three hundred feet wide, and ten feet high.
(26) On Danish Sh.e.l.l Mounds, consult Keary"s "Dawn of History,"
p. 369, _et seq._; Lubbock"s "Prehistoric Times," chap.
vii; Geikie"s "Prehistoric Europe," pp. 365-9; Figuier"s "Primitive Man," pp. 129-134; Rau"s "Early Man in Europe," pp.
108-113; Dawkins"s "Early Man in Britain," pp. 309-305.
(27) Dawkins"s "Early Man in Britain," p. 279.
(28) Figuier"s "Primitive Man," pp. 147-150 and 154: Another very important place was the Island of Rugen, in the Baltic Sea.
Rau"s "Early Man in Europe," p. 137.
(29) "Proceedings American Antiq. Society, April, 1881," p. 286.
(30) Figuier"s "Primitive Man," p. 262.
(31) See remarks of Prof. Rau on this subject ("Early Man in Europe," pp. 128-9 and note.) Mr. Dawkins thinks it "probable also that the art of weaving woolen cloth was known, although, from its perishable nature, no trace of it has been handed down to us." ("Early Man in Britain," p. 275.) (32) Lubbock"s "Prehistoric Times," p. 132.
(33) Lubbock"s "Prehistoric Times," p. 130.
(34) On this subject consult Lubbock"s "Prehistoric Times,"
chap. v.; Keary"s "Dawn of History," p. 363-6; Geikie"s "Prehistoric Europe," p. 375; Dawkins"s "Early Man in Britain,"
p. 284-9; Ferguson"s "Rude Stone Monuments;" Figuier"s "Primitive Man," chap. iii.; Rau"s "Early Man in Europe,"
p. 139; "Archaeology," Vol. XLII.
(35) "Human Species", p. 335.
(36) "Prehistoric Europe," p. 547.
(37) Dawkins"s "Early Man in Britain," p. 310, note 3.
(38) Ibid., p. 314.
(39) Thurman, Virchow, Huxley, and others.
(40) Mr. Dawkins is inclined to view them as a remnant of the Neolithic people. Whether our scholars will ultimately accept his views, remains to be seen.
(41) Brace"s "Races of the Old World," p. 82, (42) Am. Encyclopedia, Art. Basque.
(43) Brace"s "Races of the Old World," p. 82.
(44) Brace"s "Races of the Old World," p. 82.
(45) "Pre-Adamites," p. 150.
(46) It is unnecessary to caution the reader, that, after all, our knowledge of "prehistory" is vague. Prof. Virchow, who is eminent authority on these points, thinks it not yet possible to identify the prehistoric people of Europe; and good authorities hold that the Turanian tribes just named are the remnants of Paleolithic tribes, instead of Neolithic.
(47) Morgan"s "Ancient Society," p. 39.
(48) The exceptions to this statement are the higher cla.s.ses of sedentary Indians, of which we shall treat in future pages.
Chapter VII
THE BRONZE AGE IN EUROPE.<1>
Races of Men, like Individuals--Gradual change of Neolithic Age to that of Bronze--The Aryan family--First Aryans Neolithic--Origin of Bronze--How Great discoveries are made--Gold the first metal--Copper Abundant--No Copper Age--The discovery of Tin--Explanation of an Alloy--Bronze, wherever found, the same Composition--What is meant by the Bronze Age--Knowledge in other Directions--Gradual Growth of Culture--Three Centers of Bronze Production--Habitations during the Bronze Age--The Bronze Ax--Implements of Bronze--Personal ornaments--Ornaments not always made of Bronze--Advance in Arts of living--Advance in Agriculture--Warlike Weapons--How they worked Bronze--Advance in Government--Trade in the Bronze Age--Religion of the Bronze Age--Symbolical figures--Temples of the Bronze Age--Stonehenge.
It is with races of men as with individuals, the progressive growth of youth soon reaches its limit and maturity of power. While it brings greater strength, it has not the buoyancy of early years, so the manner of life becomes fixed, and onward progress stops. They can then only hope to hold on the even tenor of their way, happy if increasing years do not bring again their childhood state. The Neolithic people entered Europe early in the youth of the race which spread their civilization over the globe, but the race to which they belonged appear to have reached their zenith of development long ages ago, since which time, whatever higher culture they have reached has been a gift to them by other people. Their energies became exhausted, and for a long series of years Europe was filled by the camps, lake villages and fortified places of Neolithic times.
As to the absolute length of time during which they inhabited Europe, we have no data to determine. Relatively, their sojourn, however long, was but a short time compared to the duration of the old Stone Age. It presents no such evidence of lapse of ages as can be observed in the older deposits, yet we may be sure that it was for no inconsiderable period.
The Paleolithic Age was apparently terminated in Europe by the cold of the last glacial epoch. No such natural course put an end to the Neolithic Age, but as the strong have an advantage over the weak, the young over the old, so does a race young, undeveloped, or in the early maturity of its powers, have an advantage over the older and more fixed civilization with which it comes in contact. To understand the causes which introduced into Europe the Bronze Age, we must refer to the Aryan race and to Asia.
We have in the preceding chapter briefly mentioned the Aryan race. They have so much to do with the higher culture of the Metallic Ages, that it seems not out of place to refer once more to their origin. The evidence goes to show that the ancient Aryans inhabited some portion of South-western Asia. As a race or family, they appear to have been one of the latest developed. Yet a record of their progress is a record of civilization.
Unless we reflect, we are liable to be misled by the expression, recent development. The Hindoos, one of the latest members of this family, were in India several thousand years before Christ.<2> But however far back we trace them, we find them in possession of metals. Aside from this, we know that before the different Aryan tribes had commenced their migration (with the exception, however, of the Celts), while they formed but one ma.s.s of people, they worked some of the metals.<3> They could have acquired this knowledge only after the pa.s.sage of many years, when they were ignorant of it. This bespeaks a profound antiquity for the Aryan family.
As we have seen, Europe, while yet inhabited by Neolithic people, was invaded by a branch of the Aryans. We do not know the date of this invasion, yet it must have been an early date, since the Celts separated from the Aryans before the use of metals. The Aryans have ever been noted as an aggressive people, and under different names have, in modern times, carried victorious arms in all quarters of the globe. This is equally characteristic of the primitive Aryans. Though it is not apparent that they possessed any higher culture than the people who already inhabited Europe, yet they everywhere triumphed over them and possessed themselves of the fairest portion of the Neolithic domain, driving the primitive inhabitants to those mountainous regions where their descendants are found to-day.
It is not probable that the Aryan invaders waged exterminating war against the Neolithic tribes. The evidence shows that there was considerable mingling of the two races. It has been suggested, however, that the Neolithic people who were not driven away were reduced to slavery.<4> However that may be, the remains of the two people are found side by side in chambered tombs and sepulchral caverns, showing that they dwelt together in the same area. As before remarked, the Aryan invaders are identified as the Celts. That it was relatively late in the Neolithic Age when they made their appearance, is shown by the fact that they had only reached the English Channel when a knowledge of bronze caught up with them.
We must now endeavor to learn the origin of bronze. The impulsive energies of this newer race found vent not only in conquest over the neighboring tribes, but it is extremely probable that they are the ones who first compelled nature to yield up her metallic stores to be of service to man. If the knowledge of fire was the starting point of human advancement, surely the knowledge of metals, their useful properties, and how to extract them from their ores, may lay claim to being the starting point of our present enlightenment. We have but to glance around us to see how many of our daily comforts are dependent on the use of metals. Should we, by any mischance, become deprived of the use of iron, or of the useful alloys, bronze and bra.s.s, our civilization would be in great danger of reverting to Savagism. Man, dest.i.tute of metals, can do but little to improve his surroundings; but grant him these, and victory over his environment is secured.
We can not retrace the exact steps of this beautiful discovery; we are not sure to what family it is to be ascribed. Perhaps not to any one alone. Nature may have taken her children by the hand, and kindly guided their feeble steps in the line of experiments leading up to this knowledge, and, finally, one family, more fortunate than the others, succeeded in the attempt. All great discoveries have been approached in different directions, by different people. No sooner is it made than this fact appears, and people widely separated by time and place are found to be on the verge of the same great truth. It was probably so at the discovery of metallurgy.
The Turanian tribes, who had so long inhabited Europe, were suddenly confronted by the victorious hosts of the Celts, the vanguard of the Aryans, the precursors of a higher culture. The movements of these primitive people could not fail to have a great effect on the human mind. It would become alert, keen, and active. Such was the state of ancient society when a knowledge of bronze was introduced--a discovery which consigned stone, hitherto the substance most commonly made use of to advance human interests, to a subordinate position, and opened up for man the exhaustless mineral stores of nature.
It is suggested by some that gold was the first metallic substance employed. Its glittering particles would attract the attention of primitive man, and little articles of ornament were early manufactured from it. To be sure, the supply was very limited; but what there was would serve the useful purpose of imparting to men some idea of metallic substances. Portions of it falling in the fire might have suggested the idea of smelting and of molding--might, at least, have lead to experiments in that line. The supply of gold existing in a native state is so small, that no use could have been made of it except for ornaments.
Iron, we know, is the most abundant mineral. But it is very rare in a native state, and its ores have nothing distinguishing about them, and so it is not strange that another metal received the attention of primitive man. That metal was probably copper. It is often found in a pure state in nature. In the Michigan mines of our own country, ma.s.ses of pure copper many tons in weight have been discovered.<5> No such rich deposits are found in the Old World; but considerable quant.i.ties of native copper were obtained, and it was by no means a rare metal. Copper possesses several qualities that would attract attention. It is quite malleable; that is, it can be easily hammered into shape. We can imagine the surprise of the old stone-workers at finding a stone that, instead of breaking or splitting, could be hammered into shape. By accident, or otherwise it would be learned, in time, that it could be melted. This would lead to the idea of molding.
If the above process were followed out, there would be a real Copper Age preceding that of Bronze: no trace of such an age has yet been detected in Europe. "But there is, however, every reason for believing, that, in some parts of the world, the use of native copper must have continued for a lengthened period before it was discovered that the addition of a small portion of tin not only rendered it more fusible, but added to its elasticity and hardness."<6> The absence of a Copper Age in Europe would imply that the art of manufacturing bronze was discovered in some other locality.
Copper by itself is so soft that it would not be of much use to man, except the experience they would gain of melting and molding. In our own country the aboriginal inhabitants were well acquainted with copper, and even knew how to mold it. Yet, except as just pointed out, it is not probable that it exerted any marked influence on their development.<7> In the old world supplies of native copper are limited, and recourse must be had to the ores of copper. Now these ores, such as copper-pyrites, are nearly always of a bright color, and as such would attract the attention of primitive man. They might suspect that these bright colored ores contained copper from finding similarly colored ores in connection with native copper, in fact pa.s.sing from one form to the other. But it requires no little skill to reduce the ores of copper; and, when obtained, for reasons just pointed out, it would not be of great utility. But primitive man was thus cautiously and experimentally feeling his way to a knowledge of metallurgy.
All the evidence obtainable goes to show that tin was known as early as copper, or at least soon after. Its ores though not striking on account of their color, are on account of their great weight. It is comparatively easy to reduce it from its ores. It is quite widely distributed over the earth. It often occurs in the gravels of rivers, where, as we have already mentioned, primitive men must have, at a very early date, sought for gold. Owing to their weight, the gravel of tin-stone would remain behind with the gold when it was washed. "In process of time its real nature might have been revealed by accident; and, before the eye of the astonished beholder, the dull stone, flung into the fire, became transfigured into the glittering metal."<8>
When two metals come together in a molten state, they often form, not a mixture of the two, part copper and part tin, for example, but a new compound, different from either, called an alloy. Copper is, so to speak, a sociable metal, and readily unites with many different metals--amongst others with tin, when it forms bronze, the article that marks a new state in the history of primitive culture. It seems to us strange that an alloy, a combination of two different metals, should have been the first used by man, and not a simple metal like iron. Such, however, is the fact of the case; and we have tried to point out the probable steps which led up to the invention of bronze. We can scarcely comprehend the difficulties which attended the labors of the primitive metal-workers. There were no books containing the wisdom of many, from which the investigator could draw his stores of knowledge. and the only way that knowledge could be disseminated was by word of mouth.
Now, when one man makes an important step in a discovery, hundreds of earnest workers, some, perhaps, in distant places, are quickly made aware of the fact, and extend its scope, or point out its imperfections, and thus hasten on the desired end. Then, each individual, or community, must, of necessity, have commenced at the beginning, and the discoveries made would hardly be perpetuated in the memory of others. There were so many obstacles to be overcome before a knowledge of bronze could be acquired, in the then existing state of human knowledge, that it must ever remain a source of wonder to us, at the present day, that it was invented at all.
We may picture to ourselves the ancient copper-worker, after numerous experiments, guided by some good genius, finally hitting on some process by which, from his ma.s.s of ore, he extracted a nearly pure piece of copper. Having learned how to reduce these ores, there are many ways in which it might have been found that a mixture of the two metals would form a new compound of greatly increased value.
It must have taken a long course of experiments to determine what proportions of each metal to use to make the best bronze. It is interesting to know that these early workers had learned the proportions of each to use, not varying a great deal from the results of modern research--that is, from ten to twelve per cent of tin. Bronze relics, no matter where obtained, whether in the Old or the New World, do not widely depart from this standard, and such instances as do would probably denote that the supply of tin became short. This uniformity of composition would imply that the art of making bronze was discovered in one place, from which it gradually spread over the globe.
This fact is a key to the culture of the Bronze Age. Widely separated communities, dest.i.tute of a knowledge of metals, would instinctively make use of stone. In this case uniformity of type would not imply community of knowledge. But a knowledge of metals is altogether different. It is wonder enough that one community should have hit on the invention of bronze. The chance would be against its independent discovery in widely separated areas. They would be more apt to chance on the production of some other metal. Thus; tribes in the interior of Africa are said to have pa.s.sed direct from the Stone to the Iron Age, a knowledge of bronze not having been carried to them.
We are thus able to form a true conception of the Bronze Age. It did not prevail over the world at the same time. Indeed, as we shall subsequently see, there is every reason to suppose it spread very slowly, and that it still lingered in Central and Northern Europe long after its use had been abandoned for that of iron in the South. Neither, when it was first introduced, did it put a stop to the use of stone.
It was necessarily costly, and on its first appearance in a country, brought hither by trade, could only be afforded by rich and powerful chiefs and warriors. As time advanced, and they learned to make it cheaper, and each country took up its separate manufacture, it would gradually supersede stone. But bronze was never cheap enough to drive out the use of stone altogether. This only occurred when the art of working iron was discovered.
We shall learn that the knowledge of bronze, while a very important and distinguishing phase of culture of the Bronze Age, was not its only characteristic. It was distinguished by the arrival and spread of the Aryan races, by a great extension of commerce, by more refinements in the comforts of life, by the increasing strength of government, which in after ages flowered out in the mighty nations of antiquity, and rendered historic, civilization possible.
Some facts stand out with great prominence. The origin of this culture is lost in the very night of time. We may be sure that it goes back to a profound antiquity, and that it extended over a long series of years.
It is evident there was no great and sudden change from the culture of the Stone Age to that of Bronze. It was as if the darkness of night had given place to the roseate light of dawn, to be shortly followed by the full day of historic times. It was probably introduced by trade. The articles introduced in this way would consist of simple implements, weapons, and ornaments. Following after the trade would be found the smelter with his tools, and, where the conditions were favorable, local manufactories would be set up. But this home industry would not prevent importation of more pretentious articles from abroad. This would account for the rich collections of shields, swords, and golden cups found in Denmark that betray an Etruscan origin.
Investigations of recent scholars show that the bronze of the early Bronze Age came from Asia Minor. Subsequently there were three great centers of bronze production, each having certain styles. These were the Russian on the east, the Scandinavian on the north, and the Mediterranean on the south. If this view be correct, bronze must have been in use in the South of Europe long before it was in the North.
This view of the introduction of bronze is, we think, that of the best scholars in Europe. Others, however, think bronze was brought in by the invasion of the Aryan tribes. Mr. Keary says: "The men of the Bronze Age were a new race, sallying out of the east to dispossess the older inhabitants, and if, in some places, the Bronze men and the Stone men seem to have gone on for a time side by side, the general characteristic of the change is that of a sudden break."<9> We have shown that it was carried to England by an invasion, and it was, perhaps, so introduced into Denmark, but in other countries of Europe by trade.<10>
Let us now see what change in the home life, in the culture of the people, would be brought about by the use of bronze. We must reflect that we are not to deal with some new race, but with the same race that inhabited Europe at the close of Neolithic times. The people who had triumphed over nature with their implements of stone were now put in possession of weapons and implements of greatly increased efficiency.
The results could not fail to advance their culture. We would not expect any great change in the houses. They would, however, be much better built. The metallic tools were certainly a long ways ahead of the best stone implements. With the aid of metallic axes, knives, saws, gouges, and chisels, their cabins could be increased in size and appearance.
They still built settlements over the lakes, but the Bronze Age settlements were more substantially built, and placed farther out from sh.o.r.e. Fortified places were still numerous; the remains of thousands of them of this age have been found in Ireland. But the forests were cleared, wild animals disappeared, society became more settled, and we may be sure that an increasing number of little hamlets were scattered over the country.
Caves were resorted to during this epoch only in times of danger. One at Heathbury Burn, in England, contained portions of the skeletons of two individuals, surrounded by many articles of bronze and a mould for casting bronze axes. It is not difficult to read the story. In some time of sudden danger workers in bronze fled hither with their stores, but owing to some cause were unable to escape the death from which they were fleeing, and their bodies with their mineral stores, were lost to sight until the modern explorer made them a subject of scientific speculations.<11>