sagacious interpretations of scientific genius | law of the Conservation of Force-to the glimpses of a brilliant speculative theory. minds of men of Science; and Professor The author gathers the scraps of his readings Virchow has to address to his brother Proand the shreds of his reflections in literature fessors a rebuke which, a generation ago, and theology, and sets them forth with no would have been deemed appropriate only force except such as startling paradoxes always obtain when they fall from lips as elo- to hot-headed Divines. quent as those of this attractive speaker. All recognition of the methods of physical Science seems to have departed from his memory. The four divisions of the argument are held together by the foregone conclusion of the author that the devotee of Science may recognise nothing in the universe but matter and fate and evolution, and requires for the explanation of the existence and history of this universe neither intelligence nor good ness.' As we stated at the outset, it is in the interest of the legitimate influence of Science, no less than in that of Religion, that we offer these remonstrances against the example which Professor Tyndall has set; and on this point also we are able to fortify ourselves by an appeal to the same high scientific authority whom we have already quot ed. The Speech by Professor Virchow is throughout a protest, in the name and in the interests of Science, against such reckless dogmatizing as that of Professor Tyndall. It was elicited, as we have explained, by two speeches, the one by Dr. Haeckel, the other by Dr. Naegeli, which asserted in the most positive form the extremest modern theories of development. Dr. Haeckel went so far as to demand that his theory of the development of human beings from inorganic matter--Carbon & Co., as Professor Virchow put it-should be taught in every school in the land. Now Dr. Virchow is a statesman as well as a philosopher, and has played a very important part in the recent parliamentary history of his country. He is accustomed, therefore, to judge of the practical bearing of things, and he appears to have thought it necessary at once to interpose his influence in order to check this rash dogmatizing among his brethren, and at the same time to obviate the reaction which it was calculated to provoke. That such a protest should have been addressed by a scientific man to scientific men affords a strange illustration of the truth that human nature is very much alike in all classes and professions. A dogmatic habit of mind was till lately the special reproach of theologians. It is a fault of which they have had occasion bitterly to repent; and their temper at the present time is apt to be only too apologetic and cautious. But the dogmatic energy which has thus disappeared from their minds seems to have been transferred-perhaps by some application of the A more admirable performance than this Speech, produced, as it must bave been, at very short notice, could hardly have been delivered. It is equally characterised by severe scientific statement, by practical judgment, and by pleasant touches of humour. It will, we hope, be presented to the public in an English dress; for the whole of it deserves to be read and carefully weighed by every man of Science in this country, as well as by every one who is interested in the relations between Science and Religion. Professor Virchow abstains from any direct discussion of religious or moral questions; and when he refers to them, it is in a tone of respect and reserve which offers a strong contrast to the intrusiveness of our English Lecturer. He confines himself to an attempt to define tho true position of scientific men when they come before the public in the capacity of teachers. The speech has therefore a direct bearing on the duties of a Public Lecturer upon Science, and a more uncompromising reprobation of Professor Tyndall's method could not, from a scientific point of view, have been written. The protest is couched in language of such carnestness and vigour, as proves that Professor Virchow felt the danger his scientific friends were incurring to be both grave and imminent; and although his warnings have reference to the special perils of German political life, they are far from being out of place among ourselves. He speaks in view of the bitter controversy which Ultramontanism is now waging against German institutions; and he plainly states his apprehension that if men of Science do violence to the general sense of the public by the rashness of their dogmatizing and the extravagance of their claims, they will give the Ultramontanes an advantage which, in that country, may be pressed so far as even to fetter the freedom of scientific discussion and of scientific teaching. The fact,' he says, that we are now in a position to discuss scientific questions thus freely affords no guarantee to any one who has had my experience of public life that we shall always enjoy the same freedom.' He states accordingly, at the outset, that the main purpose of his observations is to insist that, at the present moment, it is the special duty of scientific inen to take care that by their moderation, by a certain renunciation of favourite fan ་ cies and private opinions,' the present fa- | But Professor Virchow next proceeds to vourable disposition of the country towards warn his scientific brethren, by various examthem should not be lost. 'I am,' he says, ples taken from the history of Science, of opinion that by too free a use of the against rashly pledging themselves and liberty which present circumstances afford their sciences to mere hypotheses, however us, we are actually in danger of imperilling attractive or even probable. He introduces the future; and I would utter a warning these observations by a confession, which against further indulgence in that wilfulness I'rofessor Tyndall would do well to study, of-favourite and private speculations which of the limitations of even the widest sciennow prevails in many provinces of Natural tific knowledge:Science.' Dr. Virchow proceeds, accordingly, to insist on the broad distinction, which scientific men ought to be the first to draw between truths which are definitely established by unquestionable proof, and ideas which are as yet mere problems or opinions. In proportion to the importance of obtaining a prompt public recognition of established scientific truths is the importance and the duty of not advancing this claim for mere opinions, however plausible. He takes occasion to observe that by a large portion of the public, any general theory advanced by scientific men is sure to be carried still further 'with a thousandfold greater confidence.' He tells an amusing story of the exaggerated form in which one of his own discoveries came back to him from America: and imagine,' he says, in what form the Evolution theory presents itself already in the mind of a Socialist!' Professor Tyndall talks as if it involved no risk whatever to practical life to eliminate a belief in freewill from the public mind, and to proclaim the descent of human beings from lower forms of life. But Professor Virchow, who has some experience of the tendency of these theories in practice, is of a different opinion. Yes, gentlemen,' he proceeds, 6 ་ 'That,' he says, which is my accomplishment as a man of Science is precisely the knowledge of my ignorance. In Chemistry, for instance-a science of which, though a proficient in it, he confesses he has not full mastery-the chief thing is, that I know what I do not know.' 'To attain,' he says again, such a clear view of the principles of the natural Sciences, and such an exact acedge as to be able to say to yourself, whenquaintance with the gaps in your own knowlever you come upon such a gap, are entering an unknown land this is what we ought to attain. If we were all sufficiently clear on this point, there is many a one among us who would smite upon his breast, and confess that it is a very serious matter to draw of things in general, while man is not even masuniversal conclusions respecting the development ter of the whole material out of which such conclusions have to be drawn.' "Now you This passage may be especially commended to Professor Tyndall's reflections the next time he is tempted to make an excursion into the field of theology. shall rejoice if he succeeds in acquiring the accomplishment, which Professor Virchow rates so highly, of knowing what he does not know. We cannot follow Professor Virchow into the various illustrations he quotes; but one of them offers so close a parallel to the 'such a popular exaggeration of scientific theories may to some appear ludicrous; but present position of the Darwinian doctrine it has a very serious bearing, and I will only that it may possess a special interest for our hope that the descent theory may not entail readers. The Professor is admitting that all the alarm among ourselves which similar there is considerable attractiveness to a scitheories have actually produced in the neigh-entific mind in the notion of a continuous bouring country. Undoubtedly this theory, if it be rigorously carried out, has an uncommonly serious side; and it will probably not have escaped you that Socialism has established a sympathy with it. This is a fact which we must clearly recognise.' growth of all organic life, and its natural development from inorganic. 'It corresponds to that tendency towards generalisation which is so natural to man, that in all times, even up to the most ancient period, it has found a place in the speculations of These are grave words from a man in mankind.' But, on the other hand, he Professor Virchow's position; and though says, we must emphasize the fact that all Socialism is not in this country the danger real scientific knowledge respecting vital that it is in Germany, such language should processes has proceeded in precisely the serve to warn our men of Science that they contrary way.' That is, it has proceeded are playing with edged tools, even if for by the establishment of exceptions to the present they do so with impunity. hypotheses which were at one time deemNevertheless, if any scientific doctrine, how- ed universal in their application. For ever perilous, be conclusively proved, it instance, says Professor Virchow, we must be proclaimed and generally taught. I date the commencement of our real knowl edge of the development of the higher | ductive generalisations, all his general conorganisations from the day when Harvey clusions according to the laws of analogy, laid down the law omne vivum ex ovo, printed in small letters under the text, and however probable they may seem, should be every living thing springs from an egg. that in the text he should place nothing but It would be the greatest ingratitude not to that which is really objective truth... recognise that this theory constituted an Bacon of old said truly that knowledge is immense advance, and was of the highest power. But the knowledge he meant was value for practical purposes. But it has not speculative knowledge, not the knowlbeen proved not to be universally true. edge of mere hypotheses, but objective and Since Harvey's time a great series of new actual knowledge. Gentlemen, I think we forms of life have been observed, in which should misuse our power-we should imperil the multiplication of the kind is effected by ourselves to this thoroughly legitimate, our power-if in teaching we do not confine several various methods. Even if the Dar- thoroughly secure, and unassailable prowinian theory were better established than it vince." is, it would be liable to similar exceptions. Of course, says Professor Virchow, if a man is determined to have a theory of the Universe, and equally determined not to accept any theory which supposes a Creator, he is forced to surrender himself to a thoroughgoing theory of development. There is no escape from the alternative; while, at the same time, it remains a bounden duty to acknowledge that no proof of the theory has been furnished. But theories positively asserted and afterwards disproved have recoiled upon Science to its discredit; and the Professor extracts from these illustrations the very necessary warning that, if we wish to maintain our claim upon general attention, we must resist the temptation to thrust our own surmises, our own mere theoretical and speculative edifices, into the foreground, as though we intended, by means of them, to construct a complete theory of the universe.' These memorable warnings were delivered at Munich on the 22nd of last September, and it was about a week afterwards that Professor Tyndall supplied so conspicuous an illustration of all the faults in scientific temper, and all the errors in practical judgment, which the great German pathologist dissected. With one more extract, pregnant with good sense and true Science, we shall leave Professor Tyndall in Professor Virchow's hands. We must,' he says, 'strictly distinguish between that which we wish to teach and that after which we are only enquiring. . . . Every attempt to transform our hypotheses into dogmas, to introduce our surmises as the bases of instruction -above all, the attempt simply to dispossess the Church and supplant its dogmas forthwith by a religion of evolution-believe me, gentlemen, such an attempt must be wrecked, and in its wreck will involve the greatest dangers to the general position of Science. Whoever speaks or writes for the public ought, in my opinion, to examine with double accuracy how much of what he thinks and says is objectively true. He ought to be as careful as possible that all his purely inL-3 VOL. CXLV. Admirable words! But we cannot reflect, without some shame, that it should thus be left to a German Professor to inculcate, not only the principles of scientific thought, but common sense, and common modesty upon an English Natural Philosopher. ART. III.-Mycena : a Narrative of Researches and Discoveries at Mycenae and Tiryns. By Dr. Henry Schliemann. The Preface by the Right Hon, W. E. Gladstone, M.P. London, 1878. THERE are few sciences which have made greater progress during the past half century than archæology; none which have more completely changed their method. The antiquary of tradition was supposed to love things not because they were interesting but because they were old, and to heap them about him without order or ethod. He was supposed to hate all new movements, to shut his eyes to all that was taking place in the world, and to live a id cobwebs in dreamy meditation on the past. But the archeologist of to-day has no time for dreaming. His life is one long effort to keep up with the discoveries which thicken from day to day. The books he uses become antiquated and of little value in a quarter of a century. 1 not merely from printed or written descrip- | the isthmus at Corinth, and go westward tions. Had Dr. Schliemann's excavations been carried on in some ruined town of Mexico, or an abandoned site in castern Asia, and there produced these results, the scientific archæologist would have felt perhaps equal interest. In the absence of tradition and record, the modern and rapidly rising comparative science of pre-historic archæology would have attempted the task of classifying them in point of handiwork and style, using very similar methods to those employed by the geologist when he finds a new formation or a new fossil. But the interest of the educated public would have been far more languid than it is at present. Now every one feels that what lies at the root of Greek art lies at the root of all art, and carries the seeds of modern civilisation. Even if these discoveries had been made at Orchomenus or in Ceos, they would not have stirred, as at present, the pulse of every scholar. But Mycenae is indissolubly connected with those immortal poems which have been the delight of civilised mankind for nearly three thousand years. The city of Agamemnon cannot even be named without arousing some of that enthusiasm which the Iliad never fails to excite. Nor is any Greek city more noted than Mycena in early history and in the traditions of the logographi. Hence we have an abundance of historical and legendary material for the valuation of the new discoveries, and all persons of ordinary education watch with interest the controversy which rages over them. In days when the timid sailor dared not venture out of sight of land or out of reach of a port, the Argolid possessed remarkable facilities for commerce. The Levantine sailor, at least until the sixth century B.C., loved above all to pass close under the lee of islands, or between islands and the coast, and dreaded the free motion and fierce gales of an open sea. To this day, when a sudden storm rises in the Egæan, the steamboats run for the shelter of the nearest island, and placing it between them and the wind, ride at anchor and wait. And those islands are perfect breakwaters. The change which comes over the sea when, during a high wind, one passes behind one of them, is marvellous. Now a vessel starting from Argolis could sail northwards behind a perfect screen of islands and without once striking into open sea, past Ægina, Ceos, and Euboea, as far as Pheræ in Thessaly. Or it could voyage eastwards between two rows of islands as far as Cnidus or Miletus, or southwards to Crete. Or it could pass from through the sheltered Corinthian gulf to Leucas and Epirus. Being so favourably situate, it was impossible that the Argolid should have failed to carry on large commerce from times of the remotest antiquity. In the very beginning of his work, Herodotus states that the Phoenicians had no sooner settled on the shores of the Mediterranean, than they found their way to Argos, bearing Egyptian and Assyrian wares. These they would spread out on the beach, and hold a five or six days' fair, and they thought themselves fortunate if after disposing of their goods they could attract aboard their ships the fair daughters of the land, when they would at once set sail, bearing their precious prizes to the harems of the East. In the legend which states that Danaüs, who drove out the Pelasgic king Gelanor, was the son of Belus and brother of Egyptus, we find a clear assertion in mythic form that the seeds of the higher culture which turned Pelasgians into Danaï came from abroad, and were brought from the seats of the ancient monarchies of Mesopotamia and of Egypt. But other foreign influences besides those of the sons of Belus, aided in the civilisation of Argolis. Hither came, or rather returned, Perseus with a band of Cyclopes of Lycia, who built for him the mighty walls of Mycenae and carved the lions over its gate. Mycenæ is not one of those cities like Ephesus and London, which seem from their position as if they must always have existed. The site is somewhat strangely chosen as if fixed on by individual will, and tradition assigns to the foundation à particular period, and that period not extremely remote. Some of the descendants of Perseus reigned at Mycenae, but the legends are so confused that it is impossible to say how many generations elapsed before they gave way to the family of Pelops. We have already traced Assyrian, Egyptian and Lycian influences in the Argolid. Pelops introduced a Phrygian element. At that time the golden sands of the Pactolus had made Lydia and Phrygia among the richest countries in the world. Pelops is said to have brought great store of wealth with him to Greece, and chiefly by that means to have extended his sway over the part of Hellas which still bears his name. Homer makes constant mention of the wealth and splendour of the children of Pelops. Agamemnon, his grandson, seems to have placed Mycenae for the first time on a higher level than the older and neighbouring Argos. He made it his capital, and thence ruled over Corinth and other cities of Achaia, over all Argolis and many islands. Under Orestes it may have held | Clytemnestra outside the wall. Now no still the foremost place, although the domin- scheme of word-bending can show in this ions of Orestes were wider even than his list a geographical order. It is clear that father's. But with the Dorian invasion, Pausanias's account is not taken from notes Mycena at once recedes among the less made in the order of the objects he saw one conspicuous cities of Hellas. This we know after another; for no traveller could visit from the circumstance that Temenus, the the well or rather cistern Persca, which is eldest of the Heraclidæ, set up his throne supposed still to exist in the midst of the at Argos, and Argos and Mycenae can never acropolis, while passing from the gate of have been great together. From the reign the lions to the treasure-houses, which are of Orestes to the destruction of the city by on the slope below. And no traveller, in the Argives, about B.C. 470, we know passing from the treasure-houses to the scarcely anything of its history, except that tomb of Ægisthus without the wall, would it was no longer a capital. Its splendour pass Agamemnon's tomb within the wall. began with its foundation by Perseus, and It is clear that Pausanias is writing from ended at the most five or six generations memory rather than from notes, and that later with the death of Orestes. And the he mentions the various localities just as splendour which marks this brief period they occur to his mind, one by one, and in seems mainly derived from foreign sources, no set order. We must therefore be careespecially from Lycia, the country of the ful not to press his words; nevertheless a Cyclopes, and Phrygia, the country of Pel- few points seem to be clear. Pausanias ops. Much interest attaches to the word evidently, in speaking of Mycena and its Toλúxpvous-gold-abounding-frequently walls, means the acropolis or citadel, and applied by Homer to the city of Agamem- the wall which to this day surrounds it. non, which now seems so apt. Whence The traces of a city built on the lower could Mycenae have gained the gold for the slopes of the hill beneath the acropolis had abundance of which it had become pro- probably disappeared in his age almost as verbial? Certainly not from Greece, which completely as in ours. He distinctly imeven at that period produced but little. It plies that the tombs of Agamemnon and his must either have been received from the companions, and probably that of Atreus Phoenicians in the way of trade, or else also, were within the walls of the citadel. brought by the house of Pelops from Lydia. The tombs of gisthus and Clytemnestra The distance of Mycenae from the sea, and were without the citadel. As to the underthe situation of Argos and Nauplia, which ground treasure-houses of Atreus and his would naturally make those cities rather sons, Pausanias does not imply in any way than Mycena the emporiums of Phoenician where they were situate; but there can be trade, seems almost to shut us up to the lat no reasonable doubt that he refers to the ter alternative. still preserved conical buildings of Cyclopean masonry, which are on the site of the lower city. It seems reasonably certain then that, in the second century of the Christian era, local tradition designated these conical structures as the treasuries of Atreus and his sons, and pointed out within the walls of the acropolis a spot where Agamemnon was buried, together with the companions who returned with him from Troy and were murdered by Ægisthus. The tradition preserved even the names of those companions, Eurymedon the charioteer, and Teledamus and Pelops, infant children of Agamemnon and Cassandra. Whether Cassandra herself was buried with these infants, was a matter as to which there was doubt. The inexactness of Pausanias's language leaves us uncertain whether Atreus and Electra were supposed to have been buried at the same or another spot, the former alternative seeming more probable. The next period of Mycenaean history which has an interest for us comprises the few hours when Pausanias was wandering amid the ruins. But for the information given us by that traveller, it would never have occurred to any one to seek for treasures on this spot: had he taken a little more pains to make his information accurate and his language clear, he might have left small room for divergent theories as to the origin of the recently-found hoard. But his words are so loose and careless that it is hopeless to try and fix a definite meaning upon them; and though the traditions they embody are local, yet these have evidently become corrupt and confused by frequent repetition. Pausanias, in speaking of the antiquities of Mycenae, mentions them in the following order :-The walls, the gate of the lions, the well Persea, the underground treasure-houses of Atreus and his sons, the tomb of Atreus, the tombs of Agamemnon and his companions, that of Electra, and finally the tomb of Ægisthus and The third important period of Mycenaean. history belongs to the present century. In it Dr. Schliemann is the principal actor; |