Produced by Tim Lindell, Robert Tonsing, and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)









                                  THE
                           BOOK OF THE SWORD


                          LONDON: PRINTED BY
                SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
                         AND PARLIAMENT STREET




                                  THE
                           BOOK OF THE SWORD

                                  BY
                           RICHARD F. BURTON
                       MAÎTRE D’ARMES (BREVETÉ)

                            [Illustration]

                     _WITH NUMEROUS ILLUSTRATIONS_

                                London

                     CHATTO AND WINDUS, PICCADILLY

                                 1884

                        [_All rights reserved_]


    ‘He that hath no Sword (-knife = μάχαιρα), let him sell his
  garment and buy one.’                          _St. Luke_ xxii. 36.

    ‘_Solo la spada vuol magnificarsi._’
    (Nothing is high and awful save the Sword.)
                                   _Lod. della Vernaccia_, A.D. 1200.

    ‘But, above all, it is most conducive to the greatness of
  empire for a nation to profess the skill of arms as its
  principal glory and most honourable employ.’
                          BACON’S _Advancement of Learning_, viii. 3.

    ‘The voice of every people is the Sword
    That guards them, or the Sword that beats them down.’
                                                 TENNYSON’S _Harold_.


  +--------------------------------------------------+
  |                                                  |
  |                        TO                        |
  |                                                  |
  |                    THE MEMORY                    |
  |                                                  |
  |                        OF                        |
  |                                                  |
  |          MY OLD AND DEAR COLLEGE FRIEND          |
  |                                                  |
  |               ALFRED BATE RICHARDS               |
  |                                                  |
  |                       WHO                        |
  |                                                  |
  |                 IN YEARS GONE BY                 |
  |                                                  |
  |      ACCEPTED THE DEDICATION OF THESE PAGES      |
  |                                                  |
  +--------------------------------------------------+




                               FOREWORD.

‘I wanted a book on the Sword, not a treatise on Carte and Tierce,’
said the Publisher, when, some years ago, my earliest manuscript was
sent to him.

It struck me then and there that the Publisher was right. Consequently
the volume was re-written after a more general and less professional
fashion.

I have only one wish that reader and reviewer can grant: namely, a fair
field and no favour for certain ‘advanced views’ of Egyptology. It
is my conviction that this study, still in its infancy, will greatly
modify almost all our preconceived views of archæological history.

                                                   RICHARD F. BURTON.

  TRIESTE: _November 20, 1883_.




                             INTRODUCTION.


The history of the Sword is the history of humanity. The ‘White Arm’
means something more than the ‘oldest, the most universal, the most
varied of weapons, the only one which has lived through all time.’

He, she, or it—for the gender of the Sword varies—has been worshipped
with priestly sacrifices as a present god. Hebrew revelation represents
the sharp and two-edged Sword going out of the mouth of the King of
Kings, and Lord of Lords. We read of a ‘Sword of God, a holy Sword,’
the ‘Sword of the Lord and of Gideon’; and ‘I came not to send peace
but a Sword,’ meaning the warfare and martyrdom of man.

On a lower plane the Sword became the invention and the favourite arm
of the gods and the demi-gods: a gift of magic, one of the treasures
sent down from Heaven, which made Mulciber (‘Malik Kabír,’ the great
king) divine, and Voelunder, Quida, Galant, or Wayland Smith a hero.
It was consecrated to the deities, and was stored in the Temple and in
the Church. It was the ‘key of heaven and hell’: the saying is, ‘If
there were no Sword, there would be no law of Mohammed’; and the Moslem
brave’s highest title was ‘Sayf Ullah’—Sword of Allah.

Uniformly and persistently personal, the Sword became no longer an
abstraction but a Personage, endowed with human as well as superhuman
qualities. He was a sentient being who spoke, and sang, and joyed, and
grieved. Identified with his wearer he was an object of affection, and
was pompously named as a well-beloved son and heir. To surrender the
Sword was submission; to break the Sword was degradation. To kiss the
Sword was, and in places still is, the highest form of oath and homage.

    Lay on our royal Sword your banished hands

says King Richard II. So Walther of Aquitaine:—

    Contra Orientalem prostratus corpore partem
    Ac nudum retinens ensem hac cum voce precatur.

The Sword killed and cured; the hero when hopeless fell upon his Sword;
and the heroine, like Lucretia and Calphurnia, used the blade standing.
The Sword cut the Gordian knot of every difficulty. The Sword was the
symbol of justice and of martyrdom, and accompanied the wearer to the
tomb as well as to the feast and the fight. ‘Lay on my coffin a Sword,’
said dying Heinrich Heine, ‘for I have warred doughtily to win freedom
for mankind.’

From days immemorial the Queen of Weapons, a creator as well as a
destroyer, ‘carved out history, formed the nations, and shaped the
world.’ She decided the Alexandrine and the Cæsarian victories which
opened new prospects to human ken. She diffused everywhere the bright
lights and splendid benefits of war and conquest, whose functions are
all important in the formative and progressive processes. It is no
paradox to assert _La guerre a enfanté le droit_: without War there
would be no Right. The cost of life, says Emerson, the dreary havoc of
comfort and time, are overpaid by the vistas it opens of Eternal Law
reconstructing and uplifting society; it breaks up the old horizon, and
we see through the rifts a wider view.

War, again, benefits society by raising its tone above the ineffable
littleness and meanness which characterise the every-day life of the
many. In the presence of the Great Destroyer, petty feuds and miserable
envy, hatred, and malice stand hushed and awe-struck. Very hollow in
these days sounds Voltaire’s banter on War when he says that a king
picks up a parcel of men who have nothing to do, dresses them in blue
cloth at two shillings a yard, binds their hats with coarse white
worsted, turns them to the right and left, and marches them away to
glory.

The Sword and only the Sword raised the worthier race to power upon
the ruins of impotent savagery; and she carried in her train, from
time immemorial, throughout the civilised world, Asiatic Africa,
Asia, and Europe, the arts and the sciences which humanise mankind.
In fact, whatever apparent evil the Sword may have done, she worked
for the highest ultimate good. With the Arabs the Sword was a type of
individuality. Thus Shanfara, the fleet-foot, sings in his _Lamiyyah_,
(L-poem):—

    Three friends: the Heart no fear shall know,
    The sharp white Sword, the yellow Bow.

Zayd bin Ali boasts, like El-Mutanabbi:—

    The wielded Sword-blade knows my hand,
    The Spear obeys my lusty arm.

And Ziyád El-Ajam thus writes the epitaph of El-Mughayrah: ‘So died he,
after having sought death between the spear-point and the Sword-edge.’

This ‘Pundonor’ presently extended westward. During the knightly ages
the ‘good Sword’ of the Paladin and the Chevalier embodied a new
faith—the Religion of Honour, the first step towards the religion of
humanity. These men once more taught the sublime truth, the splendid
doctrine known to the Stoics and the Pharisees, but unaccountably
neglected in later creeds:—

    Do good, for Good is good to do.

Their recklessness of all consequences soared worlds-high above the
various egotistic systems which bribe man to do good for a personal and
private consideration, to win the world, or to save his soul. Hence
Aristotle blamed his contemporaries, the Spartans: ‘They are indeed
good men, but they have not the supreme consummate excellence of loving
all things worthy, decent and laudable, purely as such and for their
own sakes; nor of practising virtue for no other motive but the sole
love of her own innate beauty.’ The ‘everlasting Law of Honour binding
on all and peculiar to each,’ would have thoroughly satisfied the
Stagirite’s highest aspirations.

In knightly hands the Sword acknowledged no Fate but that of freedom
and free-will; and it bred the very spirit of chivalry, a keen personal
sentiment of self-respect, of dignity, and of loyalty, with the noble
desire to protect weakness against the abuse of strength. The knightly
Sword was ever the representative idea, the present and eternal symbol
of all that man most prized—courage and freedom. The names describe
her quality: she is Joyeuse, and La Tisona; he is Zú ’l-Fikár (sire of
splitting) and Quersteinbeis, biter of the mill-stone. The weapon was
everywhere held to be the best friend of bravery, and the worst foe
of perfidy; the companion of authority, and the token of commandment;
the outward and visible sign of force and fidelity, of conquest and
dominion, of all that Humanity wants to have and wants to be.

The Sword was carried by and before kings; and the brand, not the
sceptre, noted their seals of state. As the firm friend of the
crown and of the ermine robe, it became the second fountain of
honour. Amongst the ancient Germans even the judges sat armed on the
judgment-seat; and at marriages it represented the bridegroom in his
absence. Noble and ennobling, its touch upon the shoulder conferred the
prize of knighthood. As ‘bakhshish’ it was, and still is, the highest
testimony to the soldier’s character; a proof that he is ‘brave as
his sword-blade.’ Its presence was a moral lesson; unlike the Greeks,
the Romans, and the Hebrews, Western and Southern Europe, during its
chivalrous ages, appeared nowhere and on no occasion without the Sword.
It was ever ready to leap from its sheath in the cause of weakness and
at the call of Honour. Hence, with its arrogant individuality, the
Sword still remained the ‘all-sufficient type and token of the higher
sentiments and the higher tendencies of human nature.’

In society the position of the Sword was remarkable. ‘Its aspect was
brilliant; its manners were courtly; its habits were punctilious, and
its connections were patrician.’ Its very vices were glittering; for
most of them were the abuses which could not but accompany its uses.
It bore itself haughtily as a victor, an arbitrator; and necessarily
there were times when its superlative qualities showed corresponding
defects. Handled by the vile it too often became, in the ‘syllogism of
violence,’ an incubus, a blusterer, a bully, a tyrant, a murderer, an
assassin, in fact ‘death’s stamp’; and under such conditions it was a
‘corruption of the best.’ But its lapses were individual and transient;
its benefits to Humanity were general and ever-enduring.

The highest period of the Sword was the early sixteenth century, that
mighty landmark separating the dark Past from the brilliant Present
of Europe. The sudden awaking and excitement of man’s mind, produced
by the revival of learning and the marriage-union of the West with
the East; by the discovering of a new hemisphere, the doubling of the
world; by the so-called Reformation, a northern protest against the
slavery of the soul; by the wide spread of the printing-press, which
meant knowledge; and, simultaneously, by the illumination of that
electric spark generated from the contact of human thought, suddenly
changed the status of the Sword. It was no longer an assailant, a
slaughterer: it became a defender, a preserver. It learned to be shield
as well as Sword. And now arose swordsmanship proper, when the ‘Art of
Arms’ meant, amongst the old masters, the Art of Fence. The sixteenth
century was its Golden Age.

At this time the Sword was not only the Queen of Weapons, but the
weapon paramount between man and man. Then, advancing by slow,
stealthy, and stumbling steps, the age of gunpowder, of ‘villanous
saltpetre,’ appeared upon the scene of life. Gradually the bayonet, a
modern modification of the pike, which again derives from the savage
spear, one of the earliest forms of the _arme blanche_, ousted the
Sword amongst infantry because the former could be combined with
the fire-piece. A century afterwards cavalrymen learned, in the
Federal-Confederate war, to prefer the revolver and repeater, the
breech-loader and the reservoir-gun, to the sabre of past generations.
It became an axiom that in a cavalry charge the spur, not the Sword,
gains the day. By no means a unique, nor even a singular process of
progress, is this return towards the past, this falling back upon
the instincts of primitive invention, this recurrence to childhood:
when the science of war reverted to ballistics it practically revived
the practice of the first ages, and the characteristic attack of
the savage and the barbarian who, as a rule, throw their weapons.
The cannon is the ballista, and the arblast, the mangonel, and
the trebuchet, worked not by muscular but by chemical forces. The
torpedo is still the old, old petard; the spur of the ironclad is the
long-disused embolon, rostrum, or beak; and steam-power is a rough,
cheap substitute for man-power, for the banks of oarsmen, whose work
had a delicacy of manipulation unknown to machinery, however ingenious.
The armed nations, which in Europe are again becoming the substitutes
for standing armies, represent the savage and barbarous stages of
society, the proto-historic races, amongst which every man between
the ages of fifteen and fifty is a man-at-arms. It is the same in
moral matters; the general spread of the revolutionary spirit, of
republicanism, of democratic ideas, of communistic, socialistic, and
nihilistic rights and claims now acting so powerfully upon society
and upon the brotherhood of nations, is a re-dawning of that early
day when the peoples ruled themselves, and were not yet governed by
priestly and soldier kings. It is the same even in the ‘immaterials.’
The Swedenborgian school, popularly known by the trivial name
_Spiritualism_, has revived magic, and this ‘new motor force,’ for such
I call it, has resurrected the Ghost, which many a wise head supposed
to have been laid for ever.

The death-song of the Sword has been sung, and we are told that ‘Steel
has ceased to be a gentleman.’[1] Not so! and by no means so. These
are mere insular and insulated views, and England, though a grand
figure, the mother of nations, the modern Rome, is yet but a fraction
of the world. The Englishman and, for that matter, the German and
the Scandinavian, adopted with a protest, and right unwillingly,
swordsmanship proper—that is, rapier and point, the peculiar and
especial weapon, offensive and defensive, of Southern Europe, Spain,
Italy, and France. During the most flourishing age of the Sword it is
rare to find a blade bearing the name of an English maker, and English
inscriptions seldom date earlier than the eighteenth century. The
reason is evident. The Northerners hacked with hangers, they hewed with
hatchets, and they cut with cutlasses because the arm suited their bulk
and stature, weight and strength. But such weapons are the brutality
of the Sword. In England swordsmanship is, and ever was, an exotic;
like the sentiment, as opposed to the knowledge, of Art, it is the
property of the few, not of the many; and, being rare, it is somewhat
‘un-English.’

But the case is different on the continent of Europe. Probably at no
period during the last four centuries has the Sword been so ardently
studied as it is now by the Latin race in France and Italy. At no time
have the schools been so distinguished for intellectual as well as for
moral proficiency. The use of the foil ‘bated’ and ‘unbated’ has once
more become quasi-universal. A duello, in the most approved fashion of
our ancestors, was lately proposed (September 1882) by ten journalists
of a Parisian paper, to as many on the staff of a rival publication.
Even the softer sex in France and Italy has become cunning of fence;
and women are among the most prosperous pupils of the _salles d’armes_.
Witness, for instance, the ill-fated Mdlle. Feyghine of the Théâtre
Français, so celebrated for her skill in ‘the carte and the tierce and
the reason demonstrative.’

Nor is the cause of this wider diffusion far to seek. In the presence
of arms of precision, the Sword, as a means of offence and defence,
may practically fall for a time into disuse. It may no longer be the
arm paramount or represent an idea. It may have come down from its
high estate as tutor to the noble and the great. Yet not the less it
has, and will ever have, its work to do. The Ex-Queen now appears as
instructress-general in the art of arms. As the mathematic is the basis
of all exact science, so Sword-play teaches the soldier to handle every
other weapon. This is well known to Continental armies, in which each
regiment has its own fencing establishment and its _salle d’armes_.

Again, men of thought cannot ignore the intrinsic value of the Sword
for stimulating physical qualities. _Ce n’est pas assez de roidir
l’âme, il faut aussi roidir les muscles_, says Montaigne, who also
remarks of fencing that it is the only exercise wherein _l’esprit s’en
exerce_. The best of callisthenics, this energetic educator teaches the
man to carry himself like a soldier. A compendium of gymnastics, it
increases strength and activity, dexterity and rapidity of movement.
Professors calculate that one hour of hard fencing wastes forty ounces
by perspiration and respiration. The foil is still the best training
tool for the consensus of eye and hand; for the judgment of distance
and opportunity; and, in fact, for the practice of combat. And thus
swordsmanship engenders moral confidence and self-reliance while it
stimulates a habit of resource; and it is not without suggesting, even
in the schools, that ‘curious, fantastic, very noble generosity proper
to itself alone.’

And now when the vain glory of violence has passed away from the Sword
with the customs of a past age, we can hardly ignore the fact that
the manners of nations have changed, not for the best. As soon as the
Sword ceased to be worn in France, a Frenchman said of his compatriots
that the ‘politest people in Europe had suddenly become the rudest.’
That gallant and courteous bearing, which in England during the early
nineteenth century so charmed the ‘fiery and fastidious Alfieri’
lingers only amongst a few. True the swash-buckler, the professional
duellist, has disappeared. But courtesy and punctiliousness, the
politeness of man to man, and respect and deference of man to
woman—that _Frauencultus_, the very conception of the knightly
character—have to a great extent been ‘improved off.’ The latter
condition of society, indeed, seems to survive only in the most
cultivated classes of Europe; and, popularly, amongst the citizens
of the United States, a curious oasis of chivalry in a waste of bald
utilitarianism—preserved not by the Sword but by the revolver. Our
England has abolished the duello without substituting aught better for
it: she has stopped the effect and left the cause.

So far I have written concerning the Sword simply to show that my work
does not come out ‘a day after the fair’; and that there is still a
powerful vitality in the heroic Weapon. The details of such general
statements will be established and developed in the following pages.
It is now advisable to introduce this volume to the reader.

During the ‘seventies’ I began, with a light heart, my Book of the
Sword, expecting to finish it within a few months. It has occupied me
as many years. Not only study and thought, but travel and inspection,
were found indispensable; a monograph on the Sword and its literature
involved visiting almost all the great armouries of continental
Europe, and a journey to India in 1875–6. The short period of months
served only to show that a memoir of the Sword embraces the annals of
the world. The long term of years has convinced me that to treat the
subject in its totality is impossible within reasonable limits.

It will hardly be said that a monograph of the Sword is not wanted.
Students who would learn her origin, genealogy, and history, find
no single publication ready to hand. They must ransack catalogues
and books on ‘arms and armour’ that are numbered by the score. They
must hunt up fugitive pamphlets; papers consigned to the literary
store-rooms called magazines; and stray notices deep buried in the
ponderous tomes of _Recueils_ and general works on Hoplology. They must
wade through volume after volume of histories and travels, to pick up
a few stray sentences. And they will too often find that the index
of an English book which gives copious references to glass or sugar
utterly ignores the Sword. At times they must labour in the dark, for
men who write seem wholly unconscious of the subject’s importance. For
instance, much has been said about art in Japan; but our knowledge of
her metallurgy especially of her iron and steel works, is elementary,
while that of her peculiar and admirable cutlery is strangely
superficial. And travellers and collectors treat the Sword much as they
do objects of natural history. They regard only the rare, the forms
which they ignore, or which strike the eye, and the unique specimens
which may have no comparative value. Thus they neglect articles of far
more interest and of higher importance to the student, and they bring
home, often at great expense, mere lumber for curiosity shops.

The difficulty of treating the Sword is enhanced by the peculiar
individuality which characterises it, evidenced by an immense variety
of physique, and resulting as much from unconscious selection as
from deep design. One of the characteristics of indigenous art is
that no two articles, especially no two weapons, are exactly alike;
and yet they vary only within narrow and measurable limits. The
minute differentiæ of the Sword are endless. Even in the present day,
swordsmen will order some shape, size, or weight which they hold—often
unwisely enough—to be improvements on the general. One man, wishing
to strengthen his arm, devises a weapon fit for a Titan and finds it
worse than useless. A tale is told of a Sheffield cutler who, having
received from Maroccan Mogador a wooden model to be copied in steel,
made several hundred blades on the same pattern and failed to find a
single purchaser. Their general resemblance to the prevailing type
was marred by peculiarities which unsuited them for general use; they
were adapted only to individual requirement, each man priding himself
upon his own pattern having some almost imperceptible difference.
Such variations are intelligible enough in the Sword, which must be
modified for every personality, because it becomes to the swordsman a
prolongation of his own person, a lengthening of the arm. The natural
results are the protean shapes of the weapon and the difficulty of
reducing these shapes to orderly description. I cannot, therefore,
agree with a President of the Anthropological Institute (‘Journal,’
October 1876) when he states: ‘Certainly the same forms of Sword might
be found in different countries, but not of so peculiar a nature (as
the Gaboon weapon) unless the form had been communicated.’ Shapes
apparently identical start up spontaneously, because types are limited
and man’s preferences easily traverse the whole range of his invention.

Thus the stumbling-block which met me on the threshold was to
introduce sequence, system, and lucid order into a chaos of details.
It was necessary to discover some unity, some starting-place for
evolution and development, without which all treatment would be vague
and inconsequent. But where find the clue which makes straight the
labyrinthine paths; the _point de mire_ which enables us to command the
whole prospect; the coign of vantage which displays the disposition of
details, together with the _nexus_, the intercommunication, and the
progress of the parts and the whole?

Two different systems of that ‘classification, which defines the
margin of our ignorance,’ are adopted by museums; and, consequently,
by the catalogues describing them. I shall here quote only English
collections, leaving to the Continental reader the task of applying
the two main principles locally and generally. These are, first, the
Topical or Geographical (_e.g._ Christy collection), which, as the
words denote, examines the article itself mainly with reference to its
media, nature and culture, place and date; and which considers man and
his works as the expression of the soil that bears him. The second is
the Material and purely Formal (General A. Pitt-Rivers’ collection),
which regards only the objects or specimens themselves, without respect
to their makers or their media; and which, by investigating the rival
laws of continuity and of incessant variation, aims at extending our
knowledge of mankind. Both plans have their merits and their demerits.
The Topical is the more strictly anthropologico-ethnological, because
it makes the general racial culture its prominent feature; but it
fails to illustrate, by juxtaposition, the origin, the life, and the
death of a special article. The Formal proposes to itself the study of
specific ideas; it describes their transmissions and their migrations;
and it displays their connection and sequence, their development
and degradation. It exemplifies the law of unconscious selection,
as opposed to premeditation and design. Thus it claims superior
sociological interest, while it somewhat separates and isolates the
article from its surroundings—mankind.

Again, it would be unadvisable to neglect the chronological and
synchronological order (Demmin’s). This assists us in tracing with
a surer hand the origin and derivation; the annals, the adventures,
and the accidents of an almost universal weapon, whose marvellously
chequered career excels in dignity, in poetry, and in romance, anything
and everything the world has yet seen. And here I have not been
unmindful of Dr. Arthur Mitchell’s sensible warning that ‘the rude
form of an implement may follow as well as precede the more finished
forms.’[2] Due regard to dates enables us to avoid the scandalous
confusion of the vulgar museum. Demmin found a large number of swords
catalogued as dating with the time of Charles the Bold, when the shapes
proved that they belonged to the late sixteenth and even to the early
seventeenth centuries. I was shown, in the museum of Aquileja, a ‘Roman
sword’ which was a basket-hilted Venetian, hardly two hundred years
old. It is only an exact chronology, made to frame the Geographical
and the Formal pictures of the weapon, that can secure scientific
distribution.

In dealing with a subject which, like the Sword, ranges through the
world-history, and which concerns the human race in general, it would,
I venture to opine, be unwise to adopt a single system. As clearness
can be obtained only by methodical distribution of matter, all the
several processes must be combined with what art the artificer may.
The Formal, which includes the Material, as well as the shape of the
weapon, affords one fair basis for classification. The substance, for
instance, ranges from wood to steel, and the profile from the straight
line to the segment of a circle. The Topical, beginning (as far as we
know) in the Nile Valley, and thence in ancient days overspreading
Africa, Asia, Europe, and America, determines the distribution and
shows the general continuity of the noble arm. It also readily
associates itself with the chronologico-historical order, which begins
_ab initio_, furnishes a proof of general progress, interrupted only by
fitful stages of retrogression, and, finally, dwells upon the epochs of
the highest interest.

After not a little study I resolved to distribute the ‘Book of the
Sword’ into three parts.

Part I. treats of the birth, parentage, and early career of the Sword.
It begins with the very beginning, in prehistoric times and amongst
proto-historic peoples; and it ends with the full growth of the Sword
at the epoch of the early Roman Empire.

Part II. treats of the Sword fully grown. It opens with the rising
civilisation of the Northern Barbarians and with the decline of Rome
under Constantine (A.D. 313–324), who combined Christianity with
Mithraism; when the world-capital was transferred to Byzantium, and
when an imitation of Orientalism, specially of ‘Persic apparatus,’
led to the art decay which we denote by the term ‘Lower Empire.’ It
proceeds to the rise of El-Islam; the origin of ordered chivalry and
knighthood; the succession of the Crusades and the wars of arms and
armour before the gunpowder age, when the general use of ballistics by
means of explosives became the marking feature of battle. This was the
palmy period of the Sword. It became a beautiful work of art; and the
highest genius did not disdain to chase and gem the handle and sheath.
And its career culminates with the early sixteenth century, when the
weapon of offence assumed its defensive phase and rose to a height of
splendour that prognosticated downfall, as surely as the bursting of a
rocket precedes its extinction.

Part III. continues the memoirs of the Sword, which, after long
declining, revives once more in our day. This portion embraces
descriptions of the modern blade, notices of collections, public and
private, notes on manufactures; and, lastly, the bibliography and the
literature connected with the Heroic Weapon.

Part I., contained in this volume, numbers thirteen chapters, of which
a bird’s-eye view is given by the List of Contents. The first seven
are formally and chronologically arranged. Thus we have the Origin of
Weapons (Chapter I.) showing that while the arm is common to man and
beast, the weapon, as a rule, belongs to our kind. Chapter II. treats
of the first weapon proper, the Stone, which gave rise to ballistics
as well as to implements of percussion. Follows (Chapter III.) the
blade of base materials, wood, stone and bone, materials still used
by races which can procure nothing better. From this point a step
leads to the metal blade, in its origin evidently a copy of preceding
types. The first, (Chapter IV.) is of pure copper, in our translations
generally rendered by ‘brass’ or ‘bronze.’ The intermediate substances
(Chapter V.) are represented by alloys, a variety of mixed metals;
and they naturally end with the so-called ‘age’ of early iron, which
prevailed throughout Europe at a time when the valleys of the Nile and
the Tigris-Euphrates wrought blades of the finest steel. This division
concludes with a formal and technical Chapter (VII.) on the shape of
the Sword and a description of its several parts. Here the subject does
not readily lend itself to lively description; but, if I have been
compelled to be dull, I have done my best to avoid being tedious.

The arrangement then becomes geographical and chronological. My next
five chapters are devoted to the Sword in its topical distribution and
connection. The first (No. VIII.) begins with the various blade-forms
in ancient Egypt, which extended throughout the then civilised world;
it ends with showing that the Nile valley gave their present shapes
to the ‘white arm’ of the Dark Continent even in its modern day, and
applied to the Sword the name which it still bears in Europe. The
second (No. IX.) passes to Palestine, Syria, and Asia Minor, lands
which manifestly borrowed the weapon from the Egyptians, and handed it
on to Assyria, Persia, and India. The arms and armour of the ‘great
Interamnian Plain’ afford material for a third (Chapter X.). Thence,
retracing our steps and passing further westwards, we find manifest
derivation and immense improvement of the Egyptian weapon in Greece
(Chapter XI.), from which Mycenæ has lately supplied bronze rapiers
perfectly formed as the steels of Bilboa and Toledo. The fifth Chapter
(No. XII.) continues the ancient history of the Sword by describing
the various blades of progressive Rome, whose wise choice and change
of arms enabled her to gain the greatest battles with the least amount
of loss. To this I have appended, for geographical and chronological
symmetry, in a sixth and last chapter (No. XIII.), a sketch of the
Sword among the contemporary Barbarians of the Roman Empire, Dacians,
Italians, Iberians, Gauls, Germans, and the British Islands. This
portion of the Sword history, however, especially the Scandinavian and
the Irish, will be treated at full length in Part II.

Here, then, ends the First Part, which Messrs. Chatto and Windus have
kindly consented to publish, whilst my large collection of notes, the
labour of years, is being ordered and digested for the other two. I may
fairly hope, if all go well, to see both in print before the end of
1884.

In the following pages I have confined myself, as much as was possible,
to the Sword; a theme which, indeed, offers an _embarras de richesses_.
But weapons cannot be wholly isolated, especially when discussing
origins: one naturally derives from and connects with the other; and
these relations may hardly be passed over without notice. I have,
therefore, indulged in an occasional divagation, especially concerning
the axe and the spear; but the main line has never been deserted.

Nor need I offer an excuse for the amount of philological discussion
which the nomenclature of the Sword has rendered necessary. If I have
opposed the Past Masters of the art, my opposition has been honest,
and I am ever open to refutation. Travellers refuse to believe that
‘Aryanism’ was born on the bald, bleak highlands of Central Asia, or
that ‘Semitism’ derives from the dreary, fiery deserts of Arabia. We
do not believe India to be ‘the country which even more than Greece or
Rome was the cradle of grammar and philology.’ I cannot but hold that
England has, of late years, been greatly misled by the ‘Aryan heresy’;
and I look forward to the study being set upon a sounder base.

The illustrations, numbering 293, have been entrusted to the artistic
hands of Mr. Joseph Grego, who has taken a friendly interest in the
work. But too much must not be expected from them in a book which
intends to be popular, and which is, therefore, limited in the matter
of expense. Hence they are fewer than I should have desired. The
libraries of Europe contain many catalogues of weapons printed in folio
with highly finished and coloured plates which here would be out of
place. That such a work upon the subject of the Sword will presently
appear I have no doubt; and my only hope is that this volume will prove
an efficient introduction.

To conclude. I return grateful thanks to the many _mitwerkers_ who have
assisted me in preparing this monograph; no more need be said, as all
names will be mentioned in the course of the work. A journey to the
Gold Coast and its results, in two volumes, which describe its wealth,
must plead my excuse for the delay in bringing out the book. The
manuscript was sent home from Lisbon in December 1881, but the ‘tyranny
of circumstance’ has withheld it for nearly two years.

                                                   RICHARD F. BURTON.

_Postscript._ An afterthought suggests that it is only fair, both
for readers and for myself, to own that sundry quotations have been
borrowed at second-hand and that the work of verification, so rightly
enjoined upon writers, has not always been possible. These blemishes
are hardly to be avoided in a first edition. At Trieste, and other
places distant from the great seats of civilisation, libraries of
reference are unknown; and it is vain to seek for the original source.
Indeed, Mr. James Fergusson once wrote to me that it was an overbold
thing to undertake a History of the Sword under such circumstances.
However, I made the best use of sundry visits to London and Paris,
Berlin, Vienna, and other capitals, and did what I could to remedy
defects. Lastly, the illustrations have not always, as they ought, been
drawn to scale, they were borrowed from a number of volumes which paid
scant attention to this requisite.




                         LIST OF AUTHORITIES.


  _Academy (The)_, a Weekly Review of Literature, Science, and Art.

  Agricola, _De Re Metallicâ_, First published in 1551.

  Akermann (J. Y.), _Remains of Pagan Saxondom_. London: Smith,
      MDCCCLV.

  Amicis (Edoardo de), _Marocco_. Milan: Treves, 1876.

  Ammianus Marcellinus, Historian of the Lower Empire. Fourth century.

  Anderson (J. R.), _Saint Mark’s Rest: the Place of Dragons_, edited
      by John Ruskin, LL.D. Allen: Sunnyside, Orpington, Kent, 1879.

  Anderson (Joseph), _Scotland in Early Christian Times_. Rhind
      Lectures in Archæology for 1879. Edinburgh: Douglas, 1882.

  _Anthropologia_ (London Anthropological Society. Established Jan.
      22, 1873; first number, Oct. 1873; died after fifth number,
      July 1875.)

  _Anthropological Institute (The Journal of)_. London: Trübner.

  _Anthropological Review_, Vol. I.-III. London: Trübner, 1863–65.

  Antiquaries of London (Society of), from the beginning in 1770 to
      1883.

  _Antiquities of Orissa_, by Rajendralala Mitra, 2 vols. fol.;
      published by Government of India.

  Apuleius (A.D. 130).

  _Archæologia, or Tracts relating to Antiquity_, published by the
      Society of Antiquaries of London, from the commencement in 1749
      to 1863.

  Archæological Association, vol. iv., _Weapons, &c., of Horn_.

  _Archæology (Transactions of the Society of Biblical)_, London:
      Longmans; beginning in 1872.

  Aristophanes.

  Aristotle, _Meteorologica, &c._

  Arrian (Flavius), A.D. 90, _Anabasis, &c._

  _Athenæum (The)_, Journal of English and Foreign Literature, &c.

  Athenæus (A.D. 230), _Deipnosophists_.

  Baker (Sir Samuel White), _The Nile Tributaries_. London:
      Macmillan, 1866. _The Albert Nyanza._ London, 1868.

  _Balthazar Ribello de Aragão; Viagens dos Portuguezes, Collecção de
      Documentas_, por Luciano Cordeiro, Lisboa, Imprensa Nacional,
      1881. The learned Editor is Secretary to the Royal Geographical
      Society of Lisbon.

  Barbosa (Duarte), _A Description of the Coasts of East Africa
      and Malabar_, translated for the Hakluyt Society, London, by
      Honourable Henry E. (now Lord) Stanley, 1866. Written about
      A.D. 1512–14, and attributed by some to Magellan.

  Barth (Henry), _Travels, &c., in Central Africa_ 1849–1855; 5
      vols., 8vo. London: Longmans, 1875.

  Barthélemy (Abbé J. J.), _Voyage du Jeune Anacharsis en Grèce,
      &c._, 5 vols. 4to. Paris, 1788.

  Bataillard (Paul) _On Gypsies and other Matters_, Société
      Anthropologique de Paris, 1874.

  Beckmann (John), _A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and
      Origins_, translated by W. Johnston. London: Bell and Daldy,
      1872 (fourth edition, revised). It is a useful book of
      reference and wants only a few additions.

  Berosus (B.C. 261), _Fragments_, edit. Müller.

  Bollaert (William), _Antiquarian, Ethnological, and other
      Researches_. London: Trübner, 1860.

  Bologna, _Congrès d’Archéologie et d’Anthropologie Préhistoriques,
      Session de Bologna_, 1 vol. 8vo. Fava and Garagnani: Bologna,
      1871.

  Bonnycastle (Captain R. H., of the Royal Engineers), _Spanish
      America, &c._ Philadelphia: A. Small, 1817.

  Borlase (William), _Observations on the Antiquities, &c., of the
      County of Cornwall_. Oxford, 1754.

  Boscawen (W. St. Chad), Papers in Society of Biblical Archæology.

  Boutell (Charles), _Arms and Armour_. London, 1867.

  Brewster (Sir David), _Letters on Natural Magic_, 12mo. London,
      1833.

  Brugsch (Heinrich), _A History of Egypt under the Pharaohs, &c._,
      by Henry Brugsch-Bey (now Pasha). Translated from the German by
      the late Henry Danby Seymour; completed and edited by Philip
      Smith, 2 vols. 8vo. London: Murray, 1879. The first part has
      been published in French, Leipzig, 1859. The archaistic German
      style of _Geschichte Aegypten’s_ is very difficult.

  _Bulletin de l’Institut Égyptien._ Cairo: Mourès, 1882.

  Bunsen (Baron C. C. J.), _Egypt’s Place in Universal History, &c._,
      with additions by Samuel Birch, LL. D., 5 vols. 8vo. London:
      Longmans, 1867.

  Burnouf (Émile), _Essai sur le Veda, ou Études sur les Religions,
      &c., de l’Inde_, 1 vol. 8vo., 1863. ‘L’Age de Bronze,’ _Revue
      des deux Mondes_, July 15, 1877.

  Burton (R. F.), _A Complete System of Bayonet Exercise_. London:
      Clowes, 1853. The _Athenæum_, Nov, 24, 1880. _Camoens, his Life
      and his Lusiads_, 2 vols. 12mo., Quaritch, 1881. _To the Gold
      Coast for Gold_. London: Chatto and Windus, 1883.

  Cæsar (Julius), _Opera Omnia_, Delphin edit., variorum notes, 4
      vols. 8vo. Londini, 1819.

  Calder (J. E.), _Some Account of the Wars of Extirpation and Habits
      of the Native Tribes of Tasmania_, Journ. Anthrop. Instit.,
      vol. iii. 1873.

  Cameron (Commander Verney Lovett, C.B., D.C.L., &c.), _Across
      Africa_. London: Daldy and Isbister, 1877.

  Camoens, _Os Lusiadas_.

  _Catalogue du Bulak Muséum_, by the late Mariette-Bey (afterwards
      Pasha). Cairo: A. Mourès, imprimeur-éditeur.

  _Catalog. Die Ethnographisch-Anthropologische Abtheilung des
      Museums Godefroy in Hamburg_, vol. i. 8vo. L. Frederichsen u.
      Co. 1881.

  Caylus (Comte de), _Recueil d’Antiquités Égyptiennes, &c._, 8 vols.
      4to. Paris, 1752–70.

  Celsus (A. Cornelius), _De Medicinâ_, edit. princeps. Florentiæ, a
      Nicolao impressus, A.D. 1478.

  Chabas, _Études sur l’Antiquité Historique d’après les sources
      Égyptiennes_, 1872.

  Chaillu (Paul B. du), _Explorations and Adventures in Equatorial
      Africa, &c._ London: Murray, 1861. The _Gorilla-book_.

  Chapman (Captain George), _Foil Practice, with a Review of the Art
      of Fencing_. London: Clowes, 1861.

  Clapperton (Captain H.), _Journal of a Second Expedition into
      Africa_, 1 vol. 4to. London, 1829.

  Clermont-Ganneau (Charles), _Horus et Saint George, &c._ Extrait de
      la _Revue Archéologique_, Dec. 1877. Paris: Didier et C^{ie}.
      The author is a prolific writer and a highly distinguished
      Orientalist.

  Cochet (Jean Benoît Désiré, Abbé), _Le Tombeau de Childéric I.,
      Roi des Francs_. Restitué à l’aide de l’archéologie et des
      découvertes récentes, 8vo. Paris: 1859.

  Cole (Lieutenant H. H., of the Royal Engineers), _Catalogue of
      Indian Art in the South Kensington Museum_.

  —— _Illustrations of Ancient Buildings in Kashmir_, prepared
      under the authority of the Secretary of State for India
      from photographs, plans, and drawings taken by order of the
      Government of India. London, 1869. 4to.

  —— _The Architecture of Ancient Delhi, especially the buildings
      around the Kutb Minar_, fol. London, 1872.

  Cooper (Rev. Basil H.), _The Antiquity and the Use of Metals and
      especially Iron, among the Egyptians_, Transac. Devonshire
      Assoc. for the Advancement of Science, 1868.

  Cory (Isaac Preston), _Ancient Fragments of the Phœnician,
      Chaldæan, Egyptian, Tyrian, Carthaginian, and other writers_,
      8vo. London, 1832. Very rare. New edit. Reeves and Turner:
      London, 1876.

  Crawfurd (John), _On the Sources of the Supply of Tin for the
      Bronze Tools and Weapons of Antiquity_, Trans. Ethnol. Soc.,
      N.S., vol. iii. 1865.

  Cunningham (General A.), _The Bhilsa Topes, &c._, 8vo. London,
      1854. _Ládak, &c._, royal 8vo. London, 1854. _Archæological
      Survey of India_, 6 vols. 8vo. Simla, 1871–78.

  Czoernig (Baron Carl von), jun. _Ueber die vorhistorischen Funde im
      Laibacher Torfmoor_. Alpine Soc. of Trieste, Dec. 8, 1875.

  Daniel (Père Gabriel), _Histoire de la Milice Françoise, et des
      Changemens qui s’y sont faits, depuis l’établissement de la
      Monarchie Françoise dans les Gaules, jusqu’à la fin du Régne
      de Louis le Grand_, 7 vols. 8vo. À Amsterdam; au dépens de la
      Compagnie (de Jésus), MDCCXXIV. It is a standard work as far as
      it goes.

  Davis (Sir John F.), _The Chinese: a general Description of the
      Empire of China and its Inhabitants_, 2 vols. 8vo. London:
      Knight, MDCCCVI.

  Day (St. John Vincent), _The Prehistoric Use of Iron and Steel_.
      London: Trübner, 1877. When sending me a copy of his learned
      and original study, Mr. Day wrote to me that he is bringing out
      a second edition, in which his ‘collection of additional matter
      will modify and correct certain of his former views.’

  Demmin (Auguste), _Illustrated History of Arms and Armour_,
      translated by C. C. Black, M.A. London: Bell, 1877. The
      illustrations leave much to be desired; the Oriental notices
      are deficient, and the translator has made them worse.
      Otherwise the book gives a fair general and superficial view.

  Denham (Major Dixon), Clapperton and Oudney’s _Travels in Northern
      and Central Africa_, in 1822–24, 2 vols. 8vo. London, 1826.

  Deschmann und Hochstetter, _Prähistorische Ansiedlungen, &c., in
      Krain_. Laybach, 1879.

  Desor (Edouard), _Les Palafittes, ou Constructions lacustres du lac
      de Neuchâtel_. Paris, 1865. _Die Pfahlbauten des Neuenberger
      Sees._ Frankfurt a. M., 1866. Desor et Favre, _Le Bel Age du
      Bronze lacustre en Suisse_, 1 vol. fol. Neufchâtel, 1874.

  Diodorus Siculus (B.C. 44), _Bibliotheca Historica_, P.
      Wesselingius, 2 vols. fol. Amstelod., 1746.

  Dion Cassius (nat. A.D. 155).

  Dionysius of Halicarnassus (B.C. 29), _Opera Omnia_, J. J. Reiske,
      6 vols. 8vo. Lipsiæ, 1774.

  Dodwell (Edward), _A Classical and Topographical Tour through
      Greece_, 1801–6, 2 vols. 4to. London, 1819.

  Douglas (Rev. James, F.A.S.), _Nænia Britannica_, 1793, folio.

  Dümichen, _Geschichte des alten Aegyptens_. Berlin, 1879.

  Ebers (Prof. George), _Aegypten und die Bücher Moses_. Leipzig,
      1868. Followed by sundry Germano-Egyptian romances, _An
      Egyptian Princess_, _Uarda_, _&c._

  Edkins (Rev. Dr.), _China’s Place in Philology: an Attempt to show
      that the Languages of Europe and Asia have a Common Origin_.
      London, 1 vol. 8vo., 1871.

  Ellis (Rev. William), _Polynesian Researches_. London: Murray, 1858.

  Elphinstone, _History of India_, 2 vols. 8vo. 1841.

  _Encyclopædia Britannica._

  —— _Metropolitana._

  —— _Penny_ (one of the best).

  —— _Knight’s._

  Engel (W. H.), _Kypros: eine Monographie_. 2 vols. 8vo. Berlin:
      Reimer, 1841.

  _Ethnological Society of London (Journal of)_ 7 vols. 8vo.
      1848–65.

  Eusebius (Bishop of Cæsarea, A.D. 264–340), _Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ
      Libri Decem_; denuo edidit F. A. Heinichen, 3 vols. 8vo.
      Lipsiæ, 1868.

  Evans (Dr. John), _The Ancient Stone Implements of Great Britain_,
      1 vol. 8vo. London: Longmans, 1872. _The Ancient Implements
      of Great Britain and Ireland_, ibid. 1881. Both works are
      admirably well studied and exhaust the subjects as far as they
      are now known.

  Ewbank (Thomas), _Life in Brazil_, 1 vol. 8vo. New York,
      1856; London: Sampson Low and Co., 1856. The Appendix is
      anthropologically valuable.

  Fairholt (F. W.), _A Dictionary of Terms of Art_, 1 vol. 12mo.
      Virtue and Hall, London, 1849.

  Farrar (Canon), _Life, &c., of Saint Paul_. Cassell and Co.:
      London, Paris, and New York (undated).

  Ferguson (Sir James), _Transactions of the Irish Association_.

  Fergusson (James), _A History of Architecture_, 4 vols. 8vo.
      London, 1874–76.

  Festus (Sextus Pompeius), _De Verborum Significatione_, K. O.
      Müller. Lipsiæ, 1839. The Grammarian lived between A.D. 100
      (Martial’s day) and A.D. 422 (under Theodosius II.).

  Ficke, _Wörterbuch der Indo-germanischen Grundsprache, &c._
      Göttingen, 1868.

  Florus (Annæus: _temp._ Trajan), _Rerum Romanarum libri IV._,
      Delphin edit., 2 vols. 8vo. Londini, 1822.

  Fox (A. Lane-, now Major-General A. Pitt-Rivers). This
      distinguished student of Anthropology, who ranks foremost
      in the knowledge of early weapons, happily applied the idea
      of evolution, development, and progress to his extensive
      collection, the work of some thirty years. To show the
      successive steps he grouped his objects according to their
      forms and uses, beginning with the simplest; and to each class
      he appended an ideal type, towards which the primitive races
      were ever advancing, making innumerable mistakes, in some cases
      even retrograding, but on the whole attaining a higher plane.
      The papers from which I have quoted, often word for word, in
      my first chapters, are (1) ‘Primitive Warfare,’ sect. i.,
      read on June 28, 1867 (pp. 1–35, with five plates), and Sect.
      ii., ‘On the Resemblance of the Weapons of Early Races, their
      Variations, Continuity, and Development of Form,’ read on June
      5, 1868 (pp. 1–42, with eight diagrams); and (2) ‘Catalogue
      of the Anthropological Collection lent for Exhibition in the
      Bethnal Green Branch of the South Kensington Museum, with (131)
      Illustrations;’ pt. I. and II. (III. and IV. to be published
      hereafter), 1874, &c., 8vo., pp. 1–184. The collection, then
      containing some 14,000 objects, left Bethnal Green for the
      Western Galleries of the Museum in South Kensington. After a
      long sojourn there it was offered to the public; but England,
      unlike France, Germany, and Italy, has scant appreciation
      of anthropological study. At length it was presented to the
      University of Oxford, where a special building will be devoted
      to its worthy reception. I have taken the liberty of suggesting
      to General Pitt-Rivers that he owes the public not only the
      last two parts of his work, but also a folio edition with
      coloured illustrations of the humble ‘Catalogue.’

  Genthe (Dr. Hermann), a paper on ‘Etruscan Commerce with the
      North,’ _Archiv für Anthrop._, vol. vi. (from his work _Ueber
      den estruskischen Tauschhandel nach Norden_). Frankfurt, 1874.

  Gladstone (Right Hon. W. E.), _Juventus Mundi_, 1 vol. 8vo. London,
      1869. ‘Metals in Homer,’ _Contemporary Review_, 1874.

  Glas (George), ‘The History of the Discovery and Conquest of the
      Canary Islands,’ _Pinkerton, Voyages_, vol. xvi.

  Goguet (Antoine Yves), _De l’Origine des Lois, des Arts, et des
      Sciences, et de leur progrès chez les anciens peuples_ (par
      A. Y. G., aidé par Alex. Conr. Fugère), 3 vols., plates, 4to.
      Paris, 1758. Numerous editions and translations.

  Goguet (M. de), _The Origin of Laws, Arts, and Sciences, and their
      progress among the most Ancient Nations_. English translation
      by Thompson, 3 vols., plates, 8vo. Edinburgh, 1761.

  Gozzadini (Senator Count Giovanni), _Di un antico sepolcro a
      Ceretolo nel Bolognese_. Modena: Vincenzi, 1872. The author
      has taken a distinguished place in antiquarian anthropology
      by his various and valuable studies of Etruscan remains found
      in and around Felsina, now Bologna. I have ventured upon
      suggesting to him that these detached papers, mostly printed by
      Fava, Garagnani, and Co., of Bologna, should be collected and
      published in a handy form for the benefit of students.

  Graah (Captain W. A.), _Narrative of an Expedition to the
      Eastern Coast of Greenland, &c._ Translated from the Danish
      (Copenhagen, 1832) by C. Gordon Macdougall, 8vo. London, 1837.

  Grant (Captain, now Colonel, James A.), _A Walk across Africa, or
      Domestic Scenes from my Nile Journal_. Blackwoods: Edinburgh,
      MDCCCLXIV.

  Grose (Captain Francis), _Military Antiquities respecting the
      History of the British Army. From the Conquest to the Present
      Time._ A new edition with material additions and improvements,
      2 vols. 8vo. London, printed for T. Egerton, Whitehall; and
      G. Kearsley, Fleet Street, 1801. The first edition appeared
      in 1786, and the learned author died (æt. 52) of apoplexy at
      Dublin, May 12, 1791.

  Grote (George), _History of Greece_, 12 vols. 8vo. 1846–56.

  Guthrie (Mrs.), _My Year in an An Indian Fort_. Hurst and Blackett:
      London, 1877.

  Hamilton (Will. J.), _Researches in Asia Minor, Pontus, and
      Armenia, &c._, 2 vols. 8vo. London: Murray, 1842.

  Hanbury (Daniel), _Science Papers, &c._, edited with Memoir by
      Joseph Ince, 1 vol. 8vo. London, 1876.

  Heath (Rev. Dunbar Isidore), _Exodus Papyri_, 8vo. London, 1855.
      _Phœnician Inscriptions._ London, Quaritch, 1873. ‘Hittite
      Inscriptions,’ _Journ. Anthrop. Institute_, May, 1880.

  _Herodotus_, Rawlinson’s, 4 vols. Murray, 1858. This valuable work
      wants a second edition revised.

  Herrera (Antonio, chief chronicler of the Indies), _Historia Geral,
      &c._, VIII. Decads, 4 vols. folio. Madrid, 1601.

  Hesiod, _Opera et Dies; Scutum, &c._ Poetæ Minores Græci, vol. i.

  Holub (Dr. Emil), _Seven Years in South Africa_, 2 vols. 8vo.
      Sampson Low and Co. 1881.

  Homer, _Opera Omnia_, by J. A. Ernesti. 5 vols. 8vo. Glasgow, 1814.

  Horatius, _Opera Om._, ex edit. Zeunii. Delphin edit., 4 vols. 8vo.
      Londini, 1825.

  Howorth (H. H.), ‘Archæology of Bronze.’ _Trans. Ethno. Soc._, vol.
      vi.

  Humboldt (Baron Alexander von), _Personal Narrative of Travels
      to the Equinoctial Regions of America_, 3 vols. 8vo. Bohn’s
      Scientific Library, London, 1852.

  _Iron, an Illustrated Weekly Journal of Science, Metals, and
      Manufactures in iron and Steel_, edited by Perry E. Nursey,
      C.E., to whom I have to express my thanks.

  Isidorus Hispalensis (Bishop of Seville, A.D. 600–636), _Opera
      Omnia_ (including the ‘Origines’ and ‘Etymologies’), published
      by J. du Breul, fol. Parisiis, 1601.

  Jacquemin (Raphael), _Histoire Générale du Costume, &c._ Du IV^{me}
      au XIX^{me} Siècle (A.D. 315–1815). Paris.

  Jähns (Major Max), _Handbuch einer Geschichte des Kriegswesens von
      der Urzeit an zur Renaissance_. Technischer Theil: Bewaffnung,
      Kampfweise, Befestigung, Belagerung, Seewesen. Leipzig: Grunow,
      1880. Major Jähns, an officer upon the General Staff of the
      German army, has produced in 1 vol. imp. 8vo. (pp. 640) a most
      laborious and useful work, accompanied by an atlas of one
      hundred carefully drawn plates. He quotes authorities literally
      by the hundred. The work amply deserves to be translated into
      English, but its public would, I fear, be very limited.

  Josephus (Flavius).

  Justinus (Frontinus). _History, Fourth and Fifth Century_, abridged
      from Trogus Pompeius.

  _Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana_, part i., with a preface and
      introduction. Printed for the Hindu Kama Shastra Society of
      London, 1883; for private circulation only. The poet whose name
      was Mallinaga or Mrillana (of the Vatsyayana family) lived
      between the first and sixth century of the Christian Æra. This,
      too, is only known by his poetry. Hindu-land is rich in Kama
      literature.

  Keller (Dr. Ferdinand), _Die Kältischen Pfahlbauten in den
      Schweizer Seen_. Zürich, 1854–66. There is an English
      translation _The Lake Dwellings of Switzerland_.

  King (late Dr. Richard), _Trans. Ethnol. Soc._, vols. i. and ii.

  Klemm (Dr. Gustav Friedrich), _Werkzeuge und Waffen_. Leipzig,
      1854. An edition of Klemm’s (G. F.), _Die Werkzeuge und
      Waffen, ihre Entstehung und Ausbildung_, with 342 woodcuts in
      the text, 8vo. Published at Sondershausen, 1858. _Allgemeine
      Culturwissenschaft_, 2 vols. with woodcuts, 8vo. Leipzig,
      1854–5.

  Kolben (Peter), _Present State of the Cape of Good Hope, &c._, 2
      vols. 8vo., 1738.

  Kremer (Ritter Adolf von), _Ibn Chaldun und seine
      Culturgeschichte_. Wien, 1879.

  Lacombe, _Les Armes et les Armures_. Paris, 1868.

  _Land and Water_, weekly paper published by William Bates; it
      contains many articles by the late lamented Mr. Frank Buckland,
      F.Z.S.

  Latham (John): this ‘Assistant-Commissioner for Exhibitions’ (1862,
      1867, and 1873), who succeeded in business Messrs. Wilkinson
      and Son of Pall Mall, and who lately died, gave me copies of
      his two excellent papers, (1) ‘The Shape of Sword-blades,’ and
      (2) ‘A Few Notes on Swords in the International Exhibition
      of 1862’ (_Journal of the R.U.S. Institution_, vols. vi. and
      vii.). With the author’s permission I have freely used these
      two valuable professional studies, especially in Chapter
      VII. The late Mr. Latham was a practical Swordsman, and his
      long experience as a maker of the ‘white arm’ renders his
      information thoroughly trustworthy. I wish every success to his
      son, who now fills his place in an establishment famous for
      turning out good work.

  Latham (Robert Gordon), _Ethnology of the British Islands_, 1 vol.
      12mo. London, 1852. _Descriptive Ethnology_, 2 vols. 8vo. 1859.

  Layard (Sir Henry Austen), _Nineveh and its Remains_, 2 vols. 8vo.,
      1849. _Monuments of Nineveh_, 1st and 2nd Series, 1849–53. _A
      Popular Account of Discoveries at Nineveh._ London: Murray,
      1851. _Fresh Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon_,
      1 vol. 8vo. London: Murray, 1853.

  Legge (Dr. James), _The Chinese Classics_, 3 vols. 8vo. London,
      1861–76; vol. i., ‘Confucius’; ii., ‘Mencius’; iii., ‘She-King
      or Book of Poetry.’

  Lenormant (François), _Manuel d’Histoire Ancienne de l’Orient_,
      2 vols., 12mo. Paris, 1868. _Les Premières Civilisations_, 3
      vols. 12mo. Paris, 1874. Germ. Trans., Jena, 1875.

  Lepsius (Dr. Richard), _Denkmäler aus Aegypten und Aethiopien
      nach den Zeichnungen der Preussischen Expedition. Denkmäler
      aus Aegypten und Aethiopien_ (1842–45). Berlin, 1849–59.
      _Discoveries in Egypt, &c._, translated by Kenneth R. H.
      Mackenzie, 8vo. London, 1852. _Die Metalle in den Aegyptischen
      Inschriften_ (Akad. der Wiss., A.D. 1871), the latter
      translated into French 1877.

  Lindsey (Dr. W. Lauder), _Proceedings of Society of Arts of
      Scotland_, vol. v. 327.

  Livy.

  Lopez (Vicente Fidel), _Les Races Aryennes du Pérou, &c._ Paris:
      A. Franck, 1871. A copy was sent to me by my old friend John
      Coghlan, C.E., of Buenos Ayres.

  Lubbock (Sir John W.), _Pre-historic Times_, 1 vol. 8vo., 1865.
      _Primitive Inhabitants of Scandinavia_ (Nillson’s), 3rd edit.
      London, 1868. _Origin of Civilisation, &c._, 8vo. London, 1870.

  Lucan.

  Lucretius.

  Luynes (Duc de), _Numismatique et Inscriptions Cypriotes_. Paris,
      1852.

  Lyell (Sir Charles), _Principles of Geology_. London: Murray,
      1830–3. _The Antiquity of Man from Geological Evidences._
      London: Murray, 1863.

  Major (R. H.), _The Select Letters of Columbus, &c._ London:
      Hakluyt Soc., MDCCCLX.

  _Manava-Dharma-Shástra_ (Laws of Menu), translated by Houghton.
      London, 1825.

  Manetho (B.C. 285).

  Marchionni (Alberto), _Trattato di Scherma, &c._ Firenze: Bencini,
      1847.

  Markham (Clements R.), _Pedro de Cieza_ (_Cieça_) _de Leon_, 1869.
      _Commentaries of the Yncas_, 1871. _Reports on the Discovery of
      Peru_, 1872. All printed by the Hakluyt Society.

  Massart (Alfred), _Gisements Métallifères du district de
      Carthagène_ (_Espagne_). Liège, 1875.

  Massey (Gerald), _A Book of the Beginnings_. London: Williams and
      Norgate, 1881. Two volumes were first published, and the two
      concluding are lately issued. A learned friend writes to him:
      ‘I find little to remark upon or criticise. You seem to have
      got down far below Tylor, and to be making good your ground
      in many matters. If people will only read your book, it will
      make them cry out in some way or other. But you require a
      populariser, and may have to wait a long time for one.’

  Mela (Pomponius), _De Situ Orbis_ (A.D. 41–54). This little work
      deserves a modern English translation; but what can be said
      of geographers whose Royal Geographical Society has not yet
      translated Ptolemy?

  Meyrick (Sir Samuel Rush), _Critical Inquiry into Ancient Armour
      as it existed in Europe, particularly in Great Britain, from
      the Norman Conquest to Charles the Second, with a Glossary of
      Military Terms of the Middle Ages_. I quote from the Second
      Edition. 3 vols. atlas 4to. London: Bohn, 1844. The first
      edition was published in 1824 without the supervision of the
      author, who found fault with it, especially with the colouring.
      The next edition, in 1844, was enlarged by the author with
      the assistance of friends, Mr. Albert Way and others. It
      was followed by _Engraved Illustrations of Ancient Arms and
      Armour_, the artistic work of Mr. Joseph Skelton.

  Milne (John), ‘On the Stone Age of Japan,’ _Journ. Anthrop.
      Instit._, May 1881.

  Mitchell (Dr. Arthur), ‘The Past in the Present,’ &c., _Rhind
      Lectures_, 1876–78, 1 vol. 8vo. Edinburgh: Douglas, 1880.

  Montaigne (Michel de), _Essais_, translated by William Hazlitt.
      London: C. Templeman, MDCCCLIII. (3rd edition).

  Monteiro and Gamitto, _O Muata Cazembe_, 1 vol. 8vo. Imprensa
      Nacional, Lisboa, 1854.

  Moore, _Ancient Mineralogy_.

  Moorcroft (William) and Trebeck (George), _Travels in the Himalayan
      Provinces of Hindustan and Punjab, &c., from 1819 to 1825_,
      8vo. London: Murray, 1841.

  Morgan (Lewis), _The League of the Iroquois_.

  Mortot, ‘On the Swiss Lakes,’ _Bulletin de la Société Vaudoise_,
      vol. vi., _&c._ ‘Les Métaux dans l’Age du Bronze’ (_Mém. Soc.
      Ant. du Nord_, 1866–71).

  Mortillet (Gabriel de), ‘Les Gaulois de Marzabotto dans l’Apennin,’
      _Revue Archéologique_, 1870–71. This anthropologist has
      published largely, and did good work at the Congress of Bologna.

  Movers, _Die Phönizier_. Berlin, 1840–56. The book is somewhat
      antiquated, but still valuable.

  Much (Dr. M.), ‘Ueber die Priorität des Eisens oder der Bronze
      in Ostasien,’ _Trans. Anthrop. Soc. of Vienna_, vol. ix.
      Separat-Abdruck.

  Müller (Prof. F. Max), _Chips from a German Workshop_, 2 vols. 8vo.
      London, 1867. _Lectures on the Science of Language_, 2 vols.
      12mo. London, 1873 (7th edit.). _Introduction to the Science of
      Religion_, 12mo. London, 1873.

  Neuhoff, _Travels in Brazil_. Pinkerton, vol. xiv.

  Nillson (Prof. Sven), _The Primitive Inhabitants of Scandinavia_,
      translated by Sir John Lubbock. He is illustrated by Colonel
      A. Lane-Fox (_Prim. Warf._, p. 135) and by Wilde (_Catalogue,
      &c._).

  Oldfield, ‘Aborigines of Australia,’ _Trans. Ethnol. Soc._, new
      series, vol. iii.

  Oppert (Professor), _On the Weapons, &c., of the Ancient Hindus_.
      London: Trübner, 1880.

  _Opusculum Fidicularum, the Ancestry of the Violin_, by Ed. Heron
      Allen. London: Mitchell and Hughes, 1882. The author kindly
      sent me a copy of his work.

  Orosius (Presbyter Paulus, A.D. 413), _Historiarum Libri Septem_.
      The Anglo-Saxon version of Aelfred the Great; translated,
      &c., by Daines Barrington, 1 vol. 8vo. London, 1773, and by
      Bosworth, 1859.

  Osburn (William), _Monumental History of Egypt_, 2 vols. 8vo.
      London, 1854.

  Owen (Prof. Richard), _On the Anatomy of Vertebrates_, 3 vols. 8vo.
      London, 1866–68.

  Palestine Exploration Fund, founded 1865; publishes Quarterly
      Statement. The Society’s office, 1 Adam Street, Adelphi, W.C.

  Palma (General Luigi di Cesnola), _Cyprus, its Ancient Cities,
      Tombs, and Temples_, 8vo. London: Murray, 1877. _Cypern._ Gena:
      Leipzig, 1879.

  Palma (Major di Cesnola), ‘On Phœnician Art in Cyprus,’ _Brit.
      Archæol. Assoc._, Dec. 6, 1882.

  Paterculus (C. Velleius, B.C. 19).

  Pausanias (_temp._ Antonin. Pius), _Periegesis_ (_or Itinerary_)
      _of Greece_. The work of a good traveller, translated by Thomas
      Taylor, 3 vols. 8vo. London, 1824.

  Percy (Dr. John), _Fuel, Fireclays, Copper, Zinc, Brass, &c._
      London: Murray, 1861. _Metallurgy: Iron and Steel_, ibid.,
      1864. _Lead_, 1870. _Silver and Gold_, part i., 1880. These
      works are too well known and too highly appreciated to be
      noticed except by name.

  Petherick (John), _Egypt, the Soudan, and Central Africa_, 8vo.
      Blackwoods, Edinburgh, MDCCCLXI. The late author was a Cornish
      miner who had the honesty not to find coal for Mohammed Ali
      Pasha of Egypt.

  Petronius Arbiter.

  Phillips (Prof. John A.), _A Guide to Geology_, 12mo. London,
      1864. ‘A Manual of Metallurgy, or a Practical Treatise on
      the Chemistry of the Metals,’ illustrated. London, 1864:
      _Archæological Journal_, vol. xvi.

  Philo Judæus (A.D. 40).

  Pigafetta (Antonio, of Vicenza, who accompanied Magalhaens, the
      first circumnavigator, 1519–1522), _Primo Viaggio intorno al
      Globo_, 4to. Milan, 1800; published by Amoretti. He was best
      known before that date by Ramusio’s work.

  Polyænus the Macedonian dedicated his 8 books of 900 Στρατηγήματα
      to M. Aurelius and L. Verus (A.D. 163).

  Polybius (nat. circ. B.C. 204), Πραγματεία, not _Historia_.
      _Historiarum quæ supersunt._ Lips.: Holtze, 1866; 5 books and
      fragments out of 40. The writer was a captain in the field
      besides being an authority on military art, a politician, and a
      philosopher, who composed for instruction, not for amusement.

  Pollux (Julius, A.D. 183), _Onomasticon_.

  Porter (Rev. J. L.), author of _A Handbook for Travellers in Syria
      and Palestine_. London: Murray, 1868 (1st edition).

  Porter (Sir Robert Ker), _Travels in Georgia, Persia, Armenia,
      Ancient Babylonia, &c._ (1817–20), 2 vols. 4to. London:
      Longmans, 1821–22.

  Procopius (nat. circ. A.D. 500), _Histories, &c._

  Ptolmey, _Geographia_.

  Ramusio (Giambattista, of Treviso, nat. 1485), _Raccolta di
      Navigazioni e Viaggi_, 3 vols. fol., 1550–59; the first
      collection of the kind, which gave rise to many others.

  Rawlinson (Canon George), _The Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient
      Eastern World, &c._, 4 vols. 8vo. London: Murray, 1862–66.

  _Records of the Past_, being English translations of the Assyrian
      and Egyptian monuments, published under the sanction of the
      Society of Biblical Archæology, vol. i. (of 12), 12mo. London,
      1874.

  _Revue Archéologique_ (under the direction of J. Gailhabaud), année
      1–16. Paris, 1844–59, 8vo. Nouvelle Série, année 1, vol. i.
      &c., 1860, 8vo. _Table Décennale_, nouvelle série, 1860–1869,
      dressée par M. F. Delaunay. Paris, 1874, 8vo. In progress.

  Rhind (A. Henry), _Thebes, its Tombs and their Tenants, &c._ 1862.

  Richtofen (Baron Ferdinand von), _China, Ergebnisse eigener Reisen
      und darauf gegründeter Studien_. Vol. i. published in 1877;
      vol. ii. (4to.), Remier: Berlin, 1882. It has not yet found a
      translator.

  Rivero (Mariano y Eduardo de) y Tschudi (Juan Diego de),
      _Antiguedades Peruanas_, 1 vol. 4to., with Atlas. Vienna, 1851.
      _Travels in Peru_, by J. J. von Tschudi, in 1838–42; was
      translated from the German by T. Ross, 8vo. London, 1847.

  Rossellini (Prof.), _I Monumenti dell’ Egitto e della Nubia_. Pisa,
      1832–41.

  Rossignol (J. P.), _Les Métaux dans l’Antiquité_. Paris: Durand,
      1863.

  Roteiro (Ruttier) _da Viagem de Vasco da Gama_, corrected by the
      late Professor Herculano and Baron do Castello de Pavia.
      Imprensa Nacional, Lisboa, MDCCCLI. (2nd edition).

  Rougé (Vicomte E. de), _Rituel Funéraire des Anciens Egyptiens,
      &c._, imp. folio. Paris, 1861–66.

  Rougemont, _L’Age de Bronze_, 1866.

  Rowbotham (J. F.), ‘On the Art of Music in Prehistoric Times,’
      _Journ. Anthrop. Inst._, May, 1881.

  Sacken (Baron E. von Osten-), _Das Grabfeld von Hallstadt und
      dessen Alterthümer_. Vienna, 1868.

  Sainte-Croix (Baron de), _Recherches Historiques et Critiques sur
      les Mystères du Paganisme_, revues et corrigées par Silvestre
      de Sacy, 2 vols. 8vo. Paris, 1817.

  Sallust.

  Sayce (Rev. A. H.), ‘On the Hamathite Inscriptions,’ _Trans. Soc.
      Bibl. Archæol._, vol. iv. part 1. Mr. Sayce has read other
      papers containing notices of more modern ‘Hittite’ finds; but I
      have failed to procure copies.

  Schliemann (Dr. Henry), _Troy and its Remains_, translated and
      edited by Philip Smith. London: Murray, 1875. _Mycenæ and
      Tiryns_, ibid. 1878. _Ilios_, ibid. 1880.

  Scott (Sir Sibbald David), _The British Army, its Origin, Progress,
      and Development_, 2 vols. London and New York: Cassell, Petter,
      & Galpin, 1868.

  Sévez, notice of Japanese Iron-works in _Les Mondes_, tome xxvi.,
      Dec. 1871.

  Silius Italicus (nat. A.D. 25).

  Smith (Captain John), _General Historie of Virginia, New England,
      and the Summer Isles, &c._, fol. London: Pinkerton, xiii.
      He made his first voyage in 1606, and his second in 1614,
      when he changed ‘North Virginia’ into ‘New England.’ On his
      third (1615), he was captured by a Frenchman and landed at La
      Rochelle.

  Smith (George), _Assyrian Discoveries_. London: Sampson Low & Co.,
      6th edit., 1876. The learned author wore himself out by travel,
      and died young.

  Smith (Rev. W. Robertson), _The Old Testament in the Jewish
      Church_. Edinburgh: Blacks, 1881.

  Smith (Dr. William), _Dictionaries_. London: Taylor & Walton—

        1. _Greek and Roman Geography_, 2 vols. 8vo. 1856–57.

        2. _Greek and Roman Antiquities_, 1 vol. 8vo. 1859.

        3. _Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology_, 3 vols. 8vo.
          1858–61.

        4. _Of the Bible_, 3 vols. 8vo. 1863.

  Solinus (Ca. Jul. Polyhistor, _alias_ ‘Pliny’s Ape’), _Geographical
      Compendium_.

  Speke (Captain James Hanning), _Journal of the Discovery of the
      Source of the Nile_. Edinburgh: Blackwoods, 1863.

  Spensley (Howard), _Cenni sugli Aborigeni di Australasia, &c._
      Venezia: G. Fischer, 1881.

  Stade (Hans), _The Captivity of Hans Stade_, translated for the
      Hakluyt Society by Mr. Albert Tootal of Rio de Janeiro. London,
      1874.

  Stanley (Henry M.), _Through the Dark Continent, &c._ London:
      Sampson Low, & Co., 1874.

  Stephens (J. Lloyd), _Incidents of Travel in Central America,
      Chiapas, and Yucatan_, 2 vols. 8vo. London: Murray, 1842. Germ.
      trans., Leipzig, 1843.

  Stevens (the late Edward T.), _Flint Chips, a Guide to Prehistoric
      Archæology, as illustrated in the Blackmore Museum, Salisbury_,
      8vo. London: Bell and Daldy, 1870.

  Strabo (B.C. 54?).

  Suetonius (C. Tranquillus).

  Tacitus (Cornelius).

  Taylor (Rev. Isaac), _Etruscan Researches_. London: Macmillan, 1874.

  Texier, _Description de l’Asie Mineure_. Paris, 1849–52.

  Theophrastus (B.C. 305), _Opera Græca et Latina_, J. G. Schneider,
      5 vols. 8vo. Lipsiæ, 1818–21.

  Tylor (E. B.), _Anahuac_. London, 1861. _Primitive Culture._
      London: Murray, 1871 (Germ. trans., 1873). _Researches into the
      Early History of Mankind and the Development of Civilisation_,
      plates. London: Murray, 1870.

  Ure (Andrew), _Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures, and Mines_.
      London, 1863.

  Vallancey (General), _Collectanea de Rebus Hibernicis_, 6 vols.
      Dublin, 1770–1804.

  Varnhagen (the late F. Adolpho de): _Historia Geral do Brazil_, 2
      vols. 8vo. Laemmert: Rio de Janeiro, 1854, Useful as ‘documents
      pour servir.’

  Varro (Terentius, nat. B.C. 116), _De Lingua Latina_.

  Vegetius (Fl. Renatus, A.D. 375–92), _De Re Militari_.

  Virgil.

  Vitruvius (M. Pollio, B.C. 46), _Architecture_, 5 vols. 4to. Utini,
      1829.

  Volney (Const. F.), _Œuvres_, 8 vols. 8vo. Paris, 1826.

  Waitz (Professor, Dr. Theodor), _Anthropologie der Naturvölker_.
      Leipzig, 1859–72. The first volume, _Introduction to
      Anthropology_, was translated by J. F. Collingwood and
      published by the Anthropological Society of London, 8vo.,
      Longmans, 1863. The manuscript of the second volume of this
      valuable work, also by Mr. Collingwood, was long in my charge;
      but the low state of anthropological study in England (and
      other pursuits unprofessional, and consequently non-paying)
      prevents its being printed.

  Wilde (Sir William R.), _Descriptive Catalogue of the Antiquities
      in the Royal Irish Academy_. Dublin: Academy House, 1863. _A
      Descriptive Catalogue of Materials in the Royal Irish Academy_,
      8vo., 1857–61. It is regretable that part 1, vol. ii., of this
      admirable work, which has become a standard upon the subject,
      has not been printed; nor has the public been informed of
      any arrangements for publishing. For permission to make use
      of the cuts, which were obligingly furnished to Mr. Grego, I
      am indebted to the courtesy of the Council, Royal Society of
      Antiquaries of Ireland.

  Wilkinson (Sir J. Gardner), _The Manners and Customs of the
      Ancient Egyptians, their Private Life, Government, Laws,
      Arts, Religion, and History_ (originally written in 1836), 6
      vols. 8vo. London: Murray, 1837–41. The author abridged his
      life-labour with the usual unsuccess, and called it _A Popular
      Account of the Ancient Egyptians_, 2 vols. post 8vo. London:
      Murray, 1874.

  Wilkinson (the late Henry, the eminent Sword-cutler in Pall Mall),
      _Observations on Swords; to which is added Information for
      Officers going to join their Regiments in India_. Pall Mall,
      London. No date.

  Willemin, _Choix des Costumes Civiles et Militaires_. Paris, 1798.

  Wilson (Daniel), _Archæology and Prehistoric Annals of Scotland_.
      Edinburgh: Sutherland and Knox, 8vo., MDCCCLI. _Prehistoric
      Man_, 2 vols. 8vo. London: Macmillan, 1862.

  Wright (the late Thomas), ‘On the True Assignation of the Bronze
      Weapons,’ &c., _Trans. Ethno. Soc._, new series, vol. iv.

  Woldrich (Prof. A.), _Mittheilungen der Wien. Anthrop. Gesell._
      Wien, 1874.

  Wood (John George), _Natural History of Man, being an Account of
      the Manners and Customs of the Uncivilised Ways of Men_, 2
      vols., 1868–70, 8vo.

  Worsäae (J. J. A.), _Afbildninger fra det Kon. Mus. for Nordiske
      Oldsager i Kjöbnhavn_, Ordnede og forklarede af J. J. A. W.
      (aided by Magnus Petersen and Aagaard). Kjöbnhavn: Kittendorf,
      and Aagaard, 1859. The order is in careful accordance with
      the _Three Ages_. Worsäae’s _Prehistoric Annals of Denmark_
      were translated by W. J. Knox, 8vo., London, 1849, and there
      is a _Leitfaden der Nordischen Alterthumerskunde_ by Worsäae,
      Kopenhagen, 1837.

  Wurmbrand (Count Gutaker), _Ergebnisse der Pfahlbauuntersuchungen_.
      Wien, 1875.

  Yule (Colonel Henry), _The Book of Marco Polo the Venetian_, 2nd
      edit. London: Murray, 1875. The learned and exact writer
      favoured me with a copy of his admirable work, without which it
      is vain to read of ‘The Kingdoms and the Marvels of the East.’




                               CONTENTS.


  CHAPTER                                                           PAGE

        FOREWORD                                                      ix

        INTRODUCTION                                                  xi

        LIST OF AUTHORITIES                                        xxiii

     I. PREAMBLE: ON THE ORIGIN OF WEAPONS                             1

    II. MAN’S FIRST WEAPONS—THE STONE AND THE STICK. THE EARLIEST
          AGES OF WEAPONS. THE AGES OF WOOD, OF BONE, AND OF HORN     16

   III. THE WEAPONS OF THE AGE OF WOOD: THE BOOMERANG AND THE SWORD
          OF WOOD; OF STONE, AND OF WOOD AND STONE COMBINED           31

    IV. THE PROTO-CHALCITIC OR COPPER AGE OF WEAPONS                  53

     V. THE SECOND CHALCITIC AGE OF ALLOYS—BRONZE, BRASS, ETC.: THE
          AXE AND THE SWORD                                           74

    VI. THE PROTO-SIDERIC OR EARLY IRON AGE OF WEAPONS                97

   VII. THE SWORD: WHAT IS IT?                                       123

  VIII. THE SWORD IN ANCIENT EGYPT AND IN MODERN AFRICA              143

    IX. THE SWORD IN KHITA-LAND, PALESTINE AND CANAAN; PHŒNICIA AND
          CARTHAGE; JEWRY, CYPRUS, TROY, AND ETRURIA                 172

     X. THE SWORD IN BABYLONIA, ASSYRIA AND PERSIA, AND ANCIENT
          INDIA                                                      199

    XI. THE SWORD IN ANCIENT GREECE: HOMER; HESIOD AND HERODOTUS:
          MYCENÆ                                                     220

   XII. THE SWORD IN ANCIENT ROME: THE LEGION AND THE GLADIATOR      244

  XIII. THE SWORD AMONGST THE BARBARIANS (EARLY ROMAN EMPIRE)        262

        CONCLUSION                                                   280

        INDEX                                                        281




                        LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.


  FIG.                                                              PAGE

    1. INDIAN WÁGH-NAKH                                                8

    2. WÁGH-NAKH, USED BY MARÁTHÁS                                     8

    3. BALISTES CAPRISCUS; COTTUS DICERAUS; NASEUS FRONTICORNIS        9

    4. SPEAR OF NARWHAL; SWORD OF XIPHIAS; RHINOCEROS-HORN; WALRUS
         TUSKS                                                        10

    5. NARWHAL’S SWORD PIERCING PLANK                                 10

    6. METAL DAGGERS WITH HORN CURVE                                  10

    7. MÁDU OR MÁRU                                                   11

    8. THE ADAGA                                                      12

    9. SERRATED OR MULTIBARBED WEAPONS                                13

   10. WEAPONS MADE OF SHARK’S TEETH                                  13

   11. ITALIAN DAGGER, WITH GROOVES AND HOLES FOR POISON              13

   12. SWORD WITH SERRATED BLADE OF SAW-FISH                          13

   13. ANCIENT EGYPTIANS THROWING KNIVES                              18

   14. JAPANESE WAR-FLAIL                                             21

   15. TURKISH WAR-FLAIL                                              21

   16. MORNING STAR                                                   21

   17. DEER-HORN ARROW-HEAD                                           24

   18. HORN WAR CLUBS WITH METAL POINTS                               24

   19. DOUBLE SPEAR AND SHIELD                                        24

   20. SPINE OF DIODON                                                24

   21. WALRUS TOOTH USED AS SPEAR POINT; TOMAHAWK OF WALRUS TOOTH     24

   22. STING OF MALACCAN LIMULUS CRAB                                 25

   23. THE GREENLAND NUGUIT                                           25

   24. NARWHAL SHAFT AND METAL BLADE                                  25

   25. JADE PATTU-PATTUS                                              25

   26. BONE ARROW-POINT FOR POISON; IRON ARROW-HEAD FOR POISON        26

   27. WILDE’S DAGGER                                                 26

   28. HOLLOW BONE FOR POISON                                         26

   29. BONE KNIFE                                                     26

   30. BONE ARROW-POINT ARMED WITH FLINT FLAKES                       26

   31. BONE SPLINTER EDGED WITH FLINT FLAKES                          26

   32. HARPOON HEAD                                                   29

   33. LISÁN IN EGYPT AND ABYSSINIA                                   32

   34. LISÁN OR TONGUE                                                32

   35. TRANSITION FROM THE BOOMERANG TO THE HATCHET                   34

   36. AUSTRALIAN PICKS                                               34

   37. INDIAN BOOMERANGS                                              35

   38. BOOMERANG AND KITE                                             36

   39. AFRICAN BOOMERANGS                                             36

   40. TRANSITION FROM THE MALGA, LEOWEL OR PICK TO THE BOOMERANG     37

   41. THE STICK AND THE SHIELD                                       38

   42. THROW-STICKS                                                   38

   43. OLD EGYPTIAN BOOMERANG                                         39

   44. BULAK SWORD                                                    39

   45. HIEROGLYPHIC INSCRIPTION ON WOODEN SWORD OF BULAK              39

   40. TRANSITION FROM CELT TO PADDLE SPEAR AND SWORD FORMS           41

   47. CLUBS OF FIJI ISLANDS                                          41

   48. WOODEN SWORDS AND CLUBS OF BRAZILIAN INDIANS                   41

   49. PAGAYA, SHARPENED PADDLE                                       42

   50. CLUBS                                                          43

   51. PADDLES                                                        43

   52. SAMOAN CLUB                                                    44

   53. WOODEN SABRE                                                   44

   54. WOODEN CHOPPER                                                 44

   55. KNIFE (WOOD), FROM VANNA LAVA                                  44

   56. IRISH SWORD                                                    45

   57. WOODEN RAPIER-BLADE                                            45

   58. FRAGMENTS OF STONE KNIVES FROM SHETLAND                        46

   59. FLINT DAGGERS                                                  46

   60. AUSTRALIAN SPEARS ARMED WITH FLINTS AT SIDE                    48

   61. SWORD OF SABRE FORM, WITH SHARKS’ TEETH                        48

   62. DITTO, ARMED WITH OBSIDIAN                                     48

   63. WOOD- AND HORN-POINTS                                          49

   64. MEXICAN SWORD OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY, OF IRON WOOD, WITH
         TEN BLADES OF BLACK OBSIDIAN FIXED INTO THE WOOD             49

   65. MAHQUAHUITLS                                                   50

   66. MEXICAN WARRIOR                                                50

   67. MEXICAN SWORD, IRON-WOOD, ARMED WITH OBSIDIAN                  50

   68. MEXICAN SPEAR-HEAD (FIFTEENTH CENTURY), BLACK OBSIDIAN,
         WITH WOODEN HANDLE                                           50

   69. NEW ZEALAND CLUB                                               50

   70. AUSTRALIAN SPEARS, WITH BITS OF OBSIDIAN, CRYSTAL, OR GLASS    51

   71. ITALIAN POISON DAGGERS                                         51

   72. ARAB SWORD, WITH DOWN-CURVED QUILLONS, AND SAW BLADE           51

   73. SEPHURIS AT WADY MAGHARAH (OLDEST ROCK TABLETS). THIRD
         DYNASTY                                                      61

   74. SORIS AND THE CANAANITES AT WADY MAGHARAH (OLDEST ROCK
         TABLETS), FOURTH DYNASTY                                     61

   75. TABLET OF SUPHIS AND NU-SUPHIS AT WADY MAGHARAH. (FOURTH
         DYNASTY.)                                                    62

   76. THE WINGED CELT, OR PALSTAVE                                   71

   77. COPPER CELTS IN THE DUBLIN COLLECTION                          72

   78. SCYTHE-SHAPED BLADE                                            73

   79. STRAIGHT BLADE                                                 73

   80. STRAIGHT BLADE                                                 73

   81. SCYTHE-SHAPED BLADE                                            73

   82. FINE SPECIMEN OF EGYPTIAN DAGGER IN POSSESSION OF MR. HAYNS,
         BROUGHT BY MR. HARRIS FROM THEBES                            80

   83. BRONZE KNIFE, FROM THE PILE-VILLAGES OF NEUCHÂTEL              82

   84. PERUVIAN KNIFE. METAL BLADE, SECURED IN A SLIT IN THE HAFT
         BY STRONG COTTON TWINE                                       82

   85. OLDEST FORM (?)                                                88

   86. METAL CELTS                                                    88

   87. KNIFE FOUND AT RÉALON (HAUTES ALPES)                           88

   88. THE GLAIVE                                                     89

   89. EGYPTIAN AXES OF BRONZE                                        89

   90. IRISH BATTLE-AXE                                               91

   91. AXE USED BY BRUCE                                              91

   92. GERMAN PROCESSIONAL AXE                                        91

   93. HALBARDS                                                       92

   94. HALBARDS                                                       93

   95. BECHWANA’S CLUB AXE; THE SAME, EXPANDED; THE SAME, BARBED;
         SILEPE OF THE BASUTOS; HORSEMAN’S AXE OF THE SIXTEENTH
         CENTURY                                                      93

   96. HINDU HATCHET FROM RAJPUTANA                                   94

   97. GERMAN HATCHET OF BRONZE PERIOD                                94

   98. BURGUNDIAN AXE; FRANCISQUE OR TAPER AXE                        94

   99. IRON SCRAMASAX                                                 94

  100. SCRAMASAX                                                      94

  101. GUNNAR’S BILL                                                  95

  102. VOULGES                                                        95

  103. EGYPTIAN SACRIFICIAL KNIVES (IRON)                            101

  104. IRON SMELTING FURNACE AMONGST THE MARÁVE PEOPLE               118

  105. PORTABLE AFRICAN BELLOWS                                      121

  106. THE ITALIAN FOIL                                              125

  107. POMMEL; QUILLONS; PAS D’ANE                                   125

  108. DOUBLE GUARD (GUARD AND COUNTERGUARD)                         125

  109. STRAIGHT QUILLONS AND LOOPS                                   125

  110. FANTASTIC FORM                                                125

  111. THE THREE FORMS OF THE SWORD                                  126

  112. DELIVERING POINT                                              127

  113. THE INFANTRY ‘REGULATION’ SWORD                               129

  114. SCYMITAR                                                      130

  115. CLAYMORE                                                      130

  116. } DIAGRAMS ILLUSTRATING THE DIRECT }

  117. } AND THE OBLIQUE CUT              }                          130

  118. SECTIONS OF SWORD-BLADES                                      131

  119. FOIL WITH FRENCH GUARD                                        133

  120. REGULATION SWORD FOR INFANTRY                                 133

  121. SCYMITAR-SHAPE                                                133

  122. YATAGHAN                                                      134

  123. ORNAMENTAL YATAGHAN AND SHEATH                                134

  124. SECTIONS OF THRUSTING-SWORDS                                  135

  125. PIERCED BLADE                                                 136

  126. PIERCED BLADE AND SHEATH                                      136

  127. FLAMBERGE                                                     136

  128. GERMAN MAIN-GAUCHE                                            136

  129. PATERNOSTER                                                   136

  130. MALAY KRÍS                                                    137

  131. WAVE-EDGED DAGGER                                             137

  132. SAW-TOOTH BLADE                                               137

  133. MAIN-GAUCHE                                                   137

  134. SWORD-BREAKERS                                                138

  135. ONE-EDGED WAVE BLADE                                          138

  136. COUNTERGUARD                                                  138

  137. TOOTHED-EDGE                                                  138

  138. HOOKED-EDGE                                                   138

  139. EXECUTIONER’S SWORD                                           139

  140. JAPANESE TYPE                                                 139

  141. CHINESE SABRE-KNIFE                                           139

  142. OLD PERSIAN SWORD                                             139

  143. SCYMITAR                                                      139

  144. OLD TURKISH                                                   140

  145. CHINESE                                                       140

  146. OLD TURKISH SCYMITAR                                          140

  147. THE DÁO                                                       140

  148. SAILOR’S CUTLASS                                              140

  149. HINDU KITÁR                                                   140

  150. GOLD COAST                                                    141

  151. BRONZE DAGGER; SWORD                                          145

  152. SINGLE-STICK IN EGYPT                                         153

  153. EGYPTIAN SOLDIER AND SHIELD                                   153

  154. EGYPTIAN SOLDIERS                                             153

  155. EGYPTIAN SOLDIER                                              153

  156. EGYPTIANS FIGHTING, FROM PAINTINGS OF THEBES; EGYPTIAN
         SOLDIERS, FROM THEBAN BAS-RELIEFS                           153

  157. BRONZE HATCHETS IN WOODEN HANDLES, BOUND WITH THONGS          154

  158. POLE-AXES                                                     154

  159. KHETEN OR WAR-AXES                                            154

  160. DIFFERENT FORMS OF THE EGYPTIAN KHOPSH (KOPIS), WITH EDGES
         INSIDE AND OUTSIDE                                          156

  161. EGYPTIAN SLING; UNKNOWN WEAPON; SHEATHED DAGGER; HATCHET;
         SCORPION, OR WHIP-GOAD                                      157

  162. EGYPTIAN DAGGERS                                              157

  163. EGYPTIAN DAGGER OF BRONZE IN BRITISH MUSEUM                   157

  164. OFFICER OF LIFE-GUARD TO RAMESES II., APPARENTLY ASIATIC      157

  165. BRONZE SWORD, FOUND AT AL-KANTARAH, EGYPT                     157

  166. AXE; SPEAR-HEAD; KHOPSH; LANCE-HEAD                           158

  167. BELT AND DAGGER                                               158

  168. EGYPTIAN DAGGERS                                              158

  169. ASSYRIAN DAGGERS, SHEATHS, AND BELTS                          159

  170. SHORT SWORD FROM CAUCASUS                                     160

  171. EGYPTIAN CHOPPER-SWORDS                                       160

  172. EGYPTIAN KHOPSH                                               160

  173. BRONZE DAGGERS AND SHEATH                                     161

  174. SHAPES OF EGYPTIAN BLADES                                     161

  175. SWORD-DAGGERS                                                 161

  176. ABYSSINIAN SWORD, A LARGE SICKLE                              164

  177. SMALLER ABYSSINIAN BLADE                                      164

  178. ABYSSINIAN SWORD IN SHEATH                                    164

  179. FLISSA OF KABYLES                                             164

  180. DANKALI SWORD                                                 165

  181. CONGO SWORD                                                   165

  182. UNYORO DAGGER-SWORD                                           166

  183. ZANZIBAR SWORDS                                               166

  184. GOLD COAST SWORDS                                             167

  185. ASHANTI SWORD-KNIFE                                           167

  186. SWORDS OF KING GELELE OF DAHOMY                               167

  187. BEHEADING SWORD                                               168

  188. WASA (WASSAW) SWORD                                           168

  189. KING BLAY’S SWORD                                             168

  190. CAPTAIN CAMERON’S MANYUEMA SWORDLET, SHEATH, AND BELT         169

  191. POKWÉ OF THE CAZEMBE’S CHIEFS                                 170

  192. GABOON SWORDS, BOTH EVIDENTLY EGYPTIAN                        170

  193. CLEAVER OF THE HABSHI PEOPLE                                  170

  194. FRANKISH BLADE, WITH MID-GROOVE OUT OF CENTRE                 171

  195. CYPRIAN DAGGER                                                173

  196. NOVACULA                                                      189

  197. NOVACULA?                                                     189

  198. NOVACULA, SICKLE? RAZOR?                                      189

  199. SILVER DAGGER                                                 189

  200. COPPER SWORD FROM THE ‘TREASURY OF PRIAM’                     192

  201. MARZABOTTO BLADE                                              195

  202. ASSYRIAN SWORD                                                199

  203. ASSYRIAN LANCE, WITH COUNTER-WEIGHT                           203

  204. ASSYRIAN SPEAR-HEAD                                           203

  205. ASSYRIAN ‘RAZOR’                                              203

  206. BABYLONIAN BRONZE DAGGER; ASSYRIAN SWORDS; ASSYRIAN
         BRONZE-SWORD                                                204

  207. DAGGER-SWORD IN SHEATH                                        204

  208. DAGGER-SWORD                                                  204

  209. CLUB-SWORD                                                    204

  210. FANCY SWORD                                                   204

  211. ASSYRIAN SWORDS                                               205

  212. ASSYRIAN SWORDS                                               205

  213. ASSYRIAN DAGGER                                               205

  214. ASSYRIO-BABYLONIAN ARCHER                                     206

  215. ASSYRIAN FOOT SOLDIER                                         206

  216. ASSYRIAN SOLDIER HUNTING GAME                                 206

  217. FOOT SOLDIER OF THE ARMY OF SENNACHERIB (B.C. 712–707)        206

  218. ASSYRIAN WARRIOR, WITH SWORD AND STAFF                        206

  219. ASSYRIAN WARRIORS AT A LION HUNT                              206

  220. ASSYRIAN EUNUCH                                               206

  221. BRONZE SWORD, BEARING THE NAME OF VUL-NIRARI I., FOUND NEAR
         DIARBEKR                                                    208

  222. PERSIAN ARCHER                                                209

  223. PERSIAN WARRIOR                                               209

  224. THE PERSIAN CIDARIS, OR TIARA                                 209

  225. PERSIAN ACINACES                                              210

  226. PERSIAN ACINACES                                              210

  227. SWORD FROM MITHRAS GROUP                                      210

  228. SWORD IN RELIEF, PERSEPOLIS SCULPTURES                        210

  229. PERSIAN ACINACES                                              211

  230. DAGGER-FORMS FROM PERSEPOLIS                                  211

  231. ACINACES OF PERSEPOLIS                                        212

  232. ACINACES OF MITHRAS GROUP                                     212

  233. HINDÚ WARRIORS                                                215

  234. JAVANESE BLADE, SHOWING INDIAN DERIVATION; HINDÚ SABRE        215

  235. BATTLE-SCENE FROM A CAVE IN CUTTACK, FIRST CENTURY A.D.       216

  236. THE FIRST HIGHLANDER                                          217

  237. ARJUNA’S SWORD                                                217

  238. JAVANESE SCULPTURES WITH BENT SWORDS                          218

  239. PESHÁWAR SCULPTURES                                           218

  240. TWO-EDGED BRONZE SWORD AND ALABASTER KNOB, MYCENÆ             223

  241. GOLD SHOULDER-BELT, WITH FRAGMENT OF TWO-EDGED BRONZE
         RAPIER                                                      228

  242. BLADE FROM MYCENÆ                                             229

  243. A LONG GOLD PLATE                                             229

  244. WEAPONS FROM MYCENÆ                                           229

  245. SWORD BLADES FROM MYCENÆ                                      229

  246. SWORD BLADES FROM MYCENÆ                                      230

  247. BRONZE LANCEHEAD (?)                                          230

  248. TWO-EDGED BRONZE SWORD AND DAGGER                             230

  249. TWO-EDGED BRONZE SWORDS AND ALABASTER KNOB                    231

  250. RAPIER BLADES OF MYCENÆ                                       232

  251. WARRIOR WITH SWORD                                            232

  252. BRONZE SWORD FOUND IN THE PALACE, MYCENÆ                      233

  253. BRONZE DAGGER: TWO BLADES SOLDERED                            233

  254. PHÁSGANON                                                     235

  255. GREEK PHÁSGANA                                                235

  256. SHORT SWORD (PHÁSGANON) OF BRONZE, FOUND IN CRANNOG AT
         PESCHIARA, AND PROBABLY GREEK                               235

  257. TWO-EDGED BRONZE SWORD AND ALABASTER POMMEL                   236

  258. KOPIS WITH POMMEL                                             236

  259. KOPIS WITH HOOK                                               236

  260. KUKKRI BLADE OF GHURKAS                                       236

  261. THE DANÍSKO                                                   237

  262. GREEK XIPHOS                                                  238

  263. GALLO-GREEK SWORD                                             238

  264. GALLO-GREEK SWORD                                             238

  265. MAYENCE BLADE                                                 238

  266. GALLO-GREEK BLADE AND SHEATH                                  238

  267. BRONZE PARAZONIUM                                             239

  268. ‘HOPLITES’ (HEAVY ARMED)                                      240

  269. GREEK COMBATANTS WITH SWORD AND LANCE                         240

  270. ROMAN SOLDIER                                                 246

  271. HELMETS OF HASTARII (FROM TRAJAN’S COLUMN); HELMETS OF
         HASTARII; BRONZE HELMET (FROM CANNÆ)                        246

  272. HASTATUS (FROM TRAJAN’S COLUMN)                               247

  273. CENTURION’S CUIRASS, WITH PHALERÆ OR DECORATIONS              248

  274. ROMAN SWORD; GLADIUS                                          255

  275. BRONZE TWO-EDGED EARLY ROMAN ENSIS                            255

  276. SWORD OF ROMAN AUXILIARY                                      255

  277. ROMAN SWORD                                                   255

  278. SWORD AND VAGINA (SHEATH)                                     256

  279. SWORD AND VAGINA (SHEATH)                                     256

  280. THE PUGIO                                                     256

  281. TWO-EDGED ROMAN STILETTOS                                     257

  282. SWORD OF TIBERIUS                                             258

  283. GERMAN OR SLAV SWORD                                          263

  284. SCRAMASAX FROM HALLSTADT                                      263

  285. DANISH SCRAMASAX                                              263

  286. BLADE AND HANDLE OF BRONZE WITH PART OF EAGLE                 265

  287. GALLIC SWORD OF BRONZE                                        266

  288. SWORD FOUND AT AUGSBURG                                       270

  289. BRONZE                                                        271

  290. THE SPATHA OF SCHLESWIG                                       272

  291. SHORT KELTIC SWORD                                            272

  292. DANISH SWORD                                                  274

  293. BRITISH SWORD, BRONZE                                         278




                        THE BOOK OF THE SWORD.




                              CHAPTER I.

                  PREAMBLE: ON THE ORIGIN OF WEAPONS.


Man’s civilisation began with Fire—how to light it and how to keep it
lit. Before he had taken this step, our primal ancestor (or ancestors)
evidently led the life of the lower animals. The legend of ‘Iapetus’
bold son’ Prometheus, like many others invented by the Greeks, or
rather borrowed from Egypt, contained under the form of fable a deep
Truth, a fact, a lesson valuable even in these days. ‘Forethought,’
the elder brother of ‘Afterthought,’ brought down the _semina flammæ_
in a hollow tube from Heaven, or stole it from the chariot of the
Sun. Here we have the personification of the Great Unknown, who,
finding a cane-brake or a jungle tree fired by lightning or flamed by
wind-friction, conceived the idea of feeding the σπέρμα πυρὸς with
fuel. Thus Hermes or Mercury was ‘Pteropédilos’ or ‘Alipes;’ and his
ankles were fitted with ‘Pedila’ or ‘Talaria,’ winged sandals, to show
that the soldier fights with his legs as well as with his arms.[3]

I will not enlarge upon the imperious interest of Hoplology: the
history of arms and armour, their connection and their transitions,
plays the most important part in the annals of the world.

The first effort of human technology was probably weapon-making.
History and travel tell us of no race so rude as to lack artificial
means of offence and defence.[4] To these, indeed, man’s ingenuity and
artistic efforts must, in his simple youthtide, have been confined. I
do not allude to the complete man, created full-grown in body and mind
by the priestly castes of Egypt, Phœnicia, Judæa, Assyria, Persia,
and India. The _Homo sapiens_ whom we have to consider is the ‘Adam
Kadmon,’[5] not of the Cabbalist, but of the anthropologist, as soon
as he raised himself above the beasts of the field by superiority of
brains and hands.

The lower animals are born armed, but not weaponed. The arm, indeed, is
rather bestial than human: the weapon is, speaking generally, human,
not bestial. Naturalists have doubted, and still doubt, whether in
the so-called natural state the lower animals use weapons properly
so termed. Colonel A. Lane Fox, a diligent student of primitive
warfare, and a distinguished anthropologist,[6] distinctly holds
the hand-stone to be _the_ prehistoric weapon. He quotes (Cat. pp.
156–59) the ape using the hand-stone to crack nutshells; the gorillas
defending themselves against the Carthaginians of Hanno; and Pedro
de Cieza (Cieça) de Leon[7] telling us that ‘when the Spaniards [in
Peru] pass under the trees where the monkeys are, these creatures
break off branches and throw them down, making faces all the time.’
Even in the days of Strabo (xv. 1) it was asserted that Indian monkeys
climb precipices, and roll down stones upon their pursuers—a favourite
tactic with savages. Nor, indeed, is it hard to believe that the
Simiads, whose quasi-human hand has prehensile powers, bombard their
assailants with cocoa-nuts and other missiles. Major Denham (1821–24),
a trustworthy traveller, when exploring about Lake Chad, says of the
quadrumans of the Yeou country: ‘The monkeys, or, as the Arabs say, men
enchanted (_Beny Adam meshood_),[8] were so numerous that I saw upwards
of a hundred and fifty assembled at one place in the evening. They did
not appear at all inclined to give up their ground, but, perched on the
top of a bank some twenty feet high, made a terrible noise, and, rather
gently than otherwise, pelted us as we approached within a certain
distance.’ Herr Holub,[9] also, was ‘designedly aimed at by a herd of
African baboons perched among the trees;’ and on another occasion he
and his men had to beat an ignominious retreat from ‘our cousins.’
‘Hence,’ suggests Colonel A. Lane Fox, ‘our “poor relation” conserves,
even when bred abroad and in captivity, the habit of violently shaking
the branch by jumping upon it with all its weight, in order that the
detached fruit may fall upon the assailant’s head.’ In Egypt, as we see
from the tomb-pictures, monkeys (baboons or cynocephali) were taught to
assist in gathering fruit, and in acting as torch-bearers. While doing
this last duty, their innate petulance caused many a merry scene.[10]

I never witnessed this bombardment by monkeys. But when my regiment
was stationed at Baroda in Gujarát, several of my brother officers
and myself saw an elephant use a weapon. The intelligent animal,
which the natives call Háthi (‘the handed’[11]), was chained to a
post during the dangerous season of the wet forehead, and was swaying
itself in ill-temper from side to side. Probably offended by the sudden
appearance of white faces, it seized with its trunk a heavy billet,
and threw it at our heads with a force and a good will that proved the
worst intention.

According to Captain Hall—who, however, derived the tale from the
Eskimos,[12] the sole living representatives of the palæolithic age in
Europe—the polar bear, traditionally reported to throw stones, rolls
down, with its quasi-human forepaws, rocks and boulders upon the walrus
when found sleeping at the foot of some overhanging cliff. ‘Meister
Petz’ aims at the head, and finally brains the stunned prey with the
same weapon. Perhaps the account belongs to the category of the ostrich
throwing stones, told by many naturalists, including Pliny (x. 1),
when, as Father Lobo explained in his ‘Abyssinia,’ the bird only kicks
them up during its scouring flight. Similar, too, is the exploded
shooting-out of the porcupine’s quills, whereby, according to mediæval
‘Shoe-tyes’[13] men have been badly hurt and even killed. On the other
hand, the Emu kicks like an Onager[14] and will drive a man from one
side of a quarter-deck to the other.

But though Man’s first work was to weapon himself, we must not believe
with the Cynics and the Humanitarians that his late appearance in
creation, or rather on the stage of life, initiated an unvarying and
monotonous course of destructiveness. The great tertiary mammals which
preceded him, the hoplotherium, the deinotherium, and other -theria,
made earth a vast scene of bloodshed to which his feeble powers could
add only a few poor horrors. And even in our day the predatory fishes,
that have learned absolutely nothing from man’s inhumanity to man,
habitually display as much ferocity as ever disgraced savage human
nature.

Primitive man—the post-tertiary animal—was doomed by the very
conditions of his being and his media to a life of warfare; a course
of offence to obtain his food, and of defence to retain his life.
Ulysses[15] says pathetically:

    No thing frailer of force than Man earth breedeth and feedeth;
    Man ever feeblest of all on th’ Earth’s face creeping and crawling.

The same sentiment occurs in the ‘Iliad’; and Pliny, the pessimist,
writes—‘the only tearful animal, Man.’

The career of these wretches, who had neither ‘minds’ nor ‘souls,’
was one long campaign against ravenous beasts and their ‘brother’
man-brutes. Peace was never anything to them but a fitful interval of
repose. The golden age of the poets was a dream; as Videlou remarked,
‘Peace means death for all barbarian races.’ The existence of our
earliest ancestors was literally the Battle of Life. Then, as now, the
Great Gaster was the first Master of Arts, and War was the natural
condition of humanity upon which depends the greater part of its
progress, its rising from the lower to the higher grade. Hobbism, after
all, is partly right: ‘Men were by nature equal, and their only social
relation was a state of war.’ Like the children of our modern day,
helpless and speechless, primæval Homo possessed, in common with his
fellow-creatures, only the instincts necessary for self-support under
conditions the most facile. Uncultivated thought is not rich in the
productive faculty; the brain does not create ideas: it only combines
them and evolves the novelty of deduction, and the development of what
is found existing. Similarly in language, onomatopœia, the imitation
of natural sounds, the speech of Man’s babyhood, still endures; and to
it we owe our more picturesque and life-like expressions. But, despite
their feeble powers, compulsory instruction, the Instructor being Need,
was continually urging the Savage and the Barbarian to evolve safety
out of danger, comfort out of its contrary.

For man, compelled by necessity of his nature to weapon himself,
bears within him the two great principles of Imitation and Progress.
Both are, after a fashion, his peculiar attributes, being rudimentary
amongst the lower animals, though by no means wholly wanting. His
capacity of language, together with secular development of letters and
literature, enabled him to accumulate for himself, and to transmit
to others, a store of experience acquired through the medium of the
senses; and this, once gained, was never wholly lost. By degrees
immeasurably slower than among civilised societies, the Savage digested
and applied to the Present and to the Future the hoarded wisdom of
the Past. The imitative faculty, a preponderating advantage of the
featherless biped over the quadruped, taught the former, even in his
infancy, to borrow _ad libitum_, while he lent little or nothing.
As a quasi-solitary Hunter[16] he was doomed to fray and foray, to
destroying others in order to preserve himself and his family: a
condition so constant and universal as to include all others. Become a
Shepherd, he fought man and beast to preserve and increase his flocks
and herds; and rising to an Agriculturist, he was ever urged to break
the peace by greed of gain, by ambition, and by the instinctive longing
for excitement.[17]

But there was no absolute point of separation, as far as the material
universe is concerned, to mark the dawn of a new ‘creative period’; and
the _Homo Darwiniensis_ made by the Aristotle of our age, the greatest
of English naturalists, is directly connected with the _Homo sapiens_.
There are hosts of imitative animals, birds as well as beasts; but the
copying-power is essentially limited. Moreover, it is ‘instinctive,’
the work of the undeveloped, as opposed to ‘reasoning,’ the process of
the highly-developed brain and nervous system. Whilst man has taught
himself to articulate, to converse, the dog, which only howled and
whined, has learned nothing except to bark. Man, again, is capable of
a development whose bounds we are unable to determine; whereas the
beast, incapable of self-culture, progresses, under the most favourable
circumstances, automatically and within comparatively narrow bounds.

Upon the imitative faculty and its exercise I must dwell at greater
length. It is regretable that the delicious wisdom of Pope neglected
to point out the great lesson of the animal-world in suggesting and
supplying the arts of offence and defence:—

    Go, from the creatures thy instructions take...
    Thy arts of building from the bee receive;
    Learn from the mole to plough, the worm to weave;
    Learn from the little nautilus to sail,
    Spread the thin oar, and catch the driving gale.[18]

Man, especially in the tropical and sub-tropical zones—his early, if
not his earliest, home, long ago whelmed beneath the ocean waves—would
derive many a useful hint from the dreadful armoury of equinoctial
vegetation; the poison-trees, the large strong spines of the Acacia and
the Mimosa, _e.g._ the Wait-a-bit (_Acacia detinens_), the Gleditschia,
the Socotrine Aloe, the American Agave, and the piercing thorns of
the _Caryota urens_, and certain palms. The aboriginal races would be
further instructed in offensive and defensive arts by the powerful and
destructive _feræ_ of the sunny river-plains, where the Savage was
first induced to build permanent abodes.

[Heading: _DISTRIBUTION OF WEAPONS._]

Before noting the means of attack and protection which Nature
suggested, we may distribute Hoplology, the science of arms and weapons
of offence and defence, human and bestial, into two great orders, of
which the latter can be subdivided into four species:—

  1. _Missile._

  2. _Armes d’hast._—_a._ Percussive or striking; _b._ Thrusting,
      piercing, or ramming; _c._ Cutting or ripping; _d._ Notched or
      serrated.

Colonel A. Lane Fox (‘Prim. Warfare,’ p. 11) thus classifies the
weapons of ‘Animals and Savages’:—

  _Defensive._   | _Offensive._ | _Stratagems._
  Hides          |  Piercing    |  Flight
  Solid plates   |  Striking    |  Ambush
  Jointed plates |  Serrated    |  Tactics
  Scales         |  Poisoned    |  Columns
                 |  Missiles    |  Leaders
                 |              |  Outposts
                 |              |  Artificial defences
                 |              |  War cries

My list is less comprehensive, and it bears only upon the origin
of the _Arme blanche_.

I. As has been said, the missile, the βέλος, is probably the first
form of weapon, and is still the favourite with savage Man. It favours
the natural self-preservative instinct. _El-Khauf maksúm_—‘fear is
distributed,’—say the Arabs. ‘The shorter the weapon the braver the
wielder’ has become a well-established fact. The savage Hunter, whose
time is his own, would prefer the missile; but the Agriculturist,
compelled to be at home for seed-time and harvest, would choose the
hand-to-hand weapon which shortens action. We may hold, without
undue credulity, that the throwing-arm is common to beasts, after a
fashion, and to man. Among the so-called ‘missile fishes’[19] the
Toxotes,[20] or Archer, unerringly brings down insects with a drop
of water when three or four feet high in the air. The Chætodon, or
archer fish of Japan, is kept in a glass vase, and fed by holding flies
at the end of a rod a few inches above the surface: it strikes them
with an infallible aim. This process is repeated, among the mammalia,
by the Llama, the Guanaco and their congeners, who propel their
acrid and fetid saliva for some distance and with excellent aim.[21]
And stone-throwing held its own for many an age, as we read in the
fifteenth century:—

    Use eke the cast of stone with slynge or honde;
    It falleth ofte, yf other shot there none is,
    Men harneysèd in steel may not withstonde
    The multitude and mighty cast of stonys.[22]

II. The stroke or blow which led to the cut would be seen exemplified
in the felidæ, by the terrible buffet of the lion, by the clawing
of the tiger and the bear, and by the swing of the trunk of the
‘half-reasoner with the hand.’ Man also would observe that the zebra
and the quagga (so called from its cry, _wag-ga, wag-ga_[23]), the
horse and the ass, the camel, the giraffe, and even the cow, defend
themselves with the kick or hoof-blow; while the ostrich, the swan,
and the larger birds of prey assault with a flirt or stroke of the
wing. The aries or sea-ram (_Delphinus orca_) charges with a butt.
The common whale raises the head with such force that it has been
held capable of sinking a whaler: moreover, this mammal uses the huge
caudal fin or tail in battle with man and beast; for instance, when
engaged with the fox-shark or thresher (_Carcharias vulpes_).[24]
These, combined with the force of man’s doubled fist, would suggest
the ‘noble art’ of boxing: it dates from remote antiquity; witness
the cestus or knuckle-duster of the classics, Greeks, Romans, and
Lusitanians. So far from being confined to Great or Greater Britain,
as some suppose, it is still a favourite not only with the Russian
peasants, but also with the Hausas, Moslem negroids who did such good
service in the Ashanti war. A curious survival of the feline armature
is the Hindu’s Wágh-nakh. Following Demmin, Colonel A. Lane Fox[25] was
in error when he described this ‘tiger’s-claw’ as ‘an Indian weapon of
treachery belonging to a secret society, and invented about A.D. 1659.’
Demmin[26] as erroneously attributes the Wágh-nakh to Sívají, the
Prince of Maráthá-land in Western India, who traitorously used it upon
Afzal Khan, the Moslem General of Aurangzeb, sent (A.D. 1659) to put
down his rebellion.[27] A meeting of the chiefs was agreed upon, and
the Moslem, quitting his army, advanced with a single servant; he wore
a thin robe, and carried only a straight sword. Sívají, descending from
the fort, assumed a timid and hesitating air, and to all appearance
was unarmed. But he wore mail under his flimsy white cotton coat, and
besides a concealed dagger, he carried his ‘tiger’s-claw.’ The Khan
looked with contempt at the crouching and diminutive ‘mountain rat,’
whom the Moslems threatened to bring back in cages; but, at the moment
of embracing, the Maráthá struck his Wágh-nakh into his adversary’s
bowels and despatched him with his dagger. The Wágh-nakh in question is
still kept as a relic, I am told, by the Bhonslá family.[28] Outside
the hand you see nothing but two solid gold rings encircling the
index and the minimus; these two are joined inside by a steel bar,
which serves as a connecting base to three or four sharp claws, thin
enough to fit between and to be hidden by the fingers of a half-closed
hand. The attack is by ripping open the belly: and I have heard of
a poisoned Wágh-nakh which may have been suggested by certain poison
rings in ancient and mediæval Europe.[29] The date of invention is
absolutely unknown, and a curious and instructive modification of it
was made by those Indians-in-Europe, the Gypsies.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.—INDIAN WÁGH-NAKH.]

[Illustration: FIG. 2.—WÁGH-NAKH, USED BY MARÁTHÁS (India Museum.)]

III. The thrust would be suggested by the combats of the goat, the
stag, and black cattle, including the buffalo and the wild bull, all
of which charge at speed with the head downwards, and drive the horns
into the enemy’s body. The gnu (_Catoblepas G._) and other African
antelopes, when pressed by the hunter, keep him at bay with the point.
In Europe ‘hurt of hart,’ a ripping and tearing thrust, has brought
many a man to the grave. The hippopotamus, a dangerous animal unduly
despised, dives under the canoe, like the walrus, rises suddenly, and
with its lower tusks, of the hardest ivory, drills two holes in the
offending bottom. The black rhinoceros, fiercest and most irritable
of African fauna, though graminivorous, has one or two horns of
wood-like fibre-bundles resting upon the strongly-arched nasal bones,
and attached by an extensive apparatus of muscles and tendons. This
armature, loose when the beast is at peace, becomes erect and immovable
in rage, thus proving in a special manner its only use—that of war. It
is a formidable dagger that tears open the elephant and passes through
the saddle and its padding into the ribs of a horse. The extinct
sabre-toothed tiger (_Machairodus latidens_), with one incisor and five
canines, also killed with a thrust. So, amongst birds, the bittern,
the peacock, and the American white crane peck or stab at the eye;
the last-named has been known to drive its long sharp mandibles deep
into the pursuer’s bowels, and has been caught by presenting to it a
gun-muzzle; the bird, mistaking the hole, strikes at it and is caught
by the beak.[30] The hern defends herself during flight by presenting
the sharp long beak to the falcon. The pheasant and partridge, the
domestic cock and quail, to mention no others, use their spurs with
a poniard’s thrust; the Argus-pheasant of India, the American Jacaná
(_Parra_), the horned screamer (_Palamedea_), the wing-wader of
Australia (Gregory), and the plover of Central Africa (Denham and
Claperton), carry weapons upon their wings.

[Heading: _THE ARMS OF ANIMALS._]

[Illustration: FIG. 3.

  1. BALISTES CAPRISCUS;
  2. COTTUS DICERAUS;
  3. NASEUS FRONTICORNIS.]

According to Pliny (viii. 38) the dolphins which enter the Nile are
armed with a knife-edged spur on the back to protect themselves
from the crocodiles. Cuvier refers this allusion to the _Squalus
centrina_ or _Spinax_ of Linnæus. The European ‘file-fish’ (_Balistes
capriscus_), found in a fossil state, and still existing, though
rare in British waters, remarkably shows the efficiency, beauty, and
variety of that order’s armature. It pierces its enemy from beneath
by a strong erectile and cirrated spine on the first anterior dorsal;
the base of the spear is expanded and perforated, and a bolt from the
supporting plate passes freely through it. When the spine is raised, a
hollow at the back receives a prominence from the next bony ray, which
fixes the point in an erect position. Like the hammer of a fire-piece
at full cock, the spear cannot be forced down till the prominence is
withdrawn, as by pulling the trigger. This mechanism, says the learned
and experienced Professor Owen,[31] may be compared with the fixing and
unfixing of a bayonet: when the spine is bent down it is received into
a groove in the supporting plate, and thus it offers no impediment to
swimming.

[Illustration: FIG. 4.—1. SPEAR OF NARWHAL; 2. SWORD OF XIPHIAS; 3.
RHINOCEROS-HORN; 4. WALRUS TUSKS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 5.—NARWHAL’S SWORD PIERCING PLANK.]

[Illustration: FIG. 6.—METAL DAGGERS WITH HORN CURVE.]

The pugnacious and voracious little ‘stickleback’ (_Gasterosteus_) is
similarly provided. The ‘bull-head’ (_Cottus diceraus_, Pallas[32])
bears a multibarbed horn on its dorsum, exactly resembling the spears
of the Eskimos and the savages of South America and Australia. The
yellow-bellied ‘surgeon’ or lancet-fish (_Acanthurus_) is armed, in
either ocean, with a long spine on each side of the tail; with this
lance it defends itself dexterously against its many enemies. The
_Naseus fronticornis_ (Lacépède) bears, besides the horn-muzzle,
trenchant spear-formed blades in the pointed and serrated tail.
The sting-fish or adder-pike (_Trachinus vipera_) has necessitated
amputation of the wounded limb: the dorsals, as well as the opercular
spines, have deep double grooves in which the venomous mucous secretion
is lodged—a hint to dagger-makers. The sting-rays (_Raia trygon_
and _R. histrix_[33]) twist the long slender tail round the object
of attack and cut the surface with the strong notched and spiny
edge, inflicting a wound not easily healed. The sting, besides being
poisonous, has the especial merit of breaking off in the wound: it
is extensively used by the savages of the Fiji, the Gambier, and the
Pellew Islands, of Tahiti, Samoa, and many of the Low Islands.[34]
These properties would suggest poisoned weapons which cannot be
extracted. Such are the arrows of the Bushman, the Shoshoni, and the
Macoinchi of Guiana, culminating in the highly-civilised stiletto of
hollow glass.

[Illustration: FIG. 7.—MÁDU OR MÁRU.]

The sword-fish (_Xiphias_), although a vegetable feeder, is mentioned
by Pliny (xxxii. 6) as able to sink a ship. It is recorded to have
killed a man when bathing in the Severn near Worcester. It attacks
the whale, and it has been known to transfix a vessel’s side with its
terrible weapon. The narwhal or sea-unicorn (_Monodon monoceros_)
carries a formidable tusk, a Sword-blade of the same kind similarly
used.[35]

Here may be offered a single proof how Man, living among, and
dependent for food upon, the lower animals, borrowed from their habits
and experience his earliest practice of offence and defence. The
illustration represents a ‘Singhauta,’[36] ‘Mádu’ or ‘Máru’ (double
dagger), made from the horns of the common Indian antelope, connected
by crossbars. In its rude state, and also tipped with metal, it is
still used as a weapon by the wild Bhíls, and as a crutch and dagger
by the Jogis (Hindús) and Fakirs (Hindís or Moslems), both orders
of religious mendicants who are professionally forbidden to carry
secular arms. It also served for defence, like the parrying-stick of
Africa and Australia, till it was fitted with a hand-guard, and the
latter presently expanded into a circular targe of metal. This ancient
instrument, with its graceful curves, shows four distinct stages of
development: first, the natural, and, secondly, the early artificial,
with metal caps to make it a better thrusting weapon. The third process
was to forge the whole of metal; and the fourth and final provided
it with a straight, broad blade, springing at right angles from the
central grip. This was the ‘Adaga’[37] of mediæval writers.

[Illustration: FIG. 8.—THE ADAGA.]

IV. The first idea of a trenchant or cutting instrument would be
suggested by various reeds and grasses; their silicious leaves at
certain angles cleave to the bone, as experience has taught most
men who have passed through a jungle of wild sugar-cane. When
full-grown the plants stand higher than a man’s head, and the
flint-edged leaves disposed in all directions suggest a labyrinth of
sword-blades. Thus the Mawingo-wingo (_Pennisetum Benthami_), like
the horse-tail or ‘shave-grass’ of Spain, was used as knives by the
executioners of Kings Sunna and Mtesa of Uganda, when cutting the
human victims to pieces.[38] Of the same kind are the ‘sword-grass’
and the ‘bamboo-grass.’ Many races, especially the Andamanese and the
Polynesian Islanders, make useful blades of the split and sharpened
bamboo: they are fashioned from the green plant, and are dried and
charred to sharpen the edge. Turning to the animal world, the cassowary
tears with a forward cut, and the wounded coot scratches like a cat.
The ‘old man kangaroo,’ with the long nail of the powerful hind leg,
has opened the stomach of many a staunch hound. The wild boar attacks
with a thrust, followed by a rip, cutting scientifically from below
upwards. This, as will appear, is precisely the plan adopted by certain
ancient forms of sabre, Greek and barbarian, the cutting edges being
inside, not outside, the curve. I may add that the old attack is one of
our latest improvements in broadsword exercise.[39]

The offensive weapon of the sting-ray, and of various insects, as well
as the teeth of all animals, man included, furnish models for serrated
or saw-edged instruments. Hence Colonel A. Lane Fox observes:[40] ‘It
is not surprising that the first efforts of mankind in the construction
of trenchant instruments should so universally consist of teeth, or
flint-flakes, arranged along the edge of staves.’ But evidently the
knife preceded the saw, which is nothing but a knife-blade jagged.
Other familiar instances would be the multibarb stings of insects,
especially that of the common bee. Again, we have the mantis, an
orthopter of the Temperates and the Tropics, whose fights, enjoyed by
the Chinese, are compared with the duels of sabrers. For the rasping
blow and parry they use the forearm, which carries rows of strong
sharp spines; and a happy stroke beheads or bisects the antagonist.
To this category belongs the armature of the saw-fish (_Pristis_),
a shark widely distributed and haunting the arctic, temperate, and
tropical seas. Its mode of offence is to spring high from the water and
to fall upon the foe, not with the point, but with either edge of its
formidable arm: the row of strong and trenchant barbs, set like teeth,
cuts deeply into the whale’s flesh. Hence, in New Guinea, the serrated
blade becomes a favourite Sword, the base of the snout being cut and
rounded so as to form a handle.

[Illustration: FIG. 9.—SERRATED OR MULTIBARBED WEAPONS.

  1. Sting of the common Bee; 2. Sting of Ray.]

[Illustration: FIG. 10.—WEAPONS MADE OF SHARKS’ TEETH.]

[Illustration: FIG. 11.—ITALIAN DAGGER, WITH GROOVES AND HOLES FOR
POISON.]

[Illustration: FIG. 12.—SWORD WITH SERRATED BLADE OF SAW-FISH.]

Thus man, essentially a tool-making animal, and compelled by the
conditions of his being to one long battle with the brute creation,
was furnished by his enemies, not only with models of implements and
instruments, and with instructions to use them, from witnessing the
combats of brutes, but actually with their arms, which he converted
to his own purposes. Hence the weapon and the tool were, as a rule,
identical in the hands of primæval man; and this forms, perhaps, the
chief test of a primitive invention. The earliest drift-flints ‘were
probably used as weapons both of war and the chase, to grub roots, to
cut down trees, and to scoop out canoes.’[41] The Watúsi of Eastern
Africa make their baskets with their sharpened spear-heads; and the
so-called Káfirs (Amazulu, &c.) still shave themselves with the
assegai. Hence, too, as like conditions engender like results, the arms
and implements of different races resemble one another so closely as to
suggest a common origin and actual imitation, even where copying was,
so to speak, impossible.

Let us take as an instance two of the most widespread of weapons.
The blow-pipe’s progressive form has been independently developed
upon a similar plan, with distinctly marked steps, in places the most
remote.[42] Another instance is the chevaux-de-frise, the spikes of
metal familiar to the classics.[43] They survive in the caltrops or
bamboo splints planted in the ground by the barefooted Mpangwe (Fans)
of Gaboon-land and by the Rangos of Malacca.

In the early days of anthropological study we read complaints that
‘it is impossible to establish, amongst the implements of modern
savages, a perfectly true sequence,’ although truth may be arrived
at in points of detail; and that ‘in regard to the primary order of
development, much must still be left open to conjecture.’ But longer
labour and larger collections have lately added many a link to the
broken chain of continuity. We can now trace with reasonable certainty
the tardy progress of evolution which, during a long succession of
ages, led to the systematised art of war. The conditions of the latter
presently allowed society periods of rest, or rather of recovery; and
more leisure for the practice which, in weapons as in other things,
‘maketh perfect.’[44] And man has no idea of finality: he will stop
short of nothing less than the absolutely perfect. He will labour at
the ironclad as he did the canoe; at the fish-torpedo as he did the
petard.[45]

[Heading: _ARMS AND ARTS._]

From the use of arms, also, arose the rudimentary arts of savage
man. Music began when he expressed his joy and his sorrow by cries
of emotion—the voice being the earliest, as it is still the best, of
music-makers. It was followed by its imitations, which pass through
three several stages, and even now we know nothing more in the way of
development.[46] When the savage clapped together two clubs he produced
the first or drum-type; when he hissed or whistled he originated the
pipe-type (syrinx, organ, bagpipe, &c.); and the twanging of his bow
suggested the lyre-type, which we still find—‘tickling the dried guts
of a mewing cat.’[47] Painting and sculpture were the few simple lines
drawn and cut upon the tomahawk or other rude weapon-tool. ‘As men
think and live so they build,’ said Herder; and architecture, which
presently came to embrace all the other arts, dawned when the Savage
attempted to defend and to adorn his roost among the tree branches or
the entrance to his cave-den.[48]

After this preamble, which has been longer than I expected, we pass to
the first or rudest forms of the Weapons Proper used by Savage Man.




                              CHAPTER II.

   MAN’S FIRST WEAPONS—THE STONE AND THE STICK. THE EARLIEST AGES OF
           WEAPONS. THE AGES OF WOOD, OF BONE, AND OF HORN.


What, then, was Man’s first weapon? He was born speechless and
helpless, inferior to the beasts of the field. He grew up armed, but
badly armed. His muscles may have been stronger than they are now; his
poor uneducated fisticuff, however, could not have compared with the
kick of an ass. As we see from the prognathous jaw, he could bite, and
his teeth were doubtless excellent[49]; still, the size and shape of
the maxilla rendered it an arm inferior to the hyæna’s and even to the
dog’s. He scratched and tore, as women still do; but his nails could
hardly have been more dangerous than the claws of the minor felines.

He had, however, the hand, the most perfect of all prehensile
contrivances, and Necessity compelled him to use it. The stone, his
first ‘weapon,’ properly so called, would serve him in two ways—as a
missile, and as a percussive instrument. Our savage progenitor, who
in days long before the dawn of history, contracted the extensor and
relaxed the flexor muscles of his arm when flinging into air what he
picked up from the ground, was unconsciously lengthening his reach
and taking the first step in the art and science of ballistics. His
descendants would acquire extraordinary skill in stone-throwing, and
universal practice would again make perfect. Diodorus of Sicily (B.C.
44),[50] who so admirably copied Herodotus, says that the Libyans ‘use
neither Swords, spears, nor other weapons; but only three darts and
stones in certain leather budgets, wherewith they fight in pursuing
and retreating.’ The Wánshi (Guanches) Libyan or Berber peoples of the
Canarian Archipelago, according to Cà da Mosto (A.D. 1505), confirmed
by many, including George Glas,[51] were expert stone-throwers. They
fought their duels ‘in the public place, where the combatants mounted
upon two stones placed at the opposite sides of it, each stone being
flat at top and about half a yard in diameter. On these they stood fast
without moving their feet, till each had thrown three round stones at
his antagonist. Though they were good marksmen, yet they generally
avoided those missive weapons by the agile writhing of their bodies.
Then arming themselves with sharp flints (obsidian?) in their left
hands, and cudgels or clubs in their right, they fell on, beating and
cutting each other till they were tired.’ An instance is mentioned in
which a Guanche brought down with a single throw a large palm-frond,
whose mid-rib was capable of resisting the stroke of an axe. Kolben,
who wrote about a century and a half ago, gives the following account
of the ape-like gestures of the Khoi-Khoi or Hottentots[52]:—‘The most
surprising strokes of their dexterity are seen in their throwing of
a stone. They hit a mark to a miracle of exactness, though it be a
hundred paces distant and no bigger than a halfpenny. I have beheld
them at this exercise with the highest pleasure and astonishment, and
was never weary of the spectacle. I still expected after repeated
successes, that the stone would err; but I expected in vain. Still went
the stone right to the mark, and my pleasure and astonishment were
redoubled. You could imagine that the stone was not destined to err,
or that you were not destined to see it. But a Hottentot’s unerring
hand in this exercise is not the only wonder of the scene; you would be
equally struck perhaps with the manner in which he takes his aim. He
stands, not still with a lift-up arm and a steady staring eye upon the
mark, as we do; but is in constant motion, skipping from one side to
another, suddenly stooping, suddenly rising; now bending on this side,
now on that; his eyes, hands, and feet are in constant action, and you
would think that he was playing the fool, and minding anything else
than his aim; when on a sudden, away goes the stone with a fury, right
to the heart of the mark, as if some invisible power had directed it.’

Nearer home the modern Syrians still preserve their old dexterity: I
have often heard the tale, and have no reason to doubt its truth, of
a brown bear (_Ursus syriacus_) being killed in the Libanus by a blow
between the eyes.[53] When the Arab Bedawin are on the raid and do not
wish to use their matchlocks, they attack at night, and ‘rain stones’
upon the victim. The latter vainly discharges his ammunition against
the shadows flitting ghost-like among the rocks; and, when his fire
is drawn, the murderers rush in and finish their work. The use of the
stone amongst the wild tribes of Asia, Africa, and America is almost
universal. In Europe, the practice is confined to schoolboys; but the
wild Irish, by beginning early, become adepts in it when adults. As a
rule, the shepherd is everywhere a skilful stone-thrower.

Turner makes the ‘Kawas’ of Tanna, New Hebrides, a stone as long
as, and twice as thick as, an ordinary counting-house ruler: it is
thrown with great precision for a distance of twenty yards. The same
author mentions stones rounded like a cannon-ball, among the people
of Savage Island and Eromanga. Commander Byron notices the stones
made into missiles by the Disappointment Islanders. Beechey, whose
party was attacked by the Easter Islanders, says that the weapons,
cast with force and accuracy, knocked several of the seamen under
the boat-thwarts. Crantz tells us that Eskimo children are taught
stone-throwing at a mark as soon as they can use their hands. The late
Sir R. Schomburg describes a singular custom amongst the Demarara
Indians. When a child enters boyhood he is given a hard round stone
which he is to hand-rub till it becomes smooth, and he often reaches
manhood before the task is done. Observers have suggested that the only
use of the practice is a ‘lesson in perseverance, which quality, in the
opinion of many people, is best inculcated by engaging the minds of
youths in matters that are devoid of any other incentive in the way of
practical utility or interest.’

[Illustration: FIG. 13.—ANCIENT EGYPTIANS THROWING KNIVES.]

In more civilised times the knife, as a missile, would take the place
of the stone. We find that the ancient Egyptians[54] practised at a
wooden block, and the German _Helden_ (champions), seated on settles,
duelled by casting three knives each, to be parried with the shield.
The modern Spaniards begin to learn when children the art of throwing
the _facon_[55], _cuchillo_ or clasp-knife. The reapers of the Roman
Campagna, mere barbarians once civilised, also ‘chuck’ the sickle with
a surprising precision.

[Heading: _THE BOW._]

The habit of stone-throwing would presently lead to the invention of
the sling, which Meyrick considers,[56] strange to say, the ‘earliest
and simplest weapon of antiquity.’ The rudest form of this pastoral
weapon used only on open plains, a ball and cord, was followed by
the various complications of string- or thong-sling, cup-sling, and
stick-sling. The latter, a split stick which held the stone till the
moment of discharge, may have been the primitive arm: Lepsius shows
an Egyptian using such a sling and provided with a reserve heap of
pebbles. Nilsson suggests that David was thus weaponed when Goliath
addressed him, ‘Am I a dog that thou comest to me with staves?’—that
is, with the shepherd’s staff turned into a sling. And this form
survived longest in the Roman ‘fustibulus,’ which the moderns corrupted
to ‘fustibale’[57]: the latter, with its wooden handle, was used in
Europe during the twelfth century, and was employed in delivering
hand-grenades till the sixteenth. The primitive ball-and-cord, known
to the ancient Egyptians, is still preserved in the Bolas of the
South American Gaucho. A simultaneously invented missile would be the
hurling or throwing-stick and its modification, the Boomerang, of which
I have still to speak. The application of elasticity and resilience
being now well known, would suggest the rudest form of the bow[58] and
arrow. This invention, next in importance (though _longo intervallo_)
to fire-making and fire-feeding, is the first crucial evidence of the
distinction between the human weapon and the bestial arm. Nilsson and
many others hold the invention to have been instinctive and common to
all peoples; and we cannot wonder that it was made the invention of
demi-gods—Nimrod, Scythes[59] the son of Jupiter, or Perses son of
Perseus.[60] The missile arm at once showed man and beast separated
by an extensive difference of degree, if not of kind, and it has
played the most notable part, perhaps, of all weapons in the annals of
humanity or inhumanity. It led to the Greek _gastrapheta_, the Roman
_arcubalista_ (crossbow[61]); to the _palintonon_ or _balista_, and
the arblast (an enlarged species of the _arcus_, intended for throwing
darts of giant size); to the _Belagerungs-balister_, a fixed form; to
the catapult, _enthytonon_, _tormentum_, scorpion or _onager_,[62] and
to other formidable forms of classical artillery which preceded the
‘cheap and nasty’ invention of chemical explosives.

[Heading: _THE CLUB._]

So much for the Hand-stone as the forefather of missiles and of
ballistic science. Held in the fist it would give momentum, weight
and velocity, force and bruising power, to the blow. Thus it was the
forerunner of the club, straight and curved; the flail, the _bâton
ferré_, the ‘morning star,’ the ‘holy-water sprinkler,’ and a host of
similar weapons[63] that added another and a harder joint to man’s
arm. Clubs—which in practice are aimed at the head, whereas the spear
is mostly directed at the body[64]—would be easily made by pulling up
a straight young tree, or by tearing down a branch from the parent
trunk and stripping it of twigs and leaves. The club of Australia,
a continent to which we look for original forms, has the branching
rootlets trimmed to serve as spikes; moreover, the terminal bulge has
been developed in order to stop or parry the assailant’s weapon. In
fact the swell, ball, lozenge, or mushroom-head was the first germ of
the Australasian shield. The next step would be to fashion the ragged
staff with fire, with friction, and with flint knives, shells or other
scrapers, into a cutting as well as a crushing instrument; and here we
have one of the many origins of the Sword and of its diminutives, the
dagger and the knife. Pointed at the end, it would become the lance
and spear, the spud, spade, and palstave, the _pilum_, the dart, the
javelin, and the assagai.

Not a few authorities contend that the earliest weapons, the most
constant in all ages and continuous in all countries, were the
spear and the axe. The first would be a development of the pointed
hand-celt[65]; the latter of the leaf-formed or almond-shaped tool.
But firstly, these would be mostly confined to countries with a
well-developed Stone Age[66]; and secondly, the conversion of the
hand-stone into an _arme d’hast_ would assuredly be later than the club
and the sharpened stick or stake.

[Illustration: FIG. 14.—JAPANESE WAR-FLAIL.]

[Illustration: FIG. 15.—TURKISH WAR-FLAIL.]

[Illustration: FIG. 16.—MORNING STAR.]

Herodotus, the father of ancient history in its modern form, a
travelled student and a great genius, whose prose poem—for such it
is—has proved incomparably more useful to us than any works of his
successors, when describing a rock-sculpture of Sesostris-Ramses (ii.
106) makes him carry in his right hand a spear (Egyptian), and in his
left a bow (Lybian or Ethiopian). Hence some writers on Hoplology have
held that he considered these to be the oldest of weapons. But the
ancients did not study prehistoric man beyond confounding human bones
with those of extinct mammals. Augustus Cæsar was an early collector,
according to Suetonius (in ‘August.’ c. xxii.). ‘Sua vero ... excoluit
rebusque vetustate ac raritate notabilibus; qualia sunt Capræis immanum
belluarum ferarumque membra prægrandia, quæ dicuntur gigantum ossa et
arma heroum.’[67] The Emperor (whom the late Louis Napoleon so much
resembled, even in the matter of wearing hidden armour[68]) preferred
these curiosities to statues and pictures. The ancients also, like
Marco Polo and too many of the moderns, spoke of the world generally
after studying a very small part in particular. The Halicarnassian here
evidently alludes to an epoch which had made notable advances upon the
Quaternary Congener of the Simiads. We must return to a much earlier
age. Lucretius, whose penetrating genius had a peculiar introvision,
wrote like a modern scientist:—

    Arma antiqua manus, ungues dentesque fuerunt,
    Et lapides et item sylvarum fragmina rami;
    Posterius ferri vis est, ærisque reperta,
    Sed prius æris erat, quam ferri cognitus usus.[69]

Gentleman Horace is almost equally correct:—

    Quum prorepserunt primis animalia terris,
    Mutum et turpe pecus, glandem atque cubilia propter
    Unguibus et pugnis, dein fustibus, atque ita porro
    Pugnabant armis quæ post fabricaverat usus.[70]

How refreshing is the excellent anthropology of these pagans after the
marvel-myths of man’s Creation propounded by the so-called ‘revealed’
religions.

[Heading: _THE ‘AGES.’_]

For the better distribution of the subject I shall here retain the
obsolete and otherwise inadmissible, because misleading, terms—Age
of Stone, Age of Bronze, Age of Iron.[71] From the earliest times
all the metals were employed, without distinction, for weapons
offensive and defensive: besides which, the three epochs intermingle
in all countries, and overlap one another; they are, in fact, mostly
simultaneous rather than successive. As a modern writer says, like
the three principal colours of the rainbow, these three stages
of civilisation shade off the one into the other; and yet their
succession, as far as Western Europe[72] is concerned, appears to be
equally well defined with that of the prismatic colours, though the
proportion of the spectrum may vary in different countries. And, as
a confusion of ideas would be created, especially when treating of
the North European Sword, by neglecting this superficial method of
classification, I shall retain it while proceeding to consider the
development of the White Arm under their highly conventional limits.

I must, moreover, remark that the ternary division, besides having no
absolute chronological signification, and refusing to furnish any but
comparative dates, is insufficient. Concomitant with, and possibly
anterior to, the so-called Stone Age, wood, bone, teeth, and horn were
extensively used; and the use has continued deep into the metal ages.
Throughout the lower valley of the River of the Amazons, where stone
is totally wanting, primitive peoples must have armed themselves with
another material. The hard and heavy trees, both of the Temperates and
the Tropics, supplied a valuable material which could be treated simply
by the use of fire, and without metal or even stone. Ramusio speaks
of a sago-wood (_Nibong_ or _Caryota urens_) made into short lances
by the Sumatrans: ‘One end is sharpened and charred in the fire, and
when thus prepared it will pierce any armour much better than iron
would do.’[73] The weapon would be fashioned by the patient labour
of days and weeks, by burying in hot ashes, by steaming and smoking,
by charring and friction, by scraping with shells and the teeth of
rodents, and by polishing with a variety of materials: for instance,
with the rasping and shagreen-like skin of many fishes, notably the
ray; with rough-coated grasses, and with the leaves of the various
‘sandpaper-trees’ which are hispid as a cat’s tongue. And the first
step in advance would be dressing with silex, obsidian, and other
cutting stones, and finishing with pumice or with the mushroom-shaped
corallines. I shall reserve for the next chapter a description of the
_sabre de bois_, unjustly associated in the popular saying with the
_pistolet de paille_.

[Heading: _THE ‘BONE AGE.’_]

Bone, which includes teeth, presented to savage man a hard and
durable material for improving his coarse wooden weapons. Teledamus
or Telegonus, son of Circe and founder of Tusculum[74] and Præneste,
according to tradition slew his father, Ulysses, with a lance-head
of fish bone—_aculeum marinæ belluæ_. The teeth of the Squalus and
other _gigantum ossa_ or megatherian remains supplied points for the
earliest projectiles, and added piercing power to the blow of the
club. That a Bone Age may be traced throughout the world,[75] and that
the phrase a ‘bone- and stone-using people’ is correct, was proved
by the Weltausstellung of Vienna (1873), whose splendid collection
found an able describer in Prof. A. Woldrich.[76] The caves of
venerable Moustier (Département Dordogne), of Belgium, and of Lherm
(Département Arriège) contributed many jawbones of the cave bear
(_Ursus spelæus_); the ascending ramus of the inferior maxilla had been
cut away to make a convenient grip, and the strong corner-teeth formed
an implement or an instrument, a tool or a weapon. The caves of Peggau
in Steiermark (Styria), of Palkau in Moravia, and the Pfahlbauten[77]
or Pile-villages of Olmütz, produced a number of bone articles and
remnants of the cave bear. These rude implements remind us of the
weapon used to such good effect by the Biblical Samson, the Hebrew type
of Hercules, the strong man, the slayer of monsters, and the Sun-god
(Shamsún).[78]

[Illustration: FIG. 17.—DEER-HORN ARROW-HEAD. (S. America.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 18—HORN WAR CLUBS WITH METAL POINTS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 19.—DOUBLE SPEAR AND SHIELD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 20.—SPINE OF DIODON.]

[Illustration: FIG. 21.—1. WALRUS TOOTH USED AS SPEAR POINT; 2.
TOMAHAWK OF WALRUS TOOTH.]

The wilder tribes of Cambodia convert the bony horn of the
sword-fish into a spear head, with which they confidently attack the
rhinoceros.[79] At Kotzebue Sound Captain Beechey found lances made
of a wooden staff ending in a walrus-tooth; and this defence was also
adapted to a tomahawk-point. The New Guinea tribes tip their arrows
with the teeth of the saw-fish and the spines of the globe-fish
(_Diodon_ and _Triodon_). The horny style of the Malaccan king-crab
(_Limulus_), a Crustacean sometimes reaching two feet in length, is
also made into an arrow-pile.[80] The Australians of King George’s
Sound arm their spears with the acute barbules of fishes; and the
natives of S. Salvador, when discovered by Columbus, pointed their
lances with fish-teeth. The Greenlander’s ‘nuguit’ (fig. 23) is
mentioned by Crantz as armed with the narwhal’s horn, and the wooden
handle is carved in relief with two human figures. By its side is
another spear (fig. 24) with a beam in narwhal-shape, the foreshaft
being composed of a similar ivory, inserted into the snout so as to
represent the natural defence. Here we see the association in the
maker’s mind between the animal from which the weapon is derived and
the purpose of destruction for which it is chiefly used. It also
illustrates the well-nigh universal practice amongst savages of
making their weapons to imitate animate forms. The reason may be a
superstition which still remains to be explained.

[Illustration: FIG. 22.—STING OF MALACCAN LIMULUS CRAB.]

[Illustration: FIG. 23.—TUE GREENLAND NUGUIT.]

[Illustration: FIG. 24.—NARWHAL SHAFT AND METAL BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 25.—JADE PATTU-PATTUS.]

Foreshafts and heads of bone are still applied to the arrows of
the South African Bushmans. They alternate with wood, chert, and
metal throughout the North American continent, from Eskimo-land to
California. A notable resemblance has been traced between the bone-club
of the Nootka Sound ‘Indians,’ and the jade Pattu-Pattu or Meri of New
Zealand. Hence it has been suspected that this short, flat weapon, oval
or leaf-shaped, and made to hold in the hand, as if it were a stone
celt, was originally an imitation of the os humeri. Like the celt,
also, is the stone club found by Colonel A. Lane Fox in the bed of the
Bawn river, north Ireland.[81]

The long bones of animals, with the walls of marrow-holes obliquely
cut and exposing the hollow, were fastened upon sticks and poles,
forming formidable darts and spears. The shape thus suggests the bamboo
arrow-heads of the North Americans, whose cavity also served to carry
poison.[82] They would, moreover, easily be fashioned by fracture, and
by friction upon a hard and rough-grained substance, into Swords and
daggers. The Fenni, or Finns, of Tacitus (‘Germ.’ c. 46), having no
iron, used bone-pointed arrows. The Innuits, or Eskimos, of Greenland
and other parts of the outer north, form with the ribs of whales their
shuttles as well as their Swords. In ‘Flint Chips’ we find that the
ancient Mexicans had bone-daggers. Wilde[83] gives a unique specimen of
such a weapon found in the bed of the River Boyne ‘in hard blue clay,
four feet under sand, along with some stone spear-heads.’ Formed out of
the leg-bone of one of the large ruminants, it measures ten and a sixth
inches long, the rough handle being only two and a half inches[84]; the
blade is smooth, and wrought to a very fine point. This skeyne (the
Irish ‘scjan’[85]) looks like a little model of a metal cut-and-thrust
blade (fig. 27). Equally interesting is the knife-blade (fig. 29) found
with many other specimens of manufactured bone in the Ballinderry
‘Crannog’[86] (county Westmeath): the total length is eight inches,
and the handle is highly decorated. Other bone knives are mentioned in
the ‘Catalogue’ (pp. 262–63). Bone prepared for making handles, and
even ferules, for Swords and daggers is also referred to (p. 267):
the material, being easily worked and tolerably durable, has, indeed,
never fallen into disuse. In the shape of ivory,[87] walrus-tusk, and
hippopotamus-tooth it is an article of luxury extensively used in the
present day for the hafts of weapons and domestic implements. Lastly,
bone served as a base to carry mere trenchant substances. The museum
of Professor Sven Nilsson[88] shows (fig. 31) a smooth, sharp-pointed
splinter, some six inches long, grooved in each side to about a quarter
of an inch deep. In each of these grooves, fixed by means of cement,
was a row of sharp-edged and slightly curved bits of flint. A similar
implement (fig. 30) is represented in the illustrated catalogue of the
Museum of Copenhagen. Of this contrivance I shall speak at length when
treating of the wooden Sword.[89]

[Illustration: FIG. 26.—1. BONE ARROW-POINT FOR POISON; 2. IRON
ARROW-HEAD FOR POISON. (S. America.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 27.—WILDE’S DAGGER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 28.—HOLLOW BONE FOR POISON.]

[Illustration: FIG. 29.—BONE KNIFE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 30.—BONE ARROW-POINT ARMED WITH FLINT FLAKES.]

[Illustration: FIG. 31.]

[Heading: _‘AGES’ BEFORE THE ‘STONE AGE.’_]

While bone was extensively used by primitive Man, horn was the
succedaneum in places where it was plentiful. The Swiss lake-dwellings
have yielded stag’s horn and wooden hafts or helves, with bored holes
and sockets; borers, awls or drills; mullers, rubbers, and various
other instruments. The caverns of the Reindeer period in the south of
France are not less rich. Stag-horn axes are common in Scandinavia,
and one preserved by the Stockholm Museum bears the spirited outline
of a deer. Beads, buttons, and other ornaments are found in England.
This material, when taken from the old stag, is of greater density
than osseous matter and of almost stony hardness, as the cancellated
structure contains carbonate of lime; moreover it was easily worked by
fire and steam.

[Heading: _THE ‘HORN-AGE.’_]

Diodorus (iii. cap. 15) describes the Ichthyophagi as using antelopes’
horns in their fishing, ‘for need teacheth all things.’ The earliest
mention of a horn-arm is by Homer (‘Iliad,’ ii. 827, and iv. 105),
who describes Pandarus, the Lycian, son of Lycaon, using a bow made
of the six-spans-long[90] spoils of the ‘nimble mountain-goat.’ The
weapon may have retained the original form. The early Greek types
were either simple or composite. The Persians[91] preferred, and till
lately used, wood and horn, stained, varnished, and adorned as much as
possible. Duarte Barbosa[92] describes the Turkish bow at Hormuz Island
as ‘made of buffalo-horn and stiff wood painted with gold and very
pretty colours.’ The ‘Hornboge’ occurs in the ‘Nibelungenlied,’ and the
Hungarians appeared in Europe with horn-bows and poisoned arrows.

The bows of the Sioux and Yutahs are of horn, backed with a strip of
raw hide to increase the spring. The Blackfoot bow is made from the
horn of the mountain-sheep (Catlin), and the Shoshone of the Rocky
Mountains shape it by heating and wetting the horn, which is combined
with wood (Schoolcraft). The Eskimos of Polar America, where nothing
but drift-timber is procurable, are compelled to build their weapons
with several bits of wood, horn, and bone, bent into form by smoking or
steaming.

Admirable bows of buffalo-horn—small, but throwing far, and strong—are
still made in the Indus-valley about Multan. For this use the horns are
cut, scraped, thinned to increase elasticity; joined at the bases by
wooden splints, pegs, or nails, and made to adhere by glue and sinews.
Man would soon learn to sharpen his wooden shafts with horn-points, the
spoils of his prey. Hence the ancient Egyptians applied horn to their
light arrows of reed.[93] The Christy collection contains an arrow
from South America (?) armed with a pile of deer-horn. The Melville
Peninsula, being scant of materials, uses as arrow-piles the horns of
a musk-ox (_ovibos_, more _ovis_ than _bos_), and the thinned defences
of the reindeer strengthened by sinews. Antelope-horns are still used
as lance-points by the Nubians, the Shilluks, and the Denkas of the
Upper Nile; by the Jibbus of Central Africa, and by the tribes of the
southern continent.[94] The ‘Bantu’ or Kafir races, Zulus and others,
make their _kiri_ (kerry) either of wood or of rhinoceros-horn. It
varies from a foot to a yard long, and is capped by a knob as large
as a hen’s egg or a man’s fist: hence it is called ‘knob-stick’ or
‘throw-stick.’ The Ga-ne-u-ga-o-dus-ha (deer-horn war-club) of the
Iroquois ended in a point of about four inches long; since the people
had intercourse with Europeans they have learned to substitute metal.
The form suggests that the _martel-de-fer_ of Persia and India, used by
Europe during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, was derived from a
weapon of this kind: suitable points for arming it have been found in
England and Ireland. The Dublin Museum (case 21, Petrie) contains an
antler of the red deer converted into a thrusting weapon. The Jumbiyah
(crooked dagger) of the Arabs, the Khanjar[95] of Persia and India,
whence the Iberian Alfânge (El-Khanjar) and our silly ‘hanger,’ shows
by form and point that it was originally the half of a buffalo-horn
split longitudinally. The modern weapon, with metal blade and ivory
handle, has one side of the latter flat, betraying its origin by
retaining a peculiarity no longer required. The same is the case when
the whole Jumbiyah is, as often happens, made of metal[96] (fig. 6, p.
10).

[Illustration: FIG. 32.—HARPOON HEAD.]

The sufficiency of horn for the slender wants of uncivilised
communities was admirably illustrated by the discovery of a Pfahlbau,
or crannog, some three miles south of Laibach, the capital of Carniola,
and a little north of the Brunnsdorf village. The site is a low
mountain-girt basin, formerly a lake or broad of the Lai-cum-Sava
river, and still flooded after heavy rains. Surface-finds were picked
up in 1854–55, and regular explorations began in July 1875.[97] During
that year two hundred articles were dug up. The material was chiefly
stag-horn, tines, and beams, the latter often cut at the burr or
antler-crown. The chief objects—many of them artistic as those of the
French ‘Reindeer epoch’—were hatchets, hammers, needles, spindles, and
punches of horn and split bone; fish-hooks, pincers, and skin-scrapers
of hog’s tusks; with ornaments set in bone, and teeth bored for
stringing. Many of these articles showed signs of the saw-kerf or notch
which had probably been cut with sanded fibre acting like a file.
There were harpoon-heads of peculiar shape, supposed to be unpierced
whistles, the hole not having been bored through[98]: evidently they
were made to ‘unship’ when striking the Welsen (_Siluri_) of the
old lake, some of which must have been six feet long. The wooden
foreshaft, joined by a string to its head, acted as float, and betrayed
the position of the prey. This is the third stage of the harpoon:
the first would be merely a heavy, pointed stick, and the second a
spear with barbs. There were six horn _Dolche_ (daggers), and one
peculiar article, an edge of polished stone set in a horn-handle: the
latter shows at once the abundance of game, and the value and rarity
of the mineral, which probably belonged only to the rich. The eight
stone implements were of palæolithic type; the few metal articles—a
leaf-shaped sword-blade, a rude knife, lance-heads, arrow-piles,
needles, and bodkins—were chiefly copper, five only being bronze;
and the pottery corresponds with that of the neolithic period in the
museums of Copenhagen and Stockholm. Thus the find, like several in
Switzerland, showed a great preponderance of horns, bones, and teeth
during a transitional age when the rest of Europe was using polished
stone and metal.[99]

Prehistoric finds are still common in the Laibacher moorground
(1882). Lauerza, a hamlet on the edge of the swamp, supplied (Nov.
7) a large stone-axe (_Steinbeil_), pierced and polished, of the
quartzose conglomerate common in the adjacent highlands. This article
was exceptional, most of the stone implements being palæolithic. At
Aussergoritz appeared remnants of pottery and Roman tiles, a broken
hairpin of bronze, a spear of Roman type, and a ‘palstab,’[100] also
of bronze: the latter is the normal chisel-shaped hatchet with the
flanges turned over for fitting to the handle; it measures 16·5 cent.
long by 3·5 of diameter at the lower part. The sands of Grosscup also
yielded sundry fine bronze armlets of Etruscan make found upon embedded
skeletons. All the finds have been deposited in the Provincial Museum
at Laibach.

The use of horn, like that of bone, has survived to the present day,
and still appears in the handles of knives, daggers, and swords. It is
of many varieties, and it fetches different prices according to the
texture, the markings, and other mînutiæ known to the trade.[101]




                             CHAPTER III.

    THE WEAPONS OF THE AGE OF WOOD: THE BOOMERANG AND THE SWORD OF
            WOOD; OF STONE, AND OF WOOD AND STONE COMBINED.


                         _The Sword of Wood._

The ‘Age of Wood’ began early, lasted long, and ended late. As the
practice of savages shows, the spear was originally a pointed stick
hardened in the fire; and arrows, the diminutives of the spear, as
daggers are of the Sword, were tipped with splinters of bamboo, whose
Tabáshir or silicious bark acted like stone. The Peruvians, even after
they could beat out plates of gold and silver, fought with pikes having
no iron tips, but with the points hardened in the fire.[102] The same
was the case with the Australians,[103] who, according to Mr. Howard
Spensley,[104] also fashioned Swords of very hard wood: the Arabs of
the Tihámat or Lowlands of Hazramaut (the Biblical Hazramaveth) are
still compelled by poverty to use spears without metal. I pass over the
general use of this world-wide material to the epoch when it afforded a
true Sword.

The wooden Sword, as we see from its wide dispersion, must have
arisen spontaneously among the peoples who had reached that stage of
civilisation where it became necessary.[105] These weapons were found
in the hands of the Indians of Virginia by the well-known Captain John
Smith. Writing in 1606, Oldfield describes swords of heavy black wood
in the Sandwich Islands, and Captain Owen Stansley in New Guinea. Mr.
Consul Hutchinson notes the wooden swords used by the South American
Itonanamas, a sub-tribe of the Maxos. Those preserved in Ireland and
others brought from the Samoa Islands will be noticed in a future page.
They may mostly be characterised as flat clubs sharpened at the edge,
and used like our steel blades.

[Illustration: FIG. 33.—LISÁN IN EGYPT AND ABYSSINIA.]

The shape of the wooden sword greatly varies, and so does its origin.
Mr. Tylor fell into the mistake, so common in these classifying,
generalising, and simplifying days, of deriving the sabre, because it
is a cutting tool, from the axe, and the tuck or rapier from the spear
because it thrusts. Wooden sword-blades alone have three prototypes,
viz.:—

  1. The club.
  2. The throw-stick.
  3. The paddle.

[Illustration: FIG. 34.—LISÁN OR TONGUE.]

I. The Bulak Museum (Cairo)[106] shows two good specimens of the
ancient ‘Lisán’ (‘tongue’-weapon) club or curved stick. The first
battles, says Pliny (vii. 57), were fought by the Africans against
the Egyptians with clubs which they called _phalangæ_. The shorter
club-sword (1 ft. 11 in.) has a handle ribbed with eighteen fine raised
rings. The longer or falchion-shaped weapon (2 ft. 5 in.) is hatched
at the grip with a cross pattern. Both are of hard wood blackened by
age, and both have the distinct cutting edge. The ancient war-club was
tipped with metal and whipped with thongs round the handle for firmer
grasp, like the Roman fasces. The modern Lisán-club, made of tough
mimosa-wood and about 2½ ft. long, is still used in close combat by the
Negroid tribes of the Upper Nile. To the Bishárins and Amri the Lisán
supplies, at dances and on festal occasions, the place of the sword. In
Abyssinia there is a lighter variety (1 ft. 6 in.) banded alternately
with red, blue, and green cloth, and protected by a network of brass
wire. The Ababdeh (modern Æthiopians), content with this, the spear,
and its pendant the shield, fear not to encounter tribes whose arms are
the matchlock and a ‘formidable looking, but really inoffensive sword
with a wondrous huge straight blade.’ These pastoral Nomads are of a
peculiar and interesting type. The short stature and the well-curved
and delicate limbs, whose action is quick, lithe, and graceful as the
leopard’s, connect them with the Bedawin of Arabia; while the knotted
and spiral locks standing on end, and resembling when tallowed a huge
cauliflower, affiliate them to the African Somal. Their arms are more
extensive than their dress, a mere waist cloth, the primitive attire of
tropical man; and they live by hiring their camels to caravans.

The Dublin Museum[107] also shows the transitional forms between the
club and the Sword. The weapon (_a_) numbered 143 is some twenty-five
inches long: the second (_b_) is labelled ‘No. 144, wooden club-shaped
implement, twenty-seven inches long.’

The club of the Savage developed itself in other directions to the
shepherd’s staff, the bishop’s crozier, and the king’s sceptre; hence,
too, the useless bâton of the field-marshal, and the maces of Mr.
Speaker and My Lord Mayor. Here we may answer the question why the
field-marshal should carry a stick instead of a Sword. The unwarlike
little instrument is simply the symbol of high authority:[108] it is
the rod, not of the Lictor, but of the Centurion, whose badge of office
was a vine-sapling wherewith to enforce authority. Hence Lucan (vi.
146) says of gallant Captain Cassius Scæva who, after many wounds, beat
off two swordsmen:—

                            Sanguine multo
    Promotus Latiam longo gerit ordine vitem.

This use was continued by the drill-sergeant of Europe from England
to Russia. The club again survives in the constable’s staff and the
policeman’s truncheon.

[Heading: _THE BOOMERANG._]

The form of throwing-stick, which we have taught ourselves to call
by an Australian name ‘boomerang,’[109] thereby unduly localising an
almost universal weapon from Eskimo-land to Australia, was evidently
a precursor of the wooden Sword. It was well known to the ancient
Egyptians. Wilkinson shows (vol. i. chap. 4) that it was of heavy
wood, cut flat, and thus offering the least resistance, measuring 1
ft. 3 in. to 2 ft. long by 1½ in. broad. The shape, however, is not
the usual segment of a circle, but a shallow S-curve inverted (Ƨ),
more bent at the upper end, and straighter in the handle. One weapon
(p. 236) seems to bear the familiar asp-head.[110] The British Museum
contains a boomerang brought from Thebes by the Rev. Greville Chester,
and a facsimile was exhibited by General Pitt-Rivers.[111] The end
is much curved; the blade has four parallel grooves, and it bears
the cartouche of Ramses the Great. In no instance have we found the
round shape and the returning flight of its Australian congener. Three
illustrations[112] show a large sportsman (the master) bringing down
birds which rise from a papyrus-swamp, while a smaller figure (the
slave) in the same canoe holds another weapon at arm’s length.

[Illustration: FIG. 35.—TRANSITION FROM THE BOOMERANG TO THE HATCHET
(AUSTRALIA).]

[Illustration: FIG. 36.—AUSTRALIAN PICKS.

  1, 2. Pick of New Caledonia; 3. Malga or Leowel Pick.]

Strabo[113] describes the (Belgian) Gauls as hunting with a piece of
wood resembling a pilum, which is hand-thrown, and which flies to a
distance farther than an arrow. He calls it the Γροσφὸς, which is also
described as a pilum, dart, or javelin by Polybius;[114] but evidently
this Grosphus means the throw-stick, usually termed by the Greeks
ἀγκύλη (Ancyle). Silius Italicus arms in the ‘Punica’ one of the Libyan
tribes which accompanied Hannibal with a bent or crossed _cateia_: the
latter is identified with the throw-stick by Doctor (now Sir) Samuel
Ferguson, poet and antiquary.[115] The encyclopædia of Bishop Isidore
(A.D. 600–636) explicitly defines the _cateia_ to be ‘a species of bat
which, when thrown, flies not far by reason of its weight; but where
it strikes it breaks through with extreme impetus, and if it be thrown
with a skilful hand it returns to him who threw it:—rursum redit ad eum
qui misit.’ Virgil also notices it:—

    Et quos maliferæ despectant mœnia Abellæ
    Teutonico ritu soliti torquere cateias. (_Æn._ vii. 740).

Jähn (p. 410)[116] remembers the _Miölner_, or hammer of Thor, which
flew back to the hand.

[Illustration: FIG. 37.—INDIAN BOOMERANGS.

  1. War Hatchet, Jibba Negros; 2. Steel Chakra, or Sikh Quoit; 3.
  Steel Collery; 4, 5. Collery of Madras, with knobbed handle.]

[Illustration: FIG. 38.—BOOMERANG AND KITE.]

It has been noted that this peculiarity of reversion or back-flight
is not generic, even in the true boomerang, but appertains only to
specific forms. Doubtless it was produced by accident, and, when found
useful for bringing down birds over rivers or marshes, it was retained
by choosing branches with a suitable bend. The shapes greatly differ in
weight and thickness, in curvature and section. Some are of the same
breadth throughout; others bulge in the centre; while others are flat
on one side and convex on the other. In most specimens the fore part
of the lath is slightly ‘dished’: hence the bias causes it to rise in
the air on the principle of a screw-propeller. The thin edge of the
weapon is always opposed to the wind, meeting the least resistance. The
axis of rotation, when parallel to itself, makes the missile ascend
as long as the forward movement lasts, by the action of the atmosphere
on the lower side. When the impulse ceases it falls by the line of
least resistance, that is, in the direction of the edge which lies
obliquely towards the thrower. In fact, it acts like a kite with a
suddenly broken string, dropping for a short distance. But as long as
the boomerang gyrates, which it does after the forward movement ends,
it continues to revolve on the same inclined plane by which it ascended
until it returns to whence it came. This action would also depend upon
weight; the heavy weapons could not rise high in the air, and must drop
by mere gravity before coming back to the thrower.

[Illustration: FIG. 39.—AFRICAN BOOMERANGS.

  1, 2. Hunga-munga; 3. African Weapon; 4. Kordofan Weapon; 5. The
  same developed; 6. Faulchion of Mundo Tribe; 7. The same developed;
  8. Jibba Negros; 9. Knob-stick; 10. Ancient Egyptians (Rosellini);
  11. Old Egyptian; 12–15. Tomahawks of Nyam-Nyams; 16. Fan (Mpangwe)
  Tomahawk; 17. Dor Battle-axe; 18. Dinka and Shilluk Weapon.]

From Egypt the weapon spread into the heart of Africa. The Abyssinian
‘Trombash’ is of hard wood, acute-edged, and about two feet long; the
end turns sharply at an angle of 30°, but the weapon does not whirl
back.[117] The boomerang of the Nyam-Nyams is called _kulbeda_. Direct
derivation is also shown by the curved iron projectile of the Mundo
tribe on the Upper Nile, a weapon of the same form being represented
on the old Egyptian monuments. The ‘hunga-munga’ of the negros south
of Lake Chad, and the adjoining peoples, shows a further development
of spikes or teeth disposed at different angles, enabling the missile
to cut on both sides. The varieties of this form, with a profusion of
quaint ornaments, including lateral blades which answer the purpose
of wings, and which deal a severer wound, are infinite. Denham and
Clapperton give an illustration of a Central African weapon forming
the head and neck of a stork. So the Mpangwe negros[118] of the Gaboon
River, West Africa, shape their missiles in the form of a bird’s head,
the triangular aperture (fig. 40, No. 5) representing the eye.

[Illustration: FIG. 40.—TRANSITION FROM THE MALGA, LEOWEL OR PICK TO
THE BOOMERANG (AUSTRALIA).]

The throwing-stick has been found in Assyrian monuments: Nemrúd
strangling the lion holds a boomerang in his right hand. Thence the
weapon travelled East; and the Sanskrit Ástara, or Scatterer, was
extensively used by the pre-Aryan tribes of India. The Kolis, oldest
known inhabitants of Gujarát, call it ‘Katuriyeh,’ a term probably
derived from ‘Cateia’; the Dravidians of the Madras Presidency know
it as ‘Collery,’ and the Tamulian Kallar and Marawar (of Madura),
who use it in deer-hunting, term it ‘Valai Tadi’ (bent stick). The
Pudukota Rajah always kept a stock in arsenal. The length greatly
varies, the difference amounting to a cubit or more; and three feet by
a hand-breadth may be the average. The middle is bent to the extent
of a cubit; the flat surface with a sharp edge is one hand broad.
‘Its three actions are whirling, pulling, and breaking, and it is a
good weapon for charioteers and foot soldiers.’ Prof Oppert, writing
‘On the Weapons, &c. of the ancient Hindus’ (1880), tells us that the
Museum of the Madras Government has two ivory throw-sticks from Tanjore
and a common wooden one from Pudukota; his own collection contains
four of black wood and one of iron. All these instruments return,
as do the true boomerangs, to the thrower. The specimens in the old
India-House Museum conform with the natural curvature of the wood,
like the Australian; but, being thicker and heavier, they fall without
back-flight. Not a few of the boomerangs cut with the inner edge, the
shapes of the blade and of the grip making them unhandy in the extreme.

[Illustration: FIG. 41.—THE STICK AND THE SHIELD.

  1. Various forms of Australian Tamarang or Parrying Shields;
  2. Shield of Mundo Negros; 3. Negro parrying Shield; 4. Old
  Egyptian Parrying Shield; 5. Dowak straight flat Throw-stick
  (Australia); 6. Boomerang that does not return; 7. Boomerang
  that does return.]

[Illustration: FIG. 42.—THROW-STICKS.

  1. Australian Tombat; 2. Malga War-pick; 3–6. Australian Waddy
  Clubs; 7. Hatchet Boomerang.]

[Illustration: FIG. 43.—OLD EGYPTIAN BOOMERANG.]

[Illustration: FIG. 44.—BULAK SWORD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 45.—HIEROGLYPHIC INSCRIPTION ON WOODEN SWORD, OF
BULAK.]

From the throw-stick would naturally arise the Chakrá, the steel wheel
or war-quoit, which the Akális—a stricter order of Sikhs—carried in
their long hair, and launched after twirling round the forefinger.[119]
The boomerang-shape is also perpetuated in the dreaded Kukkri or Gurkha
Sword-knife, now used, however, only for hand-to-hand fighting. I
have mentioned the Cuchillo or Spanish clasp-knife- and the Italian
sickle-throwing. The Australian weapon was unknown, like the shield, to
Tasmania, whose only missile was the Waddy or throw-stick.

As the Australian club, swelling at the end, developed itself in one
direction, to the Malga (war-pick) and hatchet, so on the other line it
became, by being narrowed, flattened, and curved, the boomerang and the
boomerang-sword. Finally, the immense variety of curves—some of them
bending at a right angle—were straightened and made somewhat long-oval
and leaf-shaped for momentum and impetus.

[Heading: _THE BOOMERANG-SWORD._]

The direct descent of the curved wooden Sword of Egypt from the
boomerang is shown in many specimens. The blade becomes narrow,
flat, and more curved; the handle proves that it is no longer a
mere missile, and the grip is scored with scratches to secure a
firmer grasp.[120] The best specimen known to me is in the Bulak
Museum.[121] It is a light weapon of sycomore wood, measuring in
length 1 mètre 30 cent. (4 ft. 3 in.), in breadth nearly 15 cent. (6
in.), and in thickness 0·2 cent. (0·78 in.), while the depth of the
perpendicular connecting the arc with the chord is 10 cent. But what
makes it remarkable is that the Sword bears at one side the so-called
‘Cartouche’[122] of King Ta-a-a (17th dynasty), and at the other end of
the same side in a parallelogram the name and titles of Prince ‘Touaou,
the servant of his master in his expeditions.’ This fine specimen was
found with the mummy and other articles at the Drah Abu’l-Neggah, the
Theban cemetery.

The paddle or original oar, mostly used by savages with the face to
the bow,[123] is of two kinds. The long, pointed spear-like implement
serves, as a rule, for deeper, and the broad-headed for shallower,
waters. Both show clearly the transitional state beginning with the
club and ending with the Sword.

Mr. J. E. Calder,[124] describing the Catamaran of the swamp tea-tree
(_Melaleuca_, sp.) on the southern and western coasts of Tasmania,
says (p. 23): ‘The mode of its propulsion would shock the professional
or amateur waterman. Common sticks, with points instead of blades,
are all that were used to urge it with its living freight through the
water, and yet I am assured that its progress is not so very slow.’
Spears were employed in parts of Australia to paddle the light bark
canoes,[125] and the Nicobar Islanders have an implement combining
spear and paddle: it is of iron-wood, and of pointed-lozenge shape,
about five feet in length.[126]

[Heading: _THE CLUB-SWORD._]

The African paddles, usually employed upon lagoons and inland waters,
are broad-headed, either rounded off or furnished with one or more
short points at the end. Every tribe has its own peculiarities, and a
practised eye easily knows the people by their paddles. A broad blade,
almost rounded and very slightly pointed, is also made in the Austral
Isles, in the Kingsmill Islands, and in the Marquesas.

[Illustration: FIG. 46.—TRANSITION FROM CELT TO PADDLE SPEAR AND SWORD
FORMS.

  1. Wooden Club Sword from New Guinea; 2. Paddle from New
  Guinea; 3. New Zealand Pattu-Pattu, or Meri; 4. Pattu-Pattu
  from the Brazil; 5. Analogous forms; 6. Ditto, ditto; 7–10.
  Club Paddles from Polynesia; 11–13. Wooden Spears from Friendly
  Islands.]

[Illustration: FIG. 47.—CLUBS OF FIJI ISLANDS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 48.—WOODEN SWORDS AND CLUBS OF BRAZILIAN INDIANS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 49.—PAGAYA, SHARPENED PADDLE.]

[Heading: _THE PADDLE-SWORD._]

The passage of the paddle into the Sword is well shown amongst
the wilder ‘Indians’ of the Brazil. The Tupis still employ the
Tacapé, Tangapé, or Iverapema, which is written ‘Iwarapema’ by Hans
Stade, of Hesse, in the charmingly naïve account of his travels and
captivity.[127] It was a single piece of the hard, heavy, and gummy
wood which characterises these hot-damp regions,[128] and of different
shapes with and without handles.[129] The most characteristic implement
is a long and rounded shaft with a tabular, oval, and slightly-pointed
blade: it was slung by a lanyard round the neck and hung on either
side. With a weapon of this kind the cannibal natives slaughtered Pero
Fernandes Sardinha, first Bishop of Bahia, and all his suite; the
‘martyrs’ had been wrecked on the shoals of Dom Rodrigo off the mouth
of the Coruripe River. The scene is illustrated in the ‘History’ of the
late M. de Varnhagen (p. 321).

A similar Brazilian instrument was the Macaná, still used on the Rio
das Amazonas, and there called Tamarana. It retains the form of the
original paddle, while for offensive purposes the pointed oval head is
sharpened all round. In parts of the Brazil the Macaná was a rounded
club; and the sharpened paddle used as a Sword was called Pagaye.[130]
The Peruvian Macaná and the Callua—the latter compared with a short
Turkish blade—were made of chonta-wood (_Guilielma speciosa_ and
_Martinezia ciliata_) which was hard enough to turn copper tools.[131]
Mr. W. Bollaert[132] tells us that the ‘Macaná was said by some to be
shaped like a long Sword, by others like a club.’ It was both. The
Tapuyas set these broad-headed weapons with teeth and pointed bones.

[Illustration: FIG. 50.—CLUBS.

  1–4. Samoa Clubs; 5. Cross-ribbed Club; 6. Toothed Club (Fiji).]

[Illustration: FIG. 51.—PADDLES.

  1–3. Spear Paddles; 4, 5. Leaf-shaped; 6. Austral Isles; 7. New
  Ireland; 8. African, from Gaboon River; 9. African, from Coast
  of Dahome.]

Ojeda, during his famous voyage to Carthagena, found the warlike Caribs
wielding great Swords of palm wood, and the women ‘throwing a species
of lance called _Azagay_.’ General Pitt-Rivers’ collection has a fine
flat Club-Sword, five feet two inches long, straight and oval pointed,
from Endeavour River, Queensland, and a smaller article, about three
feet, with a longer handle, from Australia. Barrow River, Queensland,
has supplied him with a half-curved wooden blade five feet long.

[Illustration: FIG. 52.—SAMOAN CLUB (Godeffroy Collection).]

[Illustration: FIG. 53.—WOODEN SABRE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 54.—WOODEN CHOPPER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 55.—KNIFE (WOOD), FROM VANNA LAVA.]

[Heading: _THE WOODEN SWORD._]

The fine Ethnological Museum of Herr Cesar Godeffroy[133] of Hamburg
and Samoa, illustrating the ethnology of the Pacific Islands,
contains many specimens of the knob-stick bevelled on one side of
the head to an edge and gradually passing into the Sword. On the
right-hand entrance-wall are, or were, two fine sabres (fig. 53)
of Eucalyptus-wood, labelled ‘Schwert von Bowen (Queensland).’
The Sandwich Islanders, we see, still wield the Sword-club with
sharp-cutting edges, like their neighbours of New Ireland. The savage
Solomon Archipelago has supplied a two-handed sabre of light and
bright-yellow wood; its longitudinal mid-rib shows direct derivation
from the paddle-club. There is also a lozenge-shaped hand-club, which
may readily have given a model to metal-workers. It is of hard, dark,
and polished wood, and the handle is whipped round with coir (Tafel xx.
p. 97): the length is seventy cent. by four of maximum breadth. The
Swords are unfortunately not figured in the catalogue; but there is a
fine wooden knife forty-nine cent. long by six cent. broad, with open
handle and highly-worked grip (Tafel xxi. p. 135). It comes from Vanna
Lava, Banks Group, New Hebrides, Polynesia (fig. 55).[134]

[Illustration: FIG. 56.—IRISH SWORD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 57.—WOODEN RAPIER-BLADE (Dublin Museum).]

The wooden Sword extended deep into the Age of Metal. Articles of the
kind have been brought from New Zealand, which are evident copies of
modern European weapons. Wilde (p. 452) gives the wooden Sword, found
five feet deep in Ballykilmunary near High Park, county Wicklow, with
some bog-butter, but he finds no indications of its age. The length
is twenty inches (fig. 56). Upon the side of the blade, and of a
piece with it, stands a projection whose purpose is unknown: it is
evidently inconvenient for a toy; but if the relic be a model for a
sand-mould, the excrescence would have left an aperture by which to
pour in the metal. This view is supported by the shape of the handle,
which resembles the grips of the single-piece bronze Swords found in
different parts of Europe. The Dublin Museum also contains[135] a blade
apparently intended for thrusting, and labelled ‘Wooden Sword-shaped
Object.’ The material is oak, blackened by burial in bog-earth: it has
a mid-rib, a bevelled point, and no appearance of being a model (fig.
57).

[Heading: _THE STONE-SWORD._]

Whilst wood was extensively used for Swords, the Age of Stone supplied
few. The broad and leaf-shaped silex-flakes, dignified by the name
of Swords, are only daggers and long knives. The fracture of flint
is uncertain, even when freshly quarried.[136] The workmen would
easily chip and flake it to form scrapers, axes, spear-heads, and
arrow-piles; but after a certain length, from eight to nine inches,
the splinters would be heavy, brittle, and unwieldy. Obsidian, like
silex, would make daggers rather than swords. Such are the stone
dirk and cutlass in the Kensington Museum. Several European museums
preserve these flat, leaf-shaped knives of the dark cherty flint found
in Egypt. The British Museum contains a polished stone knife broken at
the handle, which bears upon it in hieroglyphics the name of ‘Ptahmes
(Ptah-son), an officer.’ There is also an Egyptian dagger, of flint
from the Hay Collection, still mounted in its original wooden handle
apparently by a central tang, and with remains of its skin sheath.[137]
The Jews, who borrowed circumcision from the Egyptians, used stone
knives (τὰς μαχαίρας τὰς πετρίνας). Atys, says Ovid, mutilated himself
with a sharp stone,—

    Ille etiam saxo corpus laniavit acuto;

and the Romans sacrificed pigs with flints. Several undated poniards in
our collections are remarkable: for instance, the English daggers of
black and white flint, rare in Scotland and unknown in Ireland; (_a_)
the Iberian or Spanish blade in the Christy Collection, five and a half
inches long, and found at Gibraltar; the Tizcuco blade of chalcedony,
eight inches long (_ibid._); (_b_) the Danish dagger in the Copenhagen
Museum, thirteen and a half inches long (the rounded handle makes it
a ‘marvel of workmanship’); and (_c_) the flint hatchet-sabre of the
same collection, fifteen and a half inches in length. It is a mystery
how the minute and delicate ornamentation, the even fluting like ripple
marks, on these Danish flint-daggers was produced.

[Illustration: FIG. 58.—FRAGMENTS OF STONE KNIVES FROM SHETLAND.]

[Illustration: FIG. 59.—FLINT DAGGERS.

  _a._ Iberian or Spanish Blade (Christy Collection); _b._ Danish
  Flint Dagger; _c._ Danish Flint Hatchet Sabre.]

A better substance than flint was found in the compact sandstone
and in granitic serpentine, so called because that rock resembles a
snake’s skin. It is easily worked, while it is harder than the common
serpentine. A dagger or knife found beside a stone cist in Perthshire
is described as a natural formation of mica-schiste.

The Stone Age produced nothing more remarkable than the Pattu-Pattu or
Meri of New Zealand, which an arrested development prevented becoming
a Sword. Its shape, that of an animal’s blade-bone, suggests its
primitive material; and New Guinea has an almost similar form, with
corresponding ornamentation in wood. What assimilates it to the Sword
is that it is sharp-edged at the top as well as at the side. It is
used for ‘prodding’ as well as for striking, and the place usually
chosen for the blow is the head, above the ear, where the skull is
weakest. Some specimens are of the finest green jade or nephrite,[138]
a refractory stone which must have been most troublesome to fashion.

[Heading: _THE SWORD OF WOOD AND STONE._]

Wood, however hard and heavy, made a sorry cutting weapon, and stone
a sorrier Sword; but the union of the two improved both. Hence we may
divide wooden Swords into the plain and the toothed blades, the latter—

    Armed with those little hook-teeth in the edge,
    To open in the flesh and shut again.

An obvious advance would be to furnish the cutting part with
the incisors of animals and stone-splinters. In Europe these would
be agate, chalcedony, and rock-crystal; quartz and quartzite; flint,
chert, Lydian stone, horn-stone, basalt, lava, and greenstone (or
diorite); hæmatite, chlorite, gabbro (a tough bluish-green stone),
true jade (nephrite), jadite, and fibrolite, found in Auvergne. Pinna
and other shells have been extensively used—for instance, by the
Andamanese—as arrow-heads and adze-blades.[139]

[Illustration: FIG. 60.—AUSTRALIAN SPEARS ARMED WITH FLINTS AT SIDE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 61.—SWORD OF SABRE FORM, WITH SHARKS’ TEETH (South
Pacific).

  From the Meyrick Collection, now in the British Museum.]

[Illustration: FIG. 62.—ARMED WITH OBSIDIAN (Mexico).]

Tenerife, and the so-called New World, preferred the easily-cleft
green-black obsidian,[140] of which the Ynkas also made their knives.
The Polynesian Islands show two distinct systems of attachment. In the
first the fragments, inserted into the grooved side, are either tied or
made fast by gum or cement. In the second they are set in a row between
two small slats or strips of wood, which, lastly, are lashed to the
weapon with fibres. The points are ingeniously arranged in the opposite
direction, so as to give severe cuts both in drawing and withdrawing.
The Eskimos secure the teeth by pegs of wood and bone. The Pacho of the
South Sea Islanders is a club studded on the inner side with shark’s
teeth made fast in the same manner. The Brazilian Tapuyas armed a
broad-headed club with teeth and bones sharpened at the point.[141] In
‘Flint Chips’ we find that a North American tribe used for thrusting
a wooden Sword, three feet long, tipped with mussel-shell. Throughout
Australia the natives provide their spears with sharp pieces of
obsidian or crystal: of late years they have applied common glass,[142]
a new use for waste and broken bottles (fig. 70). The fragments are
arranged in a row along one side near the point, and are firmly
cemented. There is no evidence of this flint-setting in Ireland: but
the frequent recurrence of silex implements adapted for such purpose
has suggested, as in the Iroquois graves, that the wood which held them
together may have perished. We read in ‘Flint Chips’ that the Selden
Manuscript shows a flake of obsidian mounted in a cleft wooden handle,
the latter serving as a central support, with a mid-rib running nearly
the whole length. The sole use of the weapon was for thrusting.[143]

[Illustration: FIG. 63.—WOOD- AND HORN-POINTS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 64.—MEXICAN SWORD OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY, OF IRON
WOOD, WITH TEN BLADES OF BLACK OBSIDIAN FIXED INTO THE WOOD. (This
weapon is twenty-five inches long.)]

The people of Copan (Yucatan) opposed Hernandez de Chaves with slings,
bows, and ‘wooden Swords having stone edges.’[144] In the account of
the expedition sent out (1584) by Raleigh to relieve the colony of
Virginia, we read of ‘flat, edged truncheons of wood,’ about a yard
long. In these were inserted points of stag-horn, much in the same
manner as is now practised, except that European lance-heads have
taken their place. Knives, Swords, and glaives, edged with sharks’
teeth,[145] are found in the Marquesas; in Tahiti, Depeyster’s Island,
Byron’s Isles, the Kingsmill Group, Redact Island,[146] the Sandwich
Islands, and New Guinea. Captain Graah notices a staff edged with
shark’s teeth on the cast coast of Greenland, and the same is mentioned
amongst the Eskimos by the late Dr. King.[147]

In the tumuli of Western North America, Mr. Lewis Morgan, the
‘historian of the Iroquois,’ mentions that, when opening the ‘burial
mounds’ of the Far West, rows of flint-flakes occurred lying side by
side in regular order; they had probably been fastened into sticks or
swords like the Mexican. Hernandez[148] describes the ‘Mahquahuitl’
or Aztec war-club as armed on both sides with razor-like teeth of
‘Itzli’ (obsidian), stuck into holes along the edge, and fastened with
a kind of gum. Mr. P. T. Stevens (‘Flint Chips,’ p. 297) says that this
Mexican broadsword had six or more teeth on either side of the blade.
Herrera, the historian, mentions, in his ‘Decads,’ ‘Swords made of
wood having a gutter in the fore part, in which the sharp-edged flints
were strongly fixed with a sort of bitumen and thread.’[149] In 1530,
according to contemporary Spanish historians, Copan was defended by
30,000 warmen, armed with these and other weapons,[150] especially with
fire-hardened spears. The same have been represented in the sculptures
of Yucatan, which imitated the Aztecs. Lord Kingsborough’s ruinous work
on Mexican antiquities, mostly borrowed from Dupaix, shows a similar
contrivance (_b_ and _c_). A Sword having six pieces of obsidian in
each side of the blade, is to be seen in a museum in Mexico.[151] A
Mexican Sword of the fifteenth century is of iron-wood, twenty-five
inches long, and armed with ten flakes of black obsidian; and the same
is the make of another Mexican Sword nearly four feet long.[152]

[Illustration: FIG. 65.—MAHQUAHUITLS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 66.—MEXICAN WARRIOR.]

[Illustration: FIG. 67.—MEXICAN SWORD, IRON-WOOD, ARMED WITH OBSIDIAN.
(One metre eight inches long.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 68.—MEXICAN SPEAR-HEAD (FIFTEENTH CENTURY), BLACK
OBSIDIAN, WITH WOODEN HANDLE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 69.—NEW ZEALAND CLUB.]

The next step would be to use metal for bone and stone. So the Eskimos
of Davis Strait and some of the Greenlanders show an advance in art by
jagging the edge with a row of chips of meteoric iron.[153] This would
lead to providing the whole wooden blade with an edge of metal, when
the latter was still too rare and too expensive for the whole weapon.
This economy might easily have overlapped not only the Bronze, but the
Iron Epoch.

The tooth-shaped edge was perpetuated in the Middle Ages, as we see
by serrated and pierced blades of Italian daggers. That it is not yet
extinct the absurd saw-bayonet of later years proves.

[Heading: _FIRST USE OF METALS._]

We now reach the time when Man, no longer contented with the baser
materials—bone and teeth, horn and wood—learned the use of metals,
possibly from an accidental fire, when

          ... a scrap of stone cast on the flame that lit his den
  Gave out the shining ore, and made the Lord of beasts a Lord of men.

The discovery of ore-smelting and metal-working, following that of
fire-feeding, would enable Man to apply himself, with notably increased
success, to the improvement of his weapons. But many races here stopped
short. The Australian, who never invented a bow, contenting himself
with the boomerang, could not advance beyond the curved and ensiform
club before he was visited by the sailors of the West. His simplicity
in the arts has constituted him, with some anthropologists, the living
example of the primitive and prehistoric _genus homo_.[154] The native
of New Guinea, another focus of arrested civilisation, was found
equally ignorant of the metal blade. The American aborigines never
taught themselves to forge either cutting or thrusting Swords; and they
entertained a quasi-superstitious horror of the ‘long knife’ in the
hands of the pale-faced conqueror. This is apparently the case with
all the lower families of mankind, to whom the metal Sword is clean
unknown. If the history of arms be the history of our kind, and if the
missile be the favourite weapon of the Savage and the Barbarian, the
metal Sword eminently characterises the semi-civilised, and the use of
gunpowder civilised, man.

[Illustration: FIG. 70.—AUSTRALIAN SPEARS, WITH BITS OF OBSIDIAN,
CRYSTAL, OR GLASS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 71.—ITALIAN POISON DAGGERS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 72.—ARAB SWORD, WITH DOWN-CURVED GUILLONS AND SAW
BLADE. (Musée d’Artillerie, G. 413, inscription not legible.)]

A chief named Shongo, of Nemuro, in Japan, assured Mr. John Milne[155]
that, ‘in old times, when there were no cutting tools of metal, the
people made them of Aji, a kind of black stone, or of a hard material
called ironstone. Even now implements of this material are employed by
men who dwell far in the interior.’ Here, then, is another instance of
the stone and the metal ‘Ages’ overlapping, even where the latter has
produced the perfection of steel-work.




                              CHAPTER IV.

             THE PROTO-CHALCITIC OR COPPER AGE OF WEAPONS.


I will begin by noticing that the present age has settled a question
which caused much debate, and which puzzled Grote (ii. 142) and
a host of others half a century ago, before phosphor-bronze was
invented. This was the art of hardening (not tempering) copper and its
alloys. All knew that these metals had been used, in cutting the most
refractory substances,[156] granite, syenite, porphyry, basalt, and
perhaps diorite,[157] by the ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, Trojans,
and Peruvians. But none knew the process, and some cut the knot by
questioning its reality. When you cannot explain, deny—is a rule with
many scientists. The difficulty was removed by the Uchatius-gun,[158]
long reported to be of ‘steel-bronze,’[159] but simply of common
bronze hardened by compression. At the Anthropological Congress of
Laibach[160] (July 27–29, 1878), Gundaker Graf Wurmbrandt, of Pettau,
exhibited sundry castings, two spear-heads and a leaf-shaped blade of
bright bronze (Dowris copper) adorned with spirals to imitate the old
weapons. They were so indurated by compression that they cut the common
metal.

Again, at the Anthropological Congress of Salzburg (August 8, 1881),
Dr. Otto Tischler, of Prussian Königsberg, repeated the old experiment,
showing how soft copper and bronze could be hardened by the _opus
mallei_ (simple hammering). Moreover his metal thus compressed could
cut and work the common soft kinds without the aid of iron or steel.
He exhibited two bronze plates in which various patterns had been
punched by bronze dies. The hammering, rolling, beating, and pressing
of copper for the purpose of hardening are well known to modern, and
doubtless were to ancient workmen. The degree of compression applied is
the feature of the discovery, or rather re-discovery.[161]

It may be doubted whether old Egypt and Peru knew our actual process
of hydraulic pressure, whose simplest form is the waterfall. But they
applied the force in its most efficient form. The hardest stones
were grooved to make obelisks; the cuts were filled with wedges of
kiln-dried wood, generally sycomore; and the latter, when saturated
with water, split the stone by their expansion. And we can hardly deny
that a people who could transport masses weighing 887 tons[162] over a
broken country, from El-Suwan (Assouan) to Thebes, a distance of 130
miles, would also be capable of effecting mechanical compression to a
high degree.

Buffon (‘Hist. Nat.’ article ‘Cuivre’) believed in the ‘lost art.’
Rossignol[163] (pp. 237–242) has treated of the _trempe_ (διά τινος
βαφῆς) _que les anciens donnèrent au cuivre_; and relates that the
chemist Geoffrey, employed by the Comte de Caylus, succeeded in
hardening copper and in giving it the finest edge; but the secret was
not divulged. Mongez, the Academician, held that copper was indurated
by immersion and by gradual air-cooling, but that _la trempe_ would
soften it.[164] In 1862 David Wilson, following Proclus and Tzetzes,
declares the process of hardening and tempering copper so as to give
it the edge of iron or steel, a ‘lost art.’ Markham[165] supposes
that the old Peruvians hardened their copper with tin or silica; and
he erroneously believes that tin is scarcely found in that section of
South America.

Modern archæological discovery has suggested that in many parts of the
world we must intercalate an age of virgin Copper between the so-called
Stone and Bronze Periods. The first metal, as far as we know, was the
stream-gold, washed by the Egyptians; and, as Champollion proved, the
hieroglyphic sign for Núb (gold) is a bowl with a straining-cloth
dripping water.[166] The fable of glass-discovery by the Sidonians
on the sands of the Belus,[167] a tale which has _le charme des
origines_, explains, I have said, how a bit of metalliferous stone,
accidentally thrown upon the fire in a savage hut, would suggest one
of the most progressive of the arts. And soon the ‘featherless biped,’
like the Mulciber and the Mammon of Milton—

    Ransack’d the centre, and with impious hands
    Rifled the bowels of their mother earth
    For treasures better hid.

The greater antiquity of copper in Southern Europe was distinctly
affirmed, as has been seen, by the Ancients. The use of sheeting, or
plating, on wood or stone was known as long ago as the days of Hesiod
(B.C. 880–850?):

    Τοῖς δ’ ἦν χάλκεα μὲν τεύχεα, χάλκεοι δέ τε οἶκοι,
    Χαλκῷ δ’ εἰργάζοντο, μέλας δ’ οὐκ ἔσκε σίδερος.—_Erga_, 149.

    Copper for armour and arms had they, eke Copper their houses,
    Copper they wrought their works when naught was known of black
        iron.[168]

Copper sheets[169] were also used for flooring, as we learn from the
χάλκεος οὐδός (Copper threshold) of Sophocles (‘Œdip. Col.’); and
the treasury-room of Delphi, as opposed to the λάϊνος οὐδός (stone
threshold). So in the Palace of Alcinous (‘Odys.’ vii. 75) the walls
and threshold were copper, the pillars and lintels were silver, and the
doors and dogs of gold.

The same practice was continued in the Bronze Period, as Dr. Schliemann
proved when exploring the Thalamos attached to the Treasury of Minyas
at Orchomenus. Nebuchadnezzar, in the ‘Standard Inscription,’ declares
that he plated with copper the folding-doors and the pillars of the
Babylon rampart, and it is suspected that gold and silver sheeted the
fourth and seventh stages of the Temple of Belus, _vulgò_ the Tower of
Babel.

Lucretius[170] is explicit upon the priority of copper—[171]

    Posterius ferri vis est ærisque reperta,
    Sed prior æris erat quam ferri cognitus usus.
    Ære solum terræ tractabant, æreque belli
    Miscebant fluctus et volnera vasta ferebant.—V. 1286.

He justly determines its relation to gold—

    Nam fuit in pretio magis æs, aurumque jacebat,
    Propter inutilitatem, hebeti mucrone retusum.—V. 1272.

And he ends with the normal sneer at his own age—

    Nunc jacet æs, aurum in summum successit honorem.—V. 1274.

Virgil, a learned archæologist, is equally explicit concerning the
heroes of the Æneid and the old Italian tribes—

    Æratæ micant peltæ, micat æreus ensis.—Æn. vii. 743.

And similarly Ennius—

    Æratæ sonant galeæ: sed ne pote quisquam
    Undique nitendo corpus discerpere ferro.[172]

Even during her most luxurious days Rome, like Hetruria, retained
in memoriam the use of copper (or bronze?) for the sclepista or
sacrificial knife. When founding a city they ploughed the pomœrium
with a share of æs. The Pontifex Maximus and priests of Jupiter used
hair-shears of the same material, even as the Sabine priests cut their
locks with knives of æs. The Ancile or sacred shield was also of æs.

Pope, and other writers of his time, translated copper and bronze by
‘brass’ (copper and zinc); and in older English ‘native brass’ was
opposed to ‘yellow copper’ (_cuivre jaune_). The same occurs in the
A. V. Tubal Cain (the seventh in descent from Adam) is ‘an instructor
of every artificer in _brass_ and iron’[173] (Gen. iv. 22). Moses is
commanded to ‘cast five sockets of _brass_ for pillars’[174] (Exod.
xxvi. 37). Bezaleel and Aholiab, ‘artists of the tabernacle,’ work in
_brass_ (Exod. xxxi. 4). We read of a ‘land whose stones are iron,
and out of whose hills thou mayest dig _brass_’ (Deut. viii. 9). Job
tells us, ‘Surely there is a vein for the silver, and a place for gold
where they fine it. Iron is taken out of the earth, and _brass_ is
molten out of the stone.’[175] Hiram of Tyre was ‘cunning to work all
works in _brass_’ (casting and hammer-wrought), for Solomon’s Temple,
which dates from about two centuries after the time of the Trojan war
(B.C. 1200). In Ezra (viii. 27) the text mentions ‘two vessels of fine
copper, precious as gold;’ and the margin reads ‘yellow or shining
_brass_.’ Nor is the old word quite forgotten: we still speak of a
‘_brass_ gun.’

‘In the _Brazen_ Age,’ unphilosophically says Schlegel (‘Phil. of
Hist.’ sect. ii.), ‘crime and disorder reached their height: violence
was the characteristic of the rude and gigantic Titans. Their arms were
of _copper_, and their implements and utensils _brass_ or bronze.’ I
should generally translate, with Dr. Schliemann and Mr. Gladstone, the
Homeric χαλκός, ‘copper,’ not bronze, chiefly because the former is
malleable and is bright, two qualities certainly not possessed by the
alloy. There are alloys which are malleable,[176] and others (Dowris
copper) which shine; but this is not the case with common bronze, and
no poet would note its brilliancy as a characteristic.

Pure copper, however, would generally be used only in lands where tin
for bronze, and zinc for brass, were unprocurable: isolated specimens
may point only to a temporary dearth. Thus, the Copper Age must have
had distinct areas. M. de Pulsky and M. Cartenhac (‘Matériaux,’ &c.)
held to a distinct Copper Age between the Neolithic and the Bronze.
Dr. John Evans considers the fabrication due to want of tin or to
preference of copper for especial purposes. But the types of copper
tools, &c., are not transitional.

The native ore was used in many districts of North America. Celts of
various shapes from Mhow, Central India, were analysed by Dr. Percy,
who found no tin in them. Tel Sifr in Southern Babylonia and the island
of Thermia in the Greek Archipelago supplied similar articles. They are
also discovered exceptionally in Denmark, Sweden, Austria, and Hungary,
France, Italy, and Switzerland. I have noticed the use of the unmixed
metal in the Crannogs of Styria. It seems to have prevailed in Istria:
at Reppen-Tabor near Trieste, the supposed field of battle with the
Romans that decided the fate of the Peninsula (B.C. 178), was found a
fine lance-head of pure copper eight and a half inches long: it is now
in the Museo Civico. The same was the case with Dalmatia; at Spalato
and elsewhere I saw axe-heads of unmixed metal. And we have lately
obtained evidence that old Lusitania, like Ireland,[177] was in similar
conditions.

Thus the Age of Copper would be simply provisional in certain
localities, separating the periods of horn and bone, teeth and wood,
from that of alloys; even as the latter led, in the due line of
development, to the general adoption of iron and steel for Swords and
other weapons. But we have no need for dividing the epochs with the
perverse subtilties of certain naturalists, who use and abuse every
pretext for creating new species. If there be any sequence, it would
be copper, bronze, and brass. In most places, however, the ages were
synchronous, and some races would retain the use of the pure metal,
even when tin and zinc lay at their doors.

The Venus (♀) of alchemy was called in the Semitic tongues _nhs_ or
_nhsh_, in Arab _nahás_, and in Hebrew _nechosheth_ (נחשת). The term
is popularly derived from a triliteral root signifying a snake, the
crooked reptile, the serpent that is in the sea (Job xvi. 13; Is.
xxvii. 1; Amos ix. 3, &c.); either because the metal is poisonous, like
the Ophidæ, or from its brightness of burnish. Similarly, _dhahab_
(זהב), gold, was named from its splendour; and silver, also meaning
money (_argentum_, argent), was _kasaf_ (כסף), the pale metal, the
‘white gold’ of Egypt. Both _nechosheth_ and _nahás_ apply equally to
copper, bronze, and brass; hence we must probably read ‘copper Serpent’
for ‘_brazen_ Serpent,’ and ‘City of Copper’ for ‘City of _Brass_.’

[Heading: _COPPER IN CYPRUS._]

There is the same ambiguity in the Greek and the Roman terms. The word
χαλκός (_chalcus_) is popularly derived from χαλάειν, ‘to loose,’
because easily melted: I should prefer Khal or Khar, ‘Phœnicia,’ whose
sons introduced it into Greece. The Hellenes dug it in Eubœa, where
Chalcis-town[178] gave rise to the ‘stone’ χαλκῖτις (_chalcitis_,
Pliny, xxxiv. 2). They also knew the ore as ἡ κύπρος; and when the
Romans, who annexed Cyprus in B.C. 57, worked the mines, their produce,
says Josephus, was called χαλκὸς κύπριος. _Chalcos_ is essentially
ambiguous unless qualified by some epithet, as ἔρυθρος (red), μέλας
(black), αἴθιοψ (Ethiopian colour = ruddy brown), πόλιος (iron-grey),
and so forth. In fact, like _æs_, it is a generic term for the
so-called ‘base metals’ (iron,[179] copper, tin, lead, and zinc), as
opposed to the ‘noble metals’—gold and silver, to which we should add
platinum.

Worse still, χαλκεύς (_khalkefs_), a copper-smith, was applied to the
blacksmith,[180] and even to the _chrysochoös_, or gold-caster, at
the court of Nestor (‘Od.’ iii. 420, 432); and to χαλκεῖα or χαλκήϊα,
smithies in general. The Roman _æs_, opposed to the _cyprium_ or _æs
cyprium_[181] of Pliny (xxxiv. 2, 9), and _smaragdus cyprius_ or
malachite, is equally misleading unless we render it ‘base metal.’ We
know not how to translate Varro[182] when he speaks of the cymbals at
the feast of Rhea: ‘Cymbalorum sonitus, ferramentorum jactandorum vi
manuum, et ejus rei crepitus in colendo agro qui fit, significant quod
ferramenta ea ideo erant ære’ (copper, bronze, brass?), ‘quod _antiqui_
illum colebant ære antequam ferrum esset inventum.’ Here he wisely
limits the dictum to Greece and Rome.

According to S. P. Festus (_sub voce_), ‘ærosam appellaverunt antiqui
insulam Cuprum,[183] quod in eâ plurimum æris nascitur.’ We now derive
the Sacred Island from ‘Guib’ (pine-tree), ‘er’ (great), and ‘is’
(island); ‘Guiberis,’ alluding to its staple growth. General Palma (di
Cesnola[184]) prefers the Semitic ‘kopher’ (_Lawsonia inermis_), the
henna-shrub, even as Rhodes took its name from the rose or malvacea;
and he finds in Stephanus Byzantinus[185] that the plant was then
abundant. The diggings are alluded to by all the great geographers of
antiquity, Aristotle (‘de Anim.’ v. 17[186]), Dioscorides (v. 89),
Strabo (xvi. 6), and Pliny (xii. 60, xxxiv. 20). In Ezekiel (xxvii. 13)
the trade in copper vessels is attributed to Javan (Ionia), Tubal, and
Meshech; the latter are the Moschi of Herodotus (vii. 78), a Caucasian
people who may have originated the ‘Moscows’ or Russians. Agapenor
and his Arcadians were credited with having introduced copper-mining
into Neo-Paphos; yet there is no doubt that the Phœnicians had worked
metal there before the Greek colonisation. Menelaus (‘Od.’ iv. 83–4)
visits Cyprus for copper; and Athene-Mentor fetches it, as well as
‘shining iron’ (steel?), from Temése (Τεμέση, ‘Od.’ i. 154).[187] These
diggings, together with those of Hamath (Amathus, Palæo-Limassol),
Soli, Curium, and Crommyon, are mentioned by Palma, who also alludes
to an ‘unlimited wealth of copper.’ Yet, despite this and the general
assertion that copper was the most important production of Cyprus, we
have found only the poorest mines at Soli in the Mesaoria-plain, the
counterslope of the Pedia. The island, it is true, has been wasted
and spoiled by three centuries of the ‘unspeakable Turk.’ But the
researches of late travellers and collectors—and these have been
exhaustive since the British occupation—have hitherto failed to find
extensive traces of mining. The rarity, together with the poverty of
the matrix, would suggest the following explanation.

Cyprus was probably not so much a centre of production as a depôt of
trade which collected the contributions of adjacent places—e.g. the
isle of Siphanos (Sifanto), where copper has been found with iron and
lead. Such was the general history of islands and archipelagos outlying
barbarous and dangerous coasts on the direct lines of commerce, various
sections of the world’s great mercantile zone and highway of transit
and traffic. The Cassiterides, also, served as storehouses for the
stream-tin and the chalcopyrite (copper pyrites) of Cornwall and of
Devonshire, whilst they enjoyed the fame of producing it. During the
Middle Ages, Hormuz or Ormuz (Armuza), in the Persian Gulf, served, and
Zanzibar still serves, as a centre of import, export, and exchange, as
a magazine and as a shipping station for its mainland.

One of the ores which occurs in the greatest number of places[188] and
in the largest quantities; having a specific gravity ranging from
8·830 to 8·958; harder and more elastic than silver; the most tenacious
of metals after iron and platinum; malleable when cold as well as when
hot, so as not to require the furnace; melting at a temperature between
the fusion points of silver and gold (1196° F.); and readily cast in
sand-beds and moulds, Copper must have been used in the earliest ages,
and has continued to our day, when the art of smelting it—at Swansea,
for instance, in South Wales—is perhaps more advanced than that of any
other ore. When the stone-and-bone weaponed peoples began their rude
metallurgy, they would retain, with similar habits of thought, the same
principles of design. The old Celtis, Celt, or chisel of serpentine or
silex, would be copied in the newly-introduced and gradually-adopted
weapon-tool of metal; and the transition would be so gradual that we
trace without difficulty the process of development. The first metal
blade was probably a dagger of copper, preserving the older shape of
wood, horn, and stone: possibly it resembled the copper knife found at
Memphis in 1851 by Hekekyan Bey; and this afterwards would grow to a
Sword. Wood, stone, copper, and bronze, iron and steel, must long have
been used simultaneously, slowly making way for one another, as the
musket took the place of the matchlock, the rifle of the musket.

According to Pliny (vii. 57), ‘Aristotle supposes that Scythes,
the Lydian, was the first to fuse and temper copper; while
Theophrastus,[189] in Aristotle’s day, ascribes the art to Delas,
the Phrygian. Some give the origin to the Chalybes, others to the
Cyclopes.’ Achilles, the pupil of Chiron (ibid. v. 20), is represented
in pictures as scraping the _ærugo_[190] or verdigris off a spear
into the wound of Telephus, the effect of which diacetate would soon
be followed by the discovery of blue-stone (sulphate of copper, blue
copperas) or blue vitriol, still a favourite in the East. Pausanias
(‘Æliaca’) further informs us that Spanish copper, or copper from
Tartessus, was the first used. The classics agree that Cadmus (not
‘the foreigner,’ but the ‘old man,’ _El-Kadim_, or the ‘Eastern man,’
_El-Kadmi_) introduced metallurgy into Greece.

[Heading: _EGYPTIAN COPPER MINES._]

We have ample evidence of extensive working and use of copper, called
‘Khomet,’ by the peoples of the Nile Valley. The ore occurs in the
Wady Hammámát, the Egyptian Desert, and the so-called ‘Sinaitic’
Peninsula. As the Pyramids are the oldest of buildings, so the works
in Wady Magharah (Valley of Caves) are perhaps the most ancient mines
in the world.[191] They were first opened (circ. B.C. 3700–3600) by
the eighth king of the Third Dynasty, the Sephouris of Manetho, the
Senoferu (‘he that makes good’) of the inscriptions, who lies buried
in the pyramid of Mi-tum (Maydúm).[192] A rock-tablet of this Pharaoh,
the ‘great god, the subduer, conqueror of countries,’ shows him holding
a foreigner by the hair and smiting the captive with a mace. Above his
head are carved a graver (pick?) and a mallet. Soris, first Pharaoh of
the Fourth Dynasty, ‘Lord of Upper and Lower Egypt, ever living,’ also
strikes down an enemy and shows the same symbols. They again appear
in the tablet of Souphis, the Shufu or Khufu of the Tables of Abydos
and Sakkara,[193] and the Cheops of the Great Pyramid, whilst they
are wanting in that of his brother Nu-Shufu (Souphis II.) or Khafra
(Cephren) of the Pyramid.

[Illustration: FIG. 73.—SEPHURIS AT WADY MAGHARAH (OLDEST ROCK
TABLETS). THIRD DYNASTY.]

[Illustration: FIG. 74.—SORIS AND THE CANAANITES AT WADY MAGHARAH
(OLDEST ROCK TABLETS). FOURTH DYNASTY.]

[Illustration: FIG. 75.—TABLET OF SUPHIS AND NU-SUPHIS AT WADY
MAGHARAH. (FOURTH DYNASTY.)]

The diggings were not abandoned till the days of Amenemhat, of the
Twelfth Dynasty, when the labourers were removed to Sarábit-el-Khádim,
the ‘Men-hirs’ (not heights) of the Servant in the Wady Nasb or Valley
of Sacrificial Stone. Here gangs of miners, guarded by a strong force,
extracted (as the slag-heaps show) Mafka or Mefka[194] (copper?
malachite?[195] turquoise?), ‘black metal’ (copper), ‘green stones’
(malachite?), manganese, and iron. Supt and Athor or Hathor (Venus),
the Isis of pure light, who presided over the Mafka-land, and who was
the ‘goddess of copper,’ are mentioned in a tablet. Other hieroglyphs
contain the names and titles of the rulers, and fragments of vases
bear the name of Mene-Pthah,[196] one of the supposed Pharaohs of the
Exodus. The ‘hands’ left their marks by graffiti or scribblings, and
there are extensive remains of slave-quarters, of deep cuts, and of
rock-sunk moulds for running the metal into ingots, Sarábit-el-Khádim
continued working until Ramses IV. (Twentieth Dynasty), the last
royal name there found: his date in round numbers would be B.C. 1150.
Agatharchides (B.C. 100) reports that chisels of chalcos (λατομίδες
χαλκαῖ) were found buried in the ancient gold mines of Egypt, and hence
he deduces that the use of iron was unknown.

[Heading: _COPPER IN AFRICA AND ASIA._]

From Kemi or Χημία, ‘black-earth land,’ _alias_ Egypt, the art of
metallurgy doubtless extended southwards into the heart of Africa.
Hence travellers wonder when they see admirable and artistic
blacksmiths amongst races whose sole idea of a house is a round hut
of wattle and dab. The only coppers in South Africa with which I am
familiar are those of Katanga in the Cazembe’s country,[197] where the
Portuguese have long traded. Captain Cameron[198] was shown a calabash
full of nuggets found when clearing a water-hole. In Uguhha he procured
a ‘Handa’ from Urua, a Saint Andrew’s cross with central ribs to the
arms, measuring diagonally fifteen to sixteen inches by two inches wide
and half an inch thick: the weight was two and a half to three pounds.
The people prefer this ‘red copper’ to the ‘white copper,’ as they call
gold. In the Pantheon of Yoruban Abeokuta, ‘Ogun,’ the local Vulcan and
Wayland Smith, god of metal-workers and armourers, is symbolised by a
dwarf spear of copper or iron, and human sacrifices are, or were, made
to it. Barth (vol. iii.) notes the copper (ja-n-Karfi) in El-Hofrah
(‘the Diggings’) of Waday, south of Dar-For; and in the Kano, the
Runga, and the Bute countries. Copper wire is worn by the women of the
hill-lands of Gurma, but it is supposed to be brought from Ashanti (?).
Africa, however, is as yet unexplored as regards its mineral wealth,
and we are only beginning to work our old-world California—the Gold
Coast. Farther south the highly-important copper-mines of Pemba, now
Bemba, and other parts of the inner Congo and Benguella regions,
were discovered by the Capitão-Mór, Balthazar Rebello de Aragão, in
1621–23.[199] Still more to the south, Namaqua-land supplies chalcitic
ores, a native carbonate, reduced with cow-chips.

In Asia mines were worked by the ancient Assyrians for copper as
well as lead and iron, and the former was applied to their weapons,
tools, and ornaments.[200] The Kurds and Chaldæans still extract from
the Tiyari heights about Lizan and the valley of Berwari various
minerals—copper, lead, and iron; silver, and perhaps gold. Upon the
Steppes of Tartary, and in the wildest parts of Siberia, the remains of
old copper-furnaces, small and of rude construction, are met with. The
Digaru Mishmís of Assam have copper-headed arrows.

The Chinese declare that in olden times men used the metal for arms,
which in the days of the Thsin (B.C. 300) began to be made of iron.
Sir John Davis (i. 230) confirms the fact that the Chinese Sword and
backsword, both wretched weapons, were originally of copper, long ago
changed to iron. Dr. Pfizmaier tells us that about B.C. 475 the King
of U sent a steel blade to his minister, U-tse-tsui, wherewith to
behead himself. According to Pliny, the Seres exported iron to Europe
together with their tissues and their skins. The Chinese distinguish
between Thse-thung (purple copper) and Thing-sung (green copper) or
bronze. They prefer the ‘Tze-lae,’ or natural ore, gathered in the
torrent-beds of Kwei-chow and Yun-nan, and the latter exclusively
produces the famous Pe-tung,[201] or white copper, which takes a fine
polish like silver. They made copper the base of their coinage as
well as their weapons. Amongst their many charms and talismans are
the ‘money-swords,’ a number of ancient copper coins pierced with
a square central hole, and connected by a metal bar shaped like a
cross-hilted Sword. These are suspended over the testerns of beds and
sleeping-couches, that the guardianship of the kings in whose reigns
the money was issued may keep away ghosts and spirits.

The Japanese copper[202] is of the finest quality, and is used as a
standard of comparison. The superiority of the metal, which contains
a percentage of gold, enabled the self-taught native workmen to
produce those castings which are the admiration and the despair of
the European artist. The copper delivered at Nagasaki and Kwashi is
from Beshki, Akita, and Nambu; other places produce the more ordinary
kinds. The rich red surface is due to a thin and tenaciously adhering
film of dioxide: this has been imitated in England. The famous Satzuma
copper, held to be the best in the world, was prepared under Government
officials, none being sold privately. The ore was roasted in kilns
for ten to twenty days, smelted in large furnaces with charcoal, and
cast in water to make the well-known Japanese ingots. These were bars
measuring about half an inch on the side, by seven to nine inches in
length, and weighing some ten taels, nearly equal to one pound. They
were packed in boxes each weighing a picul (= 125 to 133⅓ lbs. avoir.),
about the load of a man. The price of course greatly varied. The trade
was at first wholly in the hands of the Hollanders, who made a good
thing of their monopoly. There was also an old traffic in Japanese
copper on the eastern coast of India, especially Coromandel. The
opening of the empire has caused revolutionary changes.

[Heading: _THE COPPER AGE._]

Copper was abundantly produced in Europe, and the pure metal was used
throughout the continent with the exception of Scandinavia, where
specimens are exceedingly rare. The iron age of Denmark begins with
the Christian era, and was preceded only by bronze and stone. We know
nothing of the discovery of copper in Ireland. It is supposed in legend
to have been introduced by the Fir-bolgs (bag-men, Belgæ?), or by the
Tuatha (gens) de Danaan (the Danes?). These oft-quoted races, known
to us only by name, have been affiliated with a host of continentals,
even with the Greeks.[203] It would be mere guess-work to consider the
Irish style of treating the ores—by spalling or breaking the stone,
by wasting, fluxing, or smelting. We have, however, many specimens
which explain the casting. The metal was called by the natives Uma or
Umha, a Keltic word; also Dearg Umha, red copper, opposed to Ban[204]
Umha (white copper) or tin; and this term afterwards became ‘stan,’
evidently from stannum (Gall. Estain). There are still traditions of
copper mines having existed at an early period; and, among the wonders
related by Nonnius (Archæol. Soc. Ireland), we find Loch Lein, now
Killarney, surrounded by four circles of copper, tin, lead, and iron.
Of late years ‘miners’ hammers,’ the native name for stone pounders,
have been dug up in the neighbourhood of that lake, in Northern
Antrim, at an ancient mine in Ballycastle, and in sundry parts of
Southern Ireland.[205] The metal occurs in small quantities at Bonmahon
(Waterford); copper and cobalt at Mucross, and grey copper ore in Cork,
Kerry, Tipperary, and Galway. In 1855 some 1157 tons were shipped to
Swansea.

The Greenlanders and Eskimos cut and hammer their pure native copper,
without smelting, into nails, arrow-piles, and other tools and weapons.
Mackenzie (second voyage) tells us that pure copper was common among
the tribes on the borders of the Arctic Sea, whose arrow-heads and
spear-heads were cold-wrought with the hammer. Columbus (fourth
voyage), before touching the mainland of Honduras, saw at Guanaga
Island a canoe from Yucatan[206] laden with goods, amongst which he
specifics ‘copper hatchets, and other elaborate articles, cast and
soldered; forges, and crucibles.’[207] At Hayti the great Admiral
(first expedition) had mentioned masses of native copper weighing six
arrobas (quarters).[208] When the Spaniards first entered the province
of Tupan they mistook the bright copper axes for gold of low touch,
and bought with beads some six hundred in two days:[209] Bernal Dias
describes these articles as being very highly polished, with the handle
curiously carved, as if to serve equally for an ornament and for the
field of battle.

[Heading: _COPPER IN AMERICA._]

In North America there are two great copper regions which supplied the
whole continent[210]—Lake Superior and the lower Rio Grande. The former
shows the first transitional steps from stone to metal. The ore occurs
in the igneous and trappean rocks that wall in the vast fresh-water
sea, and is found in solid blocks: one, fifty feet long, six feet deep,
and six feet in average thickness, was estimated to weigh eighty tons.
At Copper Harbour, Kawunam Point, a single vein yielded forty thousand
pounds. The largest mass in the Minnesota Mine (Feb. 1857) occupied
Mr. Petherick and forty men for twelve months: it was forty-five feet
long, thirty-two feet broad (max.), and eight feet thick; containing
over forty per cent. ore, and weighing four hundred and twenty to five
hundred tons. Malleable and ductile, representing an average of 3·10
per cent. native silver, and with a specific gravity of 8·78 to 8·96,
it required no crucible but Nature’s; it wanted only beating into
shape, and it needed nothing of the skilled labour necessary for the
ores of Cornwall and Devon, which contributed so largely to the wealth
of Tyre. The workings are supposed to belong to the race conveniently
called ‘Mound-builders,’ and to date from our second century, when
the Damnonians of Cornwall were in a similar state of civilisation.
‘Cliff Mine’ supplied fine specimens of weapons and tools, arrow-piles
and spear-heads, knives and three-sided blades like the old bayonet.
The socket was formed by hammering flat the lower end, and by turning
it over partially (without overlapping) at each side, so as to make a
flange. Professor James D. Butler (‘Prehistoric Wisconsin’) facsimiles
twenty-four copper implements. The ‘Indians’ called the metal
Miskopewalik (red iron), opposed to black iron. As is also proved by
the Brockville relics, the people had the art of hardening copper.

The mines of the lower Rio Grande supplied Mexico with materials for
arms and tools. According to Captain R. H. Bonnycastle,[211] the
metal was found in New Mexico and in the volcanic rocks of Mechoacan
(Valladolid, New Spain). Mexico, like Peru, used the crucible and added
bronze to copper. The metals were under the god Quetzalcoatl, an Aztec
Tubal Cain-ben-Lamech.

Another great centre of the Copper Age was the land ‘where men got gold
as they do iron out of Biscay.’ The Peruvian army, a host of three
hundred thousand levied from a total population of twenty millions,
was armed with bows and arrows, clubs, pikes, javelins, war-axes (of
stone and copper), and the paddle-sword;[212] while the people of
Anahuac (Mexico) had bows and spears, clubs and axes, knives and Swords
one-handed and two-handed, the Mahquahuitl set with obsidian teeth.
In the former country the pre-Ynkarial Aymaras, who dug for gold and
silver, copper and tin, and who employed alloys, almost ignored for
their ‘Ayri’ (cutting implements) the use of iron and steel, which they
called Quella (Khellay). The Andes range is popularly derived from
the Quichua word Anta[213] (copper): the native ore occurred in the
parts above the cultivation-line, and it abounded in the cupriferous
sandstones of Bolivian Corocoro. The Huaunanchuco country (Rivero and
Tschudi, p. 203),[214] conquered by the ninth Ynka, produced a fine
collection of stone and copper axes, chisels, pins, and tweezers. Blas
Valera, one of the earliest writers, still often quoted, tells us that
‘Anta’ served in place of iron, and that the people worked it more than
other ores, preferring it to gold (_Khori_) and silver.[215] Of it were
made their knives, carpenters’ tools, women’s dress-pins (_Tupies_),
polished mirrors, and ‘all their rakes and hammers.’ Garcilasso de
la Vega adds: ‘pikes, clubs, halberts, and pole-axes,[216] made of
silver, copper, and some of gold, the “tears of the sun,” having sharp
points, and some hardened by the fire’; also carpenters’ axes; adzes
and hatchets; bill-hooks of copper, and blow-pipes of the same metal
about a yard long applied to earthen or clay pots which they carried
from place to place. A nugget or loose pebble acted as bell-clapper,
and copper statuettes were coated or plated with precious metals. The
‘Royal Commentaries of the Yncas’ tells us that copper served in
place of iron for making weapons of war: the people valued it highly
because more useful than gold and silver; the demand was greater than
for any other metal, and it paid tribute (vol. i. pp. 25, 43, 48).
We find notices of copper hammers, bellows-nozzles, adzes, axes, and
bill-hooks (i. p. 102). Cieza de Leon (chap. lxiii.) tells us that the
Peruvians placed a piece of gold, silver, or copper in the corpse’s
mouth. He mentions vases of copper and of stone (chap. civ.), and small
furnaces of clay where they laid the charcoal and blew the fire with
thin canes instead of bellows (ibid.). The Introduction (p. lii) notes
the Peruvian use of copper-trowels for smoothing and polishing walls,
and a ‘terrible weapon of copper in the shape of a star.’ According to
Rivero and Tschudi (chap. ix.) the Peruvians could not work copper as
well as gold or silver; yet they made idols, vases, solid staves a yard
long with serpents inlaid, and sceptre-heads decorated with condor-like
birds. The household _vaisselle_ of the Ynkas consisted of gold and
silver, copper and stone. Rivero, analysing Peruvian weapons and tools
(hatchets and chisels), found from five to ten per cent. silica: he
could not determine whether it was an artificial or an accidental
impurity. Tschudi (1841) discovered copper arms in a tomb three leagues
from Huaco, and established the fact that the Peruvians used the
paddle-sword and the scymitar.[217] A copper axe, found in a Huaca (old
grave) at the now well-known Arica, was associated with a thong-sling
and with other primitive instruments.

The people of New Granada, according to the tale of Bollaert,[218]
‘gilt’ their copper by ‘rubbing the juice of a plant on it and then
putting it into the fire, when it took the gold colour’—a process which
reminds us of Pliny’s ox-gall varnish. Ecuador forged copper nippers
for tweezers. The Chitchas, or Muiscas (i.e. men), of Bogota, who knew
only gold and ignored copper, tin, lead, and iron, made their weapons
and tools of hard wood and stone. Thomas Ewbank,[219] of New York,
catalogues as breast-plates two laminæ of copper and one of bronze,
the latter being notably the lighter. Out of sundry ‘bronzes’ from
Peru he found four of pure copper. Chile had abundant mines of copper,
and her metal is held to be the toughest: a bar three-eighths of an
inch thick will bend backwards and forwards forty-eight times before
breaking. Her chief centres are Copiapo (i.e. ‘turquoise’), Huasco,
Coquimbo, Aconcágua and Caléo. The Couche range at Guatacondo, in sight
of the desert of Atacama, which gave a name to Atacamite (submuriate
of copper), is said to supply from the same vein gold, silver, copper,
and coquimbite or white copperas called Pampua (packfong?).[220] Gillis
(Plate viii. 12, 3) described, amongst the antiquities found near the
great Ynkarial High-road, a cast copper axe, weighing about three and
a quarter pounds: he doubts, however, that the ancient Chilians worked
in that metal. The wild Araucanians called gold ‘copper’ (Bollaert, p.
184). According to Molina, the Puelche tribe extracted from the mines
of Payen a copper containing half its weight (?) in gold; and the same
natural alloy was found in the Curico mines.

[Heading: _COPPER._]

Returning to the Old World, we see copper tools denoted in Egyptian
hieroglyphs by a reddish-brown tint;[221] iron and steel, as in
Assyria, being coloured, not grey, but water-blue.[222] With these
yellow tools the old workmen are seen cutting stone blocks and
fashioning colossal statues. Dr. John Forbes, of Edinburgh,[223] had
a large chisel of pure copper, showing marks of use, found with a
wooden mallet in an Egyptian tomb. A flat piece of copper, apparently a
knife-blade, was turned up when boring thirteen feet below the surface
where stands the statue of Ramses II. (B.C. 1400).[224] The Abbé
Barthélemy proved, to the satisfaction of P. J. Rossignol, that the
arms of the Greeks were first of copper; that iron was introduced about
the date of the Trojan war (circ. B.C. 1200),[225] and that after this
time ‘Athor-Venus’ was no more in use. Ulysses (‘Iliad,’ i. 4, 279)
offers Achilles all the gold and copper he can collect, and Achilles
will carry off all the gold, the red copper (χαλκὸν ἐρυθρόν), women,
and iron or steel (σίδηρον), when Peleides returns that noble answer:

    Hostile to me is the man as the hatefullest gateway of Hades,
    Whoso in thought one thing dare hide and utter another.[226]

Numa ordered the priests to cut their hair with copper, not iron,
scissors.[227] Copper vases and kettles as tomb-furniture were found
by Dr. Schliemann at Mycenæ: the museum of the Warwakeion at Athens
contains seven of these funeral urns. They have also been met with at
Etruscan Corneto and Palestrina, and in Austrian Hallstatt,[228] a
cemetery which dates from the days when iron was coming into use, and
apparently belongs to a much later period than Mycenæ. The Hindús had
a copper coinage, and that of the sub-Himalayan Gangetic provinces
appears older than Greek art. There is a copper coin bearing on the
reverse the rude figure of a horse, and on the obverse a man with
legend in old Buddhist (Pali) letters Khatrapasa Pagámashasa.[229] The
Jews, who, like the Etruscans, had a copper coinage, used the metal
for offence and defence. As amongst the Philistines, Phœnicians, and
Carthaginians, whose relics have been found in the Cannæ Plain, the
metal was at first pure. The ‘bow of steel’ (Job xx. 24, Ps. xviii.
34) should be rendered ‘bow of copper,’ either copper-plated or (more
probably) so tempered as to be elastic. Goliah of Gath (B.C. 1063), who
measured nine feet six inches, carried a target, greaves, a spear with
an iron head, and a scale-coat[230] of copper: the spear-head weighed
six hundred and the armour five thousand shekels (each 320 grains
Troy), or 33·33 and 277·77 lbs.[231] David was armed (1 Sam. xvii. 38)
with a helmet of copper. Ishi-benob (B.C. 1018), who was ‘of the sons
of the giant,’ carried a spear weighing three hundred shekels (about
sixteen and a half pounds) of copper. Finally, Buffon believes that the
arms of the ancient Asiatics were cuprine.

[Heading: COPPER IN EUROPE.]

Mr. John Latham declares:[232] ‘Copper is a metal of which, in its
unalloyed state, no relics have been found throughout England. Stone
and bone first, then bronze or copper and tin combined, but no copper
alone. I cannot get over this hiatus, cannot imagine a metallurgic
industry beginning with the use of alloys.’ But this is a negative
argument. The simple mineral would soon disappear to make bronze, and
we have some pure specimens. Sir David Brewster[233] describes a large
battle-axe of pure copper found on the blue clay, twenty feet deep
below the Ratho Bog. Philips[234] gives the analysis of eight so-called
‘bronzes,’ including three Swords, one from the Thames and two from
Ireland: the spear-head was of impure but unalloyed copper, 99·71 to
0·28 sulphur. Dr. Daniel Wilson[235] analysed in 1850 seven British
‘bronzes,’ and found one Scottish axe-head, rudely sand-cast, of almost
pure copper, the natural alloy of gold and silver not reaching to one
per cent. Moreover, the Romans certainly smelted copper in England,
where lumps of pure metal, more or less rounded, have been found, but
always in association with bronze articles. Pennant describes a relic
discovered at Caerhun (or Caerhen), the old Conovium, near Conway and
Llandudno, which still works copper: it was shaped like a cake of
beeswax, measuring eleven inches by three and three-quarter inches in
thickness; it weighed forty-two pounds, and the upper surface bore
in deep impression, ‘Socio Romæ’ (to the partner at Rome). Obliquely
across the legend ran in smaller letters, ‘Natsoc.’ It had evidently
been smelted upon the spot. In later days our country imported her
copper from Sweden and Hungary: this appears in the specification of
patent to George Danby, Jan. 21, 1636. Calamine was shipped as ballast.
Our great works began during the last century and culminated in Swansea.

[Illustration: FIG. 76.—THE WINGED CELTS, OR PALSTAVE.

  1. Semilunar blade; the rounded side edges are ornamented
  in the casting with a raised hexagon pattern; they project
  somewhat above the level of the flat surface of the implement.
  The curved stops, which are rudimentary, have their concavities
  facing the handle. 2. In the Palstave celt the loop is usually
  placed beneath the stock, and in the socketed ones it is always
  close to the top. The cut, drawn one-third of the actual size,
  represents the usual position of the loop. The lunette cutting
  edge, with marked recurved points, presents the appearance of
  having been ground.[236] These implements were cast in moulds
  of bronze, examples of which have been brought to light at
  various times. The third illustration represents the upper part
  of one of these celt moulds and the method of casting: they
  were for a long time a source of confusion to the discoverers,
  although Colonel Vallancy assigns them to their true use.]

Wilde (p. 490) expresses the general opinion when he asserts that ‘the
use of copper invariably preceded that of bronze.’ He well explains
by two reasons why so few antique implements of pure copper have been
found in Ireland: either a very short period elapsed between the
discovery of treating the pure ores and the introduction of bronze;
or the articles, once common, were recast and converted into the more
valuable mixed metal. The latter cause is made probable by the early
intercourse with Cornwall, one of the great tin emporia. ‘Tin-stone’
(native peroxide of tin or stannic acid) is produced in small
quantities by Ireland, and Dr. Charles Smith[237] declares that he
collected it.

Wilde also notices, in the Royal Irish Academy, weapons, tools, and
ornaments of red metal or pure copper. These are thirty celts of the
greatest simplicity and the earliest pattern, rudely formed tools, a
few fibulæ, a trumpet, two battle-axes, and several Sword-blades of the
short, broad, and curved shape usually called scythes.

[Illustration: FIG. 77.—COPPER CELTS IN THE DUBLIN COLLECTION.]

The pure copper celts, formed upon two or three types, are the oldest
in the Dublin collection, and were probably the immediate successors
of the stone implement. As a rule they have one side smoother than
the other, as if they had been run into simple stone moulds; they are
also thicker and of rougher surface than the bronze article. For the
most part they are rude and unornamented wedges of cast metal: a few
are lunette-shaped and semilunar blades. The cleansed specimens show a
great variety of colour. When first found, the brown crust, peculiar
to the oxidised metal, readily distinguishes them from the bronze
patina, the beautiful varnish of æruginous or verdigris hue, artificial
malachite resembling in colour the true native carbonate of copper.

[Heading: _COPPER SWORDS._]

The broad scythe-shaped Swords, numbering forty-one, are supposed to
be ‘specially and peculiarly Irish.’ The straight blades are shown by
their large burrs, holes, and rivets either to end in massive handles
of metal, or to be attached to wooden staves, long or short. Of this
kind some are curved. As many are of ‘red bronze’ (pure copper),
darkened by oxidation, it is probable that they are of great antiquity,
like the celts of that period. Although in some cases the points have
been broken off, yet the edges are neither hacked, indented, nor worn;
hence the conclusion that they were true stabbing Swords. Yet Mr.
John Evans declares that he knows no such thing as a copper Sword.
In this matter he partially follows Lévesque de la Ravalière, who
declared copper arms unknown to the Greeks[238] and Romans, Gauls and
Franks: this savant was refuted and charged with unfairly treating his
authorities by the Comte de Caylus in a description of seven copper
Swords dug up (1751) at Gensal in the Bourbonnais. The Abbé Barthélemy
attributed seven copper blades to the Franks in the reign of Childeric.

We have ample evidence that ‘copper’ is ambiguously used by modern
travellers. The modern discoverer of Troy[239] gives us, in his last
and revised volume, a full account of exploring fifty-three feet
deep of débris and laying bare the stratified ruins of seven cities,
including that of the ‘ground floor’ and the Macedonian ruins. The two
lowest bear witness to a copper age anterior to bronze, whilst they
yielded the only gilded object, a copper knife, and the most advanced
art in specimens of hand-made pottery.[240] The second from below was
walled, and the third, the most important, was the Burnt City, the
city of the golden treasures, identified with Ilios. The explorer
claims to have reduced the Homeric Ilium to its true proportions.
The grand characteristic in his finds is the paucity of iron, which
appeared only in the shape of oxidised ‘sling-bullets’: tin is also
absent. Both these metals, it is true, oxidise most readily; yet, had
the objects been numerous, they would have left signs, in rust and
stains. From ‘Troy’ we learn (p. 22) that ‘all the copper articles met
with are of pure copper, without the admixture of any other metal’:
the author also finds that ‘implements of pure copper were employed
contemporaneously with enormous quantities of stone weapons and
implements.’ He will not admit (‘Troy,’ p. 82) that he has reached the
bronze period when he discovers in the ‘Trojan stratum,’ at a depth of
thirty-three to forty-six and fifty-two feet, nails, knives, lances,
and ‘elegantly-worked battle-axes of pure copper.’[241] And we can
accept the copper, for much of it was analysed by Professor Landerer,
of Athens, ‘a chemist well known through his discoveries and writings.’
He examined the fragments found in the ‘Treasury of Priam,’ and made
all of them to consist of pure copper, without any admixture of tin or
zinc (‘Troy,’ p. 340). When treating of the Bronze Age, I shall show
that alloys were not wanting.

[Illustration: FIG. 78.—SCYTHE-SHAPED BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 79.—STRAIGHT BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 80.—STRAIGHT BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 81.—SCYTHE-SHAPED BLADE.]




                              CHAPTER V.

   THE SECOND CHALCITIC AGE OF ALLOYS[242]—BRONZE, BRASS, ETC.: THE
                          AXE AND THE SWORD.


The use of copper, I have said, would be essentially transitional; and
the discovery of smelting one kind of metal would lead immediately to
that of others and to their commixture. Moreover, when casting and
moulding began to be a general practice, unalloyed copper difficult to
smelt, and when melted thick, sluggish, and pasty, would not readily
run without some mixture into all the sinuosities of the mould. In
this chapter I propose to notice the second chalcitic age—that of the
earliest combinations of metals, their workers, and their application
to weapons.

J. P. Rossignol, following the opinion of the symbolists and
mysticists, as the Baron de Saint Croix,[243] Creuzer, Freret, and
Lobechs,[244] assigns a Divine origin—after the fashion of the day—to
metallurgy, making it resemble in this point Creation, articulate
language,[245] and the discovery of corn and wine. So he understands
the θεολογούμενα (subjects of a theological nature) alluded to by
Strabo (x. 3, § 7). It is the old hypothesis of supernatural agency
in purely natural matters, a kind of luxus-wonder, as the Germans
call useless miracles, which had waxed stale, even in the days of
Horace—‘parcus Deorum cultor et infrequens.’ He considers the Curetes
and Corybantes, the Cabiri (Kabeiroi) of Lemnos and Imbros, and the
Idæi Dactyli of Crete, the Telchines of Rhodes, and the Sinties, Sinti,
or Saii of Thrace (Strabo, xii. 3, § 20) as metallurgic δαίμονες, or
genii prisoned in human form, and typifying the successive steps of
the art. In these days we hardly admit the _intersit_ of a deity when
human nature suffices to loose the knot; nor do we believe that our
kind began by worshipping types. Man has always worshipped one thing,
himself, and himself only, either in the flesh or in the ghost—that
is, in the non-flesh or the objective nothing—till he arrived at the
transcendental Man, the superlative, the ideal of Himself.

[Heading: _THE GOD-SMITHS._]

How little of fact is known about the mysterious tribes above mentioned
becomes evident by a glance at the classics. All six are supposed to be
Asiatics, worshippers of Rhea (the earth), the great mother of the gods
and queen of the metal workers. Yet Strabo explains Curetes from Greek
terms κόροι (boys), κόραι (girls), κουρά (tonsure), and κουροτροφεῖν
(to bring up the Boy, i.e. Jupiter). Similarly their brethren, the nine
Corybantes, were termed from their dancing gait and negro-like butting
with the head, κορύπτοντας. They inhabited Samothrace (Samothracia
alta): this venerable and holy island, in hoar antiquity a general
rendezvous of freemasonry, or rather of free-smithery, forms a triangle
with metallic Thasos and with volcanic Lemnos.

The three or four Cabiri[246] bear a Semitic name, Kabir = the great or
the old. They seem at first to have represented Ptah-Sokar-Osiris,[247]
and Herodotus (iii. 37) mentions their temple at Memphis. They became
in Phœnicia the earliest boatmen or primordial shipbuilders, identified
by some with the Sesennu or Egyptian Octonary; by others with the seven
planets or the stars of Typho, our Great Bear;[248] and by others,
again, with the seven Khnemu (gnomes) or pygmy-sons who waited upon
their father Ptah-Vulcan. They inhabited Lemnos, where Hephæstus, when
expelled, like Adam, from the lowest heaven, took refuge among the
Pelasgi (Diod. Sic. lib. v.): hence the latter preserved their worship.
Damascius (‘Life of Isidorus’) says: ‘The Asclepius of Berytus is
neither Greek nor Egyptian, but of Phœnician origin; for (seven) sons
were born to Sadyk, called Dioscuri and Cabiri, and the eighth of them
was Esman (i.e. Octavius, No. 8), who is interpreted Asclepius.’[249]

The Idæan Dactyli (fingers or toes) who occupied ‘fountful Ide’[250]
consisted of five brothers, representing the _dextra_ or lucky hand
(science, art), and five sisters for the _sinistra_ or unlucky
(witchcraft, ill omens). The names of these ‘hands’ (iron-workers) were
Kelmis (fire or heat = the smelter), Damnameneus (the hammer, or who
governs by strength, Thor), Hercules (force, animal or mental), and
Akmon (the anvil or passive principle). Hence Pyracmon the Cyclop, one
of the seven architect brothers who, according to Strabo (viii. 6),
came from Lycia and built the ‘Cyclopean Wall’ in the Argolid. These
Cyclopes[251] (monocular giants) worked metal, and under their magic
hands,

            Fluit æs rivis aurique metallum;
    Vulnificusque chalybs vasta fornice liquescit.

By later writers, the Cyclopes, who

            ... Stridentia tingunt
    Æra lacu (_Æn._ viii. 445, _Georg._ iv. 172),

were held to be Sicilians.

The Telchines (fascinators, from θέλγειν, to charm) are mentioned
as metallurgists by Stesichorus the Sicilian (nat. B.C. 632): they
were the sons of Thalassa, i.e. they came from beyond the sea; they
colonised Telchinis, and they made arms and statues of the gods
like the Dædalides or artist families of later Athens. The Sinties
(plunderers) from τὸ σίνεσθαι (to pill), who, according to Hellenicus
of Lesbos (nat. B.C. 496), were pirates besides being coppersmiths
(χαλκυές), and who were eventually murdered by their wives, represented
the ancient Lemnians. So Homer (‘Od.’ viii. 290) speaks of the
‘barbarous Sintian men’ who received Vulcan when kicked out of
Paradise. A modern school of Tsiganologues would identify them with
prehistoric Gypsies, who have still a tribe called Sindi; but this
theory would bring the arts from India westwards, whereas the current
flowed the clean contrary way. Finally, Herodotus (i. 28), initiated in
the mysteries, makes the Chalybes[252] or iron-workers, neighbours (and
congeners?) of the Phrygians.

It is not difficult to see the general gist of such legends. All
these tribes probably came (like Pelops, Tantalus, and Niobe) from
the same place, Phrygia, the fertile plateau of Asia Minor, and its
Katakekaumene or volcanic tract. It was, as far as we know, the first
western centre which developed the ‘Aryan’ or non-Semitic element of
the old Egyptian tongue. It also formed the _point de départ_ of the
European[253] (miscalled ‘Indo-European’) branch of the family that
owned the Arya-land (Airyanem-vaejo), whose ethnic centre was the
barbarous region about Ray, Heri, or Herat.[254] Hence, says Herodotus
(iii. 2), the Egyptians owned the Phrygians to surpass them in
antiquity. The emigrants would pass to the islands Samothrace, Lemnos,
Thera,[255] the Cyclades and Crete; to Greece, Thessaly and Epirus,
Attica, Argos, and the farthest south, where ‘Pelops the Phrygian,’
son of King Tantalus, colonised the Morea and founded the Pelopid
race. Then they would find a home in Italy, Hetruria, and Iapygia
(or Messapia), Peucetia and Daunia, and finally they would settle in
Iberia, Spain, and Portugal, where the Briges or Brygi (Phrygians) have
left their names in the Braganza of the present day.

These Proto-Phrygians and Phrygo-Europeans, of whom several tribes
returned to Asia, were the prehistoric metal-workers. The smith (from
_smitan_, to strike) was sacred in the dawn of history; and the
Sword-maker was not inferior to him. Those who have witnessed the awe
and reverence with which savages and barbarians regard a European
mechanic at his forge will see exemplified the emotional feeling which
led to the human becoming the superhuman.[256]

[Heading: _ALLOYS._]

The first step in κρατέρωμα (hardening of metals) was, according
to Hesychius, Μίξις χαλκοῦ καὶ κασσιτέρου (the mingling of copper
and tin). The alloy was known generically as chalcos (base metal),
specifically as χαλκὸς μέλαινος (black chalcos). The Latins persisted
in terming it simply _æs_; e.g. _æs inauratum_ (gilt bronze). Our
word bronze derives from _brunus_ (fuscous, sombre, brown); _brunum
æs_. Hence the Low Latin (A.D. 805) _brunea_, _brunia_, or _bronia_,
a lorica or thorax; and the Low Greek πόρτας μπρούτξινες (pronounce
broutzines), ‘portals of bronze.’ The word is also derived from the
Basque or Iberian _bronsea_.

Tin, one of the least durable of metals, at the same time readily
fused and one of the easiest to treat metallurgically, was called by
the Greeks κασσίτερος, and by the Latins _cassiteron_,[257] whence
probably the Arab. قصدير, and the Sanskrit कस्तीर. The Hebrew name is
בדיל (Badíl = a substitute, a separation, an alloy). Hut (white metal)
in Egyptian includes silver and tin: in Coptic it is Thram, Thran, or
Basensh. Kalaí (Linschoten’s ‘Calaem’) is the popular term for tin in
India: the word is Arabic rather than Turkish. Tenekeh (tin-plate) in
Arabic is an evident congener of the Assyrian [Cuneiform] ‘Anaker,’
and it remarkably resembles the Scandinavian Din, German Zinn, and our
Tin. As we find ‘Teyne’ in Chaucer and old writers, ‘tin’ may come
from its easy ‘thinning’ or beating out. The later Latins changed the
_plumbum album_ or white lead of Pliny (iv. 30) to _stannum_: whence
our word derived through the neo-Latin. The origin of Kassiteron,
Kasdír, Kastira, is disputed, and philologists remark that Cassi is
a British (Keltic) prefix, as in Cassi-belanus. Tin was found in the
Caucasus, in India, in Southern Persia (Drangæ Country); in Tuscany, in
Iberia (Spain and Portugal),[258] in Sweden, Saxony, Bohemia, Hungary,
and notably in England. There are still deposits near the modern
Temeswar (Pannonia), and the granite hills of Gallicia and Zamora are
not exhausted. It is now produced in Russia, Greenland, the Brazil, and
the United States. Wilkinson would fetch the alloy of ancient Egypt
from Spain, India, Malacca, or even from Banca,[259] between Sumatra
and Borneo; the Banca tin-mines, long worked by the Chinese were first
visited by the Portuguese in 1506. But compounds of tin and copper were
common in Egypt at the time of the Sixth Dynasty (B.C. 3000). Tin is
mentioned as early as B.C. 1452 in the Book of Numbers (xxxii. 22),
with gold and silver, ‘brass’ (copper, especially pyrites), iron, and
lead[260] (‘oferet’). In B.C. 760 the prophetic books, called from
Isaiah (i. 25) and from Ezekiel (xxii. 18, 20), make tin an alloy of
silver.

The Egyptians would derive their metals in the first place from Upper
Egypt; and their first Kheft or mines of gold (_khetem_) and copper
lay in the Thebaid. Secondly, they would resort to the land of Midian
on the eastern flank, and running south of the long narrow gulf,
El-Akabah: this grand range of Ghats or Coast Mountains was in those
days a noted mining centre, and it has still a great industrial future.
Thirdly, by means of the Phœnicians, who apparently taught the Greeks
metallurgy which they learned in Egypt, they would import their tin
from Southern France, Spain, and England.[261]

[Heading: _TIN._]

It is a disputed question whether the Phœnicians discovered the
tin-stones and the stream-tin of the Cassiterides,[262] or whether the
ore was worked by the ‘Welsh of the Horn’—the barbarians of Cornwall
and Devonshire, who in those days were probably confined to small
coast-clearings.[263] Herodotus, indeed, knows nothing (iii. 115) of
‘any islands called the Cassiterides (tin islands) whence the tin
comes.’ These Silures or Scilly Islands were evidently mere depôts,
not sites of production. The Phœnicians kept their secret well, and
lost their ships rather than betray it; so says Strabo (iii. 5, § 11),
whose Cassiterides appear to be the Azores.[264] The age when the trade
was first opened is disputed; some place it B.C. 1500, others[265]
reduce it to B.C. 400. Diodorus Siculus (v. 21–2) tells us that tin
was found and run into pigs near the Belerium Promontory (Land’s
End); thence it was carted to Ictis (Vectis, not the Isle of Wight,
but Saint Michael’s Mount and Love Island);[266] and lastly horsed
across Gaul to the Rhone. There is in the Truro Museum[267] a pig of
tin, flat above and reniform below (the shape of the mould), two feet
eleven inches by eleven inches broad, with a particular mark; it has
been suggested that this is Phœnician. ‘Cassiter Street’ in Bodmin
is supposed to retain the classical name. The second Thursday before
Christmas Day is called in Cornwall (Kern-Walli, Cornu Galliæ) ‘Picrous
Day,’ from the man who discovered the ‘streaming’ (or washing) of
‘stean’ or tin. Strabo gives a bad account of the people of the twelve
Cassiterides and their Cornishmen, the latter ‘resembling the Furies
we see in tragic representations.’ These pleasant persons would find
stream-tin, almost fit for use, lying upon the surface by the side of
copper pyrites—the latter harder than tin, but still comparatively soft
and ductile. Both ores were easily fused, while iron was comparatively
difficult and tedious to smelt; and the two (copper and tin) combined
were not only more fusible, but they also continued longer in the fluid
state, facilitating casting and moulding. Hence Worsäae believes that
England was an ancient centre of bronze, whence the alloy was diffused
throughout Europe. It is usually stated that the bronze-using period
in England began between B.C. 1400 and 1200, and lasted eight to ten
centuries, the invasion of Cæsar taking place during the early ‘Iron
Age.’

The great bronze manufacture which we have first to consider is Egypt.
The exact average proportion of the alloy is hard to ascertain,[268]
the tin varying from ten to twenty per cent., and the copper from
eighty to ninety per cent. A dagger analysed by Vauquelin gave copper
eighty-five, tin fourteen, and iron one per cent. Wilkinson’s bronze
chisel, nine and a quarter inches long, and weighing one pound twelve
ounces, found in a quarry at Thebes, contained in one hundred parts
94·0 copper, 5·9 tin, 0·1 iron; consequently its edge is at once turned
by hard stone. He repeatedly mentions bronze chisels (ii. ch. vii.
&c.), and he seems to suspect that they were sheathed and pointed with
steel. Of course, he was puzzled to explain how the ‘bronze or brass
blades were given a certain degree of elasticity.’[269]

[Illustration: FIG. 82.—FINE SPECIMEN OF EGYPTIAN DAGGER IN POSSESSION
OF MR. HAYNS, BROUGHT BY MR. HARRIS FROM THEBES.

  The material is bronze, and still is slightly elastic. There
  is a mid-rib, but not strongly marked. The tang, which is
  continued to the pommel, measures 4 inches long by a minimum
  of 5/12. The handle, of two slices of hippopotamus hide, has
  26 ridges for firmer grasp, and there are rivets of bronze at
  the 6th and the 23rd ridges. There is no pommel, but here the
  handle is rounded off between two slices of hide, and the tang
  goes right through.]

The result of Egyptian metallurgy is admirable, both in material
and finish. At what period bronze was introduced we ignore; a cast
cylinder, however, bearing the name of Pepi, dates from B.C. 3000 in
the Sixth Dynasty of Middle Egypt, which includes Nitaker (Nitocris).
Knives appear in the sculptures dating from before that time. A bronze
dagger in the Berlin Museum, found by Sig. Passalacqua in a tomb at
Thebes, retains a spring which might be of steel. My friend, Mr. W. P.
Hayns, of the Alexandrian Harbour Works, showed me a specimen brought
from Thebes by the late Mr. Harris, made of bronze still slightly
elastic. The total length measures one foot, of which the blade is
half; the latter, slightly leaf-shaped, has a minimum breadth of one
inch and three-twelfths, and one inch at the shoulder. The tang, which
is prolonged to the handle-end (four inches), has a minimum width of
five-twelfths. The grip of two plates, hippopotamus hide (?), probably
boiled, and not unlike wood, has twenty-six ridges for firmer hold, and
there are bronze rivets at the sixth and the twenty-third ridges: it is
without pommel, the end being simply rounded off.

It is held that mummies of the Eleventh Dynasty were buried with
bronze sabres; and there is a bronze dagger of Thut-mes[270] III.
(Eighteenth Dynasty), circa B.C. 1600. As late as Mene-ptah II. of the
Nineteenth Dynasty (B.C. 1300–1266), we read in the list of his loot,
after the Prosopis battle, of bronze-armour, Swords, and daggers.
Among the Etruscans, before the foundation of Rome, bronze statues
were known; and Romulus is said to have placed a statue of himself,
crowned by Victory, in a bronze quadriga taken at Comertium. According
to Pausanias (iii. 12, § 8), Theodorus of Samos invented casting in
bronze (B.C. 800–700): this author discredits the Arcadian legend that
Neptune dedicated a bronze statue to Poseidon (the Sidonian?) Hippios
(Wilkinson, ii. chap. vii.). But the Samians cast a bronze vase in B.C.
630.

The importance of the Uchatius re-discovery, that is, of hardening
bronze as well as copper by hydraulic pressure, not by phosphorus,[271]
becomes evident by Wilkinson’s reflections. ‘We know of no means of
tempering copper, under any form, or united with any alloys for such
a purpose’ (as hollowing out hieroglyphics). He suggests that the old
Egyptian letters, sometimes exceeding two inches in depth, and the
alt-reliefs nine inches high, on granite coffins, may have been worked
with wheel-drill and emery powder.[272] The Egyptians had also the
secret of gilding bronze, as many of their remains prove; moreover,
they produced by acids a rich patina of dark and light greens.

[Heading: _METALLURGY IN ASSYRIA._]

The Assyrians rivalled in metallurgy their ancient instructors the
Egyptians: and the art passed eastwards to Persia, which inherited
Assyrian and Babylonian civilisation. Diodorus Siculus, following
Ctesias the oft-quoted contemporary of Xenophon, describes immense
works of bronze decorating the gardens of Semiramis. In Assyria, again,
the proportion of the alloy greatly varied. Layard[273] quotes the
following assays of Assyrian bronze:

            No. 1   No. 2   No. 3   No. 4
  Copper    89·51   89·85   88·37   84·79
  Tin        0·63    9·78   11·33   14·10
            —————   —————   —————   —————
            90·14   99·63   99·70   98·89

No. 1 shows the proportions found in a bronze dish from ‘Nimroud’; No.
4 in a bell; and the fore-leg of a bull[274] yielded 11·33 tin to 99·70
copper. The Mesopotamians were able to cast their bronze extremely
thin, which is no small difficulty; they fashioned it into weapons,
temple utensils, and domestic articles, and they skilfully ‘elaborated
it by chasing and by curious ornamental tracery.’ They used it in their
most sumptuous decorations, as the thrones prove; and the beautiful
workmanship of their vases shows abnormal skill in the toreumatic
treatment of bronze. Gilt specimens of bronze from Nineveh are in the
British Museum.

Dr. Schliemann questions the popular assertion that the age of Hesiod
and of Homer ignored alloys and fusion, knowing only plating, the
plates being hammer-wrought (‘Od.’ iii. 425). This explorer found
the strata of copper and lead scoriæ at the so-called Troy from
twenty-eight to twenty-nine and a half feet deep. He notes also small
crucibles and a mould of mica-schist (twenty-six feet deep), which was
probably intended for bronze casting. He finds no iron; but copper
and its alloy, bronze, are abundant. M. Damour of Lyon[275] analysed
the drillings of two ‘copper’ battle-axes from ‘Ilium,’ in fact, from
‘Priam’s Treasury’; they contained 0·0864 and 0·0384 parts tin to
0·9067 and 0·9580 copper. Nearly the same proportion of alloy was found
in a common two-edged axe dug at a depth of three and a quarter feet,
and therefore in the remains attributed to a Greek colony. Dr. Percy
analysed, with the following results, the handle of a bronze vase and a
Sword:

  Copper (mean)    86·36
  Tin (mean)       13·06
                   —————
                   99·42

The specific gravity (at 60° F.) was 8·858. The extreme proportions of
the alloy in other articles were 10·28 tin to 89·69 copper (a usual
ratio in ancient bronzes[276]), and 0·09 tin to 98·47 copper, the
latter being almost pure.

[Illustration: FIG. 83.—BRONZE KNIFE, FROM THE PILE-VILLAGES OF
NEUCHÂTEL.

  (Half-size.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 84.—PERUVIAN KNIFE, METAL BLADE, SECURED IN A SLIT
IN THE HAFT BY STRONG COTTON TWINE.]

Mongez, of the Institut, describing a bronze Sword found in France,
gives the proportions as 87·47 per cent. of copper to 12·53 of tin.
Analyses of Greek bronzes in the British Museum yielded 87·8 per cent.
copper to 12·13 tin. A bronze knife has been found in the Palafittes
(Pile-villages) of Neuchâtel, Switzerland.[277] Worsäae (‘Primæval
Antiquities’) makes the Bronze Period in Denmark and Northern Europe
begin about B.C. 500 to 600, and last some 1,100 years. It is not
found among the Normans. But it was developed in Ireland and Scotland,
in China and Japan, in Mexico and in Peru: Cieza de Leon notes the
admirable bronze work of the Ynkarial empire.

A Peruvian chisel, analysed by M. Vauquelin, contained 0·94 copper to
0·06 tin. In other tools the proportion of the latter metal varied
from two to four, six and even seven per cent. As a rule the people
used only half the proper proportion of tin, which they called
Chayantanka—a name suggesting the Old-World ‘Tanuk.’ Humboldt mentions
a cutting tool found near Cuzco with ninety-four per cent. of copper
and six of tin. Rivero (i. 201) notices in Peru brass (?) hammers and
bellows-nozzles, axes, adzes, bill-hooks, and other tools, of bronze
as well as copper. The Mexicans cast their tin ingots in T-shape. The
Peruvians hardened copper also with silver for quarrying-tools and
crow-bars. Velasco (ii. 70) tells us that when the Ynka Huasca was
being led to prison by order of his brother, a woman secretly gave him
a bar of metal, ‘silver with bronze, brass, or an alloy of silver,
copper, and tin’ (Bollaert, p. 90); by means of this he cut through the
jail wall during the night. Hutchison (ii. 330) mentions a buckler from
Ipijapa in Ecuador, and Ewbank (p. 454) notices an old Peruvian bronze
knife.[278]

[Heading: _PROPORTIONS OF ALLOYS._]

The admirable bronzes of China and Japan are well known in the English
market, and Raphael Pumpelly,[279] who studied direct from the native
workmen, has printed interesting notes on the ornamental alloys, or
Mokume, applied to Swords and other articles. Damask-work is produced
by soldering alternately thirty to forty sheets of rose-copper, silver,
_shakdo_ (copper one to gold ten per cent.), and _gui shi bu ichi_
(silver and copper). The mass is then cut into deep patterns with
the reamer. An alloy of silver (thirty to fifty per cent. of copper)
produces the favourite tint, a rich grey colour, and this becomes a
bluish black like niello by being boiled after polishing in a solution
of sulphate of copper, alum, and verdigris. Dr. Percy (p. 340)
describes the liquation of argentiferous copper in Japan.[280]

We owe to Dr. George Pearson[281] sundry experiments in alloys, which
first determined that the norm of the Old World and the best proportion
for weapons and tools are one tin to nine copper.

Fusing the metals, he found:

1 tin : 20 copper (5 per cent.) produces a dark-coloured bronze with
the red fracture of the pure metal.

1 tin : 15 (6½ per cent.) gives a stronger alloy and obliterates the
colour.

1 tin : 12, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3 gradually increases hardness and
brittleness.

1 tin : 2 makes a mixture almost as brittle as glass.

The following table[282] shows the alloys now in common use, and the
purposes to which they are applied:

  Tin   Copper     Per cent. Copper
  11     108    =   90·76            Cannon, statues, machine brasses.
  11      99    =   90               ‘Gun-metal’ proper (cannon).
  11      84    =   84·44            ‘Gun-metal,’ machinery bearings.
  11      72    =   86·75            Harder composition.
  11      60    =   84·50            Not malleable.
  11      44    =   80               Cymbals, Chinese gongs.
  11      48    =   81·35            Very hard, culinary vessels.
  11      36}   =  {76·69}           ‘Bell-metal.’
  12      36}      {75·00}
  11      24    =   68·57            Yellowish, very hard, sonorous.
  11       4    =   26·66            Very white,[283] specula.[284]

The most popular alloy of copper, next to bronze, is brass, which is
harder and wears better than the pure metal. Originally, as now, it was
a mixture of copper and zinc, popularly called spelter (old _speautre_,
_speauter_, _spiauter_, _spialter_).[285] The proportions greatly
varied, one part of the latter to two of the former being the older
ratio, and the density increasing with the amount of copper from 8·39
to 8·56.

Beckmann tells us, in his valuable ‘History of Inventions,’[286] ‘in
the course of time an ore which must have been calamine (carbonate of
zinc) or blende[287] (sulphuret of zinc), was added to copper, and
gave it a yellow colour. The addition made it harder, more fusible and
sonorous, easily subject to the lathe, more economical to work, and a
worse conductor of heat than the pure metal.’ We have few specimens
of old art-works in ‘brass’ proper, although zinc was discovered by
analysis in an ancient Sword, chiefly copper.[288] Gibel assures
us that zinc occurs only in Roman alloys, the bronze of the Greeks
containing nothing beyond copper, tin, and lead. The Romans also could
varnish or lacquer brass, but it is not known whence they derived
the art. Percy notes (p. 521) that brass was produced ‘early in the
Christian era, if not before its commencement.’ He quotes in proof
a large coin of the Cassia Gens (B.C. 20) which contained copper
82·26 and zinc 17·31; a Vespasian (Rome, A.D. 71), an imperial Trajan
(Caria, circ. A.D. 110), a Geta (Carian Mylasa, A.D. 189–212), a Greek
Caracalla (A.D. 199), and many others. In modern times zinciferous ore
was imported by the Portuguese from the East a century before it was
common throughout Europe.[289] In the early seventeenth century the
Dutch captured one of their craft laden with spelter, and the secret
became known. Bishop Richard Watson says (1783) the cargo was _calaem_,
which he connects with ‘calamine’: the latter, like the German
_Galmei_, derives from _cadmia_.

Amongst the moderns _æs_ gave rise to _airain_. The French _leton_,
_laton_, _latton_, or _laiton_ (_cuivre jaune_); the Italian
_lattone_, _lottone_, and lastly _ottone_, and the Spanish _lata_ and
_laton_, German _Latun_, and English _latten_ (thin sheet brass),
the _latoun_ of Chaucer (‘Pardoner’s Prologue,’ 64), are either
from _luteum_, yellow (metal), or from the plant _luteum_ (_Reseda
luteola_), used to stain chrysocolla.[290] Our _brass_ is probably
the Scandinavian _bras_, cement; and the German _Mosch_, _Meish_, and
_Messing_, from _mischen_ = _miscere_.[291]

[Heading: _ORICHALCUM._]

It may be advisable to notice the ὀρειχάλκον[292] of the Homerids
and Hesiod, which Strabo also calls ψευδάργυρος (false silver), and
_aurichalcum_, and which the perverse ingenuity of commentaries has
made so mysterious.[293] In the poetic phase, which loves the vague,
this ‘mountain-copper’ was a mythic natural metal, ranking between
gold and silver, and chimerical as was the _chalcolibanon_[294] of the
Apocalypse (i. 15, ii. 18). The name does not occur in Pindar or the
Dramatists. Plato (the ‘Critias,’ § ix., treating of Atlantis,[295]
America) makes _oreichalc_, ‘now known only by name,’ the most
precious metal after gold. Pliny (xxxiv. 2) tells us truly enough that
_aurichalcum_ no longer exists.

The next application of the word was to ruby copper (?), a suboxide
whose beautiful crystals are formed in the natural state. Pollux and
Hesychius the grammarian (D.D. 380) define it as copper (χαλκός)
resembling gold; and Cicero puts the question whether, if a person
should offer a piece of gold for sale, thinking he was disposing of
only a piece of orichalcum, an honest man ought to inform him that
it was really gold, or might fairly buy for a penny what is _worth
a thousand times as much_.[296] Buffon compares it with tombac, or
Chinese copper containing gold.[297] Beckmann (_s. v._ ‘Tin’) notes
_aurichalcum_ or Corinthian brass in Plautus, ‘Auro contra carum.’
Festus speaks of ‘orichalcum (copper), stannum (zinc or pewter?),
cassiterum (tin), and aurichalcum (brass).’ The same signification
occurs in Ambrose, Bishop of Milan (fourth century); in Primasius,
Bishop of African Adrumetum (sixth century), and in Isidore, Bishop of
Seville (seventh century). Albertus Magnus (thirteenth century), the
Dominican monk, in treating ‘De Natura et Commixtione Æris,’ describes
how _cuprum_ became _aurichalcum_.

Strabo is mysterious. In one place he tells us that the Cyprian copper
alone produces the Cadmian stone, copperas-water, and oxide of copper.
In another (lib. xiii.) he says, ‘There is a stone near Andeira which,
being burnt, becomes iron. It is then put into a furnace, together
with some kind of earth,[298] when it (the stone? the earth? or both?)
drops or distils a ψευδάργυρος (mock silver, zinc?), which, with the
addition of copper, produces what is called _the mixture_, and which
some term _oreichalcum_.’ Pseudargyros, also found in the neighbourhood
of Tmolus, would here seem to mean zinc or _Cadmia fossilis_ (natural
calamine or carbonate of zinc). Pliny (xxxiv. 22) confuses with cadmia,
furnace calamine, and a particular ore of copper opposed to calchitis.
When Dioscorides (v. cap. 84) seems to allude to artificial or
furnace-calamine, an impure oxide of zinc, he may mean the more modern
_tutiya_ (Avicenna), _toutia_, _thouthia_,[299] _cadmie des fourneaux_,
or tutty. Reduced to powder, and mixed with an equal quantity of wetted
charcoal by way of fondant or flux, it is melted with copper to form
brass. The Avocat de Launey (1780) and Bishop Watson both agree that
Strabo’s orichalcum is brass.

Lastly, aurichalcum was made synonymous with _electrum_, natural
or artificial. The word Ἤλεκτρος[300] is popularly derived from
Helios, as rivalling the sun in sheen. According to Lepsius it is
the ‘usem’-metal of Thut-mes III.; Brugsch (i. 345) understands by
‘usem’ brass, and thinks Asmara or Asmala equivalent to the Hebrew
_hasmal_ or _hashmal_ = _electrum_. In Bunsen (v. 757) Kasabet and
Kakhi are brass (_aurichalcum_), and Khesbet is a metal connected with
Kassiteros = tin. The alloy was known to Hesiod (‘Scut.’ 142) and to
the ‘Odyssey’[301] (iv. 73), not to the ‘Iliad.’ Sophocles (‘Antig.’
1037) applied ‘Sardian electrum’ to gold, not to silver. Herodotus
(iii. 115), in the historic age (B.C. 480–30), gives the name of the
mythical metal to the ‘tears of the Heliades,’ which the Latins called
_succinum_ (_succum_), the Low-Latins _ambrum_, the Arabs _anbar_,
and we Amber. Pliny (xxxiii. 23), repeated by Pausanias (v. 12, § 6),
notes two kinds, natural (‘in all gold ore there is some silver’[302])
and artificial; in the latter the proportion of silver must not exceed
one-fifth. The staters of Lydian Crœsus, held by the Greeks to be the
most ancient of coins, were, according to Böckh, of electrum, three
parts gold and one part silver. Lucian applies the term to glass
(ὕαλος); and, lastly, it was taken for brass and confounded with
aurichalcum.[303]

I would suggest that this aurichalcum might also be the ‘Dowris
bronze’ of Ireland, so called because first observed at Dowris, near
Parsonstown, King’s County. Wilde (p. 360) supposes with others that
the gold-coloured alloy depended upon the admixture of a certain
proportion of lead, and compares it with the Cyprus copper termed by
the Romans _Coronarium_ (used for theatrical crowns), which was coated
with ox-gall.[304] Of this _or molu_ there are many articles in the
Dublin Museum, preserving their fine golden-yellow lustre: they had
probably been lacquered or varnished like modern brasses; and the
patina might be some gum-resin. When much tarnished, they were cleaned
by holding over the fire, and then by dipping in a weak solution of
acid, as is done with modern castings. Two specimens, a Sword and a
dagger-blade, were analysed (pp. 470, 483), and proved to contain
copper 87·67 to 90·72, tin 8·52 to 8·25, lead 3·87 to 0·87, with a
trace of sulphur in the Sword.[305] The specific gravities were 8·819
to 8·675. In a spear-head (p. 512), besides copper, tin, and lead, iron
0·31 and cobalt 0·09 were found.

There were other alloys of which we read but know little; such were the
_æs ægineticum_, _demonnesium_, and _nigrum_; the _æs deliacum_, whose
secret was lost in Plutarch’s day, and the Ταρτήσσιος χαλκὸς[306]
from Southern Spain, probably shipped at Gibraltar Bay. _Ollaria_ or
pot-copper (brass) contained three pounds of _plumbum argentarium_
(equal parts of tin and lead) to one hundred pounds of copper. _Æs
caldarium_ could only be fused. Finally, _græcanicum_ (Greek-colour)
was mould or second-hand copper (_formalis seu collectaneus_) with ten
per cent. of _plumbum nigrum_ (lead) and five per cent. of silver lead
(argentiferous galena?).

[Heading: _THE CELT AND THE SWORD._]

Metal, when first introduced, must have been rare and dear; the large
modern Sword, axe, or mall would hardly have been imitated in copper,
bronze, or iron. The earliest attempts at developing the celt[307]
would have produced nothing more artful than a cutting and piercing
wedge of the precious substance (fig. 85). As smelting and moulding
improved, the pointed end would develop into the knife, the dagger,
and the Sword; and the broad end would expand to the axe. This
composite weapon, uniting the club with the celt or hand-hatchet, and
appearing in Europe with the beginning of the Neolithic period, plays a
remarkable part in history, ancient, mediæval, and even modern; whilst
its connection with the Sword is made evident by the ‘glaive.’[308] The
expansion of the edge and of the flanges developed two principal forms.
For cutting wood the long-narrow was found most serviceable: where
brute force was less required, the weapon became a broad blade with a
long crescent-shaped edge.

[Illustration: FIG. 85.—OLDEST FORM (?).]

[Illustration: FIG. 86.—METAL CELTS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 87.—KNIFE FOUND AT RÉALON (HAUTES ALPES).

  Half-size. It greatly resembles the bronze knife from the
  Palafittes of Neuchâtel, figured by Desor. The Swiss knife,
  however, has a tooth at the edge, near the hollow.]

[Heading: _THE AXE AND THE SWORD._]

The Akhu or war-axe was, as we might expect, known to ancient Egypt in
early days, and became an _objet de luxe_. A gold hatchet and several
of bronze were found buried as amulets in the coffin of Queen Askhept,
the ancestress of the Eighteenth Dynasty. Again, a bronze weapon
occurred with a mummied queen of the Seventeenth Dynasty (B.C. 1750).
Useful in war, the implement, probably when in the stone period, rose
to be a symbol of the Deity: hence, doubtless, the _hâches votives_ of
the later Bronze Age without edge to serve for work or weapons, and
intended only for religious use. The two-headed weapon was that outward
and visible sign of Labrandian Jove, so called from the λάβρα, which
in the Lydian tongue was synonymous with πέλεκυς. The emblem appears
on the medals of three Carian kings, the most notable being Mausolus
(or Mausollus), dating from B.C. 353. According to Plutarch (_De Pythiæ
Oraculis_) the Tenedians ‘took the axe from their crabs, ... because
it appears that the crabs alone have the figure of the axe in their
shells.’ Hence the double-headed weapon on the coins of Tenedos is a
votive or sacrificial, rather than a warlike, symbol. The Tenedian
Apollo also held the axe, which some regarded as the symbol of Tennes.
Aristotle and others maintained that a certain King of Tenedos decreed
that adulterers should be slain with the axe, and his carrying out
the law upon his own son gave rise to the proverb, Τενέδιος πέλεκυς,
denoting a rough-and-ready way of doing business.

[Illustration: FIG. 88.—THE GLAIVE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 89.—EGYPTIAN AXES OF BRONZE.]

Although the πέλεκυς is mentioned by Homer (‘Il.’ and ‘Od.’) as a
weapon as well as a tool, the Greeks, like the Assyrians, did not
much affect it. The Romans, who worshipped Quirinus in spear-shape,
bound the securis in a bundle of rods (_fasces_), bore it as a badge
of office, and placed it on consular coins. The weapon was lowered
in the salute, and thus, perhaps, arose our practice of dropping the
Sword-point, which is unknown to the East. The axe with expanded
blade upon Trajan’s column is in the hands of a workman. Possibly the
classics of Europe despised the weapon because it was proper to the
_securigeræ catervæ_ of the effeminate East. As early as the days of
Herodotus (I. chap. i. 215) the σάγαρις, the Armenian _sacr_, and the
Latin _securis_, made either of gold or chalcos, was the favourite
weapon of the Amazon[309] and the Massagetæ[310] horseman. In Ireland
the axe plays a part in the tales of Gobawn Saer: this goblin-builder
completed the dangerous task of finishing off a royal roof of cutting
wooden pegs, throwing them one by one into their places, and driving
them in by flinging the magic weapon at each peg in due succession.

From Egypt the axe passed into the heart of Africa. Here it still
serves, before and after use, as a medium of exchange; and this
circulation from tribe to tribe explains the various forms that have
overspread the Dark Continent. The Nile Valley again sent it eastward
through Hittite-land and Assyria to Persia and India, where the
crescent-shaped battle-axe has long been a favourite. The varieties of
form and colour are noticed by Duarte Barbosa[311] when describing the
‘Moors’ of Hormuz Island. It was adopted by the Turkish horseman, who
carried it at his saddle-bow. Klemm (‘Werkzeuge und Waffen’) notices
that it was a favourite Scandinavian weapon slung by a strap to the
back; and most of the deaths recounted in ‘Burnt Njal’ are the result
of it. The Norman long-hefted axe is common on the Bayeux tapestries.
A Scandinavian war-axe of the early seventeenth century was found on
the battle-field of Norwegian Kringelen; the handle is recurved so
as to fit the back socket. In Germany it was generally used during
the fifteenth century; in England during the sixteenth; and in the
seventeenth it became obsolete throughout Europe, except among the
Slavs and the Magyars. The German processional axe shows its latest
survival; blade and handle are of one piece of wood, ornamented with
the guild-devices, and so modified that the original weapon can hardly
be recognised. Similarly the Bergbarthe (mine-picks) of the German
Bergmänner (miners) were used, according to Klemm, for the defence
of cities, notably of Freiberg in 1643; and, made of brass as well
as iron, they are still carried in State processions. The axe, like
the spear, demarked boundaries. The charter given by Cnut (Canute)
to Christ Church, Canterbury, grants the harbour and dues thereof on
either side as far as a man standing on deck at flood-tide could cast a
taper-axe, and the custom of throwing the tool to mark boundaries has
been retained in some parts of the country to our day. It was with a
battle-axe that the Bruce of Bannockburn clove the skull of an English
champion to the chin. Monstrelet tells us that during the wars of
Jeanne d’Arc (Patay fought in A.D. 1429) the English carried hatchets
in their girdles.

[Illustration: FIG. 90.—IRISH BATTLE-AXE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 91.—AXE USED BY BRUCE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 92.—GERMAN PROCESSIONAL AXE.]

The Axe[312] was adopted by the Franks, as well as by the Scandinavians
and the Germans, especially the Saxons. Hence the two-edged axe
when affixed to long staves, forming a spear, became the Icelandic
Hall-bard[313] (hall-axe?), the Teutonic Alle-barde (‘all-cleaver’),
and the ‘Pole-axe,’ called from Poland (= Polje, the plain-country).
This modification was universal in Northern Europe during the first
ages of Christianity. The earliest shape (middle fourteenth to early
sixteenth centuries) was a broad and massive axe, mounted on a thick
and solid spear; in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the
blade became more slender and hollow-edged, and the head longer and
more taper. The Swiss introduced the Halbert to France in the middle
fifteenth century: in the seventeenth century it was conventionalised,
the axe resumed its original aspect, and the spear grew to leaf-shape.
In this form it was retained by the subalterns and sergeants of the
British army till abolished with the pig-tails of ‘Shaven England.’ It
is not wholly forgotten on ceremonious occasions in certain European
Courts, and during all its changes it has ever retained its cousinly
likeness to the broadsword.

[Illustration: FIG. 93.—HALBARDS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 94.—HALBARDS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 95.—_a_, _b_. BECHWANA’S CLUB AXE; _c._ THE SAME,
EXPANDED; _d._ THE SAME, BARBED; _e._ SILEPE OF THE BASUTOS; _f._
HORSEMAN’S AXE OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY.]

[Heading: _AXE AND SCYMITAR._]

I have shown how the stone celt might become a metal knife, and thence
develop into the straight Sword. By noting the modifications it is as
easy to see that the axe might have produced the scymitar. The earliest
form would be a broad lance-head inserted into a common club (_a_), as
is still practised in many parts of Africa. The next improvement (_c_)
would convert the tool into an arm by increasing the cutting surface;
and another step (_d_) would make it lighter by reducing the blade to
a triangle of mere barbs, ⊣. Then (_e_) we have the Khond or
Circar battle-axe, and the Silepe of the South African Basutos who,
virtually discovered by Dr. Livingstone, have become so troublesome of
late years.[314] This T-shaped blade, perpetuated in the ‘Baïonette
Gras,’ was used in Switzerland and in Venice till the sixteenth
century, according to Meyrick and Demmin. Afterwards the straight back
next to the staff would be formed into two small and graceful crescents
(_f_); and the weapon became far better fitted for the requirements
of cavalry. This shape is world-wide, and was used in England _temp._
Elizabeth. A congener of the glaive was the _Francisque à lance
ouverte_, the broad-bladed ‘taper-axe,’ used for throwing as well as
for striking. According to the Abbé Cochet, this weapon took its name
from the Franks. The Francisque is termed a ‘defensive weapon’ in the
illustrated treatise ‘Armes et Armures.’[315] The Saxons preferred to
it the Sahs, Seax or Scramasax-knife, similarly used. The Francisque is
rare in the Saxon graves compared with the spear and knife, but it is
more common than the Sword.[316]

[Illustration: FIG. 96.—HINDÚ HATCHET FROM RAJPUTANA.]

[Illustration: FIG. 97.—GERMAN HATCHET OF BRONZE PERIOD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 98.—1. BURGUNDIAN AXE; 2. FRANCISQUE OR TAPER AXE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 99.—IRON SCRAMASAX (16 inches long).]

[Illustration: FIG. 100.—SCRAMASAX (18 inches long).]

[Heading: _THE BILL AND VOULGE._]

The Bill[317] (A.-S. _byll_, Irish _biail_, _securis_) was introduced
into England _temp._ Henry VI. about the fifteenth century, when it
was allied in form to the Halbard. Skinner considers it a _securis
rostrata_ (beaked axe). It was long a favourite in Scandinavia, and the
illustration represents the weapon of Gunnar, the Icelandic champion,
which sang before battle, as also did the Sword of Sigurd.

The glaive of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries was followed by
the Guisarme, Gisarme, or Bisarme. This long blade, with a slender
spear-point projecting from the back, is still used by the Chinese; and
the Despots of Dahome borrowed it, like other quaint arms and customs,
from Europe. The _Voulge_, an intermediate form of the halbert and the
glaive, and probably a descendant of the former, was a battle-axe much
used by the Swiss in the fourteenth century. The war-scythe of the same
period figured by Demmin, and the scythe-Sword—a formidable-looking,
but unhandy weapon—were adopted by the Hungarian rebels as lately
as in 1848. Allied with these mediæval forms is a vast variety of
shapes known as the Spetum (Spiedo or Spit), the Ronçeur or Ranseur,
and the military fork. They were probably known to the Ancients, and
reintroduced into Europe by the peasantry who, compelled hastily to
arm themselves, would use the handy flails, sickles, and scythes. A
well-arranged and complete collection is still wanted to show the links
connecting them with a common prototype.

[Illustration: FIG. 101.—GUNNAR’S BILL.]

[Illustration: FIG. 102.—VOULGES.]

The interest of these weapons is chiefly connected with the various
forms of curved broadsword. The leaf-shaped metal-blade for thrusting,
which appears to be one of the earliest forms, and which is preserved
by the Somal and other barbarians, is, I have said, evidently a
spear-head fixed in a wooden handle.

Briefly to describe the Sword of the Early Bronze Age, during which,
by the by, cremation became almost universal in Europe. The weapon
is to a certain extent North European, and seems to have travelled
up the valleys of great rivers: Denmark has yielded two hundred and
fifty to six Italian bronze blades.[318] They are as a rule of fair
length, averaging about seventy-five centimetres: the profile is either
leaf-shaped, sub-leaf-shaped, or straight, ending in a bevelled point.
The hilt is of two kinds: either tanged or untanged: the tang is broad,
long, and pierced, with one or more holes for riveting; in this case
the handle was of wood, bone, or horn. Many hefts, however, as will
afterwards appear, are cast in a single piece with or without guard;
and the latter often disappears in a hollow triangular base, a crescent
or horse-shoe containing the shoulders with the concavity of the arch
towards the point; this also served in many weapons to receive the
rivets. The pommel is of various patterns, frequently a cone, oval,
globe, or dome with steps or with melon-like ridges.[319] In others,
especially amongst the old Kelts and Germans, it ended with a crutch or
crescent whose cusps were, in the richer kinds, adorned with spirals.




                              CHAPTER VI.

            THE PROTO-SIDERIC OR EARLY IRON AGE OF WEAPONS.

  ‘Of all metallurgical processes, the extraction of malleable
  iron may be regarded as amongst the most simple.’—Percy, _Iron,
  &c._ p. 573.


We now come to the King of Metals that ‘breaketh in pieces and subdueth
all things’; the only ore friendly as well as fatal to the human form;
the most useful and the most deadly in the hand of man[320]—Iron.[321]

According to the Parian Chronicle (Arundelian Marbles), followed by
Thrasyllus (Clemens Alex. in ‘Strom.’), and by a host of writers,
iron-working was discovered in B.C. 1432 or 248 years before the
Trojan war. The latter, a crucial date, is, as will appear, wholly
undetermined; the various authorities have made it range through nearly
seven hundred years. But the life of Hellas is one great ‘appropriation
clause’: the Greeks were doughty claimants, childish in their _naïveté_
of conceit; they were burglars of others’ wits (convey, the wise it
call), and they made themselves do all things. Their legends, for
instance, accredit ‘Glaucus the Chian’ with having invented the art
and mystery of steel-inlaying. De Goguet (A.D. 1761) tells us that
the Phœnicians ranked amongst their oldest heroes two brothers who
discovered iron-working; the Cretans referred it to the oldest period
of their history,[322] and the Idæan Daktyls learnt it from the ‘mother
of the gods.’ Prometheus (in Æschylus) boasts of having taught mankind
to fabricate all metals: he also wears an iron ring supposed to be a
chain not an ornament; and it possibly symbolises the union of fire
and ore. The art of iron-working is referred, now to the Cyclopes,
of Sicily, then to the Chalybes,[323] who extended from Colchis to
Spain: Clemens (Alex.) refers the discovery of making malleable iron to
the Noropes of Danubian Pannonia, who dwelt between Noricum (Styria)
and Mæsia; and finally, to quote no more, Mr. J. Fergusson, a careful
writer, tells us that ‘the Aryans (?) were those who introduced the use
of iron, and with it dominated over and expelled (?) the older races.’

Modern discovery has proved that the invention, and indeed the general
adoption, of ‘Mars’ (♂) dates from the very dawn of history; and that
it is a mere theory to assume everywhere preceding millennia of bone
and stone, copper and bronze. It is clear, for instance, in Central
Africa, where copper and tin were unprocurable, that man must first
have used iron.[324] A good authority, Mr. St. John V. Day[325] (C.E.),
who was in charge of iron works in Southern India, claims for iron—cast
as well as wrought, and even for its carburet, steel—the credit of
being ‘unquestionably the earliest of substances with which man was
acquainted.’ This writer, however, denies, contrary to all tradition,
a ‘progressive rise in the quality of materials used by man’: that is,
from the soft and yielding to the hard and refractory. He holds that
Man, once master of metallurgy, ‘would be better able to deal with the
much more easily manipulated bones, stones, or wood.’ He supposes all
the metals, noble and ignoble, as well as gems and precious stones, to
have become familiar amongst Eastern races, ‘whether they be Semitic,
Aryan, Hamitic, Sporadic, or Allophyllian, by virtue of a civilisation
due to a natural innate insight.’ Hence he declares Egypt an enigma
to those who accept the dictum of ‘man’s gradual evolution from the
condition of a savage, an ignoramus,’ and he opines that this grim
being is simply a retrograde.[326]

These ideas trench upon old metallurgic superstitions and seem to run
into extremes. We _know_ nothing concerning the home of Proto-man,
which is perhaps deep under the waters. Anthropologists, who locate him
in Mesopotamia, ‘Aryaland’ (Central Asia), or Ethiopia, look only to
the origin of the present species, and the historic cycle. Our studies,
as far as they go, suggest that Man began in the Polar regions, and
that in hoar antiquity each racial centre had its own material—wood and
horn, bone and stone, copper, bronze, and iron.[327]

[Heading: _METAL IN EGYPT._]

For our first lesson in iron we must go back as usual to Kahi-Ptah (the
Ptah-region), that Nile Valley which is the motherland of all science,
of all art. Here Bunsen[328] provides us with the following table:

  +--------------+------------------+-----------------------+
  | HIEROGLYPHS  |  PHONETIC VALUE  |      TRANSLATION      |
  +--------------+------------------+-----------------------+
  |              |                  |                       |
  | [Hieroglyph] | Ba.              | Earth, Metal, Soul,   |
  |              |                  |   Circle, Seed, Corn. |
  |              |                  |                       |
  | [Hieroglyph] | Ba.              | Iron.                 |
  |              |                  |                       |
  | [Hieroglyph] | Ba’a.            | Iron, Earth.          |
  |              |                  |                       |
  | [Hieroglyph] | Ba’aenpe (Benipe | Iron.                 |
  |              |   or Penipe).    |                       |
  |              |                  |                       |
  | [Hieroglyph] | Bet.             | Iron.                 |
  |              |                  |                       |
  +--------------+------------------+-----------------------+

Mr. Day (who has drawn it up) observes that ‘BA’ [Hieroglyph] is a
constant in the phonetic values assigned to the uncertain hieroglyphs
for iron, and feels disposed to believe it synonymous with χαλκός,
base metal in general. He would translate the Saidic ‘ΒΕΝΙΠΕ’ and the
Coptic ‘ΠΕΝΙΠΕ’ by ‘stone (ΒΕ) of (ΝΙ) sky or heaven (ΠΕ)’; in fact,
‘sky-stone,’ alluding to meteoric iron, probably the first utilised.
Dr. Birch holds ‘BA’ to be a general term for metal made particular, as
in Greece, by prefixed adjectives (white, black, yellow) denoting the
quality of the ore. And hence the determinative of ‘BA’ (metal, stone,
or hard wood) is the cube or parallelogrammic block which denotes
building and building materials.

Native iron may be distributed into two great divisions,
extra-terrestrial and terrestrial. The former is known as meteoric
or nickeliferous. Mr. Day (pp. 22–23) gives analyses of this form,
and takes, from Chladni[329] and others, a list of masses that fell
in Siberia, Thuringia, and Dauphiné; in West African Liberia, and in
American Sta. Fé de Bogotá, and Canaan, Connecticut. Though many trials
have been made in working extra-terrestrial metal, all have hitherto
failed; the phosphorus, nickel and its _alter ego_, cobalt, render the
forgings, in our present state of technology, too brittle for use.
Terrestrial or telluric iron is again divided into two classes—the
nearly pure ore and the native steel. According to the schedule of
Rosset:

  Iron is a metal not cast and malleable.
  Steel       „       cast and malleable.
  Pig-iron    „       cast and not malleable.

That iron was common amongst the ancient Egyptians we may assume as
proved. Mr. A. Henry Rhind, when opening the tomb of Sebau (nat. B.C.
68), noted on the massive doors ‘iron hasps and nails,’ ‘as lustrous and
as pliant as on the day they left the forge.’ Belzoni, who died in
1823, found an iron sickle under the feet of one of the Karnak Sphinxes
dating from B.C. 600. In June 1837, Mr. J. R. Hill, employed by Colonel
Howard Vyse, when blasting and excavating the Jízeh[330] Pyramid, came
upon a piece of iron, apparently a cramp, near the channel-mouth of
one of the air-passages: it had thus been preserved from rust, and
its authenticity cannot be doubted. Some suggested that it was used
for scraping and finishing; others for finally levelling the faces of
dressed stone, but it tapers off from the middle to an edge on either
side and it narrows at one end.[331] This relic can hardly be of later
date than B.C. 4000–3600, when Khufu (Cheops) built his burial-place
and inscribed in it his hieroglyphic shield[332] or cartouche
[Hieroglyph]. Stowed away in the British Museum, it excited scant
attention till Dr. Lepsius at the Congress of Orientalists (London,
1874), suggested that it was of steel. A trial was made (Sept. 18); it
yielded readily to a few turns of the drill, and the surfaces of the
hole showed the whiteness and the brightness of newly-cut malleable
iron. Since that discovery, sacrificial iron knives have been found in
the Nile Valley, despite the ready oxidation of the metal in a climate
of the hot-damp category. In the Bulák Museum (Salle de l’Est), with
the wooden Swords, was a straight and double-edged iron blade that had
two ribs running along its length. Another room showed a straight,
double-edged, and round-pointed dagger of gilt iron. Of the latter
weapon there are three fine specimens (Salle du Centre).

[Heading: _IRON IN EGYPT._]

The literature of Egypt abounds in allusions to the use of iron.[333]
The Rev. Basil H. Cooper[334] believes that Mibampes the ‘Iron King,’
sixth successor of primæval Mena (circ. B.C. 4560),[335] bore on his
cartouche the word ‘Benipe’; and that no less than three records[336]
entitle him ‘Lover of Iron’ (i.e. the Sword); ‘thus attesting, not only
the extreme antiquity of the use of iron, but unfortunately (?) of
that most dreadful evil of all which are the scourges of humanity—war
(?).’ And so we see the nineteenth century repeating the Herodotian
half-truth, ‘Iron has been discovered to the hurt of Man’; and looking
only at one side of the question, the evils of War, without which,
I repeat, strong races could not supplant the weaker to the general
benefit of mankind. The Epos of Pentaur, the jovial temple scribe[337]
(circ. B.C. 1350), mentions ‘iron’ thrice; and Pharaoh Mene-Ptah
II., whose ‘Sword gave no quarter,’ had vessels of iron. In later
hieroglyphic literature the notices become too numerous to justify
quotation.

[Illustration: FIG. 103.—EGYPTIAN SACRIFICIAL KNIVES (IRON).]

The old Egyptians, according to Plutarch,[338] held iron to be the
ὀστέον Τυφῶνος, or bone of Set; whereas the σιδηρίτις λίθος, or magnet,
was that of his foe-god Horus, degraded to Charon in Greece and Rome.
This siderite was known to the Hellenes in its religious aspect as
Ἡράκλεια λίθος or Ἡράκλειον, either from Heraclea-town or from Hercules
(Pliny, xxxvi. 25). Siderite or loadstone, termed ‘Magnet’ from its
supposed discoverer, was also entitled ‘live iron,’ and its wounds were
supposed to be more deadly than those of the common ore.

The Nile-dwellers had not far to go for iron, which abounds in the
well-known Wady Hammámát, one of the earliest centres of Egyptian
mining; and, as Mr. Piazzi Smyth showed, it accumulates everywhere in
the fissures of the flaky limestone:[339] it is produced in Ethiopia
(the Sudan and Abyssinia); and in Midian, where the old Kemites opened
the copper mines, it appears in the shape of black sand and large
masses of titaniferous[340] and other ores. The monuments (Karnak
Table, &c.) specify, amongst objects of tribute, iron from the lands
of the Thuhi[341] (‘the fair people’), the Rutennu (Syrians and
Assyrians), and the Asi (or rebels generally?); from these countries it
was exported in the ore and in bricks and pigs. The tribute-tables of
Thut-mes III. (B.C. 1600) mention:—

    One beautiful iron armour of the hostile king.
    One beautiful iron armour of the King of Megiddo.
    ? lbs. weight, two suits of iron armour from Naharayn.
    Iron suits of armour (taken by the warriors), and
    Five iron storm-caps (?).

[Heading: _HEBREW IRON-AGE._]

Mr. Francis Galton[342] first discovered in the ancient copper-diggings
of the so-called ‘Sinaitic’ peninsula, a blackish mass, not unlike
iron-slag, which he conjectured to date before Moses’ days. A score
of years afterwards (early 1873), Mr. Hartland[343] examined the
junction of the Wadys Kemeh, Mukattab, and Maghárah, and found the
iron-ore imperfectly extracted: assays and analyses of the slags that
lay in heaps about the ruined works produced fifty-three per cent.
of metal. He determined that the mines at Serábit El-Khádim had been
constructed on the principle of the Catalan (or rather the Corsican)
forge;[344] and he discovered near them a temple and barracks for the
soldier-guards.[345]

It is hard to believe with Mr. Proctor that Abraham, a wandering
Chaldæan Shaykh, taught the Egyptians astronomy, astrology, and
arithmetic; or with Mr. Piazzi Smyth, that Melchisedek, the petty
chief of a village in Palestine, built _the_ Pyramid. Yet it is
only reasonable to suppose that the Israelites set out upon their
exodus or exodi, for there were probably many, provided with some
of the technological wisdom of the Egyptians. Joseph, according to
Brugsch (‘Hist.’ I. chap. xii.), rose to the honour of Zaphnatpaneakh
(Governor of the Sethroitic home), and Ro-hir or Procurator, under the
Shepherd-kings or ‘Hyksos,’ a word which he renders Hek-Shasu,[346]
lord of the Shasu (Arabs); he makes the Pharaoh of the Oppression,
Ramses II. (B.C. 1333–1300), and Mene-Ptah II. the Pharaoh of the
Exodus (B.C. 1300–1266). The Pentateuch, whatever be its date, well
knew the use of Barzil (ברזל), the Chaldæan Parzil or Parzillu.
According to Sir John Lubbock (‘Prehistoric Man’), ‘iron’ is four
times mentioned, and ‘brass’ (copper, bronze?) thirty-eight times in
‘the Law.’[347] From other sources we gather that the metal was either
עשות (_ashúth_, that is, ‘the worked,’ from the rad. _ashah_), or
מוצק (_muzak_, ‘the melted,’ fused, cast; from the root _zak_). The
Lord threatens that He will make ‘the skies as iron and the earth as
copper’ (Levit. xxvi. 19). In Deuteronomy (iv. 20), Egypt is compared
with an iron furnace; and mention is made of iron shoes (xxxiii. 25).
Job includes among riches, cattle, silver, gold, brass (copper?), and
iron; he tells us (xxviii. 2) that ‘iron is taken out of the earth and
copper is molten out of the stone,’ and he speaks of lithic writing
(xix. 24), ‘graven with an iron style and lead in the rock for ever.’
But commentators are not agreed about the age of this author, and in
the hands of the Rabbis he seems gradually to be growing younger—more
modern—with every generation.

The Hebrews found the Iron-age wherever they went. ‘Barzil’ was among
the metals taken from the Midianites by Moses (Numb. xxxi. 22). The
‘bedstead,’ or rather divan, of Og, the King of Bashan, measuring nine
cubits of man (each = sixteen inches) in length by four broad, was of
iron (Deut. iii. 11). Joshua shows that the Canaanites owned ‘chariots
of iron’ (xvii. 16). These tribes, displaced by the Jews, seem to have
been accomplished workers in metal.[348] Traces of iron-smelting occur
on the Libanus,[349] where I found copper-stone,[350] and where, during
the present century, coal and asphalte have been mined. Many parts
of the country, as Argob in ancient Bashan, produce an abundance of
ironstone.[351] The old Phœnician Sanconiathon, a name which may denote
a history or its historian, tells us through the Greek translator Philo
of Byblus, that the people were famous for their Technites, artisans
and blacksmiths. The warlike Hittites, as will appear, were also
iron-workers.

From Egypt the use of iron would spread through Asia Minor[352]
eastward to Naharayn,[353] the two-river-land, Mesopotamia. But the
date is disputed. The excavations of the late Mr. George Smith yielded
no iron articles older than B.C. 1000–800. Mr. Day remarks that ‘whilst
Mesopotamia has not, up to the present time, produced any solid
evidence in the form of material iron relics belonging to the oldest
monarchies; nevertheless, the monuments of those earliest times are
numerous, and they yield abundance of testimony to the acquaintance of
the contemporary people with iron.’ In later ages he alludes to the
rings and bangles of iron in the British Museum, which were possibly
chain-links; and particularly to the ‘ombos of a shield,’ as the most
exquisite piece of their hammered iron-work he has met with: he doubts
if it can in some respects be surpassed by the productions of to-day.
The cuneiforms speak of iron fetters, and the people of the great
Interamnian plain knew the art of casting bronze over iron,[354] only
lately introduced into our metallurgy.

[Heading: _IRON IN ASSYRIA._]

According to Mr. G. Smith there is no pure Assyrian word for
‘iron.’[355] Its cuneiform symbol is [Cuneiform], but the phonetic
value or pronunciation has not yet been determined. ‘It must have been
in use 2000 B.C.,’ and it is found in inscriptions of all ages. The
word is supposed to belong to the ancient Turanian or Proto-Babylonian
race (Akkadian[356] or Sumirian) that held the river-plains, and
it has been grafted into the more recent Assyrian language. In the
inscriptions, each god has his sign, and the symbol above given,
accompanies, as his attribute, one of the deities of war and hunting:
thus it is a parallel to that found in the cartouche of the Egyptian
‘Iron King.’

Canon Rawlinson,[357] on the other hand, assigns to the symbol the
phonetic value of _Hurud_, which thus became the Chaldæan equivalent
for ‘iron.’ In concert with his distinguished brother, he came to the
conclusion: ‘There are two signs for metals in Assyria, with respect
to which there is a doubt which is iron and which is brass (or bronze
rather). These are [Cuneiform] and [Cuneiform]. Sir Henry Rawlinson, on
the whole, inclines to regard the first as bronze and the second as
iron, although the former is nowhere rendered phonetically. The latter
is rendered in a syllabary as equivalent to _Hurud_ in Akkadian and
_Eru_ in Assyrian. Mr. George Smith reverses the meanings of the two
signs. The point is a very doubtful one.’

After the decay of the Proto-Babylonian or Chaldæan empire (B.C.
2300–1500), when the seat of Interamnian rule moved to the
Tigris-Euphrates basin, and the three Assyrian periods flourished (B.C.
1500–555),[358] iron was largely used. It was produced, according
to Layard (_loc. cit._) in the Tiyari mountains, and it is still
found in quantities on the slopes, three or four days’ journey from
Mosul. The north-western palace of Nimrúd (Kalah) showed, amongst
the rubbish-heaps, much rusty iron and a perfect helmet like that
represented in the bas-reliefs. There were Swords and daggers, shields
and shield-handles, rods, and the points of spears and arrows, which
fell to pieces on exposure. Amongst the few specimens preserved were
the head of a trident-like weapon, some Sword-handles, a large blunt
spear-pile, the point of a pick, several objects resembling the heads
of sledge-hammers, and a double-handed saw of iron or steel (?), about
three feet eight inches long by four inches and five-eighths broad,
for cross-cutting timber. The British Museum owns a fine collection
of Assyrian sheet or plate iron-work; pieces of unfinished forgings;
a rude triangular lump through which a round hole has been driven
(by a heated punch?); several cylindrical bars, straight and curved;
wall-cramps, nails, and door-hinges; a ladle; rings of sizes (one being
three inches in diameter); a signet-ring containing a silver bezel or
seal; and, lastly, a portion of what seems to have been a double-sided
comb. In much later days the Assyrians of Xerxes’ army carried,
according to Herodotus, shields, spears, daggers, and wooden clubs
spiked with iron.

The Greeks learned their metallurgy, as they did all their arts, from
Egypt; and, following in the footsteps of the Phœnicians, diffused
them throughout the Western World. In Theseus’ time, according to
Wilkinson—that is, B.C. 1235—‘iron is conjectured not to have been
known, as he was found buried with a brass (copper, bronze?) Sword and
spear.’ They did not use iron weapons, and probably had no iron during
their first foreign campaign—the Trojan war. The Parian (Arundelian)
Chronicle (dating its notices from Cecrops, B.C. 1582) and the Rhodian
myths refer to a conflagration in the Cretan mountains which taught
metallurgy to the Idæan Daktyls (Δάκτυλοι Ἰδαῖοι):[359] this would,
however, be a comparatively late date when we regard Egypt.[360]

With respect to the metal in the Hissarlik remains, Dr. Schliemann
remarks (i. 31): ‘The only objects of iron which I found were a key
of curious shape and a few arrows and nails close to the surface.’ It
is no proof that it was used because Homer some centuries afterwards
spoke of the κύανος (_cyanus_), steel tempered blue, a word which even
in antiquity was translated by χάλυψ (_chalybs_, steel). The explorer
remarks: ‘Articles of steel may have existed: I believe positively that
they did exist; but they have vanished without leaving a trace of their
existence; for, as we know, iron and steel become decomposed much more
readily than copper.’ Yet, so contradictory is the whole book, and so
uncertain are its conclusions, we find,[361] ‘No. 4. Drillings of one
of the Trojan sling-bullets, externally covered with verdigris, and
internally the colour of iron’; while the assay shows that it consisted
chiefly of copper and sulphur. Among the contemporary (?) finds of
Mycenæ, which not a few authorities have pronounced to be Byzantine,
and another observer Keltic,[362] Dr. Schliemann met with iron in
the shape of knives and keys; but he holds these articles to be of
comparatively late date, not older than the fifth century B.C.[363] At
that time iron must have been general throughout Greece. In the fourth
century, Aristotle (‘Meteorologica’) treats at length upon iron and its
modifications. One passage runs: ‘Wrought iron may be so cast as to be
made liquid and to reharden; and thus it is they are wont to make steel
(τὸ στόμωμα); for the scoria of iron subsides and is purged off by the
bottom, and when it is often defæcated and cleansed, this is steel.
But this they do not often, because of the great waste, and because it
loses much weight in refining; but iron is so much the more excellent
the more recrement it has.’ Daimachus, Aristotle’s contemporary, says
of steels (τῶν στομωμάτων), ‘There is the Chalybdic,[364] the Synopic,
the Lydian, and the Lacedæmonian. The Chalybdic is best for carpenters’
tools; the Lacedæmonian for files, drills, gravers, and stone-chisels;
the Lydian also is suited for files, and for knives, razors, and
rasps.’ Avicenna (Abu Ali Siná), in his fifth book, ‘De Anima,’
according to Roger Bacon, has three species of the metal: (1) Iron,
good for hammers and anvils, but not for cutting tools; (2) Steel,[365]
which is purer and has more heat in it; it is therefore less
malleable, but better able to take an edge; and (3) Andena, ductile and
malleable under a low degree of heat, and intermediate between iron and
steel. Apparently the latter is the Hindiah or Hindiyáneh, the Ferrum
Indicum and the Ondanique of Marco Polo (i. 17).

[Heading: _ROMAN IRON._]

The Romans, a more cosmopolitan people than the Greeks, paid great
attention to the mineral wealth of their conquests, and were careful to
choose the best _acies_[366] for their weapons. Diodorus Siculus[367]
describes the process by which the Celtiberians prepared their iron for
Swords. Pliny, who was Procurator of Spain under Vespasian, may have
studied iron-mining and ore-working in the country which still produces
the Toledo blade. He characterises the metal generally as being
universally used and occurring in every part of the world—especially
in Ilva, now Elba, where there are mines of oligiste, specular iron
or iron glance. His process of steel-making is that of the Greeks.
‘Fornacum maxima differentia est; in eis equidem nucleus ferri’
(the σίδηρος ἐργασμένος or worked iron of Aristotle) ‘excoquitur ad
indurandum; aliter alioque modo ad densandas incudes, malleorumve
rostra’ (xxxiv. 41). Hence it appears that the Romans had one way
to make steel, and another to harden and temper tools, picks, and
anvils. ‘Possibly,’ says Dr. Martin Lister, ‘the latter were boiled in
“sow-metal,” as the term _densare_ seems to suggest.’

Roman mining-operations were often conducted on a large scale. The
Forest of Dean and the Wealds of Kent and Sussex, not to mention
other parts of England, show heaps of old slag containing classical
pottery and coins of Nero, Vespasian, and Diocletian. They obtained
the regulus[368] by the direct process, and used charcoal in rude
Catalan furnaces; the work was imperfect, and the scoriæ contain a
large percentage of metal. Ancient adits and shafts in Shropshire[369]
and elsewhere have preserved the rude implements with which they made
the natives labour in _corvée_. The hill-sides of Carthagena on the
seaboard of Murcia (South-Eastern Spain) had been explored for lead and
silver by the earliest Carthaginian colonists; and the industry was at
its height when Nova Carthago, under Roman rule, became (B.C. 200) a
flourishing municipium, the centre of a large population. At this time
as many as forty thousand hands were regularly employed. In our seventh
century the Arab invasion ruined the mines, not only of this district,
but of every province occupied by the ‘Moors.’ About the mid-fifteenth
century a revival was attempted; but this was checked at the beginning
of the sixteenth, when the mines of Spanish America were opened:
the Emperor Charles V. also would not see the soil of his European
dominions disturbed by digging. The miners emigrated in mass, and New
Carthage was forgotten till within the last half-century. According to
M. Alfred Massart,[370] the ancient masses of plumbiferous scoriæ were
large enough to pay for re-working. A superficial area of eight square
leagues yielded some eight hundred thousand tons of iron-ore, of which
two-thirds were ferro-manganese, and twenty thousand to twenty-five
thousand tons of lead containing thirty thousand kilogrammes of silver.
As regards the use of iron for many purposes by the ancient Britons
before the Roman conquest, we may fairly, without attaching importance
to the legend of ‘Milesius,’ believe that the industry may also have
migrated northwards from a Spanish centre. Hence, Mr. Hutton, the local
historian of Birmingham, believes that Sword-blades were made there
before the landing of Julius Cæsar.

[Heading: _IRON IN INDIA._]

From Assyria the use of iron would extend through Persia to India, to
Indo-China, and to China and Japan. Professor Max Müller, as Mr. Day
justly observes, differs with himself when he states in one place[371]
that ‘iron was not known previously to the breaking up of the Aryan
family’; and in another passage,[372] where we are told, ‘Before the
separation of the Aryan race ... there can be no doubt that iron was
known and its value appreciated.’ Here, evidently, the Sanskritist had
changed his first opinion, because he had noticed that ‘Ayas’ may also
mean copper or bronze. The Rig Veda mentions mail-coats, hatchets, and
weapons of iron; but so far from assigning to this work the age of B.C.
1300, we may fairly hold that its present shape was assumed in the
early centuries following Christianity. We have trustworthy notices of
the metal in India only at the beginning of authentic history, when
the acumen of the Greeks was applied to the gross absurdities of Hindu
fable.[373] The Malli and Oxydracæ presented to Alexander a hundred
talents’ weight of Indian steel (_ferrum candidum_) in wrought bars,
just as Homer’s Achilles (‘Il.’ xxiii. 826), nearly a thousand years
before, offered at the funeral games of Patroclus, ‘a rudely-molten
mass of iron’ (σόλον αὐτοχόωνον, self-melted?), which had been used
for hurling at the foe by Eëtion, and which would supply the farm with
metal for five years. The ‘bright iron’ of Ezekiel, named amongst the
wares of Tyre (xxvii. 19) with cassia and calamus, was probably the
same material. The Periplus mentions sideros indikos and stómoma
(steel) as imports to the Abyssinian harbours. Daimachus and Pliny
specify, amongst the dearest kinds of steel, the ferrum Indicum and the
ferrum Sericum; and Salmasius refers to a Greek chemical treatise ‘On
the Tempering (περὶ βαφῆς) of Indian Steel.’

The great iron-working age of India seems to have been in the fourth
and fifth centuries of our era, when the blacksmiths must have been
skilful and commanded an unlimited supply of the best metal. The Lát or
iron-pillar of Delhi, to mention no other, is a solid shaft, showing
that the people were unable to make a core. This simple piece of
wrought metal, calculated to weigh seventeen tons and to contain eighty
cubic feet of metal, measures in diameter 16·4 inches tapering to
12·05. The height above ground is twenty-two feet, and excavations of
twenty-six feet did not reach the base: the known length therefore is
upwards of forty-eight feet.[374] The sundry inscriptions punched upon
it are of very various dates: Prinsep[375] assigns our third or fourth
century to the Nagari character in which Rajah Dhava thus ‘renowned
it’:—

‘By him who, learning the warlike preparations and entrenchments of
his enemies with their good soldiers and allies, a monument of fame
engraved by his Sword on their limbs, who as master of the seven
advantages,[376] crossing over (the Indus?), so subdued the Vahlikas of
Sindhu [N.B.: they can hardly be the ‘people of Balkh’] that even at
this day his disciplined force and defences on the south (of the river)
are sacredly respected by them,’ &c. &c.

Metallurgists dispute as to the way in which this huge iron rod was
wrought. One writer,[377] however, seems to have hit upon the solution
of the problem: ‘The column may have been forged standing, by welding
on, one over another, thin iron plates or dires, the fire being built
round the column as it grew; and the ground raised in a mound to keep
the top of the column on a level with the workplace.’ Pyramid-building
has been explained in the same way—a causeway.

But the Lát is not the only marvel of Hindu metallurgy. Mr. James
Fergusson found in the Temple of Kanaruc, or Black Pagoda of the Madras
Presidency, beams of wrought iron about twenty-one feet in length and
eight inches section, to strengthen the roof, which the Hindus, in
their distrust of the arch, formed after their usual bracket-fashion.
In the fane of Mahavellipore he discovered sockets for similar
supports. He assigns to the Black Pagoda a date between A.D. 1236 and
1241; and to Mahavellipore any time between our tenth and fourteenth
centuries.[378] Colonel Pearse, R.A. presented to the trustees of the
British Museum a unique collection of archaic tools, iron and steel,
gouges, spatulæ, ladles, and similar articles, dug out of tumuli at
Wari Gaon, near Kampti. But there are no grounds whatever for dating
them ‘about B.C. 1500, or the time of Moses.’

[Heading: _WOOTZ._]

The _ferrum Indicum_[379] of the Classics may still be represented by
the famous Wootz or Wutz,[380] the ‘natural Indian steel,’ still so
much prized for Sword-blades in Persia and Afghanistan. The specimens
first sent in 1795 to the Royal Society of London were analysed by Mr.
Josiah M. Heath with the results given below.[381]

Colonel Yule remarks that the Wootz was, in part at least, the famous
Indian steel, the σίδηρος Ἰνδικὸς καὶ στόμωμα of the ‘Periplus,’ the
Hunduwání of the mediæval Persian traders; the Andanicum or Ondanique
of Marco Polo and the Alkinde of the old Spanish. In the sixteenth
century the exportation was chiefly from Baticala in Canara. The King
of Portugal complains (in A.D. 1591) of the large quantities shipped
from Chaul to be sold in the Red Sea to the Turks and on the African
coast about Melinde.[382] And I would note that this industry by no
means argues civilisation in India or elsewhere:[383] as Dr. Percy
remarks, ‘The primitive method of extracting good malleable iron
direct from the ore, which is still practised in India and in Africa,
requires a degree of skill very inferior to that which is implied in
the manufacture of bronze.’

The system of Wootz-making, especially at Salem and in parts of Mysore,
has been described by many writers. About a pound weight of malleable
iron, made from magnetic ore, is placed, minutely broken and moistened,
in a crucible of refractory clay, together with finely chopped pieces
of wood (_Cassia auriculata_). It is packed without flux. The open pots
are then covered with the green leaves of the _Asclepias gigantea_
or the _Convolvulus lanifolius_, and the tops are coated over with
wet clay, which is sun-dried to hardness. ‘Charcoal will not do as a
substitute for the green twigs.’ Some two dozen of these cupels[384] or
crucibles are disposed archways at the bottom of a furnace, whose blast
is managed with bellows of bullock’s hide. The fuel is composed mostly
of charcoal and of sun-dried _brattis_ or cow-chips. After two or three
hours’ smelting the cooled crucibles are broken up, when the regulus
appears in the shape and size of half an egg. According to Tavernier,
the best buttons from about Golconda were as large as a halfpenny roll,
and sufficed to make two Sword-blades (?). These ‘cops’ are converted
into bars by exposure for several hours to a charcoal fire not hot
enough to melt them: they are then turned over before the blast, and
thus the too highly carburised steel is oxidised.[385]

According to Professor Oldham,[386] ‘Wootz’ is also worked in the
Damudah Valley, at Birbhúm, Dyucha, Narayanpúr, Damrah, and Goanpúr.
In 1852 some thirty furnaces at Dyucha reduced the ore to _kachhá_ or
pig-iron, small blooms from Catalan forges; as many more converted it
to _pakká_ (crude steel), prepared in furnaces of different kind. The
work was done by different castes; the Hindís (Moslems) laboured at the
rude metal, and the Hindús preferred the refining work. I have read
that anciently a large quantity of Wootz found its way westward _viâ_
Pesháwar.

When last visiting (April 19, 1876) the Mahabaleshwar Hills near
Bombay, I had the pleasure to meet Mr. Joyner, C.E., and with
his assistance made personal inquiries into the process. The
whole of the Sayhádri range (Western Ghats), and especially the
‘great-Might-of-Shiva’ mountains, had for many ages supplied Persia
with the best steel. Our Government, since 1866, forbade the industry,
as it threatened the highlands with disforesting. The ore was worked
by the Hill-tribes, of whom the principal are the Dhánwars, Dravidians
now speaking Hindustani.[387] Only the brickwork of their many raised
furnaces remained. For fuel they preferred the Jumbul-wood, and
the Anjan or iron-wood. They packed the iron and fourteen pounds of
charcoal in layers; and, after two hours of bellows-working, the metal
flowed into the forms. The ‘Kurs’ (bloom), five inches in diameter
by two and a half deep, was then beaten into Táwás or plates. The
matrix resembled the Brazilian, a poor yellow-brown limonite striping
the mud-coloured clay; and actual testing disproved the common idea
that the ‘watering’ of the surface is found in the metal. The Jauhar
(‘jewel’ or ribboning) of the so-called ‘Damascus’ blade was produced
artificially, mostly by drawing out the steel into thin ribbons which
were piled and welded by the hammer. My friend afterwards sent me from
India an inkstand of Mahabaleshwar iron.[388]

I could not learn from Hindus that they bury iron in the earth till the
‘core’ is reached. But they are well acquainted with tempering by cold
immersion, as noticed by Salmasius (‘Exercit. Plin.’ 763): they still
believe with Pliny, Justin, and a host of others, in ‘a Sword, the
icebrook’s temper,’ and all hold that the hardening of metal depends
much upon the quality of the water. They quench delicate articles in
oil, a method also alluded to by Pliny, but they ignore his statement
(xxviii. 41) that rust produced by goat’s blood gives a better edge
to iron than the file. I am not aware that they have ever used for
quenching purposes quicksilver, the best conductor of heat.

In Burmah, as in India, the chief peculiarity of iron-smelting is
the use of green-wood fuel.[389] Throughout the mighty ‘Hollander’
Archipelago of the Farther East, this metal, known in former days
only by importation, is now everywhere common. Java received the
Egyptian arts from India, which colonised her about the beginning of
the Christian era: the now untravelled Hindú was then a voyager and an
explorer. Dr. Percy describes the iron-smelting of Borneo,[390] which
produces the Parangilang, a peculiar Sword-like weapon equally fit for
felling trees and men.[391] At Tahiti (Otaheiti), on the other hand,
Captain Cook was unable to make the natives appreciate the use of metal
till his armourer wrought an iron adze in shape like the native.

[Heading: _IRON IN CHINA._]

The oldest, and indeed the only, Chinese word for iron is 鐵—_tie_,
formerly pronounced _tit_. It is first mentioned among the
tribute-articles of Yu in the Yu-Kung section of the Shoo-King,[392]
and the latter has been estimated to date from B.C. 2200–2000. If this
be fact, hieroglyphic tablet-writing flourished amongst the ‘Bak’ some
five hundred years before the age popularly attributed to the Hebrew
Scriptures, and when the Greeks had not begun to form a nation.[393]
Either then the Sinologues, like the Sanskritists, have been deluded
by the artful native into admitting the preposterous claims to
antiquity of culture always advanced by semi-barbarous peoples; or,
what is hardly likely, China formed a centre of Turanian civilisation
wholly independent of Egypt and Chaldæa. Indeed, there appears to
have been some contact of ideas in the matter of writing. The Kemite
denoted ‘man’ and ‘eye’ by copying nature; and probably the Chinese did
the same. But the Turanian symbols have lost, by the law of pictorial
evanescence, the original forms: ‘man’ has become 人 = jin (No. 9),[394]
a pair of legs; and ‘eye’ 目 = mŭh (No. 109), looks as if copied from
a cat. The picture-origin of the Assyrian syllabary has also been
satisfactorily established by the Rev. W. Haughton, but the later forms
are as degraded as in the hieratic and demotic Egyptian.[395]

The passage above alluded to enumerates the articles of tribute as
‘musical gems-stones,’ iron, silver, steel, stones for arrow-heads, and
sounding stones, with the skins of bears, great bears, foxes, jackals,
and articles woven with their hair.’ Dr. Legge adds in a note: ‘By 鐵 =
_Tie_, we are to understand “soft iron,” and by 鏤 = _Low_ or _Lowe_,
“hard iron” or “steel.” At the time of the Han dynasty, “iron-masters”
(鐵宧) were appointed in the several districts of the old Leangchou, to
superintend the iron-works. Tsa’e refers to two individuals mentioned
in the “Historical Records”; one of the surname Ch’o, (卓氏), and the
other of the surname Ch’ing (程), both of this part of the empire, who
became so wealthy by their smelting that they were deemed equal to
princes.’ According to the Rev. Dr. Edkins, ‘with the exception of this
passage there is probably no distinct allusion to iron in writings
older than B.C. 1000;’ and his statement seems to establish the date of
Chinese technology and civilisation.

About B.C. 400 the celebrated author and philosopher Leih-Tze
mentions steel, and describes the process of tempering it. In the
‘K’ang-hi-tse-tien’ (康熙字典), better known as ‘Kanghi’s Dictionary,’
published about A.D. 1710, the author represents the Serican
contemporary of Aristotle as saying that ‘a red blade will cut Hu
(jade or nephrite) as it would cut mud.’ Mr. Day makes this to mean a
‘reddish-coloured blade,’ red being one of the many tints which a clean
surface of steel acquires in the process of tempering. It certainly
cannot refer to red-hot steel, which would make no impression upon
pietra dura. The description of steel-making in B.C. 400 is so far
complete that it names and describes the several kinds. The first
treatment produces ‘Twan-Kang’ or ball-steel, so called from the
rounded bloom,[396] or ‘Kwan-Kang’ (sprinkled steel), because treated
with cold affusion. There is also ‘Wei-Tie’ or false steel. The writer
says: ‘When I was sent on official business to Tse-Chow and visited the
foundries there, I understood this for the first time. Iron has steel
within it, as meal contains vermicelli. Let it be subjected to fire a
hundred times or more; it becomes lighter each time. If the firing be
continued until the weight does not diminish, it is pure steel.’[397]

About the beginning of the Christian era a tax was levied upon iron by
the State exchequer, showing that the manufacture had become important.
According to the Pi-tan or Pencil-Talk, written probably under the
Ming dynasty[398] (A.D. 1366–1644), steel is thus made: ‘Wrought iron
is bent or twisted up; unwrought iron (i.e. iron-ore or cast-iron) is
thrown into it; it is covered up with mud and subjected to the action
of fire, and afterwards to the hammer.’ This is the old and well-known
process of steeling practised by the Greeks. Wrought iron was either
immersed into molten cast-iron as into a bath, or it was heated with
iron-ore and layers of charcoal-fuel covered with alternate strata of
clay to exclude atmospheric influence, a treatment somewhat similar to
what is still called ‘cementation.’[399] The ore was thus deoxidised by
contact with excess of carbon; and a molten carburet was the result.
It is not a little curious, as Mr. Day observes, to find Aristotle
and Lieh-Tze describing the same process about the same time. But
I hesitate to conclude with that able writer that the fact has any
bearing upon ‘the old doctrine of the original unity of the human
race; each section of mankind carrying off with them that common stock
of knowledge which the entire family possessed before separation.’
Mr. Day, I have said, systematically opposes the ‘High Antiquity
Theory’ (p. 208); and, though he holds to Revelation and to Biblical
chronology, he has a curious tendency towards the mystical etymology of
the Jacob Bryant school, and the obsolete Phallic theories revived by
the learned and able work of the late Dr. Inman.[400]

The Pent Saow, also attributed to the days of the Mings, speaks of
three kinds of steel used for knives and Swords, a division which again
reminds us of Daimachus. The first is made by adding unwrought to
wrought iron, while the mass is subjected to the action of fire. The
second is simply the result of repeated firings as practised in Africa.
The third is native steel produced in the south-west at Hai-shan: ‘In
appearance it resembles the stone called “Tsze-shih-ying” (purple stone
efflorescence).’ It is understood that the process of manufacture is
kept secret. The ‘Hankow-steel,’ which comes to Tien-tsin from the
upper Yang-tse, is most prized; and commands much higher prices than
the best imported English and Swedish; the Chinese, like the ‘Caffirs,’
look upon these as ‘rotten iron.’

China also had her ‘literary blacksmith,’ like Wieland Smith, the
northern Dædalus. We read that Hoang-ta-tie of T’ancheu, who lived
under the Sung, followed the craft of an ironsmith. Whenever he was
at his work he used to call without intermission on the name of Amita
Buddha. One day he handed to his neighbours the following verses of his
own composing to be spread about:—

    Ding-dong! the hammer-strokes fall long and fast,
    Until the iron turns to steel at last!
    Now shall the long long Day of Rest begin,
    The Land of Bliss Eternal calls me in.

Thereupon he died. But his verses spread all over Honan, and many
learned to call upon Buddha.

The oldest Chinese iron-works were at Shansi and Chilili in the Ho
districts, where there are inexhaustible deposits of ore and coal, and
where the metal is worked to the present day. In 1875 Commissioner
Li-hung-Chang, raised from the Government-General of Chilili to be
Minister of the young King, sent Mr. James Henderson to England with
orders to bring out the most modern appliances and apparatus for
metal-working. It was proposed to build the new works at Tsze-Chow,
a town two hundred miles south-west of Tien-tsin, the head-quarters
of the Governor-General. Mr. Henderson had visited (1874) the
establishment near Yang-Ching, Shansi, which had before been described
by Baron von Richtofen and Dr. Williamson.[401] The iron ore bought
at Ping-ding-Chow was found at the Royal School of Mines, London, to
contain fifty per cent. of iron, loose hæmatite with little or no
sulphur.

M. Sévoz, an engineer of mines long resident in Japan, studied
iron-working in the province of Ykouno.[402] He found the people
using an imperfect Catalan method, but able to treat at once sixteen
thousand kilogrammes of ore, and to produce blooms weighing one
thousand three hundred kilogrammes. These huge rods were broken up
under a hammer constructed in the style of a pile-driving ram, to which
motion was given by a walking-wheel 11·5 mètres in diameter, mounted by
men. The description does not promise much; but Japan, though holding
to her ancient methods in districts unknown to Europeans, produces iron
cheaper than the English. Of her marvellous Swords I shall treat in
Part II.

The people of Madagascar worked iron,[403] but their name of the
metal is Malayan; hence Mr. Crawford traced the art back to Malacca.
Yet the Malay did not extend it far eastwards: according to Mr. E.
B. Tylor,[404] ‘In New Zealand, where there is good iron-ore, there
was no knowledge of iron previously to the arrival of Europeans.’
Passing over to the American continent, we find an immense industry
of copper, but so little iron that, till late years, the indigenes
were supposed not to have worked it. Ynka mines, however, have been
discovered near Lake Titicaca; while excavations in the tumuli of
the mysterious ‘Mound-builders,’ who may have attempted to reproduce
the Egyptian Pyramid, yielded axes described to be of ‘hæmatite
iron-ore,’ one of the easiest metals to smelt, and for that reason
probably one of the first worked. Mr. Day, who figures one of these
tool-weapons with the hammer-marks (p. 218), supposes it to have been
‘metallic iron,’ pronouncing hæmatite ‘extremely brittle and absolutely
unforgeable.’[405] He quotes Mr. Charles C. Abbott,[406] who procured
other specimens of aboriginal manufacture from the mounds. One hatchet
was four and a half inches long by two broad, and nearly uniform in
thickness, three-sixteenths of an inch; it had a well-defined edge,
which from its slightly wavy outline and varied breadth, appeared to be
hammered, not ground. According to Major Hotchkiss, who owned two other
similar specimens, a series of four was found under an uprooted tree on
an Indian trail in West Virginia.

Fragments of unworked hæmatite, small and irregular, were used instead
of flint for arrow-heads.[407] Mr. Abbott also notices ‘a curious form
of “relic,” known as a “plummet,” occasionally occurring and made of
iron ore: one specimen[408] “is made of iron ore ground down until it
is almost as smooth as glass.” As such “plummets” are found in the
Western Mounds, as well as on the surface of the ground throughout
the Atlantic coast States, and are always polished, it seems fair
to presume that a cutting instrument of such hard material would
undoubtedly be polished and ground, if at the time of its manufacture
grinding was known or practised among the aborigines in fashioning
their various weapons and instruments.’

[Heading: _IRON IN AFRICA._]

But if the savages and barbarians of Oceania and the New World rarely
worked iron, the contrary was the case with the equally uncivilised
African races, negroid and negro, who, however, had the advantage of
dwelling within importing and imitating distance of Egypt. I have
elsewhere noticed the excellent assegai-blades of the Bantu (Kafirs);
nor is this art confined to the southern regions.[409] Dr. Percy
justly makes wrought iron the original form, which we see retained
in the obscurer parts of Asia and Africa. The people always worked
by the ‘direct process,’ the oldest style; which, however, is not
wholly extinct in Europe. The art, quasi-stationary among wild men,
treats small quantities at a time: the ‘voracious iron-works’ of which
Evelyn first speaks, are beyond its wants. Moreover it can utilise
only rich ores, unlike the ‘indirect process’ of producing cast-iron
by the blast-furnace.[410] When the ore is nearly pure, a small
addition of carbon would convert it into steel;[411] and the latter
is so easily made, that the wild Hill-peoples of Africa and India
produce, and have produced from time immemorial, an excellent article
in the most primitive way. The proportion of charcoal is considerably
increased, and the blast is applied more slowly than when wrought iron
is required. The only apparatus wanted for the manufacture is a small
clay furnace, four feet high by one to two broad, like that used by the
South Africans; charcoal for fuel, and a skin with a pipe or twyers
of refractory clay for the blast.[412] For the anvil a stone-slab
suffices, and for the hammer a cube of stone with sides grooved for
fibre-cords.

The ‘Dark Continent’ is emphatically an iron-land, and all explorers
have noticed its abundance of ore. Mungo Park[413] mentions the surface
ironstone of dull red tint with greyish spots used by his ‘Mandingos’:
Barth confirms his assertion by describing magnetic metal about Kuka
of the Mandengas, and at Jinninau in the Kel-owi or Tawareh country:
Durham and Clapperton, when near Murzuk, found kidney-shaped lumps
upon the surface; and about Bilma, capital of the Tibbús, nodules
of iron-ore puddinged in the red sandstones—could this have been
laterite or volcanic mud? It was the only metal seen in the hills
of Mandara; but the Bornuese prefer to import their supply from the
neighbouring Sudan. Mr. Warren Edwards, who had temporary charge of a
Niger expedition, observed the natives supporting their cooking-pots
over the fire with fragments of surface ironstone; and it often struck
him (as it does most men) that by some such means the smelting-process
suggested itself. The metal is abundant in the Gaboon country, where
the Mpangwe or Fans,[414] the western outliers of the great race,
mostly cannibal, holding the heart of Africa, are able workers. They
have a kind of ‘fleam-money,’ small iron bars shaped somewhat like
a large lancet. I came upon the metal everywhere in Unyamwezi,
the ‘Mountains of the Moon,’ and to this universal presence of
ironstone—not to damp and heat—the Portuguese attribute the marvellous
displays of electricity throughout Central Africa. A whole night will
pass during which the thunder is never silent; and the lightning
enables one to read small print, like an electric light. Captain
Grant, in his ‘Walk across Africa,’ tells us that the people pick up
walnut-sized nuggets of iron covered with dusty rust, and in a short
time produce a spear-head that glistens like steel. My fellow-traveller
to the Gold Coast, Captain Cameron, when crossing Africa, in most
places found iron and iron-smelting.[415] In Kordofan, Mr. Petherick
saw a rich surface oxide containing from fifty-five to sixty per cent.
of pure metal. Livingstone remarked iron in the eastern regions of
Angola,[416] and traced it up the Zambeze-line from east to west. Mr.
C. T. Anderson describes it as occurring in large quantities, either
of ironstone or pure in a crystallised state. Finally, good old Kolben
mentions large iron-flakes on the surface near The Cape.

[Illustration: FIG. 104.—IRON SMELTING FURNACE AMONGST THE MARÁVE
PEOPLE.]

But, as Colonel A. Lane Fox remarks:[417] ‘Simple heating is not
sufficient for working iron: a continuous air-blast is required to
keep the temperature at a certain height.’ It is interesting to see
the means adopted by barbarians for procuring this necessary; and,
having carefully studied it in various parts of Africa, I devote to it
the remainder of this chapter. As Pliny repeats from Aristotle, ‘Libya
always produces something new.’

According to Strabo, Anacharsis[418] the Scythian, who flourished in
the days of Solon (B.C. 592), invented not only the anchor[419] and
the potter’s wheel, but also the bellows. In Egypt, however, we find
that these discoveries were already a thousand years old at least. The
earliest appearance of the latter is the forge and bellows (in Egyptian
‘H’ati’), depicted on the walls of a tomb in the days of Thut-mes III.,
about B.C. 1500. The workman stands on two bags of skin, such as are
still used to hold water, alternately weighing upon one and upon the
other; he inflates them in turns by pulling up a cord which opens a
valve, and then he closes the hole with his heel. The bellows have
twyers, and the illustrations[420] show a crucible and a heap of ore:
while the material of the H’ati is indicated by its determinative, a
hide with a tail. This rude contrivance was adopted by the Greeks and
Romans: hence the ‘taurini folles’ of Plautus: and Virgil’s—

                ... Alii ventosis follibus auras
    Accipiunt redduntque.—_Æn._ viii. 449.

The wind-bag[421] would be made of ox-hide, of goat-skin, or
of the spoils of smaller animals, according to the volume of draught
required. And thus, also, would originate the bagpipe, an instrument
common to almost all original peoples.

But in the Dark Continent we find still in use an older form than that
known to Thut-mes, and the earliest of the four several varieties.
The late Mr. Petherick describes this rude contrivance in Kordofan:
‘The blast is supplied by skin bags worked by hand; these bags are
made of skins, which are flayed by two incisions from the tail down
to the hocks; the skin, being drawn over the body, is cut off at the
neck, which makes the mouth of the bag. After tanning, the hind legs
are cut off, and each side of the skin sewn on to a straight piece of
stick; loops are placed on the outside for the fingers of the operator
to pass through. It can be opened and closed at pleasure; the neck is
secured to a tube of baked clay, and four men or boys seated round the
cupola, each with a bellows of this primitive description, produce a
blast by opening the bags when drawing them towards them, and closing
them quickly, push them forward; by which means the compressed bags
discharge the air through the tubes into the furnace, quick alternate
movements of the arms of the operator producing a blast, which throws
out a flame about a foot high from the top of the furnace; and the
slag with the metal is allowed to collect in a hole beneath it.’
Casalis similarly describes the Basuto bellows, and Mungo Park that of
Mandenga-land; Browne saw it in Dár-For,[422] and Clapperton in Kuka
and in the Highlands of Mandara, where the anvil was a coarse bloom of
iron, and the hammers two lumps weighing about two pounds each. This
is the bellows of Kathiawád[423] and of Kolapor in the Deccan, where
Captain Graham notices that the _mús_ or tubes for the blast are clay
mixed with burnt and powdered flint. Mr. E. B. Tylor found it used by a
travelling tinker at Pæstum.

The second and improved variety of African bellows was described by
myself during a visit to Yoruban Abeokuta. It deserves attention
because it is a notable step in progress, leading to a further
development; the troughs are a rudimentary cylinder, and the handles
form an incipient piston.[424] ‘The two bags of goat-skin are made fast
in a frame cut out of a single piece of wood; the upper part of each
_follis_ has, by way of handle, a stick two feet long, so that it can
be worked by one man either standing or sitting. The handles are raised
alternately by the blower, so that when one receives the air, the other
ejects it; the form is like that used on the Gold Coast; and there is
a perpendicular screen of dried clay through which the nozzle of the
bellows passes, supplying a regular blast.’

Evidently in this stage of the bellows, the lower halves of the
leather bags are useless: the result would be the same if only the
upper part of the wooden troughs were covered with skin, air-tight
but loose enough to make play. This third step has been taken by the
Djour (Júr) tribes of the Upper Nile, in north latitude 20°, and it is
thus described by Mr. Petherick: ‘The blast-pipes are made as usual of
burnt clay, and are attached to earthen vessels about eighteen inches
in diameter and six inches in height, covered with a loose, dressed
goat-skin, tied tightly round them and perforated with a few holes, in
the centre of which is a loop to contain the fingers of the operator.
A lad, sitting between two of these vessels, by a rapid alternate
vertical motion drives a continuous current of air into the furnace.’

[Heading: _THE BELLOWS IN AFRICA._]

[Illustration: FIG. 105.—PORTABLE AFRICAN BELLOWS.]

This brings us to the fourth and last stage of African
blast-improvement (fig. 105). Here the rudely-hewn wooden tube becomes
a double-barrelled forcing-pump. The two air-vessels with their loose
skin-coverings are attached to each base of the two central pipes that
join into one. Such is the shape used in Madagascar, the cylinders
being of bamboo, five feet long by two inches in diameter, and the
piston a stick ending in a bunch of feathers.

The bellows described by Dampier in Mindanao and elsewhere in the Malay
Archipelago, is evidently borrowed from the Madagascar type; and into
Borneo, Siam, and New Guinea a hollowed trunk takes the place of the
bamboos. The sculptures in the Sukuh-temple of Java, attributed to
the fifteenth century, represent smiths making Kríses (Creases), the
bellows being worked by another man, who holds a piston upright in each
hand. Colonel A. Lane Fox is of opinion that the sculptures ‘possibly
point to a Hindu origin for this particular contrivance.’ I agree with
him, but I would also trace the Asiatic article back to its old home in
Africa—Egypt.

The nature of fuel was determined by the supply of the country. That
of Egypt probably consisted of cattle-chips, a material still used by
the Fellahs. A later allusion to this article is found in the legend
of ‘Wieland Smith’: he mixes iron-filings with the meal eaten by his
geese, carefully collects the droppings, and out of them forges a blade
which cuts a wool-flock or cleaves a man to the belt without turning
edge.

I conclude this chapter with the following table,[425] printed by Mr.
Day at the end of his ‘High Antiquity of Iron and Steel.’ It gives
at one view the languages, the characters, the phonetic values, the
English equivalents, and the oldest known dates of the metals to which
he refers. I differ from him in sundry points, and these I have taken
the liberty to point out in italics.

                        GENERAL TABLE OF TERMS.

+--------------------------+-------------+----------------+---------------+------------------+
|        LANGUAGE          |             |                |               |                  |
+------------+-------------+ CHARACTERS  | PHONETIC VALUE |    ENGLISH    |   OLDEST KNOWN   |
|    NAME    |   FAMILY    |             |                |  EQUIVALENT   |     DATE OF      |
+------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+---------------+------------------+
|            |             |[Hieroglyphs]|       Ba.      |    Earth,     |                  |
|            |             |             |                |    Metal.     |                  |
|            |             |             |                |               |       2200       |
|            |  Hamitic,   |[Hieroglyphs]|       Ba.      |    Iron.      |        to        |
|  Egyptian  |    with     |             |                |               |       2300       |
|Hieroglyphs.|   Semitic   |[Hieroglyphs]|      Ba’a.     |    Iron,      |       B.C.       |
|            |  Infusion.  |             |                |    Earth.     |                  |
|            |             |             |                |               |                  |
|            |             |[Hieroglyphs]|    Ba’aenpe.   |    Iron.      |                  |
|            |             |             |                |               |  (_B.C. 4500?_)  |
|            |             |[Hieroglyphs]|      Bet.      |    Iron.      |                  |
+------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+---------------+------------------+
|  Akkadian. |             | [Cuneiform] |    Hurud.      |    Iron.      |{Oldest Monuments,|
+------------+             +-------------+----------------+---------------+{    at least     |
|            |             |             |                |               |{    2000 B.C.    |
|  Assyrian. |             | [Cuneiform] |     Eru.       |    Iron.      |{ (_B.C. 4000?_)  |
+------------+  Semitic.   +-------------+----------------+---------------+------------------+
|            |             |     נחושה   |    n’ghōshāh   |    Steel.     |       From       |
|            |             |     ברזל    |     barzel     |    Iron.      |       1500       |
|   Hebrew.  |             |  ברזל עשות  | barzel yāshūth |  Bright Iron. |       B.C.       |
|            |             |  ברזל מוצק  | barzel mūtzāq  |   Cast Iron.  |    downwards.    |
+------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+---------------+------------------+
|            | Sporadic    |     鏤       |   Low, Lowe.   |   Steel.      |                  |
|Chinese.    |    or       |     鐵       |Tie (pronounced |    Iron.      |                  |
|  [426]     |llophyllian  |             |     Tit).      |               |       2000       |
|            |(_Turanian_).|     金       |     Kin.       |    Metal.     |      B.C.        |
|            |             |    鐵宧      |      --        | Iron-masters. |                  |
+------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+---------------+------------------+
|            |             |             |                |               | Oldest Sanskrit. |
|  Sanskrit. |             |     आर      |     Ára.       |    Iron.      |    Probably      |
|            |             |    अयस्      |     Ayas.      |    Iron.      |   B.C. 1500.     |
|            |             |             |                |               |  (_B.C. 400?_)   |
+------------+   Aryan.    +-------------+----------------+---------------+------------------+
|            |             |    χάλυψ    |    Khalyps.    |    Steel.     |     Homeric      |
|            |             |   σίδηρος   |    Sideros.    |    Iron.      |       Age.       |
|   Greek.   |             |             |                |{Blue Metal,   |                  |
|            |             |   κύανος    |    Cyanos.     |{prob. tempered|       --         |
|            |             |             |                |{Steel.        |                  |
|            |             |   ἀδάμας    |    Adamas.     |    Steel.     |     Hesiod.      |
+------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+---------------+------------------+




                             CHAPTER VII.

                        THE SWORD: WHAT IS IT?


Having now reached the early Iron Age, which ends prehistoric annals,
it is advisable to answer the question—‘What is a Sword?’

The word—a word which, strange to say, has no equivalent in French—is
the Scandinavian Svärd (Icel. Sverð); the Danish Sværd; the Anglo-Saxon
Sweord and Suerd; the Old German Svert, now Schwert, and the Old
English and Scotch Swerd. The westward drift of the Egyptian Sf,
Sefi, Sayf, Sfet, and Emsetf, gave Europe its generic term for the
weapon.[427] The poetical is ‘brand’ or ‘bronde,’ from its brightness
or burning; another name is ‘laufi,’ ‘laf,’ or ‘glaive,’ derived
through French from the Latin _gladius_. Of especial modern forms
there are the Espadon, the Flamberg, Flammberg, or Flamberge,[428] the
Stoccado, and the Braquemart; the Rapier and the Claymore, the Skeyne
and Tuck, the small-Sword and the fencing-foil, beside other varieties
which will occur in the course of the following pages. ‘Sword’ includes
‘Sabre,’ which may also derive from the Egyptian through the Assyrian
Sibirru and Akkadian Sibir, also written Sapara; our ‘Sabre’ is the
Arabic Sayf with the Scandinavian terminative _r_ (Sayf-r). Ménage
would derive Sabre from the Armoric Sabrenn: Littré has the Spanish
Sable, the Italian Sciabola, Sciabla, and in Venice Sabala, from the
German Sable or Säbel, which again identifies with other languages, as
the Serb Sablja and the Hungarian Száblya. The chief modern varieties
of the curved blade are the Broadsword, the Backsword, the Hanger, and
the Cutlass, the Scymitar and Düsack, the Yataghan and the Flissa.
These several modifications will be considered in the order of their
invention. Lastly the Egyptian ‘Sfet’ originated through Keltic
the word Spata or Spatha[429] (Spatarius = a Swordsman) conserved
to the present day in the neo-Latin names of the straight foining
weapon—espada, espé, espée, épée.

Physically considered, the Sword is a metal blade intended for cutting,
thrusting, or cut-and-thrust (_fil et pointe_). It is usually, but not
always, composed of two parts. The first and principal is the blade
proper (_la lame_, _la lama_, _die Klinge_). Its cutting surface is
called the edge (_le fil_, _il filo_, _die Schärfe_),[430] and its
thrusting end is the point (_la pointe_, _la punta_, _die Spitze_ or
_der Ort_, the latter mostly opposed to the _Mund_ or sheath-mouth).

The second part, which adapts the weapon for readier use, is the hilt,
hilts or heft (_la manche_, _la manica_, _die Hilse_ or _das Heft_),
whose several sections form a complicated and a prodigiously varied
whole. The grip is the outer case of the tang, _alias_ the tongue (_la
soie_, _la spina_, or _il codolo_; _der Stoss_, _die Angel_, _die
Griffzunge_ or _der Dorn_), the thin spike which projects from the
shoulders or thickening of the blade (_le talon_ or _l’épaulement_,
_il talone_, _der Ansatz_ or _die Schulter_) at the end opposed to the
point. Sometimes there are two short teeth or projections from the
angles of the shoulders, and these are called ‘the ears’ in English, in
German, and in the neo-Latin tongues.

The tang, which is of many shapes—long and short, straight-lined or
curvilinear, plain or pierced for attachment—ends in the pommel or
‘little apple’ (_le pommeau_, _il pomolo_, _der Knauf_ or _Knopf_),
into which it should be made fast by rivets or screws. The object of
this globe, lozenge, or oval of metal is to counterpoise the weight of
the blade, to prop the ferient of the hand, and to allow of artistic
ornamentation. The grip of wood, bone, horn, ivory, metal, valuable
stones, and other materials, covered with skin, cloth, and various
substances, whipped round with cord or wire, is protected at the
end abutting upon the ‘chape’[431] or guard proper (_la garde_, _la
guardia_, _die Parirstangen_, _die Leiste_ or _die Stichblätter_)
by the hilt-piece, which also greatly varies. It may, however, be
reduced to two chief types—the guard against the thrust, and the guard
against the cut. The former was originally a plate of metal, flat or
curved, circular or oval, affixed to the bottom of the hilt, dividing
the shoulders from the tang: in fact, it was a shield in miniature
(_la coquille_, _la coccia_, _das Stichblatt_). We still use the term
‘basket-hilt,’ and apply ‘shell’ (_la coque_, _la coccia_, _der Korb_
or _die Schale_) to the semicircular hilt-guards—mostly of worked,
chased, embossed, or pierced steel—which appear to perfection in the
Spanish and Italian rapiers of the sixteenth century. This hilt-plate
has dwindled in the French fencing-foil to a lunette, a double oval
of bars shaped like a pair of spectacles. In the Italian foil, which
preserves the plate, the section of the blade between that and the
grip is called the _Ricasso_ (_a_); the parallel bar is the _Vette
traversale_ (_b_, _b_); and the two are connected by the _archetti d’
unione_ (joining bows, _c_, _c_).

[Illustration: FIG. 106.—THE ITALIAN FOIL.]

The guard against the cut is technically called the cross-guard (_les
quillons_,[432] _le vette_, _die Stichblätter_). This section is
composed of one or more bars projecting from the hilt between tang
and blade, and receiving the edge of the adversary’s weapon should it
happen to glance or to glide downwards. The quillons may be either
straight (fig. 109)—that is, disposed at right angles—or curved (fig.
107). When the two horns bend down from the handle-base towards the
point they are called _à antennes_. Others are turned up towards
the hilt, counter-curved or inversed—that is, faced in opposite
directions—or fantastically deformed (fig. 110).

Opposed to the guard proper is the bow or counterguard (_la
contregarde_, _l’elsa_, _la contraguardia_, _der Bügel_). It is of two
chief kinds. In the first the quillons are recurved towards the pommel:
the second is a bar or system of bars connecting the pommel with the
quillons (fig. 108). The former defends the fingers, the latter serves
to protect, especially from the cut, the back of the hand and the outer
wrist. This modification, unknown to the ancients of Europe, became a
favourite in the sixteenth century, and it is still found in most of
our actual hilts. Another product of the early modern age is the _pas
d’âne_.[433] At the end of the fourteenth century it was composed of
two circular or oval-shaped bars, disposed on both sides of, and partly
over, the fort of the blade. In the sixteenth century it was generally
adopted, and became a complicated and highly-decorated adjunct to the
handle. The _pas d’âne_ is now almost obsolete: a relic remains in our
army-claymore.[434]

[Illustration: FIG. 107.—_a._ POMMEL; _b._ QUILLONS; _c._ PAS D’ÂNE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 108.—DOUBLE GUARD (GUARD AND COUNTERGUARD).]

[Illustration: FIG. 109.—STRAIGHT QUILLONS AND LOOPS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 110.—FANTASTIC FORM.]

We may divide the shapes of blade into two typical forms with their
minor varieties:

I. The curved blade (sabre, shable, broadsword, backsword, cutlass,
hanger, scymitar,[435] Düsack, Yataghan, Flissa, &c.) is

  _a._ Edged on both sides (Abyssinian).
  _b._    „     concave side (old Greek, Kukkri).
  _c._    „     convex (common sabre).

II. The straight blade (Espadon, Flammberg, Stoccado, Braquemart,
rapier, claymore, skeyne, tuck, small-sword, &c.): the varieties are:

  _a._ The cut-and-thrust, one- or two-handed.
  _b._ The broad and unpointed (headman’s instrument).
  _c._ The narrow, used only for the point.

It is hardly advisable to make a third type of the half-curved blade,
adapted equally for _tac et taille_ (cutting and thrusting), which we
find in ancient Assyria, in India, and in Japan. It evidently connects
both shapes.

The following diagram shows the three forms:[436]

[Illustration: FIG. 111.]

I have given precedence to the curved blade because cutting is more
familiar to man than thrusting. Human nature strikes ‘rounders’ until
severe training teaches it to hit out straight from the shoulder.
Again, the sabre-form would naturally be assumed by the sharpened
club during the wooden age of imperfect edges; and the penetrating
power would be weak and almost _nil_ when the point was merely a
fire-hardened stick.

[Heading: _CUT AND THRUST._]

Yet there is no question of superiority between the thrust and the cut.
As the diagram[437] shows, A, who delivers point, has an advantage in
time and distance over B, who uses edge. Indeed, the man who first
‘gave point’ made a discovery which more than doubled the capability
of his weapon. Vegetius tells us that the Roman victories were owing
to the use of the point rather than the cut: ‘When cutting, the right
arm and flank are exposed, whereas during the thrust the body is
guarded, and the adversary is wounded before he perceives it.’ Even
now it is remarked in hospitals that punctured wounds in the thorax or
abdomen generally kill, while the severest incisions often heal. Hence
Napoleon Buonaparte, at Aspronne, ordered the cavalry of the Guard to
give point. General Lamoricière, a scientific soldier, recommended for
cavalry a cylindrical blade, necessarily without edge, and to be used
only for the thrust: practical considerations, however, prevented its
adoption. Moreover, the history of the ‘white arm’ tells us that the
point led to the guard or parry proper, and this ‘defence with the
weapon of offence’ completed the idea of the Sword as now understood in
Europe.

[Illustration: FIG. 112.]

Again, the peoples who fought from chariots and horseback—Egyptians,
Assyrians, Indians, Tartars, Mongols, Turks, and their brethren the
‘white Turks’ (Magyars or Hungarians), Sarmatians, and Slavs—preferred
for the best of reasons the curved type. The straight Sword, used only
for thrusting, is hard to handle when the horse moves swiftly; and the
broad straight blade loses its value by the length of the plane along
which it has to travel. On the other hand, the bent blade collects,
like the battle-axe, all the momentum at the ‘half-weak,’ or centre
of percussion, where the curve is greatest. Lastly, the ‘drawing-cut’
would be easier to the mounted man, and would most injure his enemy.

On the other hand, the peoples of southern latitudes—for instance,
those dwelling around the Mediterranean, the focus of early
civilisation, where the Sword has ever played its most brilliant
and commanding part—are active and agile races of light build and
comparatively small muscular power. Consequently they have generally
preferred, and still prefer, the pointed weapon, whose deadly thrust
can be delivered without requiring strength and weight. For the inverse
reason the sons of the north would choose the Espadon proper, the
long, straight, ponderous, two-edged blade which suited their superior
stature and power of momentum.

Such is the geographical and ethnological view of Sword-distribution,
but it gives a rule so general that a multitude of exceptions must
be expected. As far as we know, the civilised Sword originated in
Egypt, but it had many different centres of development. A gradual
and continuous progress can be traced in its history till it was
superseded by an even older form of attack—the ‘ballistic.’ Yet some of
the earliest blades show the best forms, and the line of advancement
at times becomes distorted or even broken. Again, many Southrons, and
races that fought on foot, have used the curved weapon, although the
converse, the adoption of the straight, pointed Sword by horsemen, is
comparatively rare.

I now proceed to consider various points connected with the curved and
straight forms of blade. The experience of the Sword-cutter has noticed
that the shape of any pattern or model, whether of tool or of weapon,
suggests its own and only purpose. This is what we should expect. A
swordsman chooses his Sword as a sawyer his saw. Show the mechanic a
new chisel, and its form at once explains to him its use: he learns by
the general shape, the edge-angle, the temper, the weight, and similar
considerations, that it is _not_ made to drive nails, nor to bore
holes, and that it is intended to cut wood or soft substances. Thus,
too, the form of the Sword is determined by the duty expected of it.

The Sword has three main uses, cutting, thrusting, and guarding. If
these qualifications could be combined, there would be no difficulty in
determining the single best shape. But unfortunately—perhaps I should
say fortunately—each requisite interferes to a great extent with the
other. Hence the various modifications adopted by different peoples,
and hence the successive steps of progress.

[Heading: _THE CENTRE OF PERCUSSION._]

The simplest and most effective form of trenchant instrument intended
for cutting only is the American broad-axe used by squatters in the
backwoods. This revival of the proto-historic celt and headman’s
instrument is a plain, heavy wedge of steel, fixed on a light, tough
wooden helve or heft, thus concentrating all the force in the head that
strikes the blow. Here there is no uncertainty about the use; and, were
it not necessary in swordsmanship to ‘recover guard’ and to save self
as well as disable the assailant, it would be the best, as it is one of
the oldest, weapons derived from the club. But the cutting Sword, which
in the short curved form is its congener, has a long blade that allows
a choice of cut—a good choice and a bad choice. If the blow be made,
for instance, at a tree-branch with the Sword-point (the ‘whole-weak’),
its sole effect will be to jar wrist and arm unpleasantly. The same
result will follow a blow with the ‘whole-strong.’ In either case the
vibration of the blade shows a waste of strength. By the experiment
of cutting along the entire length, inch after inch, and by comparing
the effect, the swordsman comes at last to a point, about the end of
the ‘half-weak,’ speaking roughly, where there is no jar, and where,
consequently, the whole force of the blow becomes effective. But
our ‘centre of percussion’ must not be confounded with the ‘centre
of gravity.’ This balance-position is situated in the middle of the
‘whole-strong,’ the proper part for guarding, and for guarding only.

The late Mr. Henry Wilkinson, of London, a practical man of science,
first proposed a formula for determining the centre of percussion
without the tedious process of experimenting with each and every blade.
His system was based upon the properties of the pendulum. A light rod,
exactly 39·2 inches long, capped with a heavy leaden ball, and swung
to and fro upon a fixed centre, vibrates seconds or sixty times per
minute in the latitude of London, and the three centres of percussion,
of oscillation, and of gravity are concentrated within the ball. If it
were a mathematical pendulum—a rod without weight—these three points
would lie precisely in the core of the ball, or 39·2 inches from
the place of suspension. The blade, to be graduated, is suspended,
tight-fastened at the point on which it would turn when making a cut,
and is converted by swinging into a pendulum. As the length is shorter,
so the oscillations are quicker: the blade makes eighty movements to
sixty of the pendulum. A simple formula determines the length of such
an eighty-vibrations pendulum to be twenty-two inches. This distance,
measured from the point at which the blade was suspended, is marked on
the back as the centre of percussion, where there is no jar, and where
the most effective cut can be delivered.

[Illustration: FIG. 113.—THE INFANTRY ‘REGULATION’ SWORD. C.G. Centre
of Gravity; C.P. Centre of Percussion.]

Again, an examination of the axe shows that the cutting edge lies
considerably in advance of the wrist and hand, with the effect of
carrying the edge well forward on the ‘line of direction,’ which, in
the Sword, passes directly from pommel to point. If the edge were at
the back the tendency of the weapon would be to fall away from the
line of cut, and this could be overcome only by a certain amount of
wasted force. In nearly all curved Swords, except the Japanese, some
contrivance is made to give the feeling which we express by ‘the edge
leading well forward’; and this point has been carefully studied by
nations whose attack is the cut. Usually the line of hilt is thrown
forward so as to form an angle with the axis of the blade, and the
former is made obtuser or acuter in proportion as the latter is more or
less curved. By balancing the weapon upon the pommel the effect becomes
evident; the edge falls forward like that of the axe.

[Illustration: FIG. 114.—SCYMITAR.]

[Illustration: FIG. 115.—CLAYMORE.]

The superiority of the curved blade for cutting purposes is easily
proved. In every cut the edge meets its object at some angle, and the
penetrating portion becomes a wedge. But this wedge is not disposed
at right angles with the Sword: the angle is more or less oblique
according to the curvature, and consequently it cuts with an acuter
edge. The accompanying figures of a ‘scymitar’ and a claymore, both
trenchant blades, prove that, were the edge to describe a right line (A
B) directed at any object (C), it would act as a wedge (D), measuring
exactly the breadth of the blade. But the curve throws the edge more
forward, and thus the ‘half-weak’ acts like a wedge (E), which is
longer and consequently more acute, the extreme thickness (that of the
back or base) being a fixed measure. Similarly, by cutting still nearer
the ‘weak’ or point, the increased curvature gives a more prolonged and
acuter cuneiform (F). Comparing the three sections of the same blade (D
E F), which differ only in the angle at which the edge is supposed to
meet the obstacle, we see the enormous gain of cutting power.

The difference between the direct and the oblique cut is still better
shown by the annexed diagram: ‘Let A B C D (fig. 116) represent the
portion of a Sword-blade, of which A B is the edge and C D the back,
measuring about one-eighth of an inch in thickness. Now, if the object
to be cut through is presented to the blade at right angles to the
edge, as shown by arrow No. 1, then the section of the blade with which
the cut is to be effected will be as represented in the triangular
section F E G (fig. 117). But if the object be presented to the blade
obliquely, as shown by arrow No. 2, then the section along the line of
the cut will be as represented by the angle C E K. It will readily be
seen that in the latter case the acuteness of the angle at E is greatly
increased, whilst the substance is the same as in the other case. To
effect this it is the custom in many parts of the East to strike with
a drawing cut, but the same purpose is secured by bending the blade
backwards: the curve itself presents the edge obliquely to the object
without entailing the necessity of imparting a drawing motion to the
stroke.’[438]

[Illustration: FIG. 116.]

[Illustration: FIG. 117.]

_Par parenthèse_, it is this drawing motion which, added to the curve
of the weapon and its oblique presentation, increases the trenchant
power. The ‘Talwár,’ or half-curved sabre of Hindustan, cuts as though
it were four times as broad and only one-fourth the thickness of the
straight blade. But the ‘drawing-cut’ has the additional advantage of
deepening the wound and of cutting into the bone. Hence men of inferior
strength and stature used their blades in a manner that not a little
astonished and disgusted our soldiers in the Sind and Sikh campaigns.

[Heading: _SECTIONS OF SWORD-BLADES._]

If we consider the sections of cutting weapons, we find them all
modifications of that most ancient mechanical contrivance, the wedge,
as shown by the following figures:

[Illustration: FIG. 118.—SECTIONS OF SWORD-BLADES.]

The first form (fig. 118) is the wedge that would be produced
by taking for base the dorsal thickness of an ordinary blade, and by
continuing it in an even line to the apex of the triangle—the point.
The two sides meet at an angle of nine degrees; consequently the edge
lacks the thickness, weight, and strength necessary for every cutting
tool. For soft substances it should range from ten to twenty degrees,
as in the common dinner knife. An angle of twenty-five to thirty-five
degrees, being the best for wood-working, is found in the carpenter’s
plane and chisel. For cutting bone the obtuseness rises to forty
degrees, and even to ninety; the latter being the fittest for shearing
metals, and the former for Sword-blades, which must expect to meet with
hard substances. But even an angle of forty degrees will be ineffectual
upon a thick head, unless the cut be absolutely true. No. 2 illustrates
the angle of resistance (forty degrees) and the entering angle (ninety
degrees). No. 3 shows that the true wedge of forty degrees is too thick
and heavy for use, requiring some contrivance for lightening the blade,
while preserving the necessary angle of resistance. The remaining
sections display the principal modes of effecting this object. In
Nos. 4 and 6 the angle is carried in a curved and bulging line, thus
giving the section a bi-convex form. When the back or base is flat
this is the Persian and Khorásáni, vulgarly called the ‘Damascus
blade.’ When baseless and two-edged it is the old ‘Toledo’ rapier—two
shallow-crowned arches meeting (3_a_, fig. 124). In both cases the
weapon is strong, but somewhat overweighted. In the next shapes (Nos.
5 and 7), the two sides are cut away to a flat surface and represent
the ‘Talwár’ of India. When this flat surface is hollowed, as by the
black lines of No. 5 (compare No. 8), we have the bi-concave section,
as opposed to the bi-convex. This hollowing of the wedge into two broad
grooves from the angle of resistance is one of the forms assumed by the
English ‘regulation’ Sword: it was considered the lightest for a given
breadth and thickness, but it is by no means the strongest, and there
are sundry technical objections to it.

The remaining blades in the illustration are grooved in as many
different ways. The function of the _cannelure_ is to obviate
over-flexibility; it also takes from the weight and adds to the
strength. By channelling either side of a thin or ‘whippy’ blade
it becomes stiffer, because any force applied to bend such a blade
sideways meets with the greatest amount of resistance that form can
supply. Mechanically speaking, it is to crush an arch inwards upon its
crown, and the deeper the arch the greater the resistance. Hence the
narrow groove is preferable to a broader channel of the same depth. No.
9, hollowed on each side near the base, is a good old form, superior
to the ‘regulation’ (No. 8): its weak point, the space between the
grooves where the metal is thinnest, lies in the best place—near the
back, where strength and thickness are least required. No. 10, though
somewhat lighter, doubles its weak points. No. 11 is better in this
respect: it has three grooves which are far shallower, and consequently
the metal between them is thicker. The same remark applies to Nos. 12
and 13, which are sections of claymores, single- and treble-grooved.

No. 14 shows an ingenious method of obviating the weakness caused by
deep _cannelures_: it is the section of a blade made at Klingenthal
(not ‘Klegenthal’), the Sword manufactory established by Napoleon
Buonaparte in Elsass-Lothringen. Two very marked grooves are cut in the
metal, but not directly opposite each other, and thus the channels can
touch and even overlap the axial line. This disposition gives great
stiffness, but, as testing shows, the edge is deficient in cutting
power, probably from loss of force by vibration.

Nos. 15 and 16 are experimental blades. The former has the groove
placed in the base, preserving the wedge-sides intact; but there is
great difficulty about grinding this shape, and, the resistance of the
arch-crown being wanting, there is a small increase of stiffening—the
Sword, in fact, ‘springs’ almost as readily as the straight form.
No. 16 has some good points, but, on the whole, the combination is a
failure. Lastly, No. 17, the old ‘ramrod-back’ regulation blade, is
perhaps the worst of all: the sudden change from the thick round base
to the thin sharp edge makes an equal tempering very difficult, and the
weapon cleverly undoes its own work, the base acting as check or stop
to the cut.

[Illustration: FIG. 119.—FOIL WITH FRENCH GUARD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 120.—REGULATION SWORD FOR INFANTRY.]

[Illustration: FIG. 121.—SCYMITAR-SHAPE.]

Remains now to consider the Sword as a weapon for point, a use to
which, as its various shapes show, it was applied in the earliest ages
instinctively, as it were, before Science taught the superiority of the
thrust to the cut. We learn from such hand-thrusting instruments—the
awl, gimlet, needle, and dinner-fork—that the straight weapon may
be considered a very acute wedge with a method of progression
mostly oblique. It is easy to prove that the proper shape for a
thrusting-blade is pre-eminently the straight. Fig. 119 shows the foil
making a hole exactly its own size. The ‘regulation’ Sword (fig. 120),
a shallow curve, opens, when moving in a direct line, about double its
own width; a figure which the scymitar (fig. 121) increases to five or
six times, with a proportionate loss of depth at the same expenditure
of force. This augmented resistance to penetration is one, but only
one, of the many difficulties in using a curved blade for a straight
thrust.

This difficulty probably suggested the ‘curved thrust’ method of
pointing which the foil, as opposed to the rapier, has made popular.
The point is propelled, not in a straight line, but in the arc of a
circle more or less curved to correspond with the blade. The arm makes
this cycloidal movement readily enough, but under a disadvantage; as in
the cut the space traversed is longer than what is absolutely necessary
to reach the object. Moreover, the movement cannot well be applied to
the lunge, so as to throw the weight of the body into the attack. Like
the ‘thrusting-cut,’ it is more fitted for horseback than for foot.
Although doubtless the best way of pointing with a curvilinear blade,
in no case is it better than the straight thrust.

[Illustration: FIG. 122.—YATAGHAN.]

[Illustration: FIG. 123.—ORNAMENTAL YATAGHAN AND SHEATH.]

The ‘curved thrust’ so imposed upon Colonel Marey, of the French army,
that he proposed in an elaborate work on Swords (Strasburg, 1841) to
adopt the Yataghan, whose beautifully curved line of blade coincides
accurately with the motion of the wrist in cutting, and which he
held to be equally valuable for the point. As a regulation Sword for
infantry, it was spoilt by a cheap iron scabbard. As a bayonet it lost
all its distinctive excellence: the forward weight, so valuable in
cutting with the hand, made it heavy and unmanageable at the end of a
musket, and none but the strongest arms could use it, especially when
the thrust had to be ‘lanced out.’ Yet it lasted for a quarter of a
century, and only in 1875 it was superseded by the triangular weapon
attached to the _fusil Gras_.[439]

[Heading: _SECTIONS OF THRUSTING-SWORDS._]

Fig. 124 shows sections of the principal forms of thrusting blades.
No. 1, whose section, a lozenge, is nearly square, consists of two
obtuse-angled wedges joined at the bases, making a strong, stiff,
and lasting, but very heavy, Sword. This form dates from the earliest
times: we find it in the bronze rapiers of France and England, and it
was preserved in many of the Toledan, Bilbao, Zaragosan, Solingen, and
Italian rapiers; it is known to English armourers as the ‘Saxon,’ and
to workmen as the ‘latchen’-blade. Nos. 2 and 3 show two simple methods
of lightening it, the former carrying down the axis a fore-and-aft
groove instead of the raised mid-rib on either face, which was used in
the days of the Trojan war. No. 4 is the so-called ‘Biscayan’ shape,
the _trialamellum_ of more ancient days, with three deep grooves and
as many blunt edges, by which the parries were made. Theoretically
it is good: practically and technically speaking, it is inferior to
either of the preceding. There is so much difficulty in making the
blade straight and of even temper that many professional men have
never seen one which was not either crooked or soft. Yet this is the
‘small-Sword’ proper, the duelling weapon of the last century, which
stood its ground as far as the first quarter of the present century.
It had a curious modification—the Colichemarde blade, so called from
its inventor, Count Königsmark. This was a trialamellum very wide and
heavy in the ‘whole-strong’ quarter near the hilt, and at about eight
inches suddenly passing to a light and slender rapier-section. It
was invented about 1680, and became a favourite duelling-blade, the
feather-weight at the point making it the best of fencing weapons. It
remained in fashion during the reign of Louis XIV. and then suddenly
disappeared.[440]

[Illustration: FIG. 124.—SECTIONS OF THRUSTING-SWORDS.]

The small-Sword was introduced into England during the eighteenth
century, and only after 1789 it ceased to be the almost universal
French weapon in affairs of honour. I believe that the change to the
_épée de combat_ and the foil arose from the popular prejudice that
the triangular blade is too dangerous for fair duelling, and that a
body-wound with it bleeds inwardly and is almost always fatal. This
‘small-Sword,’[441] however, left its descendant in our old bayonet,
the grooves being shallower and the ribs raised higher. No. 6, supposed
to be an experimental Sword from the Klingenthal manufactory, dated
1810–14, is a curious attempt to add cutting power to a quadrangular
thrusting blade; but, as the angles are very acute, the blow will have
hardly any effect. No. 7 is an improvement upon the latter, because it
has more trenchant capacity. The defect of both these Swords is that
they have a tendency to turn over in the hand, and to ‘spring’ at the
flat side when the point meets with the least resistance.

[Illustration: FIG. 125.—PIERCED BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 126.—PIERCED BLADE AND SHEATH.]

[Illustration: FIG. 127.—FLAMBERGE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 128.—GERMAN MAIN-GAUCHE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 129.—PATERNOSTER.]

There are other ways of lightening the blade besides grooving. A
favourite fashion in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the golden
age of the Sword, was to break the continuity by open work, which
allowed free play to the ornamenter’s hand. It was also supposed
to render the wound more dangerous by admitting the air. As will
afterwards be shown, certain Eastern and mediæval sabres were hollowed
to contain sections or pennations, which sprang out in small lateral
blades when a spring was touched. A German _main-gauche_ in the Musée
d’Artillerie, Paris (No. J. 485), shows three blades expanding by a
spring when a button is pressed in the handle, and forming a guard of
great length and breadth, in which the opponent’s Sword might be caught
and snapped. Another rare form was the ‘Paternoster blade,’ fitted with
round depressions, which enabled the pious to count the number of his
‘vain repetitions,’ even in the dark (fig. 129).

It has been shown that the material determines the obtuseness or
acuteness of the angle formed by the two planes which meet at the apex
to form the edge. There are many varieties of the _fil_. The edge
proper =V=, formed by the angles of resistance (forty degrees) and
of entrance (ninety degrees), has already been noticed. Besides this
there are the chisel-edge, mostly applied to tools such as the plane;
and lastly bevel-edge, or double-slope, [Symbol], which may be called
the chopper-edge: the obtuser angle is used for blades intended to cut
lead-bars and similar resisting substances.

[Illustration: FIG. 130.—MALAY KRÍS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 131.—WAVE-EDGED DAGGER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 132.—SAW-TOOTH BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 133.—MAIN-GAUCHE.]

[Heading: _OF THE EDGE._]

In the Sword the edge is usually straight. The principal exceptions are
the following. The wavy, cutting surface appears in the ‘flamberge,’
to which flame gave a name[442]: it is nowhere better developed than
in the beautiful Malay krís (crease). The object seems to be that of
increasing the cutting surface. The wave-edged form is well shown
in an iron dagger (end of fourteenth or early fifteenth century) of
the Nieuwerkerke Collection: similar weapons, taken from the Thames,
are found in the British Museum, and they abound in Continental
collections. Often the waves are broken into saw-teeth: this apparently
silly contrivance is found on a large scale in Indian sabres; its
latter appearance farther west is on the precious saw-bayonet, a
theoretical _multum in parvo_ equally useless for flesh and fuel. Of
somewhat similar kind is the toothed edge, which is found in Arab,
Indian, and other Eastern weapons. The deepest indentations are in
the so-called Sword-breakers (_brise-épées_), mostly of the fifteenth
century. It is not easy to explain, except by individual freak, the
meaning of the toothed or broken edge which appears in a dagger of
the fourteenth century (fig. 137). Lastly, there is the hooked-edge,
spur-edge, or prong-edge, whose projections are generally found in the
flammberg (flamberge) proper, or two-handed Sword of wavy contour.
The hooks are either single or double, and the evident intention
was to receive the adversary’s blade. As a rule the hollow of the
half-crescent is towards the point: some project horizontally, but very
few are reversed or hollow towards the hilt, as that shape would lead
the adversary’s blade to the forearm.

[Illustration: FIG. 134.—SWORD-BREAKERS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 135.—ONE-EDGED WAVE BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 136.—COUNTERGUARD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 137.—TOOTHED-EDGE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 138.—HOOKED-EDGE.]

[Heading: _OF THE POINT._]

The point again differs as much as the edge. The natural point would be
the prolongation and gradual convergence of various lines of the solid
body, conical, pyramidal, or polygonal, concurring in a common apex. In
the Japanese blade the edge-line is bent upwards to meet the back-line.
When more strength is wanted the end is bevelled, forming, like the
edge, a compound angle between forty and ninety degrees: it is thus
fitted to meet hard bodies, and the obtuser the angle the stronger the
point.

When edge only is regarded, as in the Schläger and the glaive, the
Sword of justice or the Scharfrichter’s (headman’s) weapon, the point
of the very broad thin blade is rounded off. This, as will be seen,
is the case with the early Kelto-Scandinavian Swords, miscalled
Anglo-Saxon.

[Illustration: FIG. 139.—EXECUTIONER’S SWORD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 140.—JAPANESE TYPE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 141.—CHINESE SABRE-KNIFE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 142.—OLD PERSIAN SWORD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 143.—SCYMITAR.]

There is more variety in the extremities of cutting-blades. The
falchion of Ashanti, Dahome, and Benin, the murderous despotisms of
western intertropical Africa, terminates in a whorl. This is also the
shape of the Chinese sabre-knife, with which criminals were despatched.
The old Persian Sword, often called by mistake the Turkish Sword, ends
in a point beyond a broadening of the blade. The effect is to add
force to the cut; the weapon becomes top-heavy, but that is of little
consequence when only a single slash, and no guarding, is required
of it. This peculiarity was curiously developed in the true Turkish
scymitar, which we see in every picture of the sixteenth century,
and which has now become so rare in our museums. The end gradually
developed to a monstrous size; the length was cut down for the sake of
handiness and the guard was almost abolished, because parrying was the
work of the shield. This exceptional form extended far eastwards and
westwards. Some of the Nepaul Swords have a double wave at the end.
It was adopted by the Chinese, who, as usual in their arms, reduced
it to its simplest expression: the pommel is cap-shaped, the handle
corded, and the guard a small oval of metal insufficient to protect
the hand (fig. 145). Another good specimen of the ‘Turanian blade’ is
the formidable Dáo[443] of the Nágá tribe, south-east of Assam. It is
a thick, heavy backsword, eighteen inches long, with a bevel where the
point should be, worn at the waist in a half-scabbard of wood, and
used for digging as well as killing. The Turkish form also extended to
Europe and America, where it became one of the multitudinous varieties
of the ‘mariner’s cutlass,’ from ‘curtle-axe’—_curtus_ and axe. The
‘Turanian blade’ is well shown in Eastern scutcheons.[444] Its shape
resembles that of a hunter’s horn with a Sword-knot hanging in two
ribbons, a survival from remote antiquity. The tincts are purpure,
gules and sable, upon a fasce tenné (‘on a fess’ or bar) or, vert and
argent. The descriptions are very precise and technical; for instance,
Abu el-Mahásin thus notices the Rank (armorial badges) of Anuk, son of
Abdullah el-Ashraty: ‘The coat was composed of a circle argent cut by a
bar vert, upon which was charged a Sword gules.... This Rank was very
pleasing, and the women of the town had it tattooed upon their wrists.’
The Rank was given when a subject was raised to the dignity of Amir.

[Illustration: FIG. 144.—OLD TURKISH.]

[Illustration: FIG. 145.—CHINESE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 146.—OLD TURKISH SCYMITAR.]

[Illustration: FIG. 147.—THE DÁO.]

[Illustration: FIG. 148.—SAILOR’S CUTLASS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 149.—HINDU KITÁR.]

[Heading: _CHELIDONIAN BLADES._]

Before ending the subject of the point I must briefly notice the forked
or swallow-tailed blade, a curious subject deserving an exhaustive
monograph. The Greeks evidently derived their χελιδὼν or χελιδόνιος
ξίφος,[445] and the Latins their _bidens_, from the two-ended chisels
so common in Egypt. As will be seen, there was a true forked Sword in
Assyria, and the form is commonly found in Indian daggers.

The Chelidonian sabre has two distinct shapes. In one the plates are
welded together, and separate at the third or the fourth section near
the end. Mr. Latham (Wilkinson’s) has a good specimen; the length of
the fork, however, is greater than the united part. In the Prince of
Wales Collection (Kensington) there is a two-bladed Sword, the fork
only eight inches long, with the additional peculiarity of being
saw-edged. In the other form, the Chelidonian proper, the fork is
vertical, one prong being above the other. What use it could have
supplied in cutting is hard to divine, but the Sword is essentially
personal and eccentric. I know only one historical blade of this form,
Zú’l-Fikár (Lord of Cleaving), the weapon given by the Archangel
Gabriel to Mohammed, and by the latter to his son-in-law Ali bin Ali
Tálib, who cleft with it the skull of Marhab, the giant Jew warrior of
Khaybar Fort. It appears upon the arms of the Zeydi princes, lords of
Sana’á in El-Yemen, Southern Arabia[446]: nearer home it may be seen
upon the Turkish standard, some twenty feet long, taken by Don John of
Austria from the Turk at Lepanto.[447] The weapon probably owes this
honour to having been mentioned amongst the Ahádís, or traditional
sayings of the Apostle of El-Islam, ‘la Sayfa illa Zú’l-Fikár wa lá
Fatá illa Ali’ (there is no Sword to be compared, for doing damage to
the foe, with Zú’l-Fikár, and no valiant youth but Ali).

[Illustration: FIG. 150.—GOLD COAST.]

Amongst the Chelidonian blades proper I do not include the double
blade. A fair specimen of the latter is the Orissa Sword[448]: two
slightly oval forms spring from the same hilt, but separate throughout
their length. Another shape is found upon the Gold Coast: the blades
are disposed like the astronomical sign of Aries, and its only use is
to slice off noses and ears.[449] The offending member is placed at the
commissure, and an upward shear effects the mutilation. I reserve for a
future page the ‘split Swords,’ two blades in one scabbard, which were
used in mediæval Europe, and which have been preserved in China.

To conclude this long and technical chapter. The Sword should be
tightly mounted and well shouldered-up before and behind, leaving no
interval between hilt and blade. The grip must be firm, and the tang
secured either by rivets or, better still, by a screw at the pommel: if
this be neglected, the weapon will not deliver a true edge. In trials
both back and edge should be repeatedly struck with force upon a wooden
post. Should the handle show no sign of loosening, and the blade ring
with the right sound, it is a sign that the mounting is satisfactory:
the reverse is the case if the blow jars or stings the hand: this
suggests that the cut will not prove efficient.

                   •       •       •       •       •

NOTE.—The type and model of the straight blade is the form of Rapier
which we call the Toledo. It is probably derived from the Spatha or
long Sword of the Roman cavalryman; but it assumed its present perfect
shape during the reign of Charles Quint (A.D. 1493–1519). The exemplar
of the curved blade is the so-called ‘Damascus’ sabre, dating probably
from the early days of El-Islam (seventh century), when Eastern armies
were chiefly composed of light Bedawi horsemen. Of these in Part II.




                             CHAPTER VIII.

           THE SWORD IN ANCIENT EGYPT AND IN MODERN AFRICA.


The present state of our history shows us nothing anterior to Egypt in
the civilisation of Language, of Literature, of Science, Art and Arms.
We must now modify and modernise the antiquated and obsolete saying—‘ex
Oriente lux’—the fancy that illumination came from India, when the
reverse is true. The light of knowledge dawned and dayed not in the
East, but in the South, in the Dark Continent, which is also the High
Continent.[450] Nor can we any longer admit that

    Westward the course of empire takes its way.

As Professor Lepsius teaches us, ‘In the oldest times within the memory
of man, we know of only _one_ advanced culture; of only _one_ mode of
writing, and of only one literary development, viz. those of Egypt.’
Karl Vogt, a man who has the courage to say what he thinks, bluntly
states: ‘Our civilisation came not from Asia, but from Africa.’ For our
origin we must return to

    The world’s great mistress in the Egyptian vale.

The modern Egyptologist is reforming the false and one-sided theories
based upon the meagre studies of anthropological literature in Greek,
Latin, and Hebrew. Yet in the Nile Valley we are only upon the
threshold of exploration—topographical, linguistic, and scientific. Of
its proto-Egyptians and its primæval workmanship as yet we know little;
and it is truly preposterous to suppose that man began his artistic
life by building pyramids, cutting obelisks, and engraving hieroglyphs.
The ‘Cushite School,’ based upon the Asiatic Ethiopians of Eusebius
the Bishop,[451] and unfortunately represented by Bunsen, Maspero,
Wilkinson, Mariette, Brugsch, and a host of minor names, has determined
that the old Nilotes ‘undoubtedly came from Asia.’ The theory utterly
lacks proof; and the same may be said of the popular assertion, based
upon Biblical grounds—‘The early colonists of Egypt came thither
from Mesopotamia.’ We seem to be reading fable when told (by William
Osburn[452]), ‘The skill of these primitive artists of Egypt was a
portion of that civilisation which its first settlers brought with them
when they located themselves in the Valley of the Nile.’

My conviction is that the ancient Egyptians were Africans, and pure
Africans; that the Nile-dwellers are still negroids whitened by a
large infusion of Syrian, Arabian, and other Asiatic blood; and that
Ethiopia is its old racial home. Æschylus had already robed their black
limbs in white raiment when Herodotus (ii. 104) made them dark-skinned
compared with the Arabs[453] and North Africans. Every traveller finds
his description hold good to the present day. Blumenbach declared
the old Egyptians to be of Berber origin, the race of Psametik, or
the Son of the Sun. Hartmann opined that they were not Asiatics but
Africans, and Dr. Morton modified his first opinion, finding the
cranium to be negroid. I hope to prove their correctness by making a
large collection of mummy skulls.[454] It is certain that the modern
Egyptian’s hair—that great characteristic of race, according to Pruner
Bey—is not silky, as Professor Huxley says, but wiry like that of
his forefathers.[455] Moreover, his type, as distinctly shown by the
Sphinx, is melanochroic-negroid. Lastly, there are other signs, which
need not here be noticed, distinguishing the African—horse as well as
human—from the Arabian.

[Heading: _ANTIQUITY OF EGYPT._]

There is a history of ancient Egypt, into which we have not yet
penetrated. Herodotus (ii. 142) glances at it when he makes the
Ptah-priest at Memphis pretend to an antiquity of 11,340 years,[456]
during which reigned 341 generations of kings and pontiffs.[457] Plato
does the same when he speaks of hymns 10,000 years old, and Mela[458]
when he numbers 330 kings before Amasis, who ruled more than 30,000
years. Mena (Menes), the first man-monarch who founded Memphis (B.C.
4560?) some centuries before the Hebrew Creation, was preceded for
13,000 years by the ‘Dynasty of the Gods’ (god-kings), suggesting a
governmental hierarchy of the fetisheer caste: and this lasted for
ages, till the Soldier upset the Priest and raised himself to the rank
of Pharaoh[459] and king. Traces of the proto-Egyptian dynasties in
which the men of the Pen controlled the men of the Sword long survived;
and in later times the ecclesiastical order again ruled the military.
We know nothing of the hierarchical supremacy but its baldest outline.
When our modest chronologists allow 6000 years to its incept, they
run into the contrary extreme of those who assign to it myriads of
centuries. Rodier[460] is more reasonable; he opines that the cycle of
1,460 years dates in Egypt from B.C. 14,611.

[Illustration: FIG. 151.—1. BRONZE DAGGER; 2. SWORD (14 inches long).]

Again, it will probably be found that ancient Egypt was _not_ ‘the
narrowest strip of land in the world running between a double desert.’
The extent of ‘Kemi’[461] has been arbitrarily confined to the Riverine
Valley as far as the First Cataract, or seven hundred by seven miles
widening out in the Delta-netherland to a base of eighty-one miles. We
may fairly suspect that modern Masr is only a slice from the eastern
half of the antique Mizraim. The Greeks made the frontier of Asia
extend beyond the Suez isthmus and the Nile to the lands of Libya.[462]
This Greater Egypt is still suggested by the system of Bahr bilá má,
large _Fiumare_ now bone-dry, and by the alignment of the oases in
the wilderness west of the River Valley with their giant ruins of
a proto-historic Past. These may date from the days when the basin
of the Bahr el-Ghazal—a lake like the Tanganyika and the Victoria
Nyanza—discharged its annual flood to the North in channels parallel
with the ‘River Ægyptus.’[463] The lacustrine bed would silt up by the
natural process of warping, and the surplus water, no longer able to
discharge northwards, would force itself eastwards to the Nile. The
easier drainage would presently convert the lake into a river-basin and
system, and the lands no longer irrigated would become a waste dotted
like a leopard skin with oases or watered valleys.

An abundance of popular literature has familiarised the public
with the outer aspect of ancient Egypt, but the world is still far
from recognising the message she sent to mankind. We must go back
to ‘the Wonderland on the banks of the mighty Nile’ for the origin
of all things which most interest us. It is the very cradle-land
of language. Her tongue contains all the elements of the so-called
‘Aryan,’[464] Semitic, and Allophyllian or Turanian families, and dates
long before the days of the present distribution. Bunsen’s ‘Egypt’
first noticed this fact at some length, without, however, dwelling
upon its importance. ‘All Semitic pronouns and suffixes,’ says M.
C. Bertin, ‘can be traced back to Egyptian, especially the Egyptian
of the earliest dynasties’; he might have added much about other
mechanical forms. Brugsch tells us (i. 3) that the primitive roots and
the essential elements of the Egyptian grammar point to an intimate
connection of the Indo-Germanic (!) and Semitic languages.[465] The
Allophyllian or Agglutinative Turanian,[466] a _tertium quid_ which is
neither ‘Aryan’ nor ‘Semitic,’ is also traceable in old Coptic.

[Heading: _ORIGINS IN EGYPT._]

What, then, do these facts suggest? Simply that the elements existing
in Egyptian travelled from the banks of the Nile and evolved,
discreted, and differentiated themselves in many centres. The
word-compounding or Iranian scheme found homes in Eastern Europe
(Greece, Italy, and the Slavonic or quasi-Asiatic half); in Asia
Minor—especially Phrygia—in Mesopotamia, in Persia, and finally in
India, where the settlement was comparatively modern. This explains
how a philologist would derive Sanskrit from Lithuania. This saves
us from the ‘Aryan heresy’;[467] this abolishes ‘Indo-European,’ and
worse still ‘Indo-Germanic’—that model specimen of national modesty.
Both are terms which contain a theory and an unproved theory. Again,
the word-developing or Arabian scheme, absurdly termed Semitic (from
Shem!), increased, multiplied, and perfected itself in Northern Africa
and Arabia, while the Turanian, becoming independent and specialised in
Akkadian, overspread Tartary and China.

And this one primæval language of Egypt framed for itself an alphabet
whence are derived all others. This is proved by the fact that each
and all begin, as Plutarch tells us old Coptic did, with the letter
A. Of its age in Nile-land we may judge from the cartouche containing
Khufu’s name, left by some workman on an inner block of the Great
Pyramid.[468] How many generations of articulate-speaking men must have
come and gone before so artificial and artistic a system as the Royal
Signature upon the Shield occurred to the human mind!

But Egypt did still more. She was the fountain-head of knowledge
which overflowed the world. Eastward the great current set through
Babylonia and Chaldæa, Persia and India, Indo-China, China, and Japan,
to Australia and Polynesia. Westward it flooded Africa and Europe. It
may have reached America by two ways. The Oriental line would extend
from China and Japan to the Eastern Pacific coast: the Occidental was
practicable _viâ_ Atlantis, or possibly in the days when Behring’s
Straits did not exist. It found a new Mediterranean in the great
Caribbean Gulf, and new Indies in Mexico and Peru. Indeed, the march of
intellect from Egypt is conterminous with the limits of the habitable
globe.

The invention of an alphabet would necessarily lead to
literature—poetry, history, and criticism. The earliest known
manuscript is the Prisse (d’Avennes) Papyrus, a roll dating from the
days of Pharaoh Tat-ka-ra, last of the Fifth Dynasty (circ. B.C. 3000).
It is a collection of proverbs, maxims, precepts, and commandments, of
which the fifth is, ‘Honour thy father and thy mother, that thy life
may be long’: the style is admirable for its humorous vein, and for its
graphic description of old age—‘Senex bis puer.’ The earliest epic is
the heroic poem of Pentaur, laureate to Ramses II. (B.C. 1333–1300);
it is the prototype of the cyclic songs which, in Cyprus especially,
preceded the _chef-d’œuvre_ of the Homerid chief; and it opens with an
‘Arma Virumque cano.’ The ‘Deadbook’ is the birth of the Drama, and it
may date ages before the dialogues of Job. The ‘Canticles of Solomon’
are in the evocations of Isis and Nephthys.[469] The _critique_ of a
young author’s production by a purist in style might add a sting to
reviewing in the present day.[470] To the Egyptians we must attribute
the invention of maps and plans. They first studied heraldry: every
nome had its distinctive emblem, generally bird or beast; and each
temple and guild its blazon.[471]

Literature would be imperfect without art and science, and accordingly
we find their head-quarters and old home in Egypt. These studies
humanised the people; their code suggests the mildness of modern penal
law; and their reverence for letters, for old age, and for the dignity
of man, makes them an eternal example to the world. The monuments show
their fondness for music and painting. Their knowledge of statuary
is proved by a host of works, especially the wooden Shaykh el-Balad
(village chief) in the Bulak Museum—a marvel of skill, probably dating
from the Fourth Dynasty, B.C. 3700. In architecture they invented the
arch, round and pointed; eight several orders of columns, including
the proto-Doric; Atlantes, Caryatides, and human-shaped consoles. The
‘temple of Jízeh’ near the sphinx is evidently older than the adjoining
pyramids; it is a model of solidity in which the hardest stone is
worked like wood.

[Heading: _EGYPT THE CRADLE-LAND._]

In science they especially cultivated geometry, astronomy, astrology,
and ‘alchemy,’ whose name betrays its origin. Their arithmetic taught
decimals and duodecimals. Their mathematics arose from measuring fields
and calculating the cubes of altars. They knew the precession of the
equinoxes: Rodier (p. 31) considers that they learnt it from observing
the equinoctial point and the rising of Sothis, the Tuth-star, ‘the
axle of the skies,’ in the same zodiacal sign, and that the studies at
Syene date from B.C. 17,932. They knew the motion of the apsides, and
the solar and stellar periods; they invented latitude and longitude;
they denoted by a cross the intersection of the solstices and the
equinoxes, and they published annual calendars. In optics they invented
the lens. They were not ignorant of the motive power of steam, and
possibly the electric fish had taught them the rudiments of electricity.

They were great in the mechanical arts. In medicine they dissected
and vivisected: in agriculture they invented the plough, the harrow,
the toothed sickle, the flail, and the tribulum; in carpentry the
dove-tail; in ceramics the potter’s wheel, and in hydraulics the
water-wheel. In gardening they transplanted full-grown trees. They
made glass, porcelain, and counterfeit pearls and precious stones;
and they used emery powder and the lapidary’s wheel. They spun silk,
and knew the use of mordants for stuffs and dyes for hair. They made
‘babies’ (dolls) and children’s toys of clay, and they moulded masks of
papier-mâché. In some points they were strangely modern. For hunting
they wore dresses of ‘suppressed colour,’ not pink nor ‘rifleman’s
green’: we are just beginning to find out our mistakes. They affected
falconry, and played at the draughts which led to chess; and at
_morra_, the Roman _micare digitis_. They sat on chairs whose shapes
are like ours, not on divans nor on triclinia. In their house furniture
they studiously avoided over-regularity; and Japan is now teaching
England and Germany not to weary man’s eye by monotony.

And as they were advanced in literature and politics, the religion
of earth, so they assiduously cultivated religion, the politics of
heaven. The Biblical student has found among the tombs of Nile-land
the absolute truth of what Celsus said—namely, that the Hebrews
borrowed their tenets and practices from Egypt. Their date of the
creation _ex nihilo_ (B.C. 4004–4620) was evidently Manetho’s period
of the succession of Mena, and it is used even in our day. Their
genesitic cosmogony, as Philo Judæus shows, and as Origen expressly
declares, was an adaptation of Nilotic allegories and mysteries which
the vulgar understood factually and literally. Their ‘Adam’ suggests
‘Atum,’ whence ‘Adima,’ the First Man amongst the Hindus. Their App or
Apap (Apophis), whose determinative is a snake transfixed with four
knife-blades,[472] is the great old serpent, the ophid-giant, Sin,
Sathanas. The ‘Flood’[473] is the annual Nilotic inundation modified
by the Izdubar legends of the Interamnian Plain. Noah, Nuh, Nöe, is
suspiciously like Nu or Nuhu,[474] the Sailor of the Waters, the Lord
of the Full Nile. Ham suggests Kam, the black race. The ark is the
Bahr or Ua (Baris, Argo navis) of Nu, the sacred vessel portrayed in
the ruins of Egyptian Elephanta, the boat of Osiris, or Uasur, the
man-formed Sun-god; and the floating cradle of Moses is a mere replica
of Osiris’ ark. In that complicated idolatry of deceased ancestors,
based upon a system of monotheism,[475] or rather the worship of
glorified man, which formed the religion of Egypt, the Sun typified
human life. He rose as the infant Horus; he was the Lord Ka of the
mid-day; as Tum he became old and set; and as Hormakhu (Harmachis) he
shone to the under world below the horizon, Night and Death being the
forerunners of Light and Life.[476]

The preternatural apparatus of both faiths (original and borrowed) is
the same. The four genii of Death—Amset (under Isis), Hapi (Nephthys),
Tuamutef (Neith), and Khebsenauf (Sebk)—became the four archangels. Of
Urim and Thummim, the latter is the plural of Thmei (Themis), the blind
or headless goddess of Truth and Justice.[477] Even such phrases as ‘I
am that I am’[478] are loans from the hierogrammat; Ankh (I am Life)
was rendered Yahveh (Jehovah). This ‘ineffable name’[479] is borrowed
by some, Colenso included, from Semitic heathenism; but Brugsch shows
that Egypt supplied the Mosaic conception of the Creator. There
appears, indeed, direct derivation in the unity of the Deity and in the
duality of Typhon, Set, Satan, the Evil Spirit. Later ages copied the
local Triads of Kemi, in which the third proceeded from the other two.
Both ecclesiastical establishments contained Prophets (_Sem_),[480]
High Priests,[481] Priests, ‘Holy Fathers,’ and Scribes. The Decalogue
is a _résumé_ of the forty-two commandments in the Deadbook (chapter
125). The portable shrines of the great Egyptian gods originated the
Tabernacle, which grew to be the Temple; it corresponds with the Σχήνη
ἱερὰ or movable tent of the Carthaginians. The African practice of
circumcision was probably intended originally as a prophylactic against
syphilis, of which traces have been found in prehistoric bones. The
peculiar Jewish hatred for pork is reasonless unless we explain it by a
superstitious horror of the Typhonian beast. Rationalists tell us that
the meat was religiously forbidden because unwholesome in the tropics,
a _causa non causa_: it is the favourite food in the Brazil, in China,
and in Christian India; even the Maráthás will eat wild hog; nor are
the habits of the animal more filthy than the duck’s. The truth is that
these dietary prohibitions served to make a _differentia_, to disunite
man, to pit race against race and to feed the priest.

But while the Hebrews drew largely upon the wisdom (and the unwisdom)
of Egypt, they ruthlessly cast out the eminently Nilotic ideas of a
Soul, of a Judgment of the Dead, and of a future state of rewards
and punishments—three tenets which, in modern days, form the very
foundation of all faiths. ‘If a man die, shall he live (again)?’
asks Job (xiv. 14), in a chapter showing that life once lost is lost
for ever.[482] And apparently from the days of Moses this was the
peculiarity of ‘Semitic’ thought; it lived in the Present and had
no Future, or rather it spurned the world to come. ‘Moses,’ says
Professor Owen, ‘could not admit the after-life, or teach of reward and
retribution in a future state, without risk of tainting his monotheism
with some trace of the manifold symbolism environing the “divine
son of Amen” (Osiris), who after suffering loss of the mortal life,
which he had assumed for bettering his kind, became, on resigning his
divinity, their judge.’ The Hebrews adopted Soul and Judgment, Heaven
and Hell, many centuries after Moses from their Assyrian kinsmen,[483]
who also supplied them with their present names for the twelve months
and sundry astronomical notions. And their modern descendants by
universally accepting a Resurrection have done that against which Moses
so carefully guarded.

I need hardly say that the mythologies of Greece, Etruria, and Rome
only corrupted Egyptian mysteries and metaphysics. Three instances will
suffice: Charon is a degraded Horus; Minos is Mena, and Rhadamanthus
contains the word Amenti, the right side (of Osiris), the west.
Nor can we be surprised if Egypt is now giving rise to scientific
superstitions. Every reader of ‘Pyramid Literature’ will note the
mysterious influence which Kemi is exercising upon the modern mind.[484]

[Heading: _EGYPTIAN METALLURGY._]

In the preceding chapters I have noted the development of metallurgy by
the ancient Egyptians. They probably began with gold,[485] the easiest
of all ores to find and to work; it was abundant in Upper Egypt, and
about B.C. 1600 they found a California in ‘Kush’ (Æthiopia). They
called it Tum, Khetem, and Nb, which is variously pronounced Nebu,
Neb, and Nub, whence Nubia. It has two hieroglyphic determinatives
[Hieroglyphs], the necklace and the washing-bowl covered with the
straining-cloth. The Kemites called silver ‘white gold,’[486] showing
the movement of invention; and they could draw silver wire three
thousand years ago. Wilkinson (II. chap. viii.) remarks, ‘The position
of the silver-mines is unknown’; but he wrote before the discovery
of Midian, where surface-stones have been picked up containing
three ounces per ton. As their pictures prove, they worked iron,
although little has outlasted the corrosion of Time. They applied the
blow-pipe to the works of the whitesmith. They were well acquainted
with soldering by lead or alloys,[487] as is shown by the Shesh or
Sistrum of Mr. Burton. I may here remark parenthetically that this
_crepitaculum_ used in temple-service gave rise to the Maracá or
Tammaraka, the sacred rattle, a gourd full of pebbles worshipped by
the Brazilian Tupis, who thus acknowledged the mysterious influence
of rhythmic sounds.[488] They were skilful in the damascening[489] or
inlaying of weapons, an invention claimed by those model ‘claimants,’
the Greeks. Their simple process was to cut out the ground, to hammer
in gold and silver, and, finally, to file and polish the surface.[490]

[Heading: _EGYPTIAN WEAPONS._]

The metallurgic proficiency of Old Egypt would lead to the development
of arms and armour, and enable the soldier to win easier victories
over the ‘vile, impure, and miserable Gentiles’—i.e. all men except
themselves. The god Anhar, or Shu, is ‘Lord of the Scymitar.’ Horus,
as a hawk-headed mummied deity, is seated holding two Swords. Amen-Ra,
Lord of Hab, is a ‘great god Ramenma, “Lord of the Sword.”’ The
‘wearer of the Pshent or double crown’ (the Pharaoh), the image of
Monthu, god of war, was _ex-officio_ ‘His Holiness’ (high-priest) and
Commander-in-Chief, who personally led his warriors to ‘wash their
hearts’ (cool their valours) as the Zulus wash their spears. Like
Horus, he is ‘valiant with the Sword.’[491] When going to war he was
presented with the ‘Falchion of Victory,’ and thus addressed: ‘Take
this weapon, and smite with it the heads of the unclean.’ In paintings
and sculptures he is a large and heroic figure: he draws the bow, he
spears or cuts down the foe, and he drives his war-car over the bodies
of the slain. His soldiers are divided into Calasiri (Krashr[492] or
bowmen) and Hermotybians, the latter unsatisfactorily derived[493] from
ἡμιτύβιον, a strong linen (waist-?) cloth. The two divisions represent
the second of the five castes, ranking below the priestly and above
the agricultural: they held one of the three portions into which the
land was divided. Recruits were taught in the military schools that
originated the Pentathlon and the Pancratium, the Palæstra and the
Gymnasium. They were carefully trained to gymnastics, as the monumental
pictures in the Beni Hasan tombs show; they used Mogdars or Indian
clubs, and they excelled in wrestling, though not in boxing. The royal
statues are those of athletes, with their broad shoulders, thin flanks
and well-developed muscles. The soldier practised single-stick, the
right hand being apparently protected by a basket-guard, and the left
forearm shielded by a splint or splints of wood, strapped on, and
serving for a shield (fig. 152).

The standing army consisted of foot and horse,[494] the latter being
mostly in chariots; and they were divided into corps, regiments,
battalions, and companies. The men were officered by Chiliarchs
(colonels), Hekatontarchs (captains), and Dekarchs (sergeants), as the
Greeks called them. The ‘heavies’ were armed with a long strong spear
and an immense shield provided with a sight-hole. Some carried the
‘Lisán’-club, the battle-axe, and the mace; and almost all had for
side arms pole-axes,[495] Swords, falchions, and daggers. The ‘light
bobs’ were chiefly archers and slingers, also weaponed with ‘Lisáns,’
axes, war-flails, and Swords. The chariot-corps or cavalry, besides
bows and arrows, had clubs and short Swords for close quarters. The
battle-axes show clear derivation from the stone celt, which supplied
the hieroglyphs with the word Natr or Netr (Neter, &c.), meaning god,
gods, or goddess ([Hieroglyphs]).[496] In the Demotic alphabet the axe
was K (_Kelebia_).

[Illustration: FIG. 152.—SINGLE-STICK IN EGYPT.]

[Illustration: FIG. 153.—EGYPTIAN SOLDIER AND SHIELD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 154.—EGYPTIAN SOLDIERS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 155.—EGYPTIAN SOLDIER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 156.—1. EGYPTIANS FIGHTING, FROM PAINTINGS OF
THEBES; 2. EGYPTIAN SOLDIERS, FROM THEBAN BAS-RELIEFS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 157.—BRONZE HATCHETS IN WOODEN HANDLES, BOUND WITH
THONGS. (Heads, 3 and 4½ inches, Hefts, 15½ and 16½ inches.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 158.—POLE-AXES.]

[Illustration: FIG. 159.—KHETEN OR WAR-AXES.]

The action began, at the sound of the trumpet, with an advance of
light-infantry, bowmen, slingers, and javelineers. Then came the charge
by the ponderous phalanx of ten thousand men, one hundred in front by
one hundred deep, and flanked by chariots and cavalry. Thus the close
combat was not the disorderly system of duels that prevailed in the
barbarous Middle Ages of Europe. In storming fortified places they used
the pavoise and testudo, the ram, the scaling-ladder, the bulwark or
movable tower, and the portable bridge. They were also skilful military
miners.

[Heading: _THE EGYPTIAN SWORD._]

The Egyptian phalanx was armed with the large shield, lance, and Sword;
the latter was generally called Seft, [Hieroglyphs], or [Hieroglyphs],
or [Hieroglyphs]; also inverted to Setf, [Hieroglyphs]: it becomes
Sifet in Æthiopia, and in Berber Siwuit. The weapon in the hieroglyphs
is of four different shapes. The first is the boomerang-Sword
[Hieroglyphs], _m_ or _ma_, meaning ‘to destroy’: this M is the root
of the Hebrew and Arabic _Maut_ and the Prakrit-Sanskrit, _Mar_.
The second is the Knife-Sword [Hieroglyphs], _At_ or _Kat_, the
determinative of cutting. These two are joined [Hieroglyphs] in the
root _ma_ (cut, mow). The third is the Khopsh, Khepsh, or Khepshi,
[Hieroglyphs], the sickle-Sword, still used in Abyssinia and throughout
Africa: with a flattened curve it became the Hindu Kubja, the Greek
‘Kopis,’ and the Gurkha ‘Kukkri.’ The second two are combined in the
root Smam, [Hieroglyphs], ‘to smite.’ Other names of the Sword are Ta
or Nai, [Hieroglyphs], and Nai, Na’ui, or Nakhtui, [Hieroglyphs].

The falchion (_ensis falcatus_), called Shopsh, Khepsh, or Khopsh,[497]
is represented as early as the Sixth Dynasty (after B.C. 3000). Hence,
says Meyrick, the Κοπὶς of Argos—Argolis being a very mixed province,
where the base was Pelasgian and the superstructure was Egyptian;
the latter introduced by Danaus, and followed by the Phœnicians, who
founded the town Phœnicia. Quintus Curtius (lib. iii.) says: ‘Copides
vocant gladios leviter curvatos, falcibus similes, quibus appetebant
belluarum manus.’ Apuleius (‘Met.’ lib. xi.) also speaks of ‘copides et
venabula.’[498]

Evidently the Egyptian Sf, Sefi, Seft, or ‘Sword’ generically,[499]
gave rise to the Mesopotamian Sibir, Sibirru, and Sapara; to the Greek
ξίφ-ος; to the Aramæan Saiph, Sipho, and to the Arabic صيف (Sayf-un),
the second syllables being merely terminative; while the Latin _spatha_
and the German Schwerte, and our Swerde and Sword, are the latest
echoes of Sef and Seft. The Germans say rightly, ‘Nichts wandert so
leicht als Waffen und Waffennamen.’

[Illustration: FIG. 160.—DIFFERENT FORMS OF THE EGYPTIAN KHOPSH
(KOPIS), WITH EDGES INSIDE AND OUTSIDE.]

Another Egyptian name for the sickle-shaped blade is Khrobi,[500] which
suggests the Hebrew Hereb (a weapon, a Sword). We are also sure that
the words are primitive Egyptian: the proof is that the symbol of ‘Má’
(‘destroy’ &c.), the Khopsh or _ensis falcatus_, is the numeral nine;
and the straight flesh-blade (_Kt_) is the pronoun thou, thee: the two
together alluded to the oldest religious practice.[501]

The falchion, shaped in the pattern of Ursæ major (?), was thick-backed
and weighted with bronze; the blade, in later days at least,[502]
was of iron or steel, as shown by the blue colour. Champollion[503]
notices blue Swords with golden hilts in the tomb of Ramses III., and
a ‘weapon Kops’ with the gold, of which the hilt consists, running up
the concave back of the blade. ‘The gold was therefore either sunk into
the iron, or gilded on the back. In other cases the Kops of kings was
entirely of gold, or, like other Swords, entirely of brass (copper?).
In another similar weapon, brass (copper?) and iron were blended in the
blade.’ An iron ‘Kops’ was found in a tomb at Gurnah.

[Illustration: FIG. 161.—1. EGYPTIAN SLING; 2. UNKNOWN WEAPON; 3.
SHEATHED DAGGER; 4. HATCHET; 5. SCORPION, OR WHIP-GOAD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 162.—EGYPTIAN DAGGERS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 163.—EGYPTIAN DAGGER OF BRONZE IN BRITISH MUSEUM.]

[Illustration: FIG. 164.—OFFICER OF LIFE-GUARD TO RAMSES II.,
APPARENTLY ASIATIC.]

[Illustration: FIG. 165.—BRONZE SWORD, FOUND AT AL-KANTARAH, EGYPT.]

The Khopsh, a sickle in type, and originally a throwing weapon as
well as a cutting arm, was always carried by the Pharaoh, who used it
indifferently with the pike (_Taru_), the mace, axe (_Aka_, _Akhu_),
battle-axe, or pole-axe (_Kheten_). Officers and privates, ‘lights’
as well as ‘heavies,’ also wielded it in pictures. Those commanding
infantry-corps are armed with the simple stick like the Roman centurion
and our drill-sergeant of bygone days.

[Illustration: FIG. 166.—1. AXE; 2. SPEAR-HEAD; 3. KHOPSH; 4.
LANCE-HEAD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 167.—BELT AND DAGGER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 168.—EGYPTIAN DAGGERS.]

The fourth or long-straight Sword, which does not appear in the
hieroglyphs, had a two-edged cut-and-thrust leaf-shaped blade from two
and a half to three feet long,[504] with a foining point like that
of the Somal.[505] These large weapons seem to have been used by
foreign mercenaries. The leaf- also becomes a trowel-form, betraying
its origin and derivation, the spear-head. The grip was hollowed away
in the centre, gradually thickening at either end, and was sometimes
inlaid with metal, stones, and precious woods. The pommel of that worn
in the Pharaoh’s girdle is surmounted by one or more hawk-heads, this
bird being the symbol of Ra[506] (the Sun). The handle is also adorned
with small pins and studs of gold, shown through suitable openings in
the front part of the sheath. With this weapon the warrior stabs the
enemy in the throat, as Mithras strikes the bull behind the shoulder.
A modified form was the Sword-dagger, of which two are sometimes
represented with the Pharaoh: it was generally carried in the belt.
This shape of weapon found its way to the Caucasus;[507] and the
Georgian Khanjar, hanging to the girdle in the place of the Sword, is
also a survival.

[Illustration: FIG. 169.—ASSYRIAN DAGGERS, SHEATHS, AND BELTS. (BRITISH
MUSEUM.)]

The Egyptian weapon is of various lengths. The bronze blade of Amunoph
II., found by Wilkinson at Thebes, measures only five and a quarter
inches: others rise to seven and even ten. Mr. Salt’s specimen in the
British Museum covers eleven and a half inches, including the handle;
and others reach one foot, and even sixteen inches. Many of these
blades taper from an inch and a half to two-thirds of an inch near
the point. Dr. John Evans[508] has a Sword, found at ‘Great Kantara’
during the construction of the Suez Canal; the blade is leaf-shaped,
and measures seventeen inches, and the whole length twenty-two inches
and three-eighths (fig. 165). ‘Instead of a hilt-plate, it is drawn
down to a small tang about three-sixteenths of an inch square. This
again expands into an octagonal bar about three-eighths of an inch in
diameter, which has been drawn down to a point, and then turned back
to form a hook, perhaps the earliest mode of hanging to the belt.’ At
the base of the blade are two rivet-holes, and the hilt must have been
formed of two pieces which clasped the tang. Dr. Evans also mentions a
bronze Sword-blade, presumably from Lower Egypt, in the Berlin Museum:
it has an engraved line down each side of the blade; it is more uniform
in width than the Kantara specimen, and the hilt is broken off.

[Illustration: FIG. 170.—DAGGER FROM THE CAUCASUS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 171.—EGYPTIAN CHOPPER-SWORDS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 172.—EGYPTIAN KHOPSH.]

Not a few Egyptian Swords are much thicker at the middle than at the
edges, and many are slightly grooved. The bronze is so well tempered,
either by hammering, by hydraulic pressure, or by phosphorisation (?),
that it has retained spring and pliability after several thousand
years, and is still elastic like the steel of our modern days. I have
already noticed[509] the Passalacqua and the Harris daggers—both from
Thebes. The dagger-handle was generally covered in part with metal like
that of the Sword; and the sewing of the leather-sheath again recalls
the hide-scabbard of the Somal.[510] The Egyptians, as the hieroglyphs
prove, had also single-edged cutting-knives shorter than Swords, and
apparently of steel; they resemble our flesh-knives,[511] and may
correspond with the Greek μάχαιραι (Ang.-Sax. _Meche_), while the
daggers proper represent the ἐγχειρίδια and the parazonia.

[Heading: _EGYPTIAN SWORDS._]

The long Sword must have been rare or rather barbaric, for it is seldom
found in the pictures and bas-reliefs. Yet Rosellini figures one which
resembles an Espadon or heavy two-handed weapon of our Middle Ages. An
inscription of Ramses takes as booty from the Maxyes (Cyrenians) of
Libya one hundred and fifteen Swords of five cubits (seven and a half
feet), and one hundred and twenty-four of three cubits long.

[Illustration: FIG. 173.—BRONZE DAGGERS AND SHEATH (1 FOOT LONG). (From
Theban Tomb, Berlin Museum.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 174.—SHAPES OF EGYPTIAN BLADES. (Meyrick.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 175.—SWORD-DAGGERS.]

Meyrick,[512] in his general introduction to the weapons of all
nations (vol. i. Pl. 1), gives two forms of Egyptian blades, or rather
choppers. One (_a_, fig. 174) is a straight bill-shaped cutting-blade
with the tip upturned, and the handle is provided with cords and
tassels. This is in fact the old Turkish Scymitar and its offshoots, of
which I have already spoken; and thus Egypt led to the chopper-types,
which will presently be noticed. The other (_b_) is a curved Scymitar,
with a bevelled end and a double cord at the hilt.[513] The former
seems to be an imitation of the obsidian flake: the latter is a
development of the Khopsh or sickle-Sword.

[Heading: THE SWORD IN AFRICA.]

And here I must temporarily abandon the chronological for the
geographical order, and briefly treat of the Sword in modern Africa.

In the Dark Continent, as in the New World, the weapon has scant
importance. Reviewing the arms of the former ‘Quarter,’ we must
conclude that its favourites are the war-axe (employed in rough work),
and the spear[514] (used in fine work); while the Sword proper is
confined, as a rule, to Moslem Africa.

We have seen that in olden time the Mashaua (Maxyes) of Libya,
bordering upon Egypt, used large Swords. The Adyrmachidæ, or ‘first
Libyans’ of Herodotus (iv. 168), called by Silius Italicus (iii. 219)
‘gens accola Nili,’ were also armed with curved blades.

Denham and Clapperton inform us that the Knights of Malta exported
great numbers of the straight double-edged blades which they affected,
to Benghazi, in North Africa, where they were exchanged for bullocks.
From the Tripolitan they were borne across the Sahará to Bornu, to
Hausaland, and to Kano, where they were remounted for the use of the
negroid Moslem population. Modern travellers note that the trade still
continues at Kano, where some fifty thousand blades were annually
imported across the Mediterranean—the reason is that these negroids
cannot make their own. Hence they are passed on to the Pule (Fulah)
and Fulbe tribes, the Hausas, the Bornuese, and others dwelling in the
north-western interior. The great Mandenga family, miscalled Mandingos,
are also purchasers of European blades, which they mount and sheathe
for themselves. Far to the south-east Mr. Henry M. Stanley (_loc. cit._
i. 454) notes that the ‘King of Kishakka possesses an Arab scimitar,
which is a venerated heirloom of the royal family, and the sword of the
founder of that kingdom’ (?).

Barth (‘Travels’) has left us accurate though scanty details concerning
the weapons of the North-Western and West-Central Africa. ‘Spears and
Swords’ (say the people) ‘are the only manly and becoming weapons.’
The blade, mostly made at Solingen,[515] characterises the free and
noble Amoshágh or Imoshágh; and all travellers remark that it preserves
the old knightly form of crusading days; the low-caste Tawárik carry
only the lance and the regular African Telak or arm-knife. The Forawy
trust almost wholly to their Swords: the Kel-Owy (Khayl, or people, of
the Owi Valley) and the Kel-Geres carry spear, Sword, and dagger. The
Imgád, a degraded tribe of the negroid Berbers, are not allowed to use
either Sword or spear: similarly the bow is confined to the servile
caste among the Somal. The son of the Kazi, near Agades, was armed with
an iron spear, Sword, and dagger (vol. i. 395): a Musghu chief had a
boomerang-Sword (Front. vol. iii.). Few of the Baghirmi can afford
‘Kaskara’ (Swords), and they rarely wear the Kinyá or arm-knife: the
favourite weapon of these races, as well as the Kamuri or Bornavis,
is the Njiga or Golîyo, which has been noticed under the name of
Danisko.[516] It is a short and double-pointed Egyptian hand-bill,
thrown, as well as used for cutting. At Sokoto the traveller found good
iron (iv. 180): at Kano, in Hausaland, he observed a blacksmith making,
with the rudest tools, a leaf-shaped dagger, a long-ribbed, highly
decorated, and very sharp blade. The Tawárik call the smith ‘Enhad’; in
Timbukhtu he becomes the Mu’allim or artist.

The Sword-play of North Africa is that of Arabia and India,
apparently borrowed from the original Sword-dance.[517] In Tangier
it is picturesquely described by a lively Italian writer, Edmondo de
Amicis.[518] ‘There were three swordsmen, and they used the stick
in pairs. It is impossible to do justice to the extravagance and
buffoonery (_goffagini_) of that _school_: I call it so because we
saw the same style in the other cities of Marocco. There were all the
movements of the rope-dance, high leaps without object, contusions,
leg-actions, and blows, announced a whole minute before by an immense
sweep of the arm. Everything was done with a holy phlegm which would
have allowed one of our experts to have distributed, amongst all four,
a volley of blows without the least risk of receiving one.’

The old Egyptian Sword-types spread deep into the Dark Continent, and
preserve their forms to the present day. The Somal’s weapon shows the
straight or spear-blade. The Shotel or Abyssinian Sword (fig. 176) is
a direct descendant from the Khopsh-falchion. Nothing less handy than
this gigantic sickle; the edge is inside, the grip is too small, and
the difficulty of drawing the blade from the scabbard is considerable.
The handle, four inches long, is a rude lump of black wood, and the
tang is carried to the pommel and there clinched. The coarse and ugly
blade has a mid-rib running the whole length, forming a double slope
to the edges; it is one inch broad at the base, and tapers to a point
which can hardly be used. The length along the arc is three feet
thirty-seven inches; the curve, measuring from arc to chord, is two
inches; and the projection beyond the directing line is four inches.
The rough scabbard of untanned hide is shod with a hollow brass knob,
a ferule ruder even than the blade; and a large iron buckle affixed
to the top of the scabbard under the haft, connects with a belt or
waist-strap. Such a weapon never belonged to a race of Swordsmen.[519]

The Africo-Arab tribes of the Upper Nile (e.g. the Bisharín) also
preserve Egyptian forms derived from the Lisán-stick. The Galla Sword
is shorter and simpler than the Egyptian. But the Flissa of Northern
Africa, the Yataghan whose type, by the support of the Duc d’Aumale,
supplied France for years with a bad bayonet, if borrowed from the
Lisán, has assumed a peculiar curve. Colonel A. Lane-Fox looks upon
this Flissa of the Kabyles (= Kabáil, the tribes) as resembling the
‘Kopis-blade straightened, like those represented in the hands of the
Greek warrior on the vase in the Museum at Naples.’[520] Nothing can be
better adapted for close fight than the handy stabbing weapon: stuck
on the end of a musket, and making the barrel top-heavy, nothing can
be worse. But, as the ‘military tailor’ in the British army seeks the
philosopher’s stone in the shape of a suit of uniform that shall be
at once warm and cool, heavy and light, airy and impermeable to wet,
handsome and lasting, cheap and good, so the Frenchman would transform
the bayonet into a _multum in parvo_, a Sword, a saw, _a coupe-choux_,
in fact everything that a bayonet is not and ought not to be. The
absurd Yataghan-bayonet has only lately been banished from the French
army, and retains its place in most Continental forces.

[Illustration: FIG. 176.—ABYSSINIAN SWORD, A LARGE SICKLE.

  (Breadth at hilt, 1 inch; tapers to point.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 177.—SMALLER ABYSSINIAN BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 178.—ABYSSINIAN SWORD IN SHEATH.

  (Scabbard open to allow passage of blade.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 179.—FLISSA OF KABYLES.]

The Sword amongst the Dankali tribes, who occupy the south-western
shores of the Red Sea, north of the Somal, is evidently of European
origin. The straight, thin blade, with two or more longitudinal
grooves, is about four feet long, and broadens towards the point:
the handle consists of a pommel, of a grip whipped with wire, and of
straight quillons, forming a regular cross-guard. The modern weapons
are made in Germany—I believe, at Solingen, which seems to supply all
Africa north of the Equator.

[Illustration: FIG. 180.—DANKALI SWORD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 181.—CONGO SWORD.]

Our age has at length realised the fact that the heart of Africa is
inhabited by a homogeneous race speaking tongues of the same family.
It is a large and strong-bodied people, often cannibal, and showing no
likeness with the negro of the tobacconist-shops. Scattered amongst
these man-eaters, and possibly the aborigines of the country, are
comparatively dwarfish tribes, evidently the crane-fighting Pygmies of
Homer and Herodotus, now known from their various clans, Aká, Tikitiki,
Doko, Wambilikimo (two-cubiters), and so forth. Both the dwarfs and the
(comparative) giants, of whom the Mpángwe, or Fans, first became known
in Europe, are metal workers, and both work well. They despise arms
and tools that chip and snap, and therefore prefer to ours, with ample
reason, their charcoal-smelted native produce, and they temper it by
many successive heatings and hammerings without water-quenching.[521]
According to Major Serpa Pinto (ii. 128) the Barotse temper their iron
with ox-grease[522] and salt. He notes, however (ii. 356), that the
Ganguellas ‘manufacture steel out of wrought iron, tempered by cold
water, into which the metal is thrown while hot.’

The Gaboon river also produces the Babanga[523] (?), a leaf-shaped
Sword with a square end, made at Batta, and used by the Mpángwe; a
Glaive also leaf-shaped with a long handle, having a point at the butt
end, and Swords with triangular blades more or less broadened at the
apex.

Upon the glorious Congo river[524] I was shown a Sword belonging to the
Mijolos or Mijeres, a tribe inhabiting the upper valley. All declared
it to be of native make, and used during the Sword-dance performed in
presence of the Prince. But it is an evident copy of some weapon of the
fifteenth century; and the knightly model, like that of the Mpángwe
(Fan) crossbow, had drifted into the African interior. The handle and
its pommel were of ivory (in poorer weapons wood is used): the guard
was a thin bar of iron springing from the junction of blade and grip;
forming an open oval-shaped _pas d’âne_ below, and prolonged upwards
and downwards in two quillons or branches, parallel with the hilt and
protecting the hand. The blade, which had a tang for hefting, was
straight, flexible, and double-edged.

[Heading: _AFRICAN SWORDS._]

In the Despotism of Unyoro, on the northern shores of the (Victoria)
Nyanza Lake, Sir Samuel Baker found a knife of the Egyptian leaf-shape,
the _Lingua di Bove_ of the Italians. The blade has a high mid-rib, and
the handle is whipped round with copper wire. It is evidently used,
like the Somal weapon, for stabbing as well as cutting.

[Illustration: FIG. 182.—UNYORO DAGGER-SWORD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 183.—ZANZIBAR SWORDS.]

The Arabs of Zanzibar preserve the old two-handed weapon of Europe,
with a thin, flattish, double-edged blade ending in a bevelled point,
and much resembling the executioner’s Sword prolonged. They bear the
Solingen mark. Zanzibar, however, has two Swords. The shorter weapon
(_a_, fig. 183) is three-grooved and single-edged, the blade measuring
one foot ten inches; the handle and sheath are of copper, embossed or
engraved, and adorned with fine stones. The second (_b_, fig. 183),
which is the usual shape carried by Arab gentlemen, is three feet to
three and a half feet long; the long tang tapers towards the hilt,
and is cased in wood and leather; the pommel is cylindrical, and the
grip wants guard and quillons. Demmin (p. 396) finds it ‘difficult to
understand how this singular weapon could be wielded.’ It serves mostly
for show, and when wanted is used like a quarterstaff with both hands.
But the Zanzibari’s Sword is always clumsy, as dangerous to the wielder
as the old blade of the Gauls and Ancient Britons. Their cousins, the
Bedawin living about Maskat, have conserved with a religious respect,
many ancient weapons won or bought in older days, and possibly dating
from crusading times. These valuable articles travelled far: the
Portuguese found amongst the Moors of Malacca ‘Swords bearing in Latin
the inscription “God help me.”’

The Sword is also known to the blood-stained Despotisms that border the
West Coast of Africa—Ashanti, Dahome, and Benin. Many of the shapes are
borrowed: such are the Maroccan Yataghan, the Turkish or rather Persian
Scymitar, and the Malay Krís (crease). Provided with silver hilts and
scabbard mountings, they are generally wrapped in cloths, showing
only the upper part of the sheath and grip. Some of the forms have
developed till they look almost original, especially the short broad
blades pierced with holes like fish-slicers, and ending in circinal
curves. They suggest the well-known Indian choppers, and probably in
both countries they derive from Egypt. In Ashanti-land and Dahome
they are mostly of iron, some are of brass, and others of gold;[525]
and they are fantastically punched into chevrons and pierced with
open-work. These ‘fish-slicers’ are used in sacrifice and in beheading,
an operation which they perform very badly. Mr. Henry M. Stanley[526]
refers to ‘long-handled cleaver-like weapons’ amongst the savages of
Makongo; and to iron bill-hooks and ‘massive cleaver-looking knives
with polished blades’ in Karagwé.

[Illustration: FIG. 184.—GOLD COAST SWORDS.

  (Captain Cameron.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 185.—ASHANTI SWORD-KNIFE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 186.—SWORDS OF KING GELELE OF DAHOME.]

[Illustration: FIG. 187.—BEHEADING SWORD.

  Cutch; also used in Africa.]

[Illustration: FIG. 188.—WASA (WASSAW) SWORD.

  Gold plates on wood, sewn with wire, and then beaten until the
  stitches can scarcely be seen.]

[Illustration: FIG. 189.—KING BLAY’S SWORD.

  Gold leaf stamped and beaten. Sworn by before going to war, ‘If
  I come back, cut my head off.’]

Gezo,[527] the warrior king of Dahome or Ffon-land, who loved variety
in, as well as number of, weapons, manufactured Swords with two blades
like scissors. He also had _in terrorem_ a company of ‘Amazons,’ called
Razor-women, from the ‘Nyek-ple-nen-toh’ blade. This was simply a
European razor on a large scale, with a steel of thirty inches rising
from a plain handle of black wood, and kept open by a spring. It was
used to decapitate prisoner-kings, and the very look of it made the
lieges tremble.

[Illustration: FIG. 190.—CAPTAIN CAMERON’S MANYUEMA SWORDLET, SHEATH,
AND BELT. 1. Copper; 2. Wood; 3. Steel; 4. Wood; 5. Skin.]

My friend Captain Cameron[528] gives interesting details concerning the
Sword in parts of Africa which he first visited, and he has kindly sent
me a specimen of the Manyuema (Maniwema) Swordlet drawn to scale. He
describes the Wahumla tribe as using double-edged blades of iron shaped
like those of the Roman legionary. The chiefs adorn their steel blades
with neat open-work in various patterns, and some carry a fringe of
bells all along the lower side of the sheath. The belt of twisted hide
loops into a rolled fur (often otter-skin), and ends in two bells: it
is slung over the left shoulder. The Rehombo chiefs use similar blades
with broad and crescent-shaped edges; the commoners are armed with
heavy spears, and short knives, also used when feeding.

The people of the central Copper-lands[529] have only long knives
shaped like spear-heads. Stanley (ii. 81) calls them ‘short Swords
scabbarded with wood, to which are hung small brass and iron
bells.’ The Swords used by the chiefs under ‘King Kasongo’ are left
undescribed:[530] these weapons appear to be like those seen by me on
the Congo. These negroes have a kind of sham attack in honour, a custom
well known amongst the Bedawin. ‘When sufficiently bedaubed’ (with
pipeclay or cinnabar) ‘the chief returned the bag to his boy, and,
drawing his Sword, rushed at Kasongo, seemingly intent upon cutting
him down; but just before reaching him, he suddenly fell on his knees,
driving the Sword into the ground and rubbing his forehead in the dust.’

The Poucue (Pokwé) of the Lunda chiefs is not allowed to the people.
This weapon (fig. 191) has also found its way from Egypt into lands far
south of the Equator, and may be traced in the dagger-formed knives of
the Ovampos. It is a large two-edged knife, three spans long by four
inches broad: the sheath is of leather, and the weapon hangs under the
left arm.[531] The Pokwé not a little resembles the short leaf-shaped
iron blades from the Gaboon River, West Africa; and these again suggest
the Swords and the spear-heads of the ‘Bronze Age.’ Stanley (ii. 228)
shows the ‘Baswa knife’ on the Upper Congo exactly resembling the
Pokwé; these weapons ‘vary in size from a butcher’s cleaver to a lady’s
dirk’ (?). He also found ‘splendid long knives, like Persian Kummars’
(Khanjars?) and ‘bill-hook Swords.’

[Illustration: FIG. 191.—POKWÉ OF THE CAZEMBE’S CHIEFS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 192.—GABOON SWORDS, BOTH EVIDENTLY EGYPTIAN.]

[Illustration: FIG. 193.—CLEAVER OF THE HABSHI PEOPLE.]

The Habshi people inhabiting Janjhíra (El Jezírah = the island),
off the West Coast of India, south of Bombay, retain a curious
relic of their African origin. These negroids, who call themselves
Abyssinians, are originally Wásawáhíli from Zanzibar. Their cleaver
is a straightened Khopsh wholly of iron, handle, plain cross-guard
and pommel (fig. 193). The blade is fifteen inches broad, the back
is an inch and a half thick, and the weapon is as heavy as a man can
wield. These ex-pirates, under the Habshi Nawwáb, are still feared,
on account of their great strength[532] and violent temper, by all
their effeminate Indian neighbours. It is well to note that in case of
another ‘Indian Mutiny,’ we can easily raise on the eastern coast of
Africa a negroid force sufficient to put it down.

[Illustration: FIG. 194.—FRANKISH BLADE, WITH MID-GROOVE OUT OF CENTRE.]

Colonel A. Lane-Fox[533] remarks that one of the most peculiar forms
of Sword used in Africa is the corrugated, having an ogee-section.
On each face a portion of the blade is sunk on one side only, and
on the other face the depression is on the reverse side. Thus the
transverse section somewhat resembles the angles of the letter Z. We
can understand the use of this device when adapted to the pile of the
arrow or the javelin. It would give the weapon a rotatory motion on
the principle of the screw-propeller, the action being only reversed
instead of the screw propelling itself by acting upon the surrounding
medium: in this case the air impinges upon the screw flanges and
rotates the arrow, thereby increasing the accuracy of its flight.
But the peculiarity has been preserved where it is wholly useless;
and, curious to say, this ogee-form is persistent in all the Swords
obtained from the Caucasus, while the iron blades of Saxon and Frankish
spears discovered in the graves of England and France have the same
distinctive. Both may have derived it from Egypt: the Caucasians
through Colchis, and Western Europe by means of the Phœnicians. The
illustration is taken from the ‘Pagan Saxondom’ of Mr. J. Y. Akerman,
who was the first to draw attention to the strange resemblance between
the Saxon and Hottentot spears.[534]

Thus we see that whilst Egypt originated the three shapes of
Sword-blades—straight, curved, and half-curved—the rest of Africa
invented positively nothing in hoplology. Negroids and negroes either
borrowed their weapons from Egypt or imported them from beyond the sea.
Intertropical Africa never imagined an alphabet, a plough, or a Sword.




                              CHAPTER IX.

      THE SWORD IN KHITA-LAND, PALESTINE AND CANAAN; PHŒNICIA AND
              CARTHAGE; JEWRY, CYPRUS, TROY, AND ETRURIA.


Centuries before the Hebrews had left the Delta, a great empire
bounded Nile-land on the Asiatic side, reflecting Egypt as the New
World reflects the Old; in fact what Kemi was to the West, that
Khita-land was to the East. The people were known to the Nile-dwellers
as the Khita, Kheta, or Sheta of [Hieroglyphs]. The Hebrews from the
days of Abraham to the age of Nehemiah and the Captivity, called
them חתים, Khitím (our Hittites), or the ‘children of Heth.’[535] A
hunting-inscription of Tiglath-Pileser (Tigulti-pal-Tsira) the First,
B.C. 1120–1100, mentions the [Cuneiform], Kha-at-te (Khatte);[536]
he makes them dwell on ‘the upper Ocean of the Setting Sun.’ The
Greeks translated from Hebrew Γῆ Χεττιεὶμ, and termed the race Χεττιὶμ
and Χεττεινί. They are the ἑταῖροι Κήτειοι (Keteian or Cetian[537]
auxiliaries) of Homer (‘Odys.’ xi. 520), whose leader Eurypylus, was
slain with ‘the copper’ (Sword), and of whom many perished around him
‘on account of gifts to a woman.’

The cradle of this race, which took the lead of Western Asia
during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries B.C., was the
rolling prairie between the Orontes and the Euphrates. Joshua
represents the Lord saying: ‘From the wilderness and this Lebanon
even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of
the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the
sun, shall be your coast’ (i. 4). In their palmy days they covered
the interval between Egypt and Assyria, extending northwards to
Phrygia and Cilicia; eastwards to Mesopotamia and westwards to the
Mediterranean. They had walled and fortified cities as ‘Tunep or Tunipa
(Daphne) in the land Naharayn’[538]—the latter here meaning Upper
Palestine—Arathu (Aradus); Hamatu (Hamath, the high city); Khalbu
or Khilibu (Aleppo);[539] Kazantana (Gozanitis); Nishiba (Nisipis)
and Patena, which gave rise to ‘Padan-Aram’ and to ‘Batanæa.’ Their
northern capital was Carchemish (the Gr. Hierapolis and the modern
Yaráblus),[540] on the Euphrates, lately explored: some explain the
word as ‘Kar’ (town of) ‘Chemish’ the Moab-god); others by ‘Khem’ or
‘Chemmis,’ the Egyptian Pan. It was captured by Sargon (B.C. 717), and
became the head-quarters of an Assyrian Satrapy. Their sacred city
was Kadesh (Κάδης, the holy), a synonym of El-Kuds, the Arabic name
for Jerusalem; and even of the City of David it was said (Ezek. xvi.
3), ‘her father was an Amorite and her mother a Hittite.’ A Hittite
tribe extended to the southernmost frontiers of Palestine (Gen. xxiii.
_passim_); Hebron, one of their settlements, was founded, we are told,
seven years before Zoan (‘a station for loading animals’), _alias_
San or Tanis, the capital of the Egyptian ‘Shepherd-Kings.’ But the
allusion must be to Sesostris-Ramses (II.), who also made San his
capital under the name of ‘Pi- (city of) Ramessu,’ not to the original
building by King Pepi of the Sixth Dynasty, who preceded Abraham by a
thousand years.

[Heading: _THE HITTITES._]

[Illustration: FIG. 195.—CYPRIAN DAGGER.]

The Hittites were governed by twelve ‘kings,’ probably satraps, under
the Khita-sir or supreme chief. The ‘kings of the Hittites’ are
mentioned as joining the Egyptians (2 Kings iii. 6).[541] Although the
Hebrews were ordered utterly to destroy the race, their books prove
that the Khita were often in intimate relation with the intruders,
as in the case of Uriah the Hittite, one of the thirty of David’s
body-guard. They worshipped Baal Sutech (Sutekh) the War-god, the
‘man of war,’ a counterpart of Amun, with his wife (Sakti or active
energy), Astartha-Anata, and they also venerated Targatha, Derketo
or Atargatis—two Syro-Greek words for one and the same person. The
Egyptians at times rank the Khita as a ‘great people,’ and their
habitat as a ‘great country’; holding them, in fact, almost as their
peers: they also speak with reverence of their gods. Like their
neighbours of Kemi, the ‘Hittites’ were a literary nation: the
monuments of Nile-land mention a certain Kirab-sar (or sir), ‘writer of
the books of the Chief of the Khita,’ and the determinative is papyrus
or parchment. Hebron was also originally called Kirjath- (Kariyat)
Sepher’—settlement of books.

The Khita were formidable opponents to Kemi between the seventeenth
and the fourteenth centuries B.C. They fought doughtily against
Thut-mes III. (_circa_ B.C. 1600) during his Syrian campaign, when
this ‘Alexander the Great of Egyptian history’ overthrew the chief
of Kadesh, built a fortress on the Lebanon-range and mastered
‘Naharayn.’[542] Three centuries later, Kadesh was taken by Osirei
or Seti I. (B.C. 1366). A few years afterwards took place the great
campaign of his son,[543] Ramses II., or the Great, ‘who made Egypt
anew,’ and who is famous as the Sesostris of Herodotus.[544] He was
nearly defeated at the historic battle of ‘Kadesh, the wicked’;[545]
but at last he succeeded in ‘throwing the foe one upon another, head
over heels into the waters of the Orontes.’ Wilkinson (i. 400) shows a
city with a double moat, crossed by two bridges: at the outer defence,
formed by the river running into a lake, a phalanx of the Khita is
drawn up as a reserve corps. ‘Wonderfully rich,’ says Brugsch, ‘is
the great picture which represents the fight of the chariots: while
the gigantic form of Ramses,[546] in the very midst of the hostile
war-cars, performs deeds of derring-do, astonishing friend and foe, his
gallant son, Prahiunamif, commander-in-chief of the charioteers, heads
the attack upon those of the enemy. The Khita warriors are thrown into
the river, and among them is the King of Khilibi (Aleppo), whom the
warriors try to revive by holding his legs in the air with his head
hanging down.’[547] This was the victory that gave birth to the first
of Epic poems, the ‘Song of Pentaur the Scribe.’

[Heading: _THE HITTITE SWORD._]

The war ended by the Egyptian marrying the Hittite’s daughter, and
making with his father-in-law a highly-civilised extradition treaty
engraved upon a silver plate.[548] Another invasion, however, took
place (circa B.C. 1200) under Ramses III. This ‘Rhampsinitus’ of the
Greeks, a compound title, Ramessu-pa-Neter (Ramses the god), has left
inscriptions concerning his ‘Campaign of Vengeance’ which cover one
side of the temple of Medinah Habu:[549] amongst the conquered foes
appears the ‘miserable King of Khita as a living prisoner.’

In later times the Khita became well known to Assyrian story.[550]
Shalmaneser II. (B.C. 884–852) mentions the ‘Hittites and the city
of Petra’ (Pethor); he takes ‘eighty-nine cities of the land of the
Hamathites,’ and Rimonidri of Damascus. Tiglath-pileser II. (B.C.
745–727) speaks of the ‘city of Hamatti’ (Hamath) and the ‘Arumu’
(Aramæans).

According to Wilkinson (I. chap. v.) the Khita are represented on the
monuments, the Memnonium, Medinah Habu, and elsewhere, as a shaven race
with light red skins. Their dress is the long Assyrian robe falling to
the ankles: the hair is crisply curled and at times covered with the
tall cap of Phrygian type. A characteristic article, which appears in
their hieroglyphs, is the pointed and upturned boot,[551] somewhat like
the soleret of the sixteenth century. For armour they had square or
oblong shields and quilted coats with bracelets defending their arms.
Their weapons were bows, spears, and the short straight Sword, the
modern flesh-chopper, then in use among their rival neighbours of the
Nile Valley.

These gallant Canaanites[552] were proficients in the art of war. The
army was distributed into foot and mounted men. The former consisted
of a native nucleus called Tuhir (Táhir?),[553] the ‘chosen ones,’
and a host of mercenaries under Hir-pits or captains. Amongst these
were the Shardana, Sardones, commonly translated Sardinians; Brugsch
contends that they were Colchians, and derives from them ‘Sardonian
linen.’ They were armed with horned helmets and round shields, spears
and long Swords. The Kelau or slingers appear to have been a _corps
d’élite_ that waited upon the Prince.[554] The tactics included a
regular phalanx, a herse or column of spearsmen like the Egyptian;
and, although the cavalry rode horses their ‘strength was in chariots.’

‘Hithism’[555] became a study of late years, after the publication of
‘Hittite hieroglyphs,’ first discovered at Hamah, then at Aleppo, gave
it an impulse. Two rock-inscriptions with bas-reliefs were discovered
by the Rev. E. Davis (of Alexandria) at Ibriz (Áb-ríz), three hours
south of Eregli, the old Cybistra on the great Lycaonian plain.[556]
The finds at Carchemish added to the scanty store, and there are said
to be Hittite seals in the British Museum. In Dr. Schliemann’s ‘Troy’
(p. 352), I find a Hittite hieroglyph on the stamped terra-cotta; the
middle figure to the right is apparently the fist or fist-shaped glove,
the Egyptian symbol of the hand. I shall presently notice the Lycian
coin and a gold incision from Cyprus. Three legible characters—the
bull’s head, the cap, and the bent arm—are traced to the so-called
prehistoric statue of Niobe, Mount Sipylus. Evidently Hittite, too, is
the bronze tablet in M. Peretié’s Museum, Bayrut.[557]

Modern discoveries enable us to characterise Hittite art as a blending
of Egyptian with Assyrian, or rather Babylonian, both considerably
modified. The former appears in the two sphinxes of Eyub, and in
the winged solar disk, which was also borrowed by Mesopotamia from
the Nile Valley. The bas-reliefs and gems of Assyria are reflected
in the Hittite representations of the human figure; but the stature
is shorter, the limbs are thicker and more rounded, and the muscles
are not so prominent. At Boghaz-Keui some of the deities stand upon
animals, a posture believed to be early Babylonian.[558] Here, too, the
goddesses wear mural crowns, the decoration of the Ephesian Artemis,
and Prof. Sayce thence infers its Hittite origin. At Eyub is found the
double-headed eagle which is supposed to be the prototype of the old
Siljukian and modern European monsters.[559]

[Heading: _HITTITE HIEROGLYPHICS._]

The Hittite syllabary has systematic affinities with the Egyptian, as
shown by the boot, the glove (or hand), the bent arm, the battle-axe,
and the short straight chopper-knife. But before reading these
ideographs it was necessary to determine the language, and here
difficulties arose. Prof. Sayce denies that the Khita were Semites
or spoke a Semitic tongue;[560] and in this he is followed by Mr.
W. St. Chad Boscawen. But the former contended with scant success,
that the Cypriote writing was ‘none other than the hieroglyphics
of Hamath.’[561] Mr. Hyde Clarke believes that Khita, Etruscan, and
Cypriote are kindred tongues; and detects their symbols upon the
autonomous coins of Spain. Others have supported the Scythic (Turanian)
origin of the Hittites: in our day this was inevitable. The Rev. Dunbar
I. Heath bravely pronounces the language Semitic and made a gallant
attempt at interpreting the syllabary.[562] But nothing final can be
done under present conditions: we have not even collected all the
characters.[563]

While the Khita were inlanders, the parallel shore-land of the
Mediterranean—Syria and Palestine—was occupied by a host of Semitic
and congener tribes. The former is a noble word and by no means the
‘invention of a Greek geographer’; Suríyyah denotes the rocky region
from Sur or Tsur (זור = rock), a tower (_turris_), Tyre, the Zurai of
Tiglath-pileser II., and the Tapau of the hieroglyphs. Thus ‘Syria’
and ‘Tyria’ would be synonyms. Herodotus (vii. 63) fathered a sad
confusion when he wrote, ‘The people whom the Greeks call Syrians are
called Assyrians by the barbarians.’ Assyria is from another root, אשר
(Ashur), supposed to signify ‘happiness,’ and applied, as will be seen,
to one of the gods. Syria is the hieroglyphic Khar, Kharu, or Khálu,
the ‘hinder-land,’ that is, behind or north of Osiris (Egypt), and
the Akarru or Akharu of the cuneiforms, both from the ‘Semitic’ root
Akhr. ‘Palestine’ (Syria) is simply the ‘land of the Philistines,’ the
Zahi of the hieroglyphs and mediæval Filistín; this powerful family,
probably connected with the Hyksos, extended eastward from the confines
of Egypt, and built Pelusium—‘Philistine-town,’ not town of πηλὸς or
mud.

Beyond the Philistines began the Phœnicians—merchants and traders,
travellers, explorers, and colonisers—the ‘Englishmen of antiquity.’
When Herodotus brings the Phœnicians from the ‘Erythrean Sea’ he is
generally understood to mean the Persian Gulf, where the islands of
Tyrus (or Tylos) and Aradus are supposed to be the mother-sites of
the homonymous Mediterranean settlements. The popular derivation of
‘Phœnicia’ is from φοῖνιξ, which again may have been, _more Græco_,
a mere translation of the Egyptian Kefeth, Kefthu, Keft, and Kefa, a
palm-tree. But the question would be solved if it can be proved that
the Phœnicians are the ‘Fenekh’[564] of the monuments and the Moslem
El-Fenish. Mariette Pasha derived the term Punoi, Pœni, from Pun or
Punt, by which he understood Somali-land; he is easily reconciled with
Herodotus by assuming Punt to mean, as most understand it, the opposite
Arabian coast.[565] Thus the ‘Port of Punt’ is the mythical Red Sea
(primordial matter?), where red Typhon and the red dragon App or Apáp
(Apophis) fought against the white god Horus—the prototype of Baldur
the Beautiful.[566]

The Phœnicians left their mark upon the world. For many generations the
Mediterranean was a ‘Phœnician lake,’ and they could boast of a general
θαλασσοκρατία. This enabled their merchants and navigators to diffuse
civilisation from Egypt and Assyria to the farthest West. They were
the carriers of the world. Their ‘round ships’ or merchantmen (γαυλοί)
and their long war-ships pushed far into the Northern and Southern
Atlantic. The topographical lists of Thut-mes III. show a thickly
inhabited country (Brugsch, i. 350–51), and, as Mariette Pasha says, a
map of Canaan, composed of some hundred and fifteen hieroglyphic names,
‘is a synoptical table of the “Promised Land,” made two hundred and
seventy years before the exodus of Moses.’ Among the settlements are
Debekhu, now Baalbak, the Baal-city;[567] Tum-sakhu, the gate or shrine
of Tum, the setting sun, now Damascus; Biarut (_hod._ Bayrut); Keriman
or Mount Carmel and Iopoo, Joppa, or Jaffa. We find the Jordan in the
Egyptian Iarutana, and Shabatuan is the Sabbaticus River of Pliny and
Josephus.[568]

The chief cities of Phœnicia, Tyre and Sidon, were of unexampled
splendour, depôts of the wealth of the East, as early as B.C. 1500. The
arch-Homerid, who curiously enough never mentions Tyre, attributes all
the finest works of art either to the Sidonians or to the gods. The
eastern coast of the ‘Inner Sea’ was a centre of civilisation, a school
of high culture which added beauty to necessary and useful technical
products; and its arts and handicrafts became patterns to the world,
even to Egypt, the mother. We have only a few inscriptions to remind us
of its literature; but nothing can be more touching or more poetical
than the epitaph of Eshmunazar, King of the Sidonians:[569]—‘Deprived
of my fruit of life, my wise and valiant sons; widowed, the child of
solitude, I lie in this tomb, in this grave, in the place which I
built,’ &c. Phœnicia, too, gave not only her letters but her gods to
Greece and Rome. Mulciber, for instance, was evidently Malik Kabir,
the ‘Great King,’ father of the Cabiri, the patron-saints of Palm-land
and the Pelasgi; this deity corresponded with the Egyptian Ptah,
the Demiurgus-god denoted by the Scarabæus, a symbol as common in
Phœnicia as in Nile-land. Melkarth,[570] again, whom Nonnius makes the
Babylonian Sun, was the city-god; farther west he became Herakles, the
Etruscan Erkle: the latter was an important commercial personage in
Phœnicia, for his dog (according to the Greeks) discovered the murex.
Melkarth is the Ourshol of Selden (‘De Diis Syriis’), who derives the
word from ‘Ur,’ light.[571]

Another Syrian people, often occurring upon the Egyptian monuments, is
the Shairetana, whom Layard supposes to be the Sharutinians near modern
Antioch. They inhabited a country upon a river and a lake or sea.
Their armour was a close-fitting cuirass of imbricated metal plates,
worn over a short dress and girt at the waist; the helmet had side
horns, and its upper dome was surmounted by a shaft-and-ball crest.
Their weapons were javelins, long spears, and pointed Swords. The
Tokkari, their neighbours, also carried for offence spears and large
pointed knives or straight Swords. The Rebo had bows and long straight
Swords with very sharp points. The same is the case with Ru-tennu or
Rot-n-n, who often pass in review upon the monuments. They appear to
have contained two divisions: the Ru-tennu-hir (upper Ru-tennu) were
apparently the peoples of Cœlesyria, while the Ruthens or Luthens are
mentioned in conjunction with Neniee (Nineveh), Shinar (Singar), Babel,
and other places in Eastern Naharayn (Mesopotamia).

[Heading: _THE HARPE OF PERSEUS._]

We have no knowledge of the Phœnician Sword except that supplied to us
by the legend of the enigmatical Egypto-Argive hero, Perseus. According
to Herodotus (ii. 91), his quadrangular fane was at Panopolis-Chemmis
in the Theban nome: here his sandal, two cubits long, was shown to
devotees; and the land prospered whenever he appeared, as is the
case when it sees El-Khizr, the Green Prophet of El-Islam. The
Greeks, whom we need not credit, made him the son of Jupiter by the
‘Acrisian maid’ (Danaë); and the Persians,[572] according to the
Greeks, declared his son Perses to be the _heros eponymus_ of their
country, and the ancestor of their Hakhmanish or Achæmenian kings.
His chief exploits were two. At Spanish Tartessus or in Libya (Herod.
ii. 91) he slew, with the aid of a ‘magic mirror’ given to him by
Neith-Athene, the gorgon Medusa, that old Typhonian head, from whose
neck sprang Pegasus and Chrysaor.[573] At Phœnician Joppa (Jaffa)[574]
he slaughtered the sea-monster (κῆτος) and saved ‘Andromeda,’ who is
suspiciously like ‘Anat.’

In both these feats Perseus used a celestial weapon, the Harpé of
Cronos, which Zeus had wielded in his duel with Typhon. The giant or
bad-god had torn it from the grip of the good-god, whom he presently
imprisoned in a cave; and it was not recovered till the captive was
liberated by Thut-Hermes. The Greeks call this Sword Ἅρπη (Harpé),[575]
and the name is evidently the Phœnician Hereba and the Hebrew Chereb;
whilst its description, δρέπανον ὀξὺ (_falx acuta_, sharp sickle),
identifies it with the Khopsh-blade of Egypt. Perseus performed his two
exploits as Hercules slew the Lernæan hydra; and Mercury cut off the
head of Argus (_falcato ense_), using the _harpen Cyllenida_.[576]

This legend has greatly ‘exercised’ commentators. The hero is connected
with Io, Belus, and Ægyptus; while he is evidently related to the
Cypriot Perseuth and the Phœnician Reseph[577] (flame or thunderbolt).
The original fight is the eternal warfare of good, light, warmth,
joy, with their contraries. It begins with Osiris-Typhon; it proceeds
to Assyria, where Bel the Sun-god attacks the Tiamat or marine
monster with the Sapara-Sword or Khopsh. In Persia it becomes Hormuzd
(Ahura-mazda) and Ahriman (Angra-manus): in Jewry it is an affair
between Bel and the Dragon; in Greece between Apollo and Python. The
duello is continued by St. Patrick,[578] who banished for ever snakes
from Ireland; and it makes its final appearance as ‘Saint George
and the Dragon.’ This expiring effort of Egyptian mythology is held
apocryphal by the Roman Catholic Church, and no wonder. Dragons do
not, and never did, exist, except in memory as prehistoric monsters;
moreover, the traveller in Syria is shown three several tombs of
‘Már Jiryús’ the Cappadocian, a saint who has spread himself from
Diospolis-Lydda throughout the world. Under Justinian, the Theseum of
Athens was dedicated to ‘Saint George of Cappadocia,’ and in Cyprus he
had as many temples as Venus. The Saxon teacher thus invoked him:

        Invicto mundum qui sanguine temnis,
    Infinita refers, Georgi Sancte, trophæa.

He entered the English calendar when Henry II. married Eleanor,
daughter of William of Aquitaine, the Crusader who chose the ‘flos
Sanctorum’ for his patron saint. He is still godfather of the Garter,
established by Edward III. in 1350; and the most feudal of existing
orders wears ‘the George’ on a gold medallion, and celebrates its
festival at Windsor on April 23.

One step in the Saint’s progress has been traced by M. Ch.
Clermont-Ganneau,[579] an Orientalist whose archæological acumen is
unsurpassed even by his industry. A bas-relief group in the Louvre
shows the hawk-headed Horus, mounted and in Roman uniform, piercing
with his peculiar spear (an _hamatum_, or barb-head), the neck of the
crocodile Typhon, Set, Dagon,[580] Python—the Devil. This strongly
suggests that Horus and Perseus, Saint Patrick and Saint George, are
one and the same person.

[Heading: _PHŒNICIAN SWORDS._]

The Hereba-blade has not yet been found in Phœnicia, but Wilkinson
argues (II. ch. vii.) that the beautiful Swords and daggers, buried
with the Ancient Britons and clearly not of Greek or Roman type, are
Phœnician work. Carthaginian blades, however, dug up at Cannæ are now
in the British Museum.[581] That the nations were congeners we see by
the Pœnulus of Plautus, and by such names as Dido (another form of
David) and Elissa (El-Isá, the royal woman); by Sichæus, who derives
from the same root as Zacchæus; by Hannibal and Hasdrubal (containing
the root Ba’al), and by the ‘Suffetes’—magistrates who are the Hebrew
Shophetim or Judges.[582] The mercenary armies of Carthage, whose
conquests are first alluded to by Herodotus (vii. 165), used Swords of
bronze, copper, and tin: Meyrick (i. 7) also mentions brass; and the
highly imaginative General Vallancey compares it with Dowris metal or
‘Irish brass.’ Dr. Schliemann (‘Mycenæ,’ p. 76) picked up, at ‘Motyë
in Sicily,’ Carthaginian piles (arrow-heads) of bronze, pyramidal and
without barbs (γλωχῖνες or _hami_); he found the same style at Mycenæ
(p. 123).

The Swords of the Lycians probably resembled the Egyptian Khopsh; and
the same was the case with the Cilician falchion. The latter peoples
were also armed with the σάρισσα (Sarissa); the lance or spear, sixteen
to twenty feet long, afterwards used by the people of Epirus and the
Macedonian phalanx. It is opposed to the Larissa, the lance of the
European Middle Ages, and to the Narissa affected by the Norrenses.

[Heading: _THE JEWISH SWORD._]

The most remarkable point concerning the Sword amongst the ancient
Hebrews is our practical ignorance of its shape and size. Although
shekels and similar remains have been discovered in fair quantities,
that ‘iron race in iron clad,’ the Jews of old, has not left us a
single specimen of arms or armour. This is the more curious, as we are
expressly told that the blade was buried with its wielder.[583] And
although we are assured (Gen. iv. 22) that Tubal-Cain, son of Lamech
and Zillah, was the first metal-smith, there is no direct mention of
iron arms amongst the Jews till after the Exodus. Gesenius proposes
to make Tubal-Cain a hybrid word, ‘scoriarum faber,’ from the Persian
‘Tupal’ (iron-slag or scoriæ), and ‘Kani’ (_faber_, a blacksmith). He
has been identified with Ptah, Bil-Kan (Assyria), Vulcan, and Mulciber;
and only ignorance of Hinduism prevented mediæval commentators
discovering him under the _alias_ of Vishvamitra, the artificer of
the Hindú gods. Maestro Vizani (A.D. 1588), a famous master of fence,
attributes the invention of the Sword to Tubal-Cain; we should now
place this worthy in the later bronze and early iron age. Unjust
claims to discovery are made by all ancient peoples; and here it would
be hardly fair to adduce Bochart’s ‘Judæi semper mendaces; in hoc
argumento potissimum mentiuntur liberalissime.’

It is, however, amply evident that the Phœnicians and the despised
Canaanites were highly-cultivated peoples, whereas the Jews were not.
The latter are never alluded to in Egyptian hieroglyphs.[584] Even
after they had established their principality upon the bleak and
barren uplands of Judæa, they were dependent for their art upon their
neighbours. Although gold was so abundant in the days of David that he
could collect about one thousand million pounds (one hundred thousand
talents of gold and one million of silver) for building the Temple,
yet Solomon, the Wise King, was obliged to seek stone-cutters and even
carpenters among the Σίδονες πολυδαίδαλοι. Judæa had neither science
nor art; architecture, sculpture, paintings nor mosaics; comfort nor
cookery. The Great Temple that succeeded the Tabernacle of Moses was
mainly the work of Hiram of Tyre, the Siromus of Herodotus (v. 104),
the Hiromus of Dius, Menander and Josephus (‘Apion,’ i. 17, &c.), and
probably a dynastic name, as ‘Haram’ the Sacred.

Another learned master of arms[585] declares that the first weapon
mentioned in Hebrew Holy Writ is the _flammeus gladius_ wielded by the
Cherubim (Gen. iii. 24), the ‘Chereb’ which the Septuagint renders
Ῥομφαία.[586] On the Assyrian monuments the Kerubi (‘cherub,’ which
derives, like the Arabic ‘Karrúb,’ from ‘Karb’ = propinquity) denotes
the colossal figures symbolising the Powers of Good, and guarding the
palace-gates. As they prevented the admission of Evil, they found
their way to the entrance of the Garden of Eden, whence they warned
off sinners and intruders. The ‘flaming Sword,’ which ‘turned every
way to keep the way of the tree of life,’ was, according to some, the
two-pronged blade, the Greek ‘chelidonian,’ which served as a talisman.
Tiglath Pileser I. made one of these forked Swords of copper, inscribed
it with his victories, and placed it as a trophy in one of his castles.
But the Genesitic Sword is probably the weapon-symbol of Merodach, the
Babylonian god and planet Jupiter. This revolving disc represented,
like the Aryan ‘Vajra,’ the lightning or ‘thunderbolt’ with which our
classics armed Zeus-Jovi;[587] and a highly poetical description of it
is given in an old Akkadian hymn. Here it is called among other names
_littu_ (or _litu_), which is, letter for letter, the same as the first
of the Hebrew words translated ‘flaming Sword’ (_lahat ha-Chereb_):
it may also signify the ‘Burning of Desolation.’ M. F. Lenormant[588]
suggests that the true meaning is ‘magical prodigy.’ But it is safer
to stand by the disc-like Sword, which corresponds with the wheels of
Ezekiel’s vision (chap. x. 9, 10). In the Chaldæan battle of Bel and
the Dragon we again find the great flaming Sword, turning all round the
circle when wielded by the deity against the ‘Drake.’ So the Egyptians
had long before depicted the solar god with a glory of solar rays, a
most appropriate symbol; and his enemy, Apophis [Hieroglyphs], the
serpent of Genesis, whom he destroys, is a monstrous reptile bristling
with a dorsal line of four Sword-blades, like flesh-knives, typifying
destruction.

The Hebrews borrowed their metallurgy, like all their early science,
from Egypt. M. de Goguet remarked that they were not destitute of
technological skill if they could calcine the golden calf and reduce
the metal (probably by using natron) to a powder which could be drunk
in water—_aurum potabile_.

The Hebrews called the Sword ‘Chereb’ (חרב, pl. Chereboth), a word that
occurs some two hundred and fifty times in the ‘Old Testament.’ Its
root, like the Arabic ‘khrb,’ means to waste, to be wasted; and the
noun denotes any wasting matter.[589] Mostly it means a Sword (Gen.
xvii. 40; xxxiv. 25, &c. &c.); in other places it is a knife (Josh. v.
2, 3). So we find in Ezekiel (v. 1), ‘Take thee a sharp knife [Chereb];
take thee a barber’s razor’: elsewhere it becomes a chisel (Exod.
xx. 25); an axe or pick (Jer. xxxiv. 4; Ez. v. 1, and xxvi. 9), and,
finally, violent heat (Job xxx. 30). The Arabic ‘Harbah’ signifies a
dart.

We gather from the Hebrew writings that the Sword was originally of
copper: hence the allusion to its brightness and its glittering: this
would be followed by bronze, and lastly by iron, ground upon the
whetstone (Deut. xxxii. 41). It was not of flint; the ‘sharp knives’
alluded to in Joshua (v. 2), were mere silex-flakes like the Egyptian.
The Sword was used by foot-soldiers and horsemen, the latter adding to
the ‘light Sword’ a ‘glittering spear’ (Nahum iii. 3). The ‘Chereb’
was not a large or heavy weapon, and we may safely assume that its
forms were those of the Egyptian hieroglyphs. The weight of Goliath’s
Sword is unfortunately not given (1 Sam. xvii. 45), like that of his
spear and his armour; nor are we told anything about the blade which
David refused because he had not proved it (_ibid._ 39). But the ease
with which the son of Jesse drew out of the sheath thereof and used
the Philistine’s ‘Chereb,’ suggests a normal size and weight (_ibid._
51 and xxi. 9). It was much admired, for the victor said, ‘There is
none like that’ (1 Sam. xxi. 9). From the same chapter and verse we
learn that the blade was ‘wrapped up in a cloth,’ still an Eastern
practice, ‘behind the ephod’ or priest’s robe.[590] And the fact of a
man falling upon his Sword (1 Sam. xxxi. 4, 5) shows that the blade
was stiff, short, and straight, like the Egyptian leaf-blade. Ehud the
Benjamite, when about to murder Eglon, King of Moab (Jud. iii. 16),
‘made a two-edged Sword-dagger of a cubit length’ (or eighteen inches),
apparently without a sheath. The frequent mention of the double-edged
Sword (or straight cut-and-thrust?) suggests that there were also
single-edged blades, back-Swords or, perhaps, falchions. It is hard to
understand why Meyrick tells us that the Jews wore the Sword ‘suspended
in front, in the Asiatic style.’ Ehud (_ibid._ 16, 21) girt his weapon
under his raiment upon his right thigh, and drew it with his left hand.
Again, we read, ‘Gird thy sword upon thy thigh’ (Ps. xlv. 3); and as
Joab proceeded to assassinate Amasa (2 Sam. xx. 8), the ‘garment that
he had put on was girded unto him, and upon it a girdle with a sword
fastened upon his loins in the sheath thereof; and as he went forth it
fell out.’ The allusions to the oppressing Sword (Jer. xlvi. 16; l.
25) recall the Assyrian emblem of the Sword and the Dove, which are
both figured in one image. Perhaps we must so understand the Egyptian
Ritual of the Dead: ‘I came forth as his child from his Sword.’
Apparently the Chereb was worn, as by the civilised Greeks and Romans,
only on emergencies and not, like the chivalry of Europe, habitually
in peaceful towns. The Cultellarii or Sicarii, whom Josephus and
Tacitus[591] mention, were mere assassins, like the French Coustilliers
and the English Coustrils or Custrils.

That the Hebrews were not first-rate Sword-cutlers, we may infer from
the history of Judas the Maccabee.[592] A vision of Jeremiah the
Prophet, preceding the victory over Nicanor, had promised him ‘a Sword
of God, a holy Sword,’ not the short Machæra but the large Rhomphæa (2
Mac. xv. 15). After his war with the Samaritans and the Gentiles of
Palestine, ‘Judas took the Sword of Apollonius (the Syrian general) and
fought with it all his life’ (2 Mac. iii. 12).

And yet how general was the use of the Sword in Jewry we gather from
the fact that it assisted in taking the Census: so David, by one
account (2 Sam. xxiv. 9) mustered one million three hundred thousand
‘valiant men that drew the Sword.’[593] The expression ‘girding on
the Sword’ (1 Sam. xxv. 13) denoted adults able to serve as soldiers,
and also noted the beginning of a campaign (Deut. i. 41). It has been
stated that Saul, son of Kish, used the Sword with his left hand, by
virtue of being of the tribe of Benjamin. Of the latter, however, we
learn (Judg. xx. 16) that many were ambidexters, fighting and slinging
with the left as well as with the right. Finally, to be ‘slain by the
Sword’ was evidently as great a misfortune as the ‘straw-death’ among
those muscular Christians, the Scandinavians. The curse of David upon
Joab was that there might never be wanting in his house ‘one that hath
an issue, or is a leper, or that leaneth on a staff, or that falleth on
the Sword’ (a suicide). All this makes the fact the more singular that
no Jewish Sword-blade has ever been found.

Of the weapons used by the tribes neighbouring the ancient Hebrews we
know little. In the famous muster of Xerxes’ army,[594] the Assyrians,
according to Herodotus (vii. 65), used hand-daggers (ἐγχειρίδια)
resembling the Egyptian. The Arabs (vii. 69, 86), like the Indians,
were mere savages armed with bows and arrows; and we may note that
the former mounted only camels, the horse not having been naturalised
amongst all the tribes in the days of the ‘Great King’ (B.C. 485–465).
The Philistine[595] weapons are known to us only by the famous duello
between David and Goliath of Gath (1 Sam. xvii.). The account is
full of difficulties for the ‘reconciler’ of contradictory texts;
for instance, David is Saul’s armour-bearer, and yet unknown at
Court.[596] Nor is it easy to discover where Gath is. It is popularly
identified with Kharbat (ruins of) Gat: this heap of ruins lies west of
castled Bayt Jibrín, the ‘House of Giants’ (tyrants), the Arabic name
corresponding with the Hebrew Bethogabra. The field of fight has been
found in the Wady El-Samt (Elah of St. Jerome), west of Jerusalem. The
people of this part of Palestine, probably descended from the Hyksos
or Canaanites, are a fine tall race, bred to fray and foray by the
neighbourhood of predatory Bedawin:[597] armed to the teeth, they are
adepts in the use of the huge ‘nebút’ or quarterstaff.

The plain of Philistia, which once supported five princely cities,
appears very barren viewed from the sea; but the interior shows
well-watered valleys, and the succession of ruins proves that the
country belonged to an energetic and industrious race. Gaza (‘Azzah),
at the southern extremity, was a place of considerable importance, on
account of its fine port and its trade with the adjacent Bedawin. It
must not be confused with modern Ghazzah.[598]

Goliath, the ‘champion of the uncircumcised’ (Philistines), and
possibly a type of the race, wore armour[599] of ‘brass’ (copper);
unfortunately the materials of his Sword and sheath are not specified.

[Heading: _THE CYPRUS SWORD._]

Leaving Syria, we proceed to Cyprus, which may be considered an
outlying part of Palestine. Its size, its position between the east
and the west, and its wealth in gold, silver, copper, and iron, made
it an important station for the early Pelasgo-Hellenic or Græco-Italic
race which passed westwards, using the Hellespont and the Bosphorus for
ferry-places, and the Ægean Islands for stepping-stones. Thus Cyprus
became the ‘cradle of Greek culture, the cauldron in which Asiatic,
Egyptian, and Greek ingredients were brewed together.’ General Palma
(di Cesnola)[600] has proved, by his invaluable finds, which have
‘added a new and very important chapter to the history of art and
archæology,’ that early Cypriote art was essentially Egyptian, modified
by Phœnician and Assyrian influences, and eventually becoming Greek.
Hence, too, with the dawn of Hellenic civilisation, migrated westwards
some of the fairest classical myths. Cyprus was the very birthplace
of Venus,[601] an anthropomorphism which rendered infinite service to
poetry, painting, and sculpture. Idalium (Dali) was the capital of
Cinyras, Kinnári the harper,[602] the Crœsus of his day; it was the
site of Myrrha’s sin and the death-place of her son Adonis. The latter,
who corresponds with the Tammuz of Palestine and the Assyrian Du-zi
(Son of Life), is made by Ammianus Marcellinus (xxii. 14) an ‘emblem
of the fruits of the earth cut down in their prime.’ Here was the
_atelier_ of Pygmalion, Fa’am Aliyun (_Malleus Deorum_), the hammer of
the gods;[603] and here upon his breathing statue of ivory he begat
Paphos, the king. Finally, here flourished the poets who preceded the
Homerid chief; and here was born Zeno, the Stoic, the ‘Phœnician.’

The history of Cyprus begins soon after the beginning. An inscription
of Thut-mes III. speaks of the ‘false breed of the Kittim’; and the
island is everywhere on the monuments called Asibi. In the cuneiforms
the word is ‘Kittie’: we also find ‘Atnán’: hence, possibly, the
Hellenic ‘Akamantis.’ It is the ‘Chittim’ of the Hebrews (Joseph. ‘A.
J.’ i. 7), and perhaps their ‘Caphtor’; the latter word, however,
appears to be the Egyptian ‘Kefa’ or ‘Keft’ (a palm or Phœnicia),
converted into the son of Javan and grandson of Japhet. ‘Kittim’ and
its congeners survive in the Greek Citium, now Larnaca, from ‘larnax,’
a mummy-case, a coffin. I have already noticed (chap. iv.) the disputed
origin of ‘Kypros’ and ‘Cyprus.’

The Autochthones of Cyprus are supposed upon very slight grounds to
have been ‘Aryans’ from Asia Minor, Phrygians,[604] Lycians,[605]
Lydians, or Cilicians. There must have been an early ‘Semitic’
innervation, as we see by such names as Amathus; this is the Greek form
of Hamath, the ‘high town,’ typically explained by the Hebrew ‘Amath,’
grandson of Canaan. The Phœnicians settled chiefly in the south of the
island and made it an outpost of Tyre and Sidon. Herodotus tells us
that there were also, according to their own account, Ethiopians (vii.
90), by which he means Cushito-Asiatic tribes from the head of the
Persian Gulf.

The staple of Cyprus, from the heroic ages to the Roman days, was the
copper-trade and the manufacture of arms and armour. To the legendary
Tyrio-Cyprian king Cinyras was attributed the invention of the hammer,
anvil, tongs, and other metallurgic tools. This favourite of Venus
was only the _hero eponymus_ of the Phœnician Cinyradæ, who ruled the
isle till subdued by Ptolemy Lagi (B.C. 312). They were opposed to a
Semitico-Cilician family of priests and prophets, the Tamyridæ. Homer
(‘Il.’ xi. 19) describes the breast-plate of worked and damascened
steel (? κύανος) adorned with gold and tin, which King Cinyras sent
to Agamemnon. Alexander the Great highly prized, for its lightness
and temper, the blade given to him by the King of Citium; and we know
that he used it in battle, slaying ‘with his Cyprian Sword’ Rhæsales
the Persian. Demetrius Poliorcetes wore a suit of armour from Cyprus,
which had been tested by darts shot from an engine distant only twenty
paces. In Herodotus (vii. 90) the Cyprian contingent of Xerxes’ army
was weaponed after the manner of the Greeks.

Cyprus would derive her art from the Phœnicians, whose bronze dishes
were found in the Palace-cellars at Nineveh. Gem-engraving, and working
in _pietra dura_, were highly cultivated, as is proved by General
Palma’s works, and by the Lawrence-Cesnola collection, ‘Album of Cyprus
Antiquities.’[606] Glass- and crystal-cutting were well known at a time
when Herodotus (ii. 69) could describe the former only as ‘fusible
stone’—perhaps, however, alluding to paste gems. But Theophrastus, a
century and a half after the historian, mentions glass as reported
to be made by melting a certain stone. I have already alluded to the
peculiar decency and decorum of the glyptic remains in the Isle of
Venus, where the festivals were described as being ultra-Canopic in
character.[607]

[Heading: _CYPRUS WEAPONS._]

The ‘finds’ of Cyprian weapons have little importance; perhaps due care
was not devoted to the subject. Dali (Idalium) produced a fine dagger
with an open ring for ornament between handle and blade, together
with a hatchet and spear-head in copper. Here also was found the
bronze tablet of the Duc de Luynes, the discoverer of the Cypriote
syllabary,[608] which has caused, and still causes, so much discussion.
Alambra yielded a number of copper tools, needles, bowls, mirrors,
hatchets, spear-heads, and daggers (Cesnola, Pl. V.). Among them is a
sickle-shaped implement (_a_), of the shape called a ‘razor’ by writers
on Etruscanism; it may be anything between a razor, a sickle, and a
pruning-hook.[609] A tomb at Amathus supplied copper axes and iron
arrow-heads (p. 280), and another an iron dagger (p. 276). There is
a charming dagger from the Curium treasure (Pl. XXI. p. 312); and we
are told (p. 335) of ‘an iron dagger with part of its ivory handle.’
The straight blade, the flesh-chopper, and the leaf-shaped Egyptian
Swords are found on a patera[610] (p. 329), and the broken statue of
a warrior from Golgoi carries a falchion or flesh-chopper slung under
the quiver to the left side (p. 155). The tombs containing horsemen
in terra-cotta invariably yielded one or two spear-heads seven to ten
inches long, whilst the figures of foot-soldiers were accompanied by a
battle-axe, knife, or dagger. The decapitation of the Gorgon by Perseus
adorns a sarcophagus also found at Golgoi (Pl. X.); and the head of
Medusa (Pl. XXII.) apparently suggested that of the Hindú Kali, with
the tongue lolling out as if gorged with gore. The mediæval finds
of arms seem to have been more important than the ancient. There is
a tempting notice, but only a notice, of the Venetian weapons taken
from the two casements of Famagosta, of old Amta-Khadasta,[611] the
Ammochostos of Ptolemy (v. 14, § 3): especially interesting are the
rapiers, whose handles bore the Jerusalem Cross and the owners’ crests
inlaid with gold.

[Illustration: FIG. 196.—(Plate V.) NOVACULA.]

[Illustration: FIG. 197.—(Prague Museum.) NOVACULA?]

[Illustration: FIG. 198.—(Klagenfurth Museum.) NOVACULA, SICKLE? RAZOR?]

[Illustration: FIG. 199.—SILVER DAGGER.]

[Heading: _TROJAN WEAPONS._]

On the mainland north of Cyprus lies a most remarkable land which,
forming a point of junction, a connecting-link between the East and
the West, was one of the tracks of primitive emigration from Asia
to Europe, and _vice versâ_. This _tête de pont_, commanding the
island-bridge and the various stepping-stones of rock, is the famous
Troas, occupied of old by a branch of the great Phrygian race. Hence
the interest attaching to the excavations of Dr. Henry Schliemann. His
works are too well known to require any detailed notice of the five
(seven?) cities ‘whose successive layers of ruins, still marked by the
fires that passed over them, are piled to the height of fifty (two
and a half) feet above the old summit of the Hisárlik hill.’[612] The
explorer’s labours, according to his editor, have passed through the
‘several stages of uncritical acceptance, hypercritical rejection, and
discriminating belief’: I can only remark that the question of Troy
appears farther from being settled (if possible) than it ever was; we
now know only where it was not. The excavator began by placing his city
of Priam in the second stratum from below, at a depth of twenty-three
to thirty-three feet under the surface; and afterwards raised it to the
third layer. It is regretable that the learned author did not submit
his lively volume ‘Troy’ to a professed archæologist. We should not
have heard so much about the Svasti, a Hittite ornament, nor should we
have been told that the Trojans used ‘salt-cellars or pepper-boxes’ (p.
79); that the Ramayana Epic was ‘composed at the latest eight hundred
years before Christ’ (p. 103), and that the ‘ivory, peacocks, and
apes are _Sanskrit_ words with scarcely any alteration.’[613] When,
therefore, I speak of ‘Troy proper,’ and ‘Trojan stratum,’ I mean only
Dr. Schliemann’s Troy.

The townlet had preserved, at the time of its destruction, the
technological use of stone, which, indeed, was found in the four lower
strata, and even in the Acropolis of Athens. It occurs, however, in
conjunction with gold and silver, copper, bronze, and traces of iron,
but no tin.[614] The people were, like most barbarians, very expert
metallurgists; and if Dr. Schliemann’s diorite be true diorite,[615]
they must have worked with highly-tempered tools. Copper, either pure
or slightly alloyed, was the most common metal: we read of a key, a
large double-edged axe, a vase-foot, nails, clothes-pins (ἔμβολα), a
curious instrument like a horse’s bit (p. 261); a bar, a big ring, a
chauldron (λέβης), a ridge (φάλος) for the helmet-crest (λόφος), two
whole helmets, three crooked knives, and a lance with a mid-rib (p.
279). Upon the so-called ‘great Tower of Ilios’[616] was found a large
mould of mica-schist for casting twelve different articles, axes and
daggers. Thus we learn something about the long copper knives which
the Homeric heroes carry besides their Swords and use in sacrifice:
also we may now reasonably conclude that the Iliad-poets could not,
as has often been asserted, have ignored the fusion and the casting
of metals.[617] Near this important mould appeared a fine lance (p.
279), and long thin bars, either with heads or with the ends bent
round, determined to be hair- or breast-pins. Iron showed only in a
sling-bullet, although Dr. Schliemann often mentions ‘loadstone.’[618]

The ‘upper Trojan stratum’ yielded other moulds for bar-casting and a
four-footed crucible, in which some copper was still visible. The gates
supposed to be the Scæan or left-handed[619] had two copper bolts (p.
302). The so-called ‘Palace of Priam’[620] produced a dozen long thin
pins for hair or dress; and one of a bundle of five, fused together by
fire, had two separate heads, the upper lentil-shaped, and the lower
perfectly round (p. 312). Thick nails, fitted for driving into wood,
were rare; the labour of two years produced only two. Finally, there
were fragments of a Sword, a lance, and other instruments.

[Illustration: FIG. 200.—COPPER SWORD WITH SHARP END, FROM THE
‘TREASURY OF PRIAM.’]

The first article found in the so-called ‘Treasury of Priam’ was a
copper shield (ἀσπὶς ὀμφαλόεσσα), an oval salver measuring in diameter
less than twenty inches. The flat field is surrounded by a rim (ἄντυξ)
an inch and a half high; the umbo (ὀμφαλός)[621] measured two and
one-third by four and one-third across, and this boss was bounded
by a furrow (αὖλαξ) two-fifths of an inch across (p. 324). Thus
Antyx and Aulax, suited for mounting a guard of hide, recall Ajax’s
seven-fold shield, made by Tychius[622] (‘Il.’ vii. 219–223); and
Sarpedon’s targe, with its round plate of hammered ‘Chalcos,’ and its
hide-covering attached to the inner edge of the rim by gold wires or
rivets (‘Il.’ xii. 294–97). Near the left hand of a Lebes-chauldron,
two fragments of a lance and a battle-axe were firmly attached by
fusion. There were thirteen copper lances, from nearly seven inches
to upwards of a foot long, with one and a half to two and one-third
inches of maximum breadth; the shafts had pin-holes for attachment
to the handle; the Greeks and Romans inserted the wood into the neck
of the metal-head of the lance. There was a common one-edged knife
six inches long; and of seven two-edged daggers, the largest measured
ten and two-thirds by two inches. The grips averaged two to two and
three-quarter inches, and the tang-ends, where the pommels should be,
were bent round at a right angle. Doubtless the tang had been encased
in a wooden haft; had it been of bone some trace would have remained,
and the point, which projected about half an inch, was simply turned
to keep the handle in place. This antiquated contrivance is not yet
wholly obsolete, especially when the metal is left naked. The only
sign of a Sword (p. 332) was a fragmentary blade five inches and
two-thirds long by nearly two inches broad, and with a sharp edge
at the chisel-like end. Many golden buttons, not unlike our modern
shirt-studs, were found in the ‘Treasury’; they had probably served
to ornament the belts or straps (τελαμῶνες) of knives, shields, and
Swords.[623]

[Heading: _ALL THE TROYS._]

We gather from Dr. Schliemann’s labours that his ‘Troy,’ at the time
of its destruction, was a townlet still in the local Stone-age; at
the height of the Copper-Bronze Period; and, perhaps, in the earliest
dawn of the Iron-epoch. Apparently it had an alphabet, of which the
Grecian enemy could not boast;[624] and, comparing its remains with
those of Mycenæ, its culture fully equalled, if not excelled, that
of contemporary Hellas. It is curious to observe that the deeper
the diggings, from twenty-four feet downwards, the greater were the
indications of technological skill. According to Herodotus (ii. 118),
the Egyptians bore witness to the power of Troy,[625] yet there is an
utter absence of Nilotic influence in the remains, and Brugsch denies
that there is any allusion to it on the monuments of Egypt. A similar
disconnection with Phœnicia and Assyria appears. The resemblance of the
terra cottas to those found in Cyprus and in some of the Ægean islands
suggests that there was an early relationship between the Phrygian
Trojans and the Phrygian Greeks, both being ‘Indo-Europeans’;[626] and
that the eternal Trojan war was, like the later contest between Russia
and Poland, Federals and Confederates, nothing but a family feud, a
venomous quarrel of rival cousins.

To conclude the ever-interesting subject of Troy. Homer, or the Homerid
so called, describes the city according to current legends, as an
untravelled Englishman of to-day would describe the Calais of Queen
Mary. There is no reason to believe that he saw it, much less that he
painted like the photographing of Balzac. Hence it is a daring more
than sublime, to find the Scæan Gate and the Palace of Priam. Even the
number of superimposed settlements differs. Dr. Schliemann (‘Ilios,’
&c.) proposes seven, while Dr. Wilhelm Dörpfeld[627] reduces the number
to six. These, according to Professor Jebb, are as follows: (1) The
Greek Ilium of the latest or Roman age, extending to about six feet
below the surface. (2) The Greek Ilium of Macedonian age taken by
Fimbria in B.C. 85; it extends over the plateau adjoining Hisárlik.
(3) A Greek Ilium of earlier age, taken by Charidemus (B.C. 359); it
appears confined to the little mound. (4) Another unimportant village;
possibly No. 3 in its earliest form, when the Æolic settlers occupied
Hisárlik: the evidence of the pottery[628] suggests these to have been
the oldest Hellenic remains. (5) Prehistoric city; and (6) a distinct
stratum of ruins also prehistoric. To these Dr. Schliemann adds (7) the
earliest prehistoric buildings founded on the floor-rock fifty-two feet
below the surface and fifty-nine above the present level of the plain.

Finally, Mr. W. W. Goodwin[629] comes to the ‘ultimate conclusion’
about Hisárlik, that it shows only two important settlements. The first
is the large prehistoric city extending over the hill and plateau. The
second is the historic Ilium in its three phases of primitive Æolic
occupation of the Acropolis, the Macedonian city, and the Roman Ilium.

The immediate neighbours of Troy were the Lydians, whom history makes
the forefathers of the ancient Etruscans.[630] Herodotus (i. 94) tells
the tale of Tyrrhenus and his emigration, which, however, differs from
the account of Xanthus Lydius preserved by Nicolaus of Damascus. In
the ‘Iliad’ (ii. 864), the Lydians appear only as Mæonians. They were
a people of Iranian speech, to judge from such words as καν (_canis_,
_kyon_, _svan_, &c., a dog), and ‘Sardis’ from ‘Sarat’ or ‘Sard,’ in
old Persian Thrade and in modern Persian Sál = a year. Apparently their
language had affinities with the Etruscan and Latin; for instance,
Myrsilus, son of Myrsus, the Græco-Lydian name of Candaules (Herod. i.
7), has been compared with Larthial-i-sa; and Servilius from Servius,
the _l_ denoting son (_filius_), shows the same peculiarity. The
Lydians were a civilised people who first coined gold (Herod. i. 94)
and stamped silver (_ibid._);[631] their name will ever be connected
with music. With them twelve was a sacred number; it formed the perfect
Amphictyony of the Ionians, and it survived in the Confederacy of
Etruscan cities (Livy, v. 33). Finally, the tomb of Alyattes[632] is
apparently a prototype of the Etruscan sepulchres; and the peculiarity
of these ‘homes of the dead’ suggests direct derivation from Egypt
rather than coincidental resemblance.

Until late years it has been accepted as an historic fact that the
old colonisers of Tyrrhenia dwelt for years as conquerors in Lower
Egypt. The Tuisa, Tursha, Toersha, and Turisa of the monuments wear
a close-fitting _calotte_ with a tall point, whence a long thin
tassel falls to the back of the neck, like one of the Cyprus caps and
the older style of Moslem Fez.[633] But Brugsch[634] converts the
monumental Tursha into Taurians: he wholly discredits the existence of
a Pelasgo-Italic confederacy in the days of Mene-Ptah I. and of Ramses
III.; and he positively asserts that the Egyptians of the Fourteenth
Dynasty knew nothing of Ilium and the Dardanians, Mysians and Lycians,
Lydians and Etruscans, Sardinians, Greek Achæans,[635] Siculians,
Teucinians, and Oscans.

[Heading: _THE ETRUSCAN SWORD._]

[Illustration: FIG. 201.—THE MARZABOTTO BLADE.]

However that may be, the Etruscans, the _acerrimi Tusci_ of Virgil,
were a people of high culture, to whose inventive and progressive
genius Rome owed her early steps in arts and arms.[636] A flood of
light has been thrown upon this page of proto-historic lore by the
extensive excavations of late years in the Emilian country about
Bologna, the Felsina or Velsina of Tyrrhenia. My late friend, the
learned and lamented Prof. G. G. Bianconi, forwarded to me the
accompanying sketch (fig. 202) of an exceptional iron blade found in
the ruins of Marzabotto.[637] It is described as follows (p. 3) in a
work, printed but not published, by the learned archæologist Count
Gozzadini of Bologna, ‘Di ulteriori scoperte nell’ antica necropoli di
Marzabotto nel Bolognese’[638]:—

‘Within a cell only thirty centimètres deep, and disposed two mètres
distant from one another, lay three skeletons whose heads fronted
eastwards. On each was an iron Sword-blade, sixty-two centimètres long
by four and a half broad near the tang (_spina_), and fining off to an
olive-leaf point; all have the mid-rib or longitudinal spine. Partly
attached by oxidation to one blade is a remnant of the iron scabbard,
slightly convex posteriorly and showing in the upper part a rectangular
projection, perhaps to carry the hook attached to the balteus. The
sheath-front has a mid-rib like the blade, and the wavy mouth is
adapted to the Sword-shoulders. On this face only are two buttons
(_borchie_) in high relief, connected by a band (_listello_). The tang,
twelve centimètres long, shows the length of the hilt, which, being
made of more perishable material, has altogether disappeared.’

The long narrow rapier-blade with the mid-rib is first seen in the
Egyptian bronzes;[639] the step was easy to the harder metal. That the
iron form was common in Etruria as its bronze congener at Mycenæ, is
proved by the discovery of three in a single tomb; moreover, as has
been said, a fourth has been preserved for years in the Marzabotto
collection. All are similar in form, which is highly civilised. The
number of the blades also suggests that they are of native make, not
left by the Boians and the Ligaunians, who, according to the late Prof.
Conestabile, may have buried in the Marzabotto cemetery. The date of
the latter is somewhat uncertain; but it cannot be much more recent
than the burial-ground of Villanova, where Count Gozzadini found an
_æs rude_, and which he dates from the days of Numa, B.C. 700. He is
followed by Dr. Schliemann (‘Troy,’ p. 40), and opposed by that learned
and practical anthropologist M. Gabrielle de Mortillet (‘Le Signe de la
Croix,’ &c. pp. 88–89), who would assign a far earlier epoch.

Count Gozzadini[640] gives a valuable description of a fifth Etruscan
Sword lately discovered at the ‘Palazzino’ farm, parish of Ceretolo and
commune of Casalecchio, some ten kilomètres south-west of ‘Etruscan
Bologna.’ In an isolated tomb, carefully excavated by the proprietor
(Marchese Tommaso Boschi), was found a skeleton, the feet fronting
southwards. On its left, extending higher than the head, was an iron
lance-point,[641] and on the corresponding shoulder a thick armilla of
bronze; other objects, including an Etruscan Œnochoe, two knives wholly
iron, and a chisel of the same metal, lay scattered about the grave
which was not stone-revetted. Close to the right side was an iron Sword
in a sheath of the same metal and wanting the heft: the general belief
was that the weapon had been buried with the wielder.

Count Gozzadini (pp. 19, 20) describes the Sword as follows: ‘Slightly
bi-convex and two-edged, it measures 0·625 mètre from the tang
(_codolo_) to the end of the scabbard; the tang, not including the
part forming the grip, was 0·11 mètre. The breadth is 0·47 mètre at
the shoulders, narrowing to a point, as is proved by the scabbard
diminishing to 0·27 mètre at the end. The handle showed no sign of
cross-bars or guard, which would also have been of iron; and it is
evident that the haft was of some destructible substance which has
wholly disappeared. The probability is that the grip was shaped like
those of the preceding Bronze Age—that is, bulging out behind the
blade for easier hold. The sheath was somewhat more bi-convex than
the Sword; an iron-plate about one millimètre thick, had been turned
over horizontally to unite the edges, which, near one of the sides,
formed a narrow and gradual line of superposition. This scabbard ended
in an ovoid crampet or ferule; and a fragment of plate iron with a
short broad hook, like that generally used for attachment to the belt,
probably belonged to it.’

Here, then, we have again a perfect rapier. The only question is
whether it was Etruscan, or, as supposed by M. G. de Mortillet,
Gaulish.[642] Count Gozzadini argues ably to prove the former
case.[643] He acknowledges that the invading Boii held the city and
country for two centuries (B.C. 358–566), until the Romans expelled
them for ever. But he shows that these peoples did not use such fine
Swords. When treating of the Kelts (chapter xiii.), I shall show that
the long unmanageable slashing Claidab or Spatha of these peoples had
nothing in common with the strong, bi-convex, and thoroughly-civilised
rapier of Ceretolo.

Other blades like that of Ceretolo—long, narrow, and pointed—have
been found in tombs notably Etruscan. Such, for instance, was that of
Cære, now in the Gregorian Museum, Rome. In December 1879 two other
blades were produced by a necropolis in Valdichiana, between Chiusi
and Arezzo, where a long Etruscan inscription was engraved upon the
foot of a tazza. Two similar blades are also portrayed in relief
and colour upon the stuccoed wall of a Cære tomb. Des Vergers[644]
describes them as follows: ‘La frise supérieure est ornée d’Épées
longues à deux tranchants, à la lame large et droite avec garde à la
poignée, se rapprochant de celle que les Romains désignaient par le nom
de _spatha_. Les unes sont nues, les autres dans le fourreau.’ Four
such Swords were also produced at Pietrabbondante in the district of
far-famed Isernia, and are preserved in the National Museum of Naples.
Signor Campanari discovered in an Etruscan tomb a Sword-hilt in bronze
attached to a blade of iron.[645] Finally, the Benacci property near
the Certosa of Bologna also yielded an iron blade and iron chisels like
those of Ceretolo.

The late learned Prof. Conestabile truly asserts, ‘Des Épées de même
forme et de même dimension ont été trouvées dans d’autres localités
étrusques, situées dehors la sphère des invasions Gauloises, notamment
en Toscane.’ It is certain that such blades have been discovered on
both sides of the Alps. As the Romans adopted the Iberic or Spanish
blade; so the Gauls may have substituted for their own imperfect arms
the weapons taken from the Italians; in fact, we know from history
that they did so. Moreover, the Etruscans extended their commerce, not
only over Transalpine regions, but to that vast region extending from
Switzerland to Denmark, and from Wallachia to England and Ireland.[646]
This has been proved by the investigations of many scholars: in
Germany by Lindenschmidt, Von Sacken, Virchow, Kenner, Weihold, Von
Conhausen, and Genthe; by the Swiss Morlot, De Rougemont, Desor, and
De Bonstetten; by the Dane Worsäae; by Gray, Dennis, Hamilton, and
Wyllie in England; by the Belgian Schuermans; and by the Italians
Gozzadini, Conestabile, Garrucci, and Gamurrini. Desor, when receiving
the drawing of an iron Sword with bronze handle discovered at Sion, and
declared by Thioly to resemble exactly those of Hallstadt, declared:
‘De pareilles Épées sont évidemment fabriquées à l’étranger et non dans
le pays: elles nous conduisent donc vers ce grand commerce Étrusque
qui se faisait pendant la première époque de fer, époque sur laquelle
on s’est trompé si souvent.’ Livy,[647] in fact, proves the extent of
arms-manufactory in Etruria, when he relates that in B.C. 205, at which
time the Boiian occupation of Felsina ended, Arezzo alone could furnish
Scipio’s fleet in forty-five days with three thousand helmets, as many
Scuta and lances of three different kinds.

But the rapier was not the only form of Etruscan Sword. In Hamilton’s
‘Etruscan Antiquities,’[648] a human figure carries a cutting Sword
like a ‘hanger,’ wearing the belt at the bottom of the thorax. The
Céramique of Etruria supplies copious illustrations of Swords and other
weapons; but the art is somewhat mixed, and our safest information must
be derived from actual finds.

We are justified by these finds in concluding that the Etruscans
of Italy had from their earliest times a rapier which, for a
cut-and-thrust weapon, is well-nigh perfect. The blade is long, but
not too long; broad enough to be efficient without overweight, and
strengthened to the utmost by the mid-rib which forms a shallow arch.
In chapter xi. I shall compare the Etrurian Sword with that of Mycenæ;
the latter is a marvel of its kind, but it is made of a far inferior
metal—bronze.




                              CHAPTER X.

     THE SWORD IN BABYLONIA, ASSYRIA AND PERSIA, AND ANCIENT INDIA.


[Illustration: FIG. 202.—ASSYRIAN SWORD.]

Although Professor Lepsius maintained and proved that the earliest
Babylonian civilisation was imported from Egypt, Biblical leanings, and
the fatal practice of reading myths and mysteries as literal history,
have led many moderns to hold the Plain of Shinar (Babylon) and the
ancient head of the Persian Gulf to be the cradle of culture and the
origin of ‘Semitism.’ We still read, ‘Babylonia stands prominent as
highly civilised and densely populated at a period when Egypt was
still in her youthful prime.’[649] Only in Genesis (x. 10), a document
treating of later ethnology, we find mention of Erech,[650] Urukh
being the oldest traditional king of Babylon. On the other hand, the
Egyptians declared Belus and his subjects to have been an Egyptian
colony which taught the rude Babylonians astrology and other arts.
The monumental Babylonian or pre-Chaldæan Empire begins only in B.C.
2300, many a century—say a score—after Menes. The late Mr. George Smith
warns us that some scholars would make the annals ‘stretch nearly
two thousand years beyond that time’; but he expressly declares no
approximate date can be fixed for any king before Kara-Indas (circ.
B.C. 1475?–1450?). Also, ‘The great temples of Babylonia were founded
by the kings who preceded the conquest by Hammu-rabi, King of the
Kassi’ Arabs (sixteenth century B.C.).[651]

The Burbur or Accad inscriptions found in Babylonia do not date before
B.C. 2000. Ninus, the builder of Nineveh (Fish-town) and the founder
of the Assyrian dynasties, is usually placed between B.C. 2317 and
2116. An extract, by Alexander Polyhistor from the Armenian[652]
Chronicle, gives, by adding the dynasties, an origin-date of 2,317
years. Berosus the priest, declares from official documents, that
Babylon (God’s Gate) had regal annals 1,000 years before Solomon (B.C.
993–953), in whose reign dynastic Jewish history begins. Diodorus
Siculus, quoting Ctesias (B.C. 395) makes the monarchy commence one
thousand years before the Siege of Troy, which we may place about B.C.
1200. Æmilius Sura, quoted by Paterculus, proposes the date B.C. 2145,
and Eusebius the Armenian 1340 years before the first Olympiad (B.C.
776), or B.C. 2116. The great kingdom of the Khita (Hittites)[653]
was succeeded on the rich lowlands of the Tigris-Euphrates system by
Babylon, which the Nilotes called ‘Har,’ and by the Assyrians, whom the
Egyptians called Mat or the People, and hieroglyphs notice the ‘Great
King of the Mat.’ But [Cuneiform] Assur[654] was little known till the
decline of the Pharaohs in the Twenty-first Dynasty (B.C. 1100–966)
of the priest Hirhor and his successors: one of the latter—Ramessu or
Ramses XVI.—married, when dethroned, a daughter of Pallasharnes, the
‘great king of the Assyrians,’ whose capital was Nineveh,[655] and thus
led to the Assyrian invasions of Egypt.[656] We may, then, safely hold
with Lepsius that early Babylonian civilisation was posterior to, if
not imported from, Egypt.[657]

In Babylonia a third element, the so-called ‘Turanian’ (Chinese),
first emerged from Egyptian and began to take its part in the drama
of progress. The almost unknown quantity has assumed magnificent
proportions in the eyes of certain students, and great things are still
expected from Akkadian revelation. Yet the race typified by the Chinese
could have had no effect upon the learning of Egypt. ‘At the time
when the genealogical tables of Genesis were written (chap. x.) those
regions were still so unknown and barbarous that the writer excluded
them from the civilised world.’[658]

[Heading: _THE SWORD IN ASSYRIA._]

Our factual knowledge of Mesopotamian civilisation is mostly due to
the labours of the present century. Professor Grotefend of Bonn, in
1801–1803, discovered the clue to the Persian cuneiform,[659] cuneatic
or arrow-headed character. This great step in advance opened the
labyrinth to a host of minor explorers—Heeren (1815), Burnouf (1836),
Lassen (1836–44), Hincks, who attacked the Assyrian cuneiform, and,
to mention no more, Rawlinson, whose ‘Reading made Easy’ popularised
the study in England. Actual exploration of the Mesopotamian ruins was
begun by the learned Consul Botta (Dec. 1842) who, after failing at
Koyunjik opposite Mosul, worked successfully at Khorsabad, some ten
miles to the north-east: four years afterwards (Dec. 1846) the first
collection of Assyrian antiquities reached the Louvre. He was followed
(Nov. 8, 1845) by Mr. (now Sir) H. A. Layard, who unfortunately was not
an Orientalist: his various discoveries of a stamped-clay literature,
and his popular publications, introduced to the public Koyunjik and
Kal’at Ninawi (Nineveh), Hillah (Babylon), Warká, Sippara (Abu Nabbah)
sixteen miles south-west of Baghdad, and a variety of Biblical sites.

This ‘recovery’ of antiquities buried twenty centuries ago, and a whole
literature of bas-reliefs, enables us to compare the Nile Valley, the
cradle and mother-country of science and art, with its rival-successor
on the Tigris-Euphrates. The original workmanship of Assyria, like that
of Egypt, is still unknown; and, though she borrowed from Nile-land,
her art is rather a decadence than a rise. The difference, indeed, is
between the porphyries, the granites, and the syenites of Egypt, and
the mud-bricks, the coarse black marbles, the rough basalts, and the
undurable alabasters (a calcareous carbonate) of Interamnian Assyria.
But the industrious valley-men made the best of their poor material.
The ruins show the true Egyptian arch; the so-called Ionic capital, the
original volutes being goats’ horns;[660] the Caryatides and Atlantes,
or human figures acting columns; the cornice, corbel, and bracket;
with a host of architectural embellishments to fill up plain fields.
Apparently all migrated from Nile-land. Such were the winged circle,
the lotus,[661] the fir-cone, and the rosette: the latter, also found
by Dr. Schliemann at ‘Troy’ (p. 160), became the _rosa mystica_ of
Byzantine art, and was used by Christians to denote their origin.
Again, we have the key-pattern, which is Trojan and Chinese as well
as Greek; the honeysuckle, a symbol of the Homa or Assyrian ‘Tree of
Life’;[662] the guilloche-scroll or wave-pattern; and the meander,
also miscalled the Tuscan border: the latter is common in Egypt and
Cyprus, and possibly derives from the Hittite Svasti, erroneously
called Svastika.[663] Assyria equally excelled in literature,[664] in
painting, in sculpture, in the minor arts, and in metallurgy. She made
transparent glass: a crystal lens[665] found at Nineveh accounts for
the diminutive size of some inscriptions. Her sons worked enamel, and
thus adorned the humble brick: like their Egyptian teachers, they were
skilful in ivory-carving, in cutting cylinders of jasper and _pietra
dura_, and in gem-engraving on carnelian, onyx, sardonyx, amethyst,
agate, chalcedony, and lapis lazuli.

As regards Assyrian metallurgy, few articles of iron have been found
in the river-valley’s damp and nitrous soil, but the metal is denoted,
as in Egypt, by a blue tint, and the god Ninib is termed the ‘lord
of the iron coat.’ Gold and silver were profusely used as ornaments.
Lead was dug in the Montes Gordæi (Kurd Mountains) near Mosul, the
original Ararat of ‘Noah’s ark.’ Copper vessels, bright as gold when
polished, were found in the palaces of Nimrúd: the ore was brought
from the northern highlands heading the Tigris Valley, where the
Arghana ma’adan (Diyar-i-Bekr mine) long supplied the Ottoman Empire.
The place that exported their tin is disputed.[666] They worked well
in bronze: of this alloy many castings have been found: utensils,
as pots and cauldrons, cups, forks and spoons, dishes, and plates,
plain and ornamented; tools, as picks, nails, and saws; thin plates;
the so-called razors;[667] lamps; weapons; an ægis-like object also
found in Egypt; lance-heads, shields, and door-sockets each weighing
six pounds and three and three-quarter ounces.[668] The bronze gates
of Balawat, with plates eight feet long showing the triumphs of
Shalmaneser II. (B.C. 884–850), attest high art. Layard supplied the
British Museum with many iron articles from the north-western palace
at Nimrúd, and some had iron cores round which bronze had been cast
for economy. Amongst them were iron chain-armour, two rusty helmets
ornamented with bronze; picks, hammers, knives, and saws.[669] The
approximate date may be assumed at B.C. 880.

[Illustration: FIG. 203.—ASSYRIAN LANCE WITH COUNTER-WEIGHT.]

[Illustration: FIG. 204.—ASSYRIAN SPEAR-HEAD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 205.—ASSYRIAN ‘RAZOR.’

A sickle-shaped tool from a bas-relief. A similar weapon in iron, found
at Pæstum in Lucania, is preserved in the Musée d’Artillerie at Paris.]

In mimic war (hunting) the Assyrians were proficients. Many hundreds
of bas-reliefs, which are more natural because less conventional
than those of Egypt, illustrate the chase of the lion, stag, and
jungle-swine; the wild horse, ass, and bull. They were equally skilled
in the art of war, which is shown in all its phases, the march, the
passage of streams, the siege, the battle, the sea-fight, or rather
the river-fight, the pursuit, and the punishment of prisoners by
torturing, impaling, flaying alive, crucifixion, and ‘tree-planting’
or vivi-interment. The abominable cruelties of these Asiatics, still
practised by the Persian, the Kurd, and the ‘unspeakable’ Turk,
contrast strongly with the mildness of the African Egyptians. Their
walls, single or double, were provided with the fosse and the rampart,
and with machicolations, crenelles, and battlements; the last two
originally shields like the Egyptian cartouche. The _places fortes_
were attacked by the wheeled tower,[670] the iron-pointed battering
ram, the scaling ladder, and the pavoise, or large shield common
throughout Europe in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.[671] In
the field pennons are attached to the lances, and the standard-bearers
carry eagles. The action begins with missiles, slings, darts, and
arrows; the mace and spear then play their part, and the Sword is
never absent. The warriors—who appear on foot or horseback, with
gorgeous caparisons, in chariots or swimming with floats of inflated
skins—wear helmets of many shapes, crested, crescented, capped with
the _fleur-de-lys_ and perfectly plain; some are close-fitting with
ear-flaps, the common skull-cap (_namms_) of Ancient Egypt, and the
Indian Kan-top. The head-gear usually ended in a metal point—the
_pickelhaube_. The sculptors show imbricated armour or hauberks
(mail-coats) of the Norman type, with stockings of iron- (?) rings,
gaiters, and boots laced up in front. The shields, either circular or
rounded at the top and straight at the bottom, cover the whole body.

[Heading: _THE ASSYRIAN SWORD._]

The Assyrian Sword, like the Egyptian, is of four principal shapes.
One, a long poniard of Nilotic form, is carried by all classes from
king to slinger. The other (_Malmulla_, ? fig. 206, 3), by some
translated ‘falchion,’ appears slightly curved, not like the Turkish
scymitar, but with the half-bend of the Japanese and the Indian
Talwár. The curved blades in the bas-reliefs mostly characterise
conquered peoples. The third is the Sa-pa-ra or Khopsh, of which an
illustration will be given (p. 208); and the fourth is a club-shaped
blade thickening at the end, which is almost pointless.[672] In the
cuneiforms a ‘double Sword’ is often mentioned: it may be of the kind
called by the Greeks ‘Chelidonian’ (chap. ix. and xi.).[673] Fancy
weapons appear in the bas-reliefs—for instance, the Sword from the
Nineveh palace of the Sardanapalus-reign, B.C. 1000 (fig. 210).

[Illustration: FIG. 206.—1. BABYLONIAN BRONZE DAGGER; 2, 3. ASSYRIAN
SWORDS (Layard); 4. ASSYRIAN BRONZE SWORD (bas-relief in Palace of
Khorsabad, reign of Sargon, B.C. 721–706).]

[Illustration: FIG. 207.—DAGGER-SWORD IN SHEATH.]

[Illustration: FIG. 208.—DAGGER-SWORD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 209.—CLUB-SWORD.]

[Illustration: FIG. 210.—FANCY SWORD.]

Mostly the weapons have richly decorated hilts and scabbards. In a
royal sculpture the pommel is formed by a mound or hemisphere—a
constant ornament—and below it is a ball between two flat discs: the
upper jaws of two lions, placed opposite each other, embrace the blade
and the grip where it presses against the metal sheath-mouth. Another
has a lion’s head on the handle. The two-lion scabbard is common, and
sometimes the beasts are locked in a death embrace. In another specimen
the royal blade is much broader than usual, and two lions couchant form
the ferrule, embracing the sheath with their paws and retrogardant or
bending their heads backwards (fig. 212). The ferrule of another is
enriched with a guilloche. In the inscriptions of Assur-bani-pal[674]
(Sardanapalus) we read of a ‘steel Sword and its sheath of gold,’ and
of ‘steel Swords of their girdles.’ Another legend runs—‘He lifted his
great Sword called “Lord of the Storm,”’ proving that the Sword, like
the horse, the chariot, the boat, and other favourites, had names and
titles.

[Illustration: FIG. 211.—ASSYRIAN SWORDS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 212.—ASSYRIAN SWORDS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 213.—ASSYRIAN DAGGER.]

The dagger is often decorated with the head of the hippopotamus (a
Nilotic, or rather African, beast) surmounting an imbricated handle
(fig. 213).[675] This poniard is worn in the girdle, and in some cases
it appears under and behind the surcoat. The longer weapon is carried
by a narrow bauldric slung over the right shoulder and meeting another
cord-shaped band at the breast, in fact suggesting our antiquated
cross-belts. The Sword is always worn on the left side.[676] A royal
Sword-belt bears several ranges of bosses and globules, which may be
pearls: that of the eunuch-attendant has three wide rows, the central
broken here and there by round plates. A Magian wears a broad scarf
with long hanging fringes cast obliquely over the left shoulder: it is
edged with a triple series of small rosettes placed in squares, and it
passes over the Sword, to which, perhaps, it acts bauldric. A soldier’s
bauldric is coloured red, like the wood of the bows and arrows. Another
eunuch wears the Sword-belt buckled over the waist-sash, and holds in
his right hand a scourge: this was the emblem of official rank, as the
Egyptian carried a hide-Kurbáj.[677] Another soldier has, besides the
Kamar-band (waist-sash), a red belt, and what seems to be its tassels
hanging from the shoulders before and behind.

[Illustration: FIG. 214.—ASSYRIO-BABYLONIAN ARCHER in war coat,
leggings, and fillet. Bas-relief, B.C. 700. (Museum of the Louvre.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 215.—ASSYRIAN FOOT SOLDIER with the coat, helmet
and tall crest, greaves or leggings, target and lance. Bas-reliefs of
Nineveh of Sardanapalus V. B.C. 700.]

[Illustration: FIG. 216.—ASSYRIAN SOLDIER HUNTING GAME. Bas-relief of
Khorsabad, of the reign of Sargon. (British Museum.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 217.—FOOT SOLDIER OF THE ARMY OF SENNACHERIB (B.C.
712–707). From a bas-relief in the British Museum. The shape of the
conical helmet is modern Persian; the coat and leggings appear to be of
mail; the shield is round, large, and very convex.]

[Illustration: FIG. 218.—ASSYRIAN WARRIOR, WITH SWORD AND STAFF.]

[Illustration: FIG. 219.—ASSYRIAN WARRIORS AT A LION HUNT.]

[Illustration: FIG. 220.—ASSYRIAN EUNUCH. In mail-coat, with mace, bow,
and dagger-Sword.]

[Heading: _THE SWORD IN ASSYRIA._]

The Sword and the Sword-dagger seem to have been universally used
in Assyria—none but captives and working men are without them. The
vulture-headed ‘Nisroch the god’ (of Nebuchadnezzar) carries two long
poniards in his breast garment, whereas Ashur in statues shoots his
bow. Assur-bani-pal ‘destroys the people of Arabia with his Sword.’
The king in his car, with his Cidaris (tiara) and fly-flap, has two
daggers and a Sword in his girdle, from which hang cords and tassels.
Another rests his right hand upon a staff, and his left upon the
pommel of his weapon. A third plunges a short straight blade, like the
matador’s _espada_, between the second and third vertebræ of a wild
bull, where the spinal cord is most assailable: this would be done
to-day in the spectacula of Spain. Swords are worn by the magi and the
eunuchs;[678] and one of the latter draws his weapon to cut off a head.
The body-guard bears by his side a Sword longer than usual, and holds
arrows and other weapons for his lord’s use. Even the executioner does
his work with the Sword.

Happily for students, an ancient Assyrian bronze Sword was bought by
Colonel Hanbury from the Bedawin at Nardin.[679] He could not ascertain
whence it originally came, but it was probably placed in the hands of a
statue, perhaps of Maruduk (Mars, father of Nebo or Mercury[680]): it
certainly resembles those with which the god is represented upon the
Cylinders[681] when fighting with the Dragon. The dimensions are:

  Length of blade    16 inches
  Length of hilt      5⅜  „
  Total length       21⅜  „
  Width at hilt       1⅛  „
  Width at hilt base  1⅞  „

The weapon has a richly jewelled hilt inlaid with ivory. It is of the
kind known in the Assyrian inscriptions as [Cuneiform] (Sa-pa-ra).[682]
It bears the following (cuneiform) inscription in three places: (1)
along the whole length of the flat blade, inside edge; (2) along the
back; and (3) on the outside edge, where it is divided into two lines:—

    E-kal Vul-nirari sar kissati abli Bu-di-il Sar Assuri
    Abli Bel-nirari Sar Assuri va—

  (The Palace of Vul-nirari, King of Nations, son of Budil,[683]
  Sar (king) of Assyria, son of Bel-nirari, Sar of Assyria, and—)

[Illustration: FIG. 221.—BRONZE SWORD BEARING THE NAME OF VUL-NIRARI
I., FOUND NEAR DIARBEKR.]

[Heading: _THE SWORD IN PERSIA._]

And now, proceeding east, we may note that the Persepolis sculptures
distinctly show, as we might expect, Assyrian and Babylonian
derivation. The Persians are, despite their prodigious pretensions,
a comparatively modern people,[684] and they were rude enough when
armed only with sling, lasso, and knife. The date of Hakhámanish
(Achæmenes), the _hero eponymus_ of the ruling family, can hardly be
made to precede B.C. 700. This was about the time (B.C. 721–706) when
Sargon II. first mentions the Greeks as the Yaha of Yatnan (Yunan =
Ionia), who sent him tribute from Cyprus and beyond. The Medes, before
the reign of Cyaxares had conducted the Persians from the Caspian
regions into Media Magna, were mere barbarians, like the Iliyát or
Iranian nomades of the present day, who number from a quarter to a
half of the population. But in starting into life Persia succeeded to
a rich inheritance—Babylon. To this conquest (B.C. 538) she was led
by her hero king, Cyrus the Great, or rather Kurush[685] the elder,
son of Cambyses (Xenophon), not father of Cambyses (Herodotus), and a
contemporary of Darius the Mede.[686] Their courage and conduct, their
loyalty and simplicity, their wise laws, their generosity and their
love of truth,[687] now unhappily extinct, raised them in Herodotus’
day to the proud position of ‘Lords of Asia.’

[Illustration: FIG. 222.—PERSIAN ARCHER. From a bas-relief of
Persepolis, the ancient capital of Persia (B.C. 560). The long coat,
probably of leather, descends to the ankle. The headdress has nothing
of the helmet, but nevertheless indicates workmanship in metal.]

[Illustration: FIG. 223.—PERSIAN WARRIOR. From a bas-relief of
Persepolis; a cast is in the British Museum. The shield, high enough
to rest on, is almost hemispherical; the helmet, with ear and neck
coverings in one single piece, differs from the Assyrian.]

[Illustration: FIG. 224.—THE PERSIAN CIDARIS, OR TIARA.]

Between the bas-reliefs of Khorsabad and those of Persepolis there
is the same difference as between the early Egyptian sculptures and
the degenerate days of what Macrobius calls the ‘tyranny’ of the
Ptolemies.[688] The drawing is less pure, the forms are heavier, the
anatomical details are wanting or badly indicated—they are, in fact,
clumsy imitations of far higher models.

Herodotus (VII. ch. lx.-lxxxiii.), when reviewing the army of Xerxes
(Khshhershe = Ahasuerus[689]) in B.C. 480, numbers forty-five
nations, of which only the six (including Colchians and Caspians)
wore Swords. The long straight dagger was carried by the Pactyans,
by the Paphlagonians, by the Thracians, and by the Sagartians, who
spoke Persian, and who were in dress half Persians and half Pactyans
(Afghans?).[690] The Sagartian Nomades (chap. lxxxv.) were armed with
a short blade and with lassos of plaited thongs ending in a running
noose: this denotes that they were cattle-breeders.[691] Chapter liv.
again mentions ‘the Persian Sword of the kind which they call ἀκινάκης
(Akinakes):’ like the Roman _pugio_ and the modern _couteau-de-chasse_,
it was straight, not curved, as expressly stated by Josephus.[692] The
Persian troops wore only these ‘daggers suspended from their girdles
along their right thighs.’ Hence Cambyses died of a wound on his right
side, and Valerius Flaccus describes a Parthian as—

    Insignis manicis, insignis acinace dextro. (_Arg._ vi. 701.)

Julius Pollux explains it as a περσικὸν ξιφίδιον, τῷ μηρῷ προσηρτημένον
(a Persian swordlet fastened to the thigh), and Josephus compares it
with the Sica or Sicca.[693] The favourite weapon was the bow, although
Darius speaks of the Sword as the instrument of punishment.

[Illustration: FIG. 225.—PERSIAN ACINACES. (Here worn on right side.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 226.—PERSIAN ACINACES.]

[Illustration: FIG. 227.—SWORD FROM MITHRAS GROUP.]

[Illustration: FIG. 228.—SWORD IN RELIEF, PERSEPOLIS SCULPTURES.]

The Indians, afterwards so celebrated for their Swords, were in B.C.
480 barbarians dressed in cottons and armed with only cane bows and
arrows. Of the twelve peoples who supplied the one thousand two
hundred and seven triremes, the Egyptians had long cutlasses, the
Cilicians ‘Swords closely resembling the cutlass of the Egyptians,’ the
Lycians[694] daggers and curved falchions, and the Carians daggers and
‘enses falcati,’ which apparently were not used by the Greeks (chap.
xciii.).

[Illustration: FIG. 229.—PERSIAN ACINACES. From a bas-relief at
Persepolis.]

[Illustration: FIG. 230.—DAGGER-FORMS FROM PERSEPOLIS.]

Representations of the Persian Acinaces abound in the sculptures
of Chehel Munar (the Palace of the Forty Columns) at Persepolis.
Apparently there are two kinds. Porter’s[695] illustration (Plate 37)
shows a handle like the modern weapon sheathed and slung to the right
side: Ammianus Marcellinus (xiv. 4) and all classics insist upon this
unswordsmanlike peculiarity.[696] The other (Plate 41), worn by a robed
Persian, and generally carried in the front-knots of the belt, has a
crutch-handle and wavy blade, like the Malay Krís (crease). In other
places (Plates 53 and 54) a human figure stabs the roaring monster in
the belly with a common ‘Khanjar’-dagger. The traveller considers the
stout little weapon with broad blade and ferruled sheath apparently
tied to the right thigh as the Persian Sword of that age, which the
classics describe as very short. The lineal descendant of this weapon,
now obsolete in Persia, is the Afghan Charay, a congener of the
Egyptian flesh-knife Sword.

According to Quintus Curtius: ‘The Sword-belt of Darius was of gold,
and from it was suspended his scymitar, the scabbard of which was
composed of one entire pearl.’ The practice of inlaying blades and
hilts, still popular in Persia, may explain Herodotus (ix. 80), that
amongst the spoils taken at Platæa by the Greeks ‘there were acinaces
with golden ornaments.’ That of Mardonius was long kept as a trophy
in the temple of Athene-Parthenos in the Athenian Acropolis. On the
other hand, as was elsewhere done, blades of gold were given _honoris
causâ_. Hence in the ‘Iliad’ (xviii. 597) we see Hephæstus making
youths with golden cutlasses upon Achilles’ shield. According to
Xenophon the royal gift of Persia was a golden scymitar, a Nisæan horse
with golden bridle, and other battle-gear. Herodotus (viii. 120) makes
Xerxes present the Abderites with a golden scymitar and a tiara, Diana
is girt with a golden falchion (Herod. viii. 77). The golden blade is
not unknown to more modern days. In the ‘Chronicles of Dalboquerque’
(Hakluyt, vol. ii. p. 204) two pages stand behind the King of Cananor,
one with a Sword of gold and the other with a scymitar of gold. The
weapons are distinguished from the ‘Swords adorned with gold and
silver’ (vol. i. 117). The King of Siam also sent to Dom Manoel of
Portugal ‘a crown and Sword of gold’ (vol. iii. 154). Cuzco supplied a
unique gold celt.

[Illustration: FIG. 231.—ACINACES OF PERSEPOLIS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 232.—ACINACES OF MITHRAS GROUP.]

The influence of the great Babylonio-Assyrian centre extended Egyptian
art and science to farthest Asia. From Iran we pass, with the
course of civilisation, eastward to India. Here the Hindú proper did
not succeed in establishing himself amongst the original Turanian
possessors of Hindustan, or the upper country, before the Eighteenth
Egyptian Dynasty.[697] The South was and is still essentially
Turanian—witness Malabar and its ‘nepotism.’

[Heading: THE SWORD IN INDIA.]

Unfortunately, India preserves no trustworthy Hindú records of the
past. Although Herodotus called it the ‘most wealthy and populous
country in the world,’ yet the absence of temples and other ruins
suggests barbarism when Egypt and Assyria, Greece and Rome,
were flourishing. While Buddhism is made to date from the sixth
century B.C., and we have subsequent notices of Buddha’s chief
worshippers,[698] there was evidently very little civilisation in the
days of Alexander (B.C. 327). Nearchus made the Indians ‘write letters
on cloth smoothed by being well beaten’; and Strabo (xv. 1) doubts
whether India knew the use of writing. They derived their art and
literature from Græco-Bactria, and they only degraded the former—Art
in her highest form never travels far from the Mediterranean. The
beautiful human animals and _mauvais sujets_ who were the citizens
of Olympus became in grotesque India blue-skinned, many-headed and
multi-armed monsters—the abortions of imagination.

India’s two great epics (‘Mahabhárat’ and ‘Ramáyana’) and fifteen
Puranas are mere depositories of legendary and imaginative myths,
containing few of the golden grains of truth hid in tons of rubbish.
All the anthropology we learn from them is that India had a primitive
(Turanian?) race, called in contempt Rakshasas or demons. It was
mastered by Brahminical attacks, typified in later days by Rama and
other heroes, probably during the exodes of Hyksos and Hebrews from
Egypt; and long subsequently arose Buddhism, to be followed by the rule
of the Moslems and Europeans.[699]

The Dhanurvidya,[700] or Bow-Science, contains the fullest description
we possess of the ancient Indian arms and war-implements, but the date
of composition is exceedingly doubtful. The Hindú delights in vast
numbers. Assuming the population of the earth at one thousand and
seventy-five billions, his Aksauhini, or complete army, according to
the Nitiprakáshika, an abstract Dhanurvidya by the sage Vaishampáyana,
amounts to two thousand one hundred and eighty-seven millions of foot,
twenty-one thousand eight hundred and seventy millions of horse, two
hundred and eighteen thousand seven hundred elephants, and twenty-one
thousand eight hundred and seventy chariots. The scale of salaries in
gold[701] is equally liberal and absurd.

The Hindú mind—so far justifying the term ‘Indo-Germanic’—connects
everything with metaphysics,[702] or a something that goes beyond
physical phenomena. Hence it ascribes all arms and armour to
supernatural causes. Jáyá, a daughter of primæval Daksha (one of the
Rishis or sacred sages), became, according to a promise of Brahma,
the creator, the mother of all weapons, including missiles. These
are divided into four great classes. The Yantramukta (thrown by
machines); the Panimukta (hand-thrown); the Muktasandhárita (thrown and
drawn back) and the Mantramukta (thrown by spells, and numbering six
species), form the Mukta or thrown class of twelve species. This is
opposed to the Amukta (unthrown) of twenty species, to the Muktámukta
(either thrown or not) of ninety-eight varieties,[703] and to the
Báhuyuddha (weapons which the body provides for personal struggles).
All are personified—for instance, Dhanu, the bow, has a small face,
a broad neck, a slender waist, and a strong back. He is four cubits
high and is bent in three places; he has a long tongue, and his mouth
has terrible tusks; his colour is of blood, and he ever makes a
gurgling noise; he is covered with garlands of entrails, and he licks
continually with his tongue the two corners of his mouth.[704]

The Sword (Khadga,[705] As, or Asi) belongs to the second class.
According to the sage Vaishampáyana it was a superior weapon,
introduced especially and separately by Brahma, who produced
‘Asidevatá.’ This ‘Sword-god’ appeared on the summit of the Himálayas
shaking earth’s foundations and illuminating the sky. Brahma entrusted
the arm, then fifty thumbs long and four thumbs broad, to Shiva
(Rudra), still its supreme deity, in order to free the world from the
Asuras or mighty dæmons. Shiva, after his success, passed it on to
Vishnu, the latter to Marici, and he to Indra. The Air-god conferred
it upon the guardians of the World-quarters, and these to Manu, the
son of the Sun, for use against evil-doers. Since that time it has
remained in his family. The Khadga has a total of nine names: carried
on the left side and handled in thirty-two different ways, the weapon
became a universal favourite. Amongst the four arts to be studied
besides the Káma-Shastra (_Ars Amoris_), women are enjoined by the
Sage Vatsya (Part I. p. 26)[706] to practise with Sword, single-stick,
quarterstaff, and bow and arrow.’

The Ili (hand-sword, p. 17) is two cubits long and five fingers
broad; the front part is curved; there is no hand-guard, and four
movements are peculiar to it. The Prasa, or spear, in some works
becomes a broadsword. The uterine brother of the Sword is the Pattisha
or two-bladed battle-axe. The Asidhenu (dagger), the ‘sister of the
Sword and worn by kings,’ is a three-edged blade, one cubit long, two
thumbs broad, without hand-guard, carried in the belt, and used in
hand-to-hand conflict. The Maushtika (fist-Sword, stiletto[707]) is
only a span long, and thus very handy for all kinds of movements.

[Illustration: FIG. 233.—HINDÚ WARRIORS

  From memorial stones of Bijanagar, of which the Kensington
  Museum possesses photographs. The date of these monuments
  corresponds with our Middle Ages.]

[Illustration: FIG. 234.—_a._ JAVANESE BLADE, SHOWING INDIAN
DERIVATION. _b._ HINDÚ SABRE. From a bas-relief at Bijanagar.]

The sage Vaishampáyana, a pandit or pedant lecturing on the Art of
War, warns us that the ‘Efficiency of the weapon is subject to great
changes. In different ages and places the quality of an arm is not the
same, for the material and mode of construction greatly vary. Moreover,
much depends upon the strength and ability of the person using such
weapons, in preserving, increasing, or diminishing their efficiency.’
It may also be remarked that many of his weapons appear to be the
results of a brain quickened by opium or hashísh.

The sage Shukra, or Preceptor of the Dæmons, also discourses learnedly,
in his ‘Shukraniti,’ on armies and weapons, including firearms.
The only practical part of chap. v. (Oppert, pp. 82–144) is his
description of the lucky and unlucky marks on horses. The Arabs have a
similar system, and a horse with inauspicious signs sells, however well
bred, for a small sum. And there is wisdom in verse 242 (p. 124):—

    A non-fighting King and a ne’er-faring Priest (Brahman)
    Earth swallows as Snake the hole-dwelling beast.

As regards the Sword, Shukra says (Lib. iv. sect. vii. p. 109, verse
154):—

    Ishadvaktrashcaikadháro vistáre chaturangulah
    Kshurapránto nábhisamo drahamushtissucandraruk
    Khadgah prasáshchaturhastadandabudhnah ksuránanah.

The Sword is a little curved and one-bladed; it is four-fingers broad,
and sharp-pointed as a razor; it extends up to the navel, has a strong
hilt, and is brilliant as the beautiful moon. The Khadga (two-handed
Sword) is four cubits (or six feet) long,[708] broad at the hilt, and
at the end-point sharp like a razor.

[Illustration: FIG. 235.—BATTLE-SCENE FROM A CAVE IN CUTTACK, FIRST
CENTURY A.D.]

From neither of these works do we learn anything about an interesting
subject—the elephant-Sword. It is mentioned by the Italian traveller
Ludovico di Varthema (A.D. 1503–1508), who makes it two fathoms long
and attached to the trunk. Athanasius Nikitin calls it a scythe. Knox
in his ‘Ceylon’ also speaks of a sharp iron with a socket of three
edges ‘placed on the teeth’ (tusks?). It was probably derived from
the West. Antigonus, the great elephantarch; Seleucus, and Pyrrhus
armed their beasts with ‘sharp points of steel in the tusks’—veritable
Swords. In Da Gama’s day each animal wore ten blades, five to the
tusk.[709]

It must be borne in mind that upper India about the beginning of our
æra was mostly Buddhist, and consequently she bred men of peace.
Yet the caves and the cave-temples supply in bas-relief specimens
of Sword-bearers, and even of free fights. The weapon is mostly the
short stout blade, corresponding with the Persian Acinaces, but worn
in modern fashion on the left side. Mr. James Fergusson has kindly
supplied me with two illustrations. The first (fig. 235) is the
battle-scene showing two Swords. A huge chopper or falchion, with a
tooth on the back, is wielded in the left hand, the right supporting
the shield.[710] The other, straight with one median ridge, is broad
at the end instead of being pointed. The second (fig. 236), which Mr.
Fergusson calls the ‘first Highlander,’ is of the same date, and it
shows very distinctly the handle—which might be modern—the sheath, and
the mode of wearing. It is more distinct in the photograph than in the
woodcut made by the author’s artist.

[Illustration: FIG. 236.—THE FIRST HIGHLANDER.]

[Illustration: FIG. 237.—ARJUNA’S SWORD.]

The temple-caves of Elephanta or Gharapuri (cave-town) in the Bay of
Bombay, described by Forbes and Heber, Dr. Wilson and Mr. Burgess,
show a very different and superior article. This comparatively
modern basilica—burrowed out of the rock and dedicated to Shiva or
Mahadeva, the third person of the Hindu Triad, and the representative
of destructive-reproduction in his Trimurti or triple form—contains
a multitude of alt-reliefs from ten to fourteen feet high, and so
prominent that they are almost ‘undercut,’ joined to the parent-rock
only by the back. At the north-east angle stands the figure of the hero
Arjuna, the presumed ancestor of the Pandya Princes. This Brave, an
especial favourite in Southern India,[711] holds, in the right hand,
perpendicularly and point upwards, a short, straight blade, with a
bevelled point like the Roman; there is a small hand-guard; the fist
fills the grip, and the large pommel confines the hand, as is still the
fashion throughout India.

[Illustration: FIG. 238.—JAVANESE SCULPTURES WITH BENT SWORDS.]

The military tactics of the earlier Hindús are familiarly shown by our
game of chess.[712] But their pandits and students, writing in the
closet, borrowed or devised a whole body of ‘strategemata,’ making it
easy to find amongst them the Phalanx, the Legion, the Wedge, or the
Crescent attack.

[Illustration: FIG. 239.—PESHÁWAR SCULPTURES.]

Professor Oppert informs us[713] that the Arka (_Calatropis gigantea_),
the huge swallow-wort with milky and blistering juice, which grows wild
all over the peninsula, if ‘used with discretion when iron is being
forged, contributes greatly to the excellence of the Indian steel.’
The simple is well known to the native alchemist, to the doctor, and
to the vet., but I was not aware of its being generally applied to
iron-working.

I reserve for Part II. details concerning the modern Indian Sword
and the blades imitated from it. Lieutenant-Colonel Pollok (Madras
Staff Corps)[714] describes, unfortunately without illustration, the
Burmese Dalwel (‘Dalwey,’ vol. ii. p. 18) or fighting-Sword, a ‘nasty
two-handed weapon with a blade about two feet long, and as sharp as a
razor’ (i. 51). He also notices the Dha, or Dhaw, a knife six inches
long, equally fitted for domestic use and stabbing.

  NOTE.—My lamented friend Dr. Burnell, whose loss to
  Anglo-Oriental philology is so deeply felt, took a notable
  part in reducing Hindú claims to remote antiquity. Whereas Sir
  William Jones, a _littérateur_ thoroughly well imposed upon,
  dated the Laws of Menu from A.D. 1280, Burnell boldly assigned
  them to the fourth century A.D., and partly to a much later
  period. The Theatre of Kalidása (Sakuntala, Urwasi, &c.) he
  has attributed to the sixth century instead of the first; in
  fact he leaves nothing to B.C. but parts of the Vedas and the
  earliest Buddhist texts.

  We can accept the reform unhesitatingly. The oldest Hindú
  inscription (Girnár) dates from about B.C. 250; the oldest
  Cave-temple from still later. The alphabet is a lineal
  descendant from the Egypto-Phœnician. The earliest Hindú
  buildings were wooden: India had no architecture which could
  vie with those of Greece or monarchical Rome, much less
  with the mighty works of Egypt and Mesopotamia. The Hindú’s
  ‘iron-built’ cities were probably clay-walled settlements.
  His mythology was Egyptian tempered with Greek: for instance,
  the four Yugas or periods, in the fourth of which (Kali, the
  black Yuga) we now are. And considering how early Christianity
  found its way into the Peninsula, and the highly subjective
  and receptive nature of the people, I cannot but believe
  that they borrowed largely from the sacred writings of the
  stranger. It is easier to hold that Christ originated, or at
  least influenced, Krishna, than with Volney to hold Krishna
  the original of Christ. In 1852 Mr. Pocock wrote about ‘India
  in Greece’; in 1883 we want a change of venue to ‘Greece in
  India.’ ‘Yavana’ (Greek) entered India with Alexander, and this
  gives a _terminus a quo_ though not _ad quem_.




                              CHAPTER XI.

   THE SWORD IN ANCIENT GREECE: HOMER; HESIOD AND HERODOTUS: MYCENÆ.


‘Homer and Hesiod,’ says Herodotus,[715] ‘lived, as I hold, not more
than four hundred years before my time.’ This would date them between
B.C. 880–830. The contemporaneity of the bards, their cousinship, and
even their existence, has been copiously doubted: some place Hesiod
before, others two hundred or three hundred years after—

    Blind Milesigenes thence Homer called;

and we have come to look upon Homer as one of the Homeridæ, the _heros
eponymus_ of the bards who produced the ‘Iliad’ and the ‘Odyssey.’

Assuming, with Dr. Schliemann, the date of the Trojan war at about B.C.
1200,[716] Homer, according to the ‘Father of History,’ would flourish
about four centuries and a half after the wars he sang.

‘I wish I could have proved Homer to have been an eye-witness of
the Trojan war. Alas, I cannot do it! At his time swords were of
universal use, and iron was known, whereas they were totally unknown at
Troy.[717] Besides, the civilisation he describes is later by centuries
than that which I have brought to light in the excavations. Homer
gives us the legend of Ilium’s tragic fate as it was handed down to
him by preceding bards, clothing the traditional facts of the war and
destruction of Troy in the garb of his own day.’[718]

Metallurgically speaking, the sacred Bards and Heroes of Hellas,
whose works formed the Holy Writ of Greece,[719] lived at the height
of the Copper and in the beginning of the Iron Ages. Metal, not yet
cast (χωνευτόν), would be worked in primitive fashion with the hammer
(σφῦρα = σφυρήλατον),[720] and there were two manners of hammer-work,
the Holosphyraton, in solid mass, and the Sphyraton or plate-work.
Casting and soldering were invented (for the Greeks), according to
Pausanias[721] and Pliny,[722] shortly after Homer’s day by the Samians
Rhœcus and Theodorus. The latter, who lived between B.C. 800 and 700,
may have introduced core-casting, so well known to Egypt and Assyria.
The joints would be united by the normal mechanical means,[723] and the
ornamental house-plates would be attached to the walls and floors with
nails and studs. The idea of the firmament being a copper dome vault
is known to Pindar as well as to the ‘Iliad’ and the ‘Odyssey.’[724]
Tartarus, below Hades,[725] had a similar threshold, and Atlas in
Euripides had copper shoulders.[726]

Ornamentation (δαιδάλλειν) was applied with gravers, burins, and
similar instruments; to domestic implements (cups and goblets, craters
or bowls, cauldrons and tripods); to sacred vases for the temple; and
to trumpets,[727] arms, and armour. Besides the brazier (χαλκεὺς) we
find the gold caster (χρυσοχοός) who gilds the bull’s horns.[728]

The Homeric bards[729] and Hesiod are well acquainted with iron
(σίδηρος),[730] and with steel in its various forms—Cyanus, Adámas,
and Chalyps. The former mentions seven metals, the Haft-Júsh (‘seven
boilings’), which he, like the Persians, had learned from Egypt.
Quenching in water, or tempering, was well known to the ‘Odyssey,’ as
we learn from the sputtering of Polyphemus’ eye[731]:—

    And as when armourers temper in the ford
    The keen-edg’d poleaxe, or the shining sword,
    The red-hot metal hisses in the lake, &c.[732]

And he would, doubtless, know that steel is softened by simple
exposure to gradual heating. _Síderos_ is common wrought iron; so we
find σιδήρεον for the Iron Age[733] and σίδηρος πολιός,[734] which
should be translated, not ‘hoary,’ but ‘iron-grey.’ The ‘black’
(dark-blue) ‘Cyanus’ κύανος mentioned by the ‘Iliad,’[735] would be
a fusible or artificial steel made to imitate the true blue-stone or
lazulite (Theophrastus, 55).[736] The adamas (ἀδάμας) of Hesiod,[737]
who specifies the iron of the Cretan Idæi Dactyli, would be a white
and tempered metal; while χάλυψ (steel in general) either named or was
named by the well-known Chalybes. That the harder substance was not
rare, we see by the injunction,[738] ‘Do not, at a festive banquet of
the gods, pare from the five-pointed branch (hand) with bright steel,
the dry from the fresh’: i.e. don’t cut your nails at dinner. So at
the Battle of the Ships,[739] Homer studs a great sea-fighting Xyston
(pole), twenty-two cubits long, with spikes of iron; and elsewhere
speaks of a ‘cyanus-footed table.’[740]

Yet copper was _the_ metal for arms and armour. While the shield of
Hercules was made of alabaster (not ‘gypsum’), ivory, elektron (the
mixed metal) and (pure) gold, the hero is armed with a ‘short spear
tipped with gleaming copper’;[741] and he fastens around his shoulders
a ‘Sword, the averter of destruction,’ which the context suggests to
be of the same material. The ‘fair-haired Danaë’s son, equestrian
Perseus,’[742] bears a Sword of copper with iron sheath hanging by a
felt-thong (μελάνδετον ἄορ).[743] The seven-hide shield of Ajax[744]
was χάλκεος, of copper—not ‘brass-bound’ as Lord Derby has it. The
lambs’ throats are cut with the ‘cruel copper’ (χαλκός),[745] and
Diomede pursues Venus with the same weapon.[746] Hephaistos makes for
Achilles a shield of gold and silver, copper and tin;[747] and canny
Diomede’s armour[748] is of copper, which he changes for gold, ‘the
value of a hundred beeves for the value of nine.’

In the ‘Iliad’ close-handed combat succeeds to missile-using. As
Strabo remarks,[749] Homer makes his warriors begin their duellos by
weapon-throwing and then take to their Swords. But the latter is _the_
weapon, rivalled only by the hand-spear. Hence the Egyptian-taught
Argives are insulted as arrow-throwers;[750] and Diomede reviles his
foe as ‘an archer and woman’s man.’[751] The taunts are still known to
savage tribes of modern day.

The Homeric Sword has five names. The first is _Chalcos_ (copper,
and perhaps base metal), used like the Latin _ferrum_. The second
is _Xiphos_, a word still generic in Romaic poetry and prose; the
diminutive being _Xiphidion_. The third is _Phásganon_, pronounced
Phásg_h_anon,[752] and the fourth is _Aor_. Thrace,[753] a famous
manufactory of art-works even in early ages, produced the best
and largest of these blades; we find a Thracian Xiphos, possibly
of steel, ‘beautiful and long,’ in the hands of the Trojan prince
Helenos;[754] and Achilles at the funeral games offers as a prize
a Thracian Phásganon, fair and silver-studded.[755] This hero[756]
was drawing his mighty Xiphos[757] from the sheath (κολεός, _culeus_,
_vagina_, scabbard) to assault Agamemnon, when at Athene’s instance,
‘still holding his heavy hand upon the silver hilt, he thrust back the
great Sword into the scabbard.’ The Xiphos with silver studs or bosses
occurs in sundry places,[758] and one, with a gold hilt and a silver
scabbard fitted with golden rings, belongs to Agamemnon. Dr. Schliemann
explains the epithet Πάμφαινον[759] by the line of gold bosses lying
near one of the Swords; they were broader than the blade and covered
the whole available space along the sheath. Thus the Homerid’s Helos
(ἥλος), usually rendered ‘stud’ or ‘nail,’ was applied to the bosses,
or buttons, that break the mid-rib or that stud the blade near the
handle.[760] Paris slings on a copper silver-studded Xiphos.[761]
Menelaus, with the same weapon, strikes off his enemy’s Phalos—the
helmet-ridge bearing the Lóphos-tube which confines the Hippouris or
horse-tail crest. Patroclus, when arming himself,[762] hangs from
his shoulders the silver-studded Xiphos of copper (ξίφον ἀργυρόηλον,
χάλκεον); and Achilles has a large-hilted Xiphos.[763] Peneleos and
Lycon,[764] having missed each other with the spear, ran on with the
Xiphos, which is here again called Phásganon; but Lycon’s weapon broke
at the hilt (καυλός = _caulis_), and the Xiphos of Peneleos ‘entered,
and only the skin retained it; the head hung down and the limbs were
relaxed.’ On the shield of Achilles[765] Hephaistos[766] figures youths
wearing the golden Xiphos slung from silver belts.

[Illustration: FIG. 240.—TWO-EDGED BRONZE SWORD AND ALABASTER KNOB
(MYCENÆ).]

Opposed to the Xiphos, a straight ‘rapier blade,’ as we shall presently
see, was the φάσγανον or dirk, probably a throwing-weapon like the
Scax and Scramasax. The two are often confounded in the dictionaries.
Phásganon is supposed to be _quasi_ Σφάγανον, a euphonic transposition,
like the verb φασγάνειν (to slay with the Sword). The root is evidently
Σφαγ, which appears in σφάγη (slaughter) and in σφάγειν (to slay):
there is also a form φάσλανον for σφάλανον. This is a two-edged
leaf-shaped blade (φάσγανον ἄμφηκες):[767] Thrasymedes gives one to
Diomede, and with it Rhesus is slaughtered in his sleep. The word
frequently occurs: black-hilted Phásgana, with massive handles, are
mentioned,[768] and the common Phásganon is found in ‘Odys.’ xi. 48;
in Pindar (N, 1. 80), and in the Tragedians. In another passage,[769]
however, it becomes a large (μέγα) Phásganon.

The fourth term is ἄορ,[770] usually set down, like the English
‘brand,’ as poetical; it is not used in Romaic and the Neo-Greek
dictionaries ignore it. The Aor seems to mean a broad, stout, strong
blade. With the sharp Aor (ἄορ ὀξὺ) drawn from his thigh, Ulysses digs
the furrow one cubit wide,[771] and Hector cuts in two the ashen spear
of Ajax.[772] Automedon draws a long Aor.[773] This, too, is the weapon
of earth-shaking Neptune, the ‘dreadful tapering Sword’ (τανύηκες
ἄορ),[774] ‘thunder-bolt-like, wherewith it is not possible to engage
in fatal fight, for the fear of it restrains mankind.’[775] Phœbus
Apollo has a golden Aor (χρυσάωρ).[776] Here we see the vague meaning
of the poetic word, like our ‘hanger,’ for it now means the god’s
golden bow and quiver carried on the shoulder.

Homer’s fifth is the Μάχαιρα, hung by a single belt close to the
Sword-sheath, and used for sacrifices and similar uses. It afterwards
became a favourite with the Lacedæmonians; it was then a curved
blade, as opposed to the Xiphos or uncurved. Again, in Plutarch and
other writers, the Machæra seems to mean—like Spatha—a long straight
blade. Homer does not mention the κοπὶς, but Euripides uses it[777] in
conjunction with Machæra.

[Heading: _THE SWORD IN HOMER._]

We must not expect to see the Sword so frequently drawn in the
‘Odyssey,’ which, _pace_ Mr. Sayce, appears later than the ‘Iliad.’
We note in it more character and less movement; more unity and
less digression, and, finally, less fighting and more amenity and
civilisation. But ‘Othyssefs,’ the ‘man with whom many were wroth,’
has been a soldier, and he does not forget his old trade. Besides,
commerce was still armed barter, and voyaging was enlivened by piracy.
Copper, or base metal, continues to be the basis of metallurgy, and
the hero owns it in quantities, besides gold, silver, and electrum.
Euryalus tells Alcinous that he will appease the guest (Ulysses) with
an all-copper brand (ἄορ παγχάλκεον), whose hilt (κώπη) is silver, and
whose scabbard is of newly sawn ivory.[778] The suitors would slay
Telemachus with the sharp copper.[779] In the final struggle, the
catastrophe of the poem, Eurymachus, drawing his sharp Sword of copper,
calls upon his friends to do the same, and to shield themselves with
the tables against the fast-flying shafts. In the ‘Frogs and Mice,’ the
spear is a good long needle; the ‘all-copper work of Mars.’[780]

Wrought iron is prominent in the ‘Odyssey’ as in the ‘Iliad.’
Athene-Mentes[781] sails over the dark sea to Temesa (Temessus) for
copper, and also brings back shining iron (αἴθωνα σίδηρον). Menelaus
does the same.[782] The ‘cruel iron’ balances the ‘cruel copper.’[783]
The ‘long-pointed iron,’ so fatal to the Trojans, is apparently the
spear, which began the duels. Prudent Penelope places the bow and
the grey iron (πολιόν τε σίδηρον) ready for the suitors;[784] and
the Palace contains store of wrought iron (πολύκμητος σίδηρος).[785]
The axe (πέλεκυς), sharpened on both sides,[786] is of copper; but
the hatchets, through whose rings or handle-holes (στειλειὴ) the
copper-tipped arrows must be shot, are of iron.[787] ‘Iron,’ we are
told, ‘of itself draws on a man’[788] (Tacit. ‘Hist.’ i. 80), a
sentiment repeated elsewhere in the same words.[789] And the Sword
is alluded to in more than one place without the material being
specified.[790]

In the ‘Hymn to Hermes,’[791] Mercury the god ‘vivisects’ the mountain
tortoise with a scalpel of grey iron (γλυφάνῳ πολιοῖο σίδηρου). The
Glyphanus was a carving-tool, a chisel, or a knife for reed-pens.

The dispute whether the so-called Homeric poems were written or were
orally preserved still awaits sentence. We twice find the word γράφειν,
but its primary meaning is ‘to mark,’ ‘to cut,’ and, lastly, ‘to
write.’ Thus Ajax,[792] when inscribing (ἐπιγράψας) the lot, might
simply have scraped upon it ‘Ajax his mark.’ Yet there is nothing
against writing, and there is much in its favour. For instance—

    Γράψας ἐν πίνακι πτυκτῷ θυμοφθόρα πολλά (σήματα).[793]

‘Having on tablet writ’ can mean nothing else. Pliny[794] accepts this
writing given to Bellerophon on codicilli or tablets.[795] Horace, who
was not only a great poet, but a masterful genius, mentions writing
in Homer’s day, and makes the early inscriptions laws cut into wood
(_leges incidere ligno_). Herodotus[796] tells us that he himself saw
Cadmeian (that is, old Phœnician) characters; and the tradition is
that Danaus introduced letters from Egypt, which, I repeat, produced
the one alphabet the world knows. Dr. Schliemann (‘Troy,’ Appendix by
the Editor) found at seven and a half mètres (twenty-five feet) below
the surface of the so-called Homeric Troy, many short inscriptions
in ‘ancient Cypriote characters,’ and as many Greek epigraphs were
discovered at Mycenæ. Evidently the ‘Iliad’ and the ‘Odyssey’ might
have been cut in rude Phœnician characters upon wooden tablets or
scratched on plates of lead. Professor Paley would date the literary
Homer from B.C. 400; but that is a different phase of the subject.

Herodotus is the outcome of Homer, or, if you please, of the Homerids
and of Æschylus. The work of this prose rhapsodist, besides being a
history, a logography, a record of travel, and a study of ethnology and
antiquity, is at once an Epic and a Drama. It is epic in the heroic and
romantic tone; in the unity of action, a mighty invasion-campaign;
and in the frequent digressions which aid, if they retard, the one
primary object. It is a tragedy in the scenic displays (the review
of Xerxes, for instance), in the action of Destiny, the circle of
Necessity, the Nemesiac hypothesis, and the jealousy of the gods (_Deus
ultor_); while the catastrophe is represented in ‘Calliope’ by the
destruction of the Persian host, the home-return of the victors, and
the lurid scenes at the close. It ends with an epigram, a kind of _Vos
plaudite_: ‘The Persians ... chose rather to dwell in a churlish land
and exercise lordship, than to plough the plains and be slaves of other
men’—a sentiment which would ‘bring down the house’ in the Highlands.
All is written with a distinct purpose, and the sensible chronology is
derived from Egypt. There is something poetical, too, in the enormous
numbers. The magnificent-impossible host of five millions two hundred
and eighty-three thousand two hundred and twenty men,[797] and the
one thousand three hundred and twenty-seven triremes to be defeated
and destroyed by a handful of nine thousand Greeks and three hundred
and seventy-eight ships, is highly imaginative. The philosophic and
sceptical modern mind will hardly be satisfied till the details are
confirmed by the contemporary evidence of inscriptions, for instance,
the Behistun, which is a running commentary upon ‘Thalia.’ Hellas ever
was, and is, and will be, by virtue of her mighty intellect and her
preponderating imagination, ‘Græcia mendax.’ Eastern history tells us
nothing about the marvellous Persian invasion. We may fairly believe
that there was a great movement headed by some powerful Satrap,[798]
who determined to crush the wasp’s nest to the West; but we can go no
farther. It is simply incredible that the Great King, who at the time
was Lord Paramount of the civilised world, should lead to so little
purpose millions of warriors—men, the flower of Asia, whose portraiture
is the most favourable of any we possess, and whom the Father owns to
have been not a whit inferior in prowess to the Greeks.[799] And for
this view I duly apologise to ‘Herodotus and his shade.’

The poet-historian gives an interesting description of the Sword
amongst the Scythians whom the Greeks and Persians call Sacæ (Shakas)
or Nomades.[800] To judge from Hindú legend—for instance, that of
Shak-ari, ‘foe to the Shakas,’ a title of the historical Vikramáditya
(A.D. 79)—the Sacæ were ‘Turanians’—Mongols or Tartars. When he makes
them worship Ares-Mars, he probably derives the idea from their adoring
the emblem of war, an iron dirk (ἀκινάκης σιδήρεος].[801] ‘A blade
of antique iron,’ he tells us, ‘is placed on the summit of every
such mound (a flat-topped pile of brushwood three furlongs square),
and serves as the image of Mars; yearly sacrifices are made to it.’
The victims were cattle, horses, and one per cent. of war-prisoners.
‘Libations of wine are first poured upon their heads, after which
they are slaughtered over a vase, and the vessel is then carried up to
the top of the pile and the blood poured upon the Akinákes.[802] In
the Scythian graves of Russian Cimmeria (the Crimea) and of Tartary,
the Swords are mostly bronze. Dr. M‘Pherson, however, found one of
iron (1839) in the great tomb of Kertch, the old Milesian Panticapæum,
so called from its river, Anticapes;[803] it was a short dagger-like
thrusting blade, resembling the old Persian, with mid-rib and curved
handle. In the days of Attila, a Sword, supposed to be one of the
ancient Scythian weapons alluded to by the Greek, was accidentally
found, and was made an object of worship.[804] Janghíz (Genghis) Khan
when raised to the throne repeated this sacrificial observance, which,
however, can scarcely be called a ‘Mongolic custom.’[805] It seems
common to the Sauromatæ (northern Medes and Slavs), the Alans, the
Huns, and the tribes that wandered over the Steppes.

[Heading: _THE SWORD IN HERODOTUS._]

The Scythians also swore by the emblem of Mars. ‘Their oaths,’ says
Herodotus,[806] ‘are accompanied by the following ceremonies. Into a
large earthen bowl (κύλιξ) pouring wine, they mingle with it blood of
the parties to the oath, who wound themselves superficially with a
knife or an awl; then they dip into the bowl an Akinákes, and arrows,
and a battle-axe (_sagaris_), and a javelin (_akontion_), all the while
repeating manifold prayers. Lastly, the two contracting parties drink
each a draught from the bowl, as do also the most worthy of their
followers.’[807] In the ‘Anabasis,’[808] the Greeks swear by dipping a
Sword, and the barbarians a lance, into the victim’s blood.

So far these ancient authors: we must now see how they are confirmed
by modern authorities. Dr. Schliemann’s investigations at Mycenæ[809]
are the more interesting, as the finds are supposed by him to be
synchronous with those of Burnt Troy; and they enable us to compare
the former in her prosperity with the latter in her exhaustion. The
energetic explorer doughtily supports the use of copper for arms and
utensils; and, with whole truth, makes it the staple metal of the
heroic ages. As he found no tin at Mycenæ or in the great layer of
copper scoriæ at Hisárlik (Troy), while ‘Kassiteros’ is repeatedly
mentioned by Homer, he contends that the bronze of the Greek city was
imported, and therefore rare and expensive. Unfortunately he did not
analyse the thin copper wire which carried the necklace-beads.

[Heading: _THE SWORDS OF MYCENÆ._]

[Illustration: FIG. 241.—GOLD SHOULDER-BELT, WITH FRAGMENT OF TWO-EDGED
BRONZE RAPIER. (Sepulchre I.)]

It is a new sensation to descend with Dr. Schliemann into the
old Mycenian tombs where sixteen or seventeen corpses had been
simultaneously interred (?). Sepulchre No. I, attributed to Agamemnon
and his two heralds,[810] produced a variety of interesting articles,
especially the golden shoulder-belt (τελαμών) that decorated the
mummy.[811] My photograph shows it attached to a fragmentary two-edged
Sword. Between the middle and the southern body lay a heap of broken
bronze blades, which may have represented sixty whole Swords: some
bore traces of gilding, and several had gold pins at the handle. Two
blades lay to the right of the body, and their ornamentation strikingly
resembled the description in the ‘Iliad.’[812] The handle of the larger
Sword (No. 460) is of bronze, thickly plated with intaglio’d gold; and
a broad plate of the same metal, similarly worked, passes round the
shoulders of the Sword. The wooden scabbard must have been adorned with
golden studs and a long broad plate (fig. 244), shaped somewhat like a
man, with a ring issuing from the neck. The other Sword in a similar
style of art seems to have been even richer. Dr. Schliemann[813]
considers No. 463 (fig. 245) a remarkable battle-axe, of which
fourteen were found in the ‘Trojan treasure.’[814] It is evidently a
Sword-blade, and the same may be said of Nos. 464, 465 (fig. 244).

At the distance of hardly more than one foot to the right of the
mummy-body were found eleven bronze Swords; two were tolerably
preserved, and both were of unusual size—two feet ten inches and three
feet two inches. The golden plate of the wooden Sword-handle is given
in p. 305. These weapons, also, had gold plates attached to the pommels
by twelve pins of the same metal with large globular heads. The body at
the south end of Sepulchre I. was provided with fifteen bronze Swords,
of which ten had been placed at its feet. As a rule, the wooden sheaths
had mouldered away, but the gold studs or bosses, which adorned them
like the binding of a book, lay along the remains of the warriors
who had wielded them. The whetstone (Sepulchre I.) was of very fine
sandstone.

[Illustration: FIG. 242.—(Sepulchre I. Mycenæ.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 243.—A LONG GOLD PLATE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 244.—NOT BATTLE-AXES.]

[Illustration: FIG. 245.—SWORD BLADES. (Sepulchre I. Mycenæ.)]

The fourth Sepulchre was almost as interesting in its supply of
Swords. Excavating from east to west, the explorer came upon a heap of
more than twenty bronze blades, most of them with remnants of wooden
scabbards and handles. The flat, round pieces of wood, and the small
shield-like or button-like disks of gold with intaglio-work, seemed to
have been glued in unbroken series along both sides of the sheath; and,
the largest being at the broad end with a gradual diminishing in size,
they determined the width. The wooden hilts bore similar plates of
intaglio’d gold; the remaining space had been studded with gold pins,
and gold nails were fixed in the large pommels of wood or alabaster.
The quantity of fine gold-dust left no doubt that the handles and
scabbards had been gilt. The smith evidently did not possess the
knowledge of gilding silver: he first plated the metal with copper and
then the copper with gold. The golden cylinder (No. 366), adorned at
both ends with a broad border of wave-lines, and the field filled with
interwoven spirals, all intaglio-work, probably belonged to a heft of
wood. Along the middle runs a row of pin-holes; there are four flat
pin-heads, and in the centre is the head of a larger stud by which it
is attached.

Sepulchre IV. also yielded forty-six bronze Swords, more or less
fragmentary. Of these ten were short and single-edged: their solid
metal measured when entire from two to two feet three inches in
length. The handles are too thick for mounting in wood, and the tangs
end in rings for suspension to the ‘Telamon’ or to the girdle (ζώνη,
ζωστήρ). The chopper-shaped blade (fig. 246), evidently of Egyptian
derivation, is broken at the point, which may incline either way,
probably inwards. The other (fig. 246) is the normal leaf-shape. Dr.
Schliemann believes[815] that they explain the Homeric φάσγανον, which
he makes ‘perfectly synonymous with Xiphos and Aor.’ Here I venture to
differ with him, holding the Phásganon probably to have been the short
Egyptian Sword, used like the boomerang-blade for throwing as well as
cutting.

[Illustration: FIG. 246.—(Sepulchre IV. Mycenæ, p. 279.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 247.—BRONZE LANCEHEAD (?), p. 279.]

[Illustration: FIG. 248.—TWO-EDGED BRONZE SWORD AND DAGGER. (Sepulchre
IV. Mycenæ.)]

The double-edged weapon with the long narrow tube (αὐλός) was judged
to be a dagger-knife, the hollow being intended to save weight; to me
it appears a lance-head, and the attached ring seems to prove its use
(fig. 247). The fragmentary two-edged blade of bronze (_a_ fig. 249)
shows a mid-rib broken by serrations intended either for ornament or
for jagging the wound: the same toothings appear in another weapon
(_b_ fig. 249), which is supposed to be a dagger. No. 446 is a short
two-edged blade showing at the shoulders, on either side, four large
flat head-pins of gold. A gold plate extends all along the middle part
of the blade on both sides, and fragments of the wooden sheath are
visible in the middle as well as at the end.

[Illustration: FIG. 249.—TWO-EDGED BRONZE SWORDS AND ALABASTER KNOB.
(Sepulchre IV. Mycenæ.)]

We now come to the most startling part of the collection. It proves
indubitably, if Dr. Schliemann’s conclusions be correct, and if the
blades[816] do not belong, as they may do, to a later date, that the
highest form of Sword, which became the fashion during our sixteenth
century, was known in B.C. 1200. It is a curious comment upon the fact,
how soon perfection was reached in the ‘White Arm,’ compared with the
slow progress of firearms, which had to await the invention of the
self-igniting cartridge. Plate No. 445 (p. 281) gives a two-edged blade
with a mid-rib, in fact the rapier, which can be used only for the
point. It measures two feet seven inches (_a_ fig. 250), and at the
top are attached remnants of its wooden scabbard. The lower end of its
neighbour (_b_ fig. 250) is adorned with three flat golden pin-heads
on either face. No. 448, measuring two feet ten inches long, is very
well preserved; by its side lies its alabaster pommel (fig. 249). No.
449 has retained part of its heft, which is gold-plated and attached by
gold pins. Vertical lines of intaglio work run along the blade and give
it a truly beautiful aspect.

Dr. Schliemann (p. 283) notices the length, in some cases exceeding
three feet, compared with the narrowness of these grand blades. He
adds, ‘So far as I know, Swords of this shape have never been found
before.’ I would refer him to the Villanova (Etruscan) blade described
in chapter viii.

The fourth Sepulchre also yielded three shoulder-belts of gold. No. 354
measures four feet one and a half inch long by one and seven-eighths
inch in width (fig. 241). On either side of the band is a narrow
edging made by turning down the gold plate: the field is occupied by
a row of rosettes, six oval petals surrounding a central disk and the
whole encircled by dots or points. At one end are two apertures in the
shape of hour-glasses; these served to attach the clasp to the other
extremity, as is shown by the small hole and two cuts (p. 308). The
second ‘Telamon,’ a plain band four feet six inches long by two to two
and one-third inches broad, was, the discoverer suggests, possibly
made for the funeral: it is too thin and fragile for general wear. To
some blades were still attached particles of well-woven linen, which
the discoverer considers to have been sheaths (p. 283). The natives of
India and of other hot-damp regions retain, I have said, the custom of
bandaging their blades with greased rags. We are also shown (p. 304) a
gold tassel probably suspended to a belt of embroidered work.

[Illustration: FIG. 250.—RAPIER-BLADES OF MYCENÆ.]

[Illustration: FIG. 251.—WARRIOR WITH SWORD.]

The first of the tomb-stones found in the Acropolis above the
sepulchres (p. 52) shows (very imperfectly) a hunter standing in a
one-horse chariot: he grips in his right a long broadsword. The second
tomb-stone (p. 81) has a naked warrior, who holds the horse’s head
with his right, and raises in his left a double-edged blade (fig.
251): Dr. Schliemann finds the figure ‘full of anguish’ (p. 84); the
head is in profile, and the body almost fronts the spectator. The
huntsman-charioteer holds in his left a sheathed Sword of the long
dagger type, ending in a large globular pommel. Many such articles
were found in the tombs, and the author (p. 225) draws attention to
the size of the ‘knob’ upon the signet ring. Mostly they were of
wood or alabaster (p. 281) with golden nails, and frequently plated
with precious metal. I would suggest that the perforated ball of
polished rock-crystal (No. 307) found in Sepulchre III., and the
large-mouthed article (No. 308) coloured red and white inside, were
also Sword-pommels.

The Treasury supplied ‘five unornamental blades of copper or bronze,’
with rings of the same metal. The large Cyclopean house, which the
energetic discoverer would identify with the Palace of the Atreidæ,
yielded a straight, two-edged, thrusting-blade of bronze: the shoulders
were pierced with four holes, and there are as many in the tang for
attaching the handle (fig. 252). The heft was of various substances,
wood, bone, and ivory, amber, rock-crystal, and alabaster, and it
was often plated with metals, especially the most precious. Of the
latter, six specimens are given (pp. 270–71), all highly decorated
with intaglio work of circles and spirals, rope-bands, and shell-like
quaquaversal flutings.

The general opinion that Homer ignored soldering[817] gives unusual
interest to a large bronze dagger found in No. III. Sepulchre, six
mètres and a half below the surface (p. 164). Two blades are well
soldered together in the middle (fig. 253). The same art appears (p.
280) in the attachment of two long narrow plates of thick bronze.
Crickets (_cicadæ_) and other ornaments were also found of gold worked
in _repoussé_ and composed of two halves soldered together.

[Illustration: FIG. 252.—BRONZE SWORD FOUND IN THE PALACE (p. 144).]

[Illustration: FIG. 253.—BRONZE DAGGER. TWO BLADES SOLDERED.]

The goldsmiths of Mycenæ were true artists. They had work in plenty;
Dr. Schliemann estimates the metallic value of his finds at five
thousand pounds. An admirable bit of work (p. 251) is the goat
standing, like that of Assyria and Istria, with gathered legs upon the
top of a pin.[818] Another (No. 365) is the lion-cub, apparently cut
and tooled. As in modern India, the circles, spirals, and wave-lines
are excellently executed, and so is the gold-plating upon buttons of
wood (pp. 258–59). The old Greek city, too, had a peculiar treatment
of the whorl, which, combining two and even three—either _dextrorsum_
or _sinistrorsum_—about a common centre, and making the lines of at
least two continuous, deserves to be called the ‘Mycenæ spiral.’ This
ornament passes from the gold trinkets and the tomb-stones of the
Acropolis to the ‘Treasuries’ of much later date.

An intaglio of gold is especially interesting, because it represents
a Monomachía or duel. He to the proper right, a tall beardless or
shaven warrior, without helmet, and clad only in ‘tights’ and ‘shorts,’
bears the whole weight of his body upon his left leg, extending the
right, as in a lunge, and is about to plunge his straight and pointed
dagger-blade into the throat of his bearded foe (p. 174). A signet-ring
displays a gigantic warrior who has felled one opponent, put to flight
a second, and is stabbing a third with a short broad straight blade.
The vanquished man attempts to defend himself with a long Xiphos (p.
225). Perhaps the subject may be Theseus clearing out the thieves. A
gold button shows a square formed by four sacrificial chopper-knives of
Egyptian shape (p. 263, No. 397).

The characteristics of the Sepulchres are the orientation of the
remains, the heads lying to the East, and their imperfect cremation.
The latter is familiar in Hindú-land, although the people hold the
fire-funeral to be a fire-birth, when the vital principle called ‘soul’
or ‘spirit’ has been purged of its earthly dross. The regular layers
of pebbles, which by ventilating the floor would give draught to the
flames, have also been noticed in ancient Etruria.[819] The only
_viaticum_ or provisions for the dead were unopened oysters: the rest
was probably burnt. The utensils are jugs and vases of terra cotta
(plain and painted), copper tripods and cauldrons, urns and kettles,
and cups and goblets, the latter one- and two-handed. The ornaments, of
gold and electrum, are foil-work and plates upon wood, beads of glass
and agate, studs and buttons, crosses and breast-covers, lentoid gems
and masks, crowns and diadems. The weapons, all of bronze,[820] are
axes and arrows, lances, knives, daggers, and Sword-blades; while gold
and alloys are abundant. We may fairly say that iron is absent from the
Acropolis of Mycenæ as well as from the Burnt City of the Troad. And
there is a remarkable similarity in the pattern and construction of
sundry articles, especially the gold tubes with attached spirals.

Dr. Schliemann’s discoveries have been subjected to much adverse
criticism.[821] As far as they go, they prove that the warriors of
Mycenæ used three varieties of Swords—the Xiphos, the Phásganon, and
the Kopis.

[Heading: _THE SWORD IN GREECE._]

The ξίφος of Mycenæ is the long, straight, rapier-shaped,
cut-and-thrust (_cæsim et punctim_) blade; its only guard is a
cross-bar, which, like the scabbard, is beautifully ornamented. The
word Xiphos is still applied in Romaic to a straight Sword opposed to
Spati (Σπάτι),[822] the sabre, the broadsword.

The φάσγανον or dirk which Meyrick (Pl. IV. fig. 16), and sometimes
perhaps the Ancients, confound with the Xiphos, is a straight blade,
mostly leaf-shaped and showing its descent from the spear. It is
rarely longer than twenty inches. In Romaic poetry the word is still
applied to knives and Sword-daggers like the Yataghan. My idea that the
Phásganon was used for throwing does not derive from the classics, but
from the similarity of the blade to the Seax and the Scramasax.

[Illustration: FIG. 254.—PHÁSGANON.]

[Illustration: FIG. 255.—GREEK PHÁSGANA.]

[Illustration: FIG. 256.—SHORT SWORD (PHÁSGANON) OF BRONZE, FOUND IN A
CRANNOG AT PESCHIARA, AND PROBABLY GREEK.]

The Κοπίς, which Meyrick makes an Argive weapon, and which English
translators render simply by ‘Sword,’ has been derived by me from the
Egyptian Khopsh, whose ‘inside cutting curve’ it imitates, merely
flattening the bend. Writers on hoplology have mostly ignored its
origin. They follow Xenophon, who speaks of it as being used by the
Persians and Barbarians; and Polybius, who assigns its use to the
Persians before the Greeks—apparently an anachronism. They remark that
on vases it is the weapon of the Giants, not of the Gods, and that the
Amazons wield it against Hercules. Hence Señor Soromenho[823] would
assign its origin to the Arabs, and Colonel A. Lane-Fox to the Roman
legionaries. The latter authority, indeed, contends that its form is
‘obviously derived from the straight, leaf-shaped, bronze sword, of
which it is simply a curved variety.’ Here, I think, he reverses the
process. Specimens of the Kopis are rare; one was found in a tomb, said
to be Roman, between Madrid and Toledo, and another of the same find is
in the British Museum.

[Illustration: FIG. 257.]

[Illustration: FIG. 258.—KOPIS WITH POMMEL.]

[Illustration: FIG. 259.—KOPIS WITH HOOK.]

[Illustration: FIG. 260.—KUKKRI BLADE OF GURKHAS.]

The peculiarity of the Kopis is, I have said, its cutting with the
inner, not the outer curve, and thus suggesting the use of the point
and the ‘drawing cut’ instead of the sheer cut. This peculiarity was
inherited from Egypt, and long appeared in Greek blades. It is well
shown in the fragment of a bronze Kopis-like broadsword from the
collection of Don Giovanni Bolmarcich, the Arciprete of Cherso: the
relic was found in the Island of Ossero with an immense variety of
bronzes, Greek,[824] Roman, and prehistoric or proto-historic. General
Pitt-Rivers has a bronze Sword-blade from Corinth—a very fine specimen.
The handle has an =H= section, the pommel measuring two and a quarter
inches across, and the grip three and a half inches in length. There
is no tang; the blade springs from the shoulders, which are prominent;
the length is twenty-seven inches, and the section that of the Toledo
rapier. It is, however, slightly leaf-shaped. In the Armeria Real of
Turin (section Beaumont to north-west), two Greek blades are shown in a
glass case. One is especially interesting. The total length, all being
in one piece, is three feet and a half; the blade has a mid-rib; there
is a straight simple cross-bar at the shoulders, and the hilt ends in a
crutch, like the Hindú antelope-horns and the scroll-hilt of the Danish
Swords.

The inside edge has been preserved from days immemorial by the
Abyssinian Sword;[825] an exaggerated sickle or diminutive scythe.
It reappears in various parts of Africa, as shown by Barth’s Travels
(chap. ii. 37 &c.). His ‘Danísko,’ which he translates ‘hand-bill,’
is used by the people of a highly interesting province—‘Adamáwa.’ The
general weapon in the neighbourhood is the ‘goliyo’ or bill-hook of
the Marghi, and the Njiga of the Baghirmi. It is a heavy and clumsy
‘Khopsh’ of the boomerang type.[826]

[Illustration: FIG. 961.—THE DANÍSKO.]

The inside edge characterises, to a certain extent, the Albanian
yataghan, and the Flissa of the Kabáil (Kabyles); and it is thoroughly
well developed in the formidable Korá or Kukkri of the Gurkha or
Nepaulese mountaineers, whose edge swells out to a half-moon.

The Mycenæ finds do not enlighten us upon the subject of the Ἄορ
and other forms of the Greek Sword. We know nothing of the Thracian
Ῥομφαία, the Rumpia of Gellius (x. 25), which the A. V.[827] translates
‘Sword.’ Most writers hold it to be a Thracian lance, like the European
‘partisan;’ and Smith’s ‘Dictionary of Antiquities’ describes it as a
long spear resembling the Sarissa, with a Sword-like blade. This comes
from Livy (xxxi. 39), who tells us that in woodlands the Macedonian
phalanx was ineffectual on account of its _prælongæ hastæ_, and that
the Rhomphæa of the Thracians was a hindrance for the same reason. But
in modern Romaic usage it denotes the flammberg (_flamberge_), or that
form of the wavy blade which the Church places in the hands of the
angelic host. It is always carried by ‘Monseigneur Saint Michel, the
Archangel, the first knight who in the quarrel of God battled with the
Dragon, the old enemy of mankind, and drove him out of heaven.’[828]
Mycenæ supplied no specimen of the χελιδὼν (_gladius Chelidonius_), the
broad blade with a bifurcated swallow-tailed point. It is mentioned
by Isidore (xviii.) and by Origen (chap. vi.); and I have alluded to
it in Chapter VII. We are unable to specify the shape of the Athenian
Κνήστεις (_Knesteis_) or the Lacedæmonian ξυίναι (_Xyinæ_), which
Xenophon calls ξυήλαι (_Xuelæ_). They may have been, to judge from
their use, thick cut-and-thrust daggers, in fact _Coupe-Choux._ Nor do
we know what kind of blade was carried by the Xystophori (ξυστοφόροι)
in addition to the _Xyston_: the latter was either the footman’s spear
(δόρυ) or the horseman’s lance; in the ‘Iliad,’ as has been seen, it is
a long pole studded with iron nails.

[Illustration: FIG. 262.—GREEK XIPHOS (Jähns).]

According to history, the Greek infantry Sword was a straight two-edged
blade, rather broad, and of equal width from hilt to point, which was
of bevelled shape. For cavalry they preferred the sabre or cutting
weapon.[829] Iphicrates (B.C. 400), when improving arms and armour,
must have found spear and Sword too short, for he ‘doubled the length
of the spear and made the Swords also longer’ (Diod. Sic. xv. 144;
Corn. Nepos, xi.). Plutarch (in ‘Lycurg.’) tells us that a man in the
presence of Agesilaus jeered at the Spartan blade, which measured only
fourteen to fifteen inches long, saying that ‘a juggler would think
nothing of swallowing it’;[830] whereto the great commander replied,
‘Yet our short Swords can pierce our foes.’ And when a bad workman
complained of his tool, the Spartan suggested with dry heroism, ‘You
have only to advance a pace.’

Dodwell[831] relates that an iron blade found in a tomb at Athens was
two feet five inches long, including its handle of the same metal. Most
of our museum specimens, both of bronze and iron, are of fair average
dimensions. That of Mayence measures nineteen and a half inches (_a_
fig. 265), and that of the Museum of Artillery thirty-two. The Pella
blade in the K. Antiquarium, Berlin, is only twenty-one centimètres,
including four for the heft.

[Illustration: FIG. 263.—GALLO-GREEK (60 cents. long).]

[Illustration: FIG. 264.—GALLO-GREEK.]

[Illustration: FIG. 265.—MAYENCE BLADE.]

[Illustration: FIG. 266.—GALLO-GREEK BLADE AND SHEATH.]

The Swords called Gallo-Greek,[832] with bronze blades and sheaths
(figs. 263, etc.), are of moderate length—twenty-five inches.
Pausanias[833] alludes to perhaps a shorter weapon (ταῖς μαχαίραις τῶν
Γαλατῶν). And we are told that when Manlius invaded Galatia he found
the Swords were _prælongi gladii_.[834]

The Greek fashion of carrying the Sword apparently varied with the
times, and, perhaps, with the length of the weapon: it is easy to draw
a dagger from the right, but awkward to unsheathe a full-sized blade.
Some writers make the Greeks carry the weapon on the right, and others
on the left: Homer seems purposely to leave his description vague,
e.g.:—

    Ἢ ὅγε φάσγανον ὀξὺ ἐρυσσάμενος (or σπασσάμενος) παρὰ μηροῦ.

    Drawing the grided dirk fro’ the sheath which hung by his
        thigh-side.[835]

The words _parà merou_ are similarly used elsewhere,[836] but which
thigh is not specified. Hector’s sharp Sword hangs below his loins
both huge and strong, and brandishing it he rushes to his death by
Achilles’ spear.[837] The Trojan, too, strikes Ajax,[838] who carried
his weapon after Assyrian fashion, ‘where the two belts cross upon his
breast, both that of the shield and that of the silver-studded Sword.’
The ‘Parazonium’ dagger, with its metal scabbard, was usually attached
to the Sword-belt[839] on the other side. Shaped like an ox-tongue
(‘Anelace,’ or _Langue-de-bœuf_), and measuring twelve to sixteen
inches long, it was common to Greece and Rome; I have shown its origin
in Egypt.

[Illustration: FIG. 267.—BRONZE PARAZONIUM (16⅘ inches long).]

The part played by the Hellenes upon the great stage of the world’s
history was their development of civil life—of citizenship. As a
nation, they wanted the life-long practice of arms and training for
warfare, brought to absolute perfection by the Romans. Their annual
games, as shown by the Pindaric Odes, were mostly trials of speed and
agility. They had the Bibasis or gymnastic dance, and, to mention no
other, the Pyrrhic or Sword-dance, like all ancient and many modern
peoples; but these mimicries soon became in the cities mere women’s
work. They wore side-arms at home only during the Panathenaic fêtes,
where orchestral actions and attitudes were displayed; and they had not
those military colonies like the Romans, where every man was a soldier
and every soldier was a veteran. Their _gymnasia_ and _palæstræ_
were schools for calisthenics, which the sturdier Italians held in
contempt. They were, like the gymnastic-grounds of the Spartan girls,
mere hot-beds for growing beauty and good breeders; for attaining
the perfection of form duly to be transmitted. This process, indeed,
began with the bride, who furnished her nuptial chamber with the
finest possible models in painting and statuary. Hence every well-bred
citizen at Athens, every ‘gentleman,’ was expected to be handsome.
The Beautiful, the Good, and the Holy grew to be almost synonymous.
Physical man was raised to his highest expression, till he became the
mythological, ideal god-man. This anthropomorphism found its final
stage in Phidias; the Parthenon was its expression, and Olympus its
culmination.[840] Since the ancient man-breeding and man-shaping system
was abandoned, and the race became intimately mixed with foreign blood,
chiefly Slav and Hebrew, the reverse has become noticeable: a Greek of
the classical type is now rarely seen.

[Illustration: FIG. 268.—‘HOPLITES’ (HEAVY ARMED).[841]]

[Illustration: FIG. 269.—GREEK COMBATANTS WITH SWORD AND LANCE.]

Then came the intellectual age of Greece. Already in B.C. 450
Protagoras the Sophist, of the Cyrenaic school, had made ‘man the
measure of all things.’ The individual becomes a duality; as Aristotle
expresses it, the animal life is one of sensation, the divine life of
intelligence. And this change of view gradually extinguished the holy
fire of art.

The Hellenes, even in their best times, did not pay that attention to
the use of arms which was a daily practice with the more practical
Romans. They had no gladiatorial shows, the finest _salles d’armes_
in the world. The ὁπλοδιδακταὶ (ὁπλοδιδασκολοὶ) or army _maîtres
d’armes_, and professors of the noble arts of offence and defence,
were not required by law in Lacedæmon. They practised the Sword, as
we learn from Demosthenes; he compared the Athenians ‘with rustics
in a fencing school, who after a blow always guard the hit part and
not before.’[842] Yet they preferred the pentathlum, the pancration,
and military dancing; the fencing-room was a secondary consideration.
Indeed, Plato objected to the useless art of Sword-exercise, because
neither masters nor disciples ever became great soldiers—a stupendous
Platonic fallacy![843]

Nor did Hellas greatly prize herself upon mere arms. The soldier at
Athens and amongst all the Ionian and kindred races occupied, it is
true, an honourable position; in the four castes[844] he followed
the priestly, and he preceded the peasants and the mechanics. But
the Hellene was essentially a citizen—a politician. He chose his
magistrates and pontiffs, and he could aspire to become one himself.
He spent his life in the Agora, canvassing laws and constitutions,
treaties and alliances. His minor delight was gossip, euphuistically
expressed by ‘hearing new things.’ Hellas soon learned that her _forte_
lay in literature, poetry, oratory, and philosophy, in engineering,
and in the fine arts. She excelled the world in the exquisite rules of
proportion; in the breadth of idea, and in the clearness and perfection
of the literary form: these arts she bequeathed as a heritage to
mankind, who have nowhere and never surpassed her. While the grand old
Kemites built for eternity, and subjected even size[845] to solidity,
Hellas elaborated the principle of Beauty and carried it to its very
acme. Her spoilt children were avid of novelty: they constructed every
possible system of cosmogony, of astronomy, of geology (except the
right one); and they ‘paraded their knowledge,’ as Bacon says, ‘with
fifes and drums.’ Hence their teachers of the Nile Valley told them
‘they were ever children’; and hence they excelled their teachers.

This is not the place to discuss Greek tactics, nor is there anything
new to say about them: authors are contented with borrowing from the
treatises of Ælian and Arrian, who lived in the days of Hadrian. I will
only remind the reader that even during the ‘Iliad’-ages the Greek
army had its scheme of battle. Nestor advises his warriors to keep
their ranks in action after the wont of their forbears; and in two
places[846] we have allusions to a rude phalanx or oblong rectangle of
civilised Egypt and Khita-land. Xenophon[847] tells us that the army of
Agesilaus appeared all bronze (χαλκὸν) and red (φοίνικα); the latter
survives in our most inappropriate British scarlet. For the heavy-armed
Hoplite-swordsmen and the light Peltasts, who had apparently no Swords,
the student will consult any ‘Dictionary of Antiquities.’

Another unpleasant feature in Greek warfare was its indifference to
human life, so much regarded by the Romans. The former preserved their
old barbarous practice of putting to death their war-prisoners; whilst
even during the first Punic War the latter had a system of exchange
combined with a money-payment for any number in excess on either side.

Greece rarely appears in arms except in defensive warfare (as against
the Persians), in civil wars between citizens and citizens, and in
semi-civil wars, as between the Athenians and the Spartans, the
Dorians, Ionians, and Æolians. A glance at any of their campaigns—the
‘Anabasis,’ for instance—gives us their measure as soldiers; and what
else can we expect from a race whose typical men were Themistocles
and Alcibiades? They were too clever by half; too vain, too restless,
too impulsive (ever ‘shedding tears’), too self-assertive to become
disciplined men-machines. They were always ready for a revolt, for a
change of officers; and it must have been a serious thing to command
them. In this point, perhaps, they are rivalled by the Frenchman, one
of the best soldiers in Europe, and also one of the most difficult
to manage. Great captains—Turenne and Napoleon Buonaparte, for
instance—shot their recalcitrants by the dozen till the survivors
learned to ‘tremble and obey.’[848] Like the French, too, and the
Irish, the Greeks had more dash than firmness. They gained victories by
the vigour and gallantry of their attack, but they did not distinguish
themselves in a losing game. Here England excels, and hence Marshal
Bugeaud said, ‘She has the best infantry in the world; happily they are
not many.’ We must make them so.

Hellas owed her successes in foreign wars mainly to the barbarous
condition of her neighbours. The Romans and all the peoples of Asia
Minor, save her own colonies,[849] were far behind her when, after the
fashion of the equestrian races of Northern Asia, she had exchanged
the chariot for the charger;[850] and when she borrowed from Egypt the
arts of warfare by land and sea, the paraphernalia of the siege, the
best of arms and armour, and even the redoubtable phalanx. But she
lost pre-eminence, physical and moral, when the rival races rose to
be her equals, and even her superiors, in weapons, organisation, and
discipline. She began with beating, and she ended with being thoroughly
beaten by, the Romans.

Greek literature does not abound, like Roman and Hebrew, in perpetual
allusions to the Sword: it refers more frequently to the spear and
bow. Yet Athenæus ennobles the end of his curious _olla podrida_ (the
‘Deipnosophists’) with some charming lines alluding to the Queen of
Weapons. The first passage begins with:—

    I’ll wreathe my sword in myrtle bough,
    The sword that laid the tyrant low,
    When Patriots burning to be free
    To Athens gave equality.[851]

The second is the song of Hybrias the Cretan:—

    My wealth is here, the sword, the spear, the breast-defending
        shield,
    With this I plough, with this I sow, with this I reap the field;
    With this I rape the luscious grape and drink the blood-red wine,
    And slaves at hand in order stand, and all are counted mine![852]

And here arises a curious question. Do races, as is generally assumed,
decline and fall like nations and empires? Does the body politic obey
the law of the body corporal? Do peoples grow old and feeble and barren
after their most brilliant periods of gestation? Or rather do they not
cease to be great, and to bear great men, because their neighbours have
grown to be greater, and because genius is repressed by unfavourable
media? I cannot see that Time has greatly changed the peasant of the
Romagna, the mountaineer of the Peloponnesus, the Persian become a
Parsi in Bombay, or the modern soldier of the Nile Valley, who, under
Ibrahim Pasha, defeated the Turks in every pitched battle. But the
conditions of Italy, Greece, Persia, and Egypt, are now fundamentally
altered: they are no longer superior to their surroundings; they are
environed by races stronger than themselves. Hence, perhaps, what is
popularly called their degeneracy.




                             CHAPTER XII.

       THE SWORD IN ANCIENT ROME; THE LEGION AND THE GLADIATOR.


The _rôle_ played by pagan Rome on the stage of history was
twofold—that of conqueror and that of regulator. In obeying man’s
acquisitive instinct she was compelled to perfect her executive
instrument, the fighter. To her we owe the words ‘arms’ and ‘army,’
‘armour’ and ‘armoury.’[853] As _pugna_ derives from _pugnus_, the
fist, so _arma_ and its congeners derive from _armus_, the arm:
‘antiqui humeros cum brachiis armos vocabant,’ says Festus. Well
knowing that the ‘God of Battles’ favours superiority of weapons as
much as, and in select cases more than, ‘big battalions,’ she ever
chose the implements and instruments she found the best; and, following
her own proverb, she never disdained to take a lesson in arms even from
the conquered.

But Rome soon learnt that to make good soldiers she must begin by
making good citizens. She insisted upon the civilising maxim ‘Cedant
arma togæ,’ without, however, the invidious precedence which Sallust
calls ‘those most offensive words of Cicero’

    ——Concedat laurea linguæ.

She subordinated the Captain to the Magistrate, and she proclaimed to
both the absolute Reign of Law. The idea presented itself to the Greek
mind in the shape of Fate, Anagké, Nemesis: Rome brought it down from
the vague to the realistic, from the abstract to the concrete, from
heaven to earth. Thus, while Greece taught mankind the novel lessons
of ordered liberty, free thought, intellectual culture, and patriotic
citizenship, Rome, by her reverence for Law, in whose sight all men
were equal, preached the brotherhood of mankind. Hence Christendom
ever has been, and is still, governed by a heathen code, by that Roman
jurisprudence which flowed from the Twelve Tables, like the laws of
Jewry from the Ten Commandments. Indeed the ‘Fecial College’ which
pronounced upon the obligations of international war and peace, is an
institution which might profitably be revived in the modern world.[854]

Rome was single-minded in her objective, conquest; and unlike the
Greeks, from whom she borrowed, she was not diverted by art or
literature. All her poets for a thousand years fit into one volume.
All her art, indeed, can hardly be said to exist; history is silent
concerning any save a few exceptional Roman architects. Varro laughs
at the puppets and effigies of the gods. The triumph of Metellus
(B.C. 146) introduced Art, but the Helleno-Roman artist contented
himself with copies and with portrait-statues of the great. In the
days of their highest luxury and refinement, the toga’d people
were connoisseurs and purchasers who diffused instead of adding to
knowledge. Others, as Virgil said, might give movement to marble and
breath to bronze: the Art of the Roman was to rule the nations, to
spare the subjected, and to debase the proud. ‘Fortia agere Romanum
est.’

For the constitution of the Roman army we must consult the estimable
Polybius,[855] its early historian, Livy, and the latest of the great
authorities, Vegetius, in the days of Valentinian II. (A.D. 375–92);
not forgetting Varro,[856] who treats of weapon changings.

Whilst the militia consisted of three bodies, the citizens, the allies,
who were sworn, and the auxiliaries or mercenaries; the characteristic
of Roman organisation was the Legion—that is, _legere_ (they chose).
Emerging by slow degrees from the Phalanx or close column,[857] it
learnt to prefer for battle the _acies instructa_, haye or line, and
the _acies sinuata_, with wings; and it reserved for especial purposes
the _agmen pilatum_ or close array, and the _agmen quadratum_ or hollow
square.

The reason of the change is manifest. The Phalanx or oblong herse was
irresistible during the compact advance. The wise Egyptian inventors
made it perfect for the Nile Valley. But it lost virtue in woodlands
and highlands; it was liable to be broken when changing front, and
the long unwieldy spears which it required caused confusion on broken
ground.

The Legion consisted, strictly speaking, of heavy-armed infantry—of
Milites, from _Mil-es_, because reckoned by their thousands. They were
preceded by the Velites, Ferentarii, or Rorarii, ‘light infantry,’
_éclaireurs_, who cleared the way for action; in the first century they
were reinforced by the Accensi Velati.[858] Whilst the Auxiliaries
fought with bows and arrows, and some, like the Etruscans, with the
‘funda’ or sling, the Veles carried two to seven light throw-spears
(_hastæ velitariæ_) about three feet long in the shaft, with a
nine-inch lozenge-shaped head of iron.[859] For close quarters he
wore on his right side a Parazonium-dagger, and on the right a broad
cut-and-thrust blade of moderate size. His defences were an apron of
leather strips, studded with metal; and a Parma,[860] the small round
shield, like the Cetra, some three feet in diameter.[861]

[Illustration: FIG. 270.]

[Illustration: FIG. 271.—1, 2. HELMETS OF HASTARII (FROM TRAJAN’S
COLUMN); 3, 4. HELMETS OF HASTARII; 5. BRONZE HELMET (FROM CANNÆ).]

The Legion proper was a line or rather a triple line of Hastarii[862]
or legionary spearmen. Livy[863] briefly describes the Acies, when
it emerged from the Phalanx, as ‘drawn up into distinct companies,
divided into centuries. Each company contained sixty soldiers,[864]
two centurions, and one ensign or standard-bearer.[865] First in line
stood the Hastati in fifteen companies with twenty Velites.[866]
Behind them were the Principes with heavy shields and complete armour,
also numbering fifteen companies. These thirty companies were called
Antepilani, because there were fifteen others placed behind them
with the standards; each of the latter consisted of three divisions,
and the first division of each they called a Pilus. The first ensign
was at the head of the third line proper, the Triarii. Behind them
stood the Rorarii, whose ability was less by reason of their youth
and inexperience; and, lastly, in the rear, came the Accensi, a body
in which little confidence was reposed. The Hastati began the fight,
and if unable to gain the day, passed to the rear through the ranks
of the Principes. The latter now marched forwards to action, the
Hastati following. Meanwhile the Triarii continued kneeling behind
the Ensigns; the left legs extended to the front, the shields resting
on the shoulders; the spear-points erect with butts firmly fixed in
the ground, so that the line bristled as if inclosed by a rampart. If
the Principes failed, “res ad Triarios rediit.” The Triarii, after
receiving the Principes and Hastati into their intervals, closed files
and fell upon the enemy in a compact body.[867] This was the most
formidable attack, when the enemy, having pursued the vanquished,
suddenly beheld a new line starting up.’

[Illustration: FIG. 272.—HASTATUS (FROM TRAJAN’S COLUMN).]

Thus far Livy. I am tempted by the subject of the Roman legionaries,
those ‘massive hammers of the whole earth,’ to add, despite its
triteness, a few details.

The Hastatus or spearman, a young light-armed soldier, preceded the
colours; hence he was called Antesignanus. He wore for defence a plain
or crested helmet which varied with his legion.[868] He had a bronze
breast-plate thirty-two inches long, or a cuirass of thin metal plates
defending the chest and forming shoulder-pieces. A kilt[869] of the
same material protected his lower body; greaves or leggings (_ocreæ_)
his legs, and the Scutum or shield his flank. This article (σκῦτος,
leather, dog-skin?), a curved rectangular oblong, larger than the
Parma, measured about four feet by two and a half feet; the framework
was of wood, and the covering had a strong boss and metal platings. As
his name denotes, the Hastatus was armed with the full-sized spear, and
with a long or short ‘gladius’ or ‘ensis.’ The latter was carried on
the right, as a rule; as will be seen, it greatly varied in size and
shape. The soldier, when excited in battle, threw away his spear and
drew his Sword; the Etruscans did the same.[870] The shield-umbo was
also used in close combat to bear down the opponent.

[Illustration: FIG. 273.—CENTURION’S CUIRASS, WITH PHALERÆ OR
DECORATIONS.]

The second line, which like the third followed the standards, was
composed of the Principes or Proci, soldiers of mature age. The name
seems to denote that originally they formed the front line, as the
Greek Promachoi and our Grenadiers.[871] Lastly came the Triarii (third
line men), a reserve, so called from their position—veterans of tried
valour who were expected to retrieve the fortunes of the day. At first
they were the only Pilani[872] (javelineers), as opposed to the two
first lines (Antepilani). Their redoubtable weapon, which conquered
so much of the old world, and which descended by inheritance to the
Franks, was about six feet and three-quarters long, composed of an
iron (two feet) with oval or pyramidal head, set by a broad tang in a
wooden socketed shaft treble its length. The latter was round at the
heel and squared about the shoulders, as we learn from Livy,[873] when
describing the Phalarica or fire-missile. Both Principes and Triarii
also carried Swords, the former at the right hip, the latter above
it: as has before been noticed this is a most complicated subject.
The bandsmen wore, like the Signa-bearers, a peculiar helmet; they
consisted of tubicines (using the _tuba_, a long Etruscan trumpet), of
cornicines (the _cornu_ being a writhed horn), and of buccinatores,
blowing a short simple instrument. The Roman officers were armed like
the men.

Under the term _utraque militia_ was included the legionary cavalry
whose number varied little in proportion to the infantry. In
Polybius’ day the ratio was two hundred to four thousand. This arm
was clad in a complete suit of bronze less heavy than the Greeks
and the Gallo-Greeks;[874] the buckler of ox-hide was round, oval,
or polygonal. The horseman’s weapons were a Spear (_contus_), often
accompanied by a javelin, a waist-dagger, and a Sword worn on the
right; the latter, unlike ours, preserved the form of the infantry
weapon. The Greek cavalry in the Roman service at the siege of
Jerusalem, as we learn from Josephus, carried long Swords suspended to
the right flank.

Lastly, the Legion was followed by its massive _tormenta_ (artillery):
catapults (for darts) and _balistæ_ (for stones), escorted by the
_vexillarii_ or oldest soldiers, under their own _vexillum_, and
worked by the Sappers or _fabri_ (_lignarii_, &c.). The camp-followers
(_calones_, _lixæ_) and the baggage (_impedimenta_) brought up the rear.

The Roman infantry was carefully drilled. Vegetius tells us that
recruits were exercised with osier-bucklers and stakes double the
weight of the normal Swords. There were also regular _champs de Mars_,
‘sham-fights’ with wooden Swords and with javelins whose points were
sheathed in balls.

In the effeminate days of the Empire, shortly after Constantine,
military discipline was relaxed, and the decay of the Legion became
complete. Instead of shouldering their packs the men carried them in
carts. The Hasta was given up, and the helmet and the cuirass were
dispensed with as too heavy. Vegetius[875] had reason to ascribe the
defeat of the Legion by the Goths to the want of its old defensive
armour.

It was not only when campaigning that the Romans studied the use of
arms. In the Campus Martius and the other seven ‘parks’ of the Capital,
crowds of young men practised riding, swording, and athletics. Another
mighty _Salle d’Armes_ was the Amphitheatre. To a purely military
nation, gladiatorism had great merits. ‘C’estoit, à la verité,’ says
Montaigne,[876] ‘un merveilleux exemple, et de tresgrand fruict pour
l’institution du peuple, de veoir touts les jours en sa presence
cent, deux cents, voire mille couples d’hommes, armez les uns contre
les aultres, se hacher en pieces, avecques une si extreme fermeté
de courage, qu’on ne leur voit lascher une parole de foiblesse ou
commiseration, jamais tourner le dos, ny faire seulement un mouvement
lasche pour gauchir au coup de leur adversaire, ains tendre le col à
son espee, et se presenter au coup.’

It appears to me that the nineteenth century wastes much fine sentiment
upon the ‘detestable savagery of the Lanista,’[877] and upon the
wretches

    Butchered to make a Roman holiday.

The _ludus gladiatorius_[878] began as a humane institution amongst the
Etruscans, who, instead of slaughtering, upon the funeral pyre, slaves
and war-captives, like Achilles and Pyrrhus, allowed them to fight for
their lives. The _munus_ at Rome, moreover, was originally confined
to public funerals, and it was an abuse which allowed it at private
interments, at entertainments, and at holiday festivals in general.

According to Livy[879] ‘when Scipio exhibited gladiators at Carthage’
(B.C. 546) ‘they were not slaves or men who sold their blood, the
usual stuff of the Lanista’s school.’[880] The service was voluntary
and gratuitous. Combatants were often sent by petty princes to show
the courage of their people; others came forward in compliment to the
General, and some decided their disputes by the Sword. Amongst persons
of distinction were Corbis and Orsua, cousins-german, who determined
to fight out their claims to the city called Ibes, and they ‘exhibited
to the army a most interesting spectacle,’ the elder swordsman easily
mastering the artless attacks of the younger.

[Heading: _THE ROMAN GLADIATOR._]

Even when the gladiators at Rome were condemned criminals and captives
whose lives were forfeited by the old laws of war, some humanity
remained. Although the malefactors doomed _ad gladium_ were to be
slain within the year, those sent only _ad ludum_ might obtain their
discharge within three years. And under the Empire to join the shows
became ‘fashionable:’ Severus was compelled to forbid freeborn
citizens, knights, senators, and even women from entering the arena.

The life of the gladiator was one to make the ‘honest poor’ curse
their lot. He was trained in the best climates, and fed with the most
succulent food (_sagina gladiatoria_): hence Cicero[881] calls rude
health and good condition ‘gladiatoria totius corporis firmitas.’ He
became one of a _familia_ or brotherhood after taking the oath, which
Montaigne gives from Petronius (117):—‘Nous jurons de nous laisser
enchainer, brusler, battre et tuer de glaive, et de souffrir tout ce
que les gladiateurs légitimes souffrent de leur maîtres, engageant
très-religieusement le corps et l’âme à son service.’ In other words,
he had plenty of society and he was disciplined. Under the Lanista he
practised daily at the schools, and the _ludus matutinus_ near the
Cœliolus or little Cœlian Hill was frequented by all classes.[882]
Here he ‘fought the air’ (ἀέρα δέρειν), a Σκιαμαχία like our fighting
the sack; he contended with the _rudis_ (rod or wooden Sword); he cut
at the Palus, the ‘post-practice’ of German universities and modern
regiments, and he strengthened back and shoulders with the Halteres
(dumb-bells, _dombelles_), and with other artifices. Thus a wound,
fatal to a man out of training, would only disable one in such splendid
condition.[883] Pliny,[884] indeed, makes light of his danger. Speaking
of C. Curio’s two pivot-theatres, which during representations could be
wheeled inwards or outwards, this model grumbler declares: ‘The safety
of the gladiators was almost less compromised than that of the Roman
people, which allowed itself to be thus whirled round from side to
side.’

If worsted in combat and sentenced to receive the Sword (_ferrum
recipere_), the gladiator, prepared for his fate, met it with manly
firmness. When the down-turned thumbs granted mercy, the vanquished
got his _missio_ or discharge for the day. Augustus humanely abolished
the barbarity of shows _sine missione_, where no quarter was given.
The victor was presented with palms, whence _plurimarum palmarum
gladiator_; and with cash, which doubtless commended him to the other
sex. We read of old gladiators, showing that the career was not
necessarily fatal. These veterans, and sometimes novices who had
fought only in a few _munera_, were, at the request of the people,
discharged the service by the Editor or Exhibitor of the games. They
were then presented with a Rudis (_rude donati_), and, as Rudiarii
lived happily ever afterwards.

We have also notices of distinguished gladiators. Diogenes
Laertius[885] does not disdain to mention as the fourth Epicurus,
‘lastly, a gladiator.’ Spartacus, Crixus, and Œnomaus broke out of
Lentulus’ fencing-school, escaped from Capua, and made a camp at
Vesuvius; they used the Swords made out of iron plundered in the
slave-houses to such effect that Athenæus declares, ‘If Spartacus had
not died in battle, he would have caused no ordinary trouble to our
countrymen, as Eunus did in Sicily.’[886]

Gladiatorial shows were first exhibited (B.C. 246) in the Forum
Boarium by Marcus and D. Brutus at their father’s funeral, during the
Saturnalia (our Christmas) and the Minerva feasts.[887] They were
abolished by Constantine ‘the Great’ (A.D. 306–33), but the edict
seemed to give them fresh life; Frank prisoners were slaughtered by the
hundred in the arena of Trèves. They were finally suppressed (A.D. 404)
by Honorius, who made a martyr of the monk Telemachus. I need hardly
relate how this meddling ecclesiastic rushed into the amphitheatre to
separate the combatants, and was incontinently stoned by ‘the house.’

But the time had come for abolishing these glorious _spectacula_; as
mostly happens, long custom and familiarity had merged the use into
the abuse, and caused Lactantius to exclaim ‘tollenda est nobis!’ The
misuse had begun under Divus Cæsar, who collected so many gladiators
for the fights that his enemies became alarmed, and restricted the
number. Caligula, the ‘Bootling,’ was devoted to the sport, and
made some gladiators captains of his German guards. He deprived
the ‘Mirmillones’[888] of certain weapons. One Columbus coming off
victorious in a fight, but slightly hurt, he caused the wound to be
infused with poison, which got the name of Columbinum. The nervous
Claudius (‘Caldius’) assisted at the _spectacula_ ‘muffled up in a
pallium, a new fashion!’ Having spared, at the intercession of his
four sons, a conquered prize-fighter, he sent a billet round the house
reminding the spectators how much it behoved them to get children,
since these could procure favour and security for a gladiator. In later
years he became savage. If a combatant chanced to fall, especially one
of the Retiarii, he ordered him to be butchered that he might enjoy
the look of the face in the agonies of death. Two combatants happening
to kill each other, he ordered some little knives to be made of their
Swords. He also delighted in seeing Bestiarii, and he made the sport
most brutal and sanguinary. Nero, during his ‘golden quinquennium,’
ordered that no gladiators, even condemned criminals, should be slain;
and he persuaded four hundred senators and six hundred knights, some
of unbroken fortunes and unblemished fame, to fight in the arena.
He espoused the cause of the Thraces or Parmularians, and often
joined in the popular demonstrations in favour of the Prasine or
‘green faction,’ without, however, compromising his dignity or doing
injustice. In his later and crueller days,[889] hearing the master of
a family of gladiators say that a Thrax was a match for a Mirmillo,
but not so for the exhibitor of the games, he had him dragged from the
benches into the arena and exposed to the dogs, with this label, ‘A
Parmularian guilty of speaking blasphemy.’ And, as ‘Mero’ scandalised
the world by his passion for singing and harping, so Commodus degraded
himself by amateur gladiatorship. He was cunning of fence, but in
the most cowardly way. A powerful man and a practised gymnast, he
wore impenetrable armour and fought with a heavy Sword, whereas his
antagonists were allowed only blades of tin and lead. Even the humane
Trajan[890] exhibited after his victories some ten thousand Dacian
‘monomachists.’ The militarism of the Romans, however, made them
familiar with butchery. Thus Tacitus[891] says: ‘The Germans gratified
us with the spectacle of a battle in which above sixty thousand men
were slain.’ This ‘gladiatorial show’ took place near the canal of
Drusus, where the Roman guard on the Rhine commanded a view of the
other shore.

The gladiators used both forms of Swords, the straight two-edged blade
and the curved.[892] The Dimacheri carried, as the name denotes, two
weapons: these may have been either two Swords of the same size, as
carried by the Japanese,[893] or possibly Sword and dagger, a practice
long preserved on the shores of the Mediterranean. The same may be
said of the _duos gladios_ borne by the Gaul whom Torquatus slew.
The Hoplomachi, armed _cap-a-pie_, must also have been Swordsmen.
The Mirmillo[894] was weaponed with a curved blade, cutting inside
(‘gladio incurvo et falcato’): in Montfaucon, he carries a long convex
shield and a Sica or short-Sword.[895] Opposed to the Mirmillo was
the Retiarius, armed with net and trident: Cortez found net-soldiers
in Mexico, as was natural to fishermen. Winckelmann shows a fight
between the two: Retiarius has netted his fish and proceeds to use the
_fuscina_ or _tridens_, while a toga’d Lanista, rod in hand, stands
behind him and points out where to strike.

The Samnites were distinguished by the oblong tribal _scutum_[896] and
the leaf-shaped Greek Sword: so says the Comte de Caylus; but on the
monument erected by Caracalla to Bato, the weapon is straight up and
down. The Thræces or Threces (Thracians proper)[897] had round shields,
and instead of the huge Swords noted by Livy, the short knife called
by Juvenal _falx supina_.[898] The Thracian’s Sword closely resembles
that used in the Isle of Cos. Winckelmann[899] gives a combat between
two Thracians, each backed up by his Lanista. We find also a naked
Gladiator, with Sword and shield, fighting another in breast-belt,
apron (_subligaculum_), and boots, with a shield and a three-thonged
_flagellum_ or scourge.

The Gladiators were an order distinct from the Bestiarii (θηριομάχοι)
who fought against wild beasts; these were exhibited in the Forum,
those in the Circus. Again, Bestiarii, who can boast that St. Paul once
belonged to them, must not be confounded with the criminals thrown
_ad leones_, without means of defence, like Mentor, Androclus, and
early Christian communists.[900] The beast-fighters had their _scholæ
bestiarum_ or _bestiariorum_ where they practised weapons, and they
received _auctoramentum_ or pay. The arms were various: mostly they are
shown with a Sword in one hand, a veil in the other, and the left leg
protected by greaves. Under Divus Cæsar criminals for the first time
encountered wild beasts with silver weapons. The modern survival is
the Spanish bull-fight. Gladiatorism lasted in England after a fashion
till the days of Addison; amongst professional Swordsmen, the highest
surviving name is that of

        ——the great Figg, by the prize-fighting swains
    The monarch acknowledged of Mary’bone plains.[901]

To conclude this discursus on gladiatorism. Most popular sports are
cruel, but we must not confound, as is often done, cruelty with
brutality. The former may accompany greatness of intellect, the
latter is the characteristic of debasement. Every nation is disposed
to ‘fie-fie’ its neighbour’s favourite diversion. The English
fox-hunter and pigeon-shooter[902] are severe upon bull-fighting and
cock-fighting—the classical and Oriental pastime preserved in Spain
and in Spanish South America.[903] The boxer, who imitates, at a humble
distance, the Cestus-play of the Greeks and Romans, looks scandalised
at _la boxe Française_, with its garnishing of _savate_; and at the
Brazilian _capoeira_, who butts with his woolly head. And so _vice
versâ_. Absence or presence of fair play should, methinks, condemn
or justify all the various forms of sport which are not mere or pure
barbarities. And, applying this test, we shall not harsh judge the
gladiatorial games of Rome.

I now proceed to describe the Sword amongst the Romans, a simpler
subject than in Greece.

As the so-termed founding of Rome took place during the early Iron
Age of Southern Europe, it is probable that the citizens, like their
predecessors the Etruscans, originally made their blades of copper and
bronze, the leaf-shape being borrowed from the Greeks, as we see it
retained by the gladiators. The material would last into the Age of
Steel, but even in her early years Rome must have preferred the harder
metal. Pliny expressly tells us that Porsena, after his short-lived
conquest, prohibited the future masters of the world from using iron
except in agriculture; it was hardly safe to handle a stylus. Polybius
notes that in his day bronze was entirely restricted to defensive
armour—helmets, breast-plates, and greaves. All offensive weapons,
swords and spears, were either made of, or tipped with, steel. To this
superiority of material we may attribute the Roman successes in the
second Punic war (B.C. 218–201), and their conquest of the gallant
Gauls, when their foes could oppose nothing better than bronze. They
had reason to call a Sword _ferrum_.[904]

[Heading: _THE SWORD IN ROME._]

The Romans called the Sword Ensis, Gladius, and Spatha. The two former
are used as synonyms by Quinctilian,[905] but the first presently
became poetical. The derivations are eminently unsatisfactory. Voss
would find Ensis in ἔγχος, _hasta_; Sanskritists in _Asi_, a Sword, the
Zend _Anh_. Gladius is popularly drawn _a clade ferenda, quasi cladius_
(Varro and Littleton); Voss prefers κλάδον (_ramus_), a young branch,
the earliest Sword: to others it appears a congener of the Keltic
_Clad_, the destroyer. Of the derivation of ‘Spatha’ I have already
treated: Suetonius[906] makes it equivalent to Machaira; but this word
and its diminutive Machærium are loosely used.

The Roman Sword was, like their other weapons, longer and larger,
heavier and more formidable than that of the Greeks.[907] The earliest
form, the ‘hero’s arm’ of Virgil and Livy, was a short single-edged
cutting weapon of bronze, also called the ‘Gallic Sword,’ because
long preserved by that people. It is shown in the arm of the Roman
Auxiliary (fig. 276). Another very early, if not the earliest, shape
was the leaf, which varied in length from nineteen inches (the blade
found at Mayence) to twenty-six inches (the Bingen find). The latter is
peculiar; the hilt is ornamented with bronze, and it has a cross-guard.
Upon another blade (fig. 277), of which a cast is in the Artillery
Museum, Paris, appears the armourer’s mark, _Sabini_ (_opus_).

[Illustration: FIG. 274.—1. ROMAN SWORD (19 inches long); 2. GLADIUS.]

[Illustration: FIG. 275.—BRONZE TWO-EDGED EARLY ROMAN ENSIS.[908]]

[Illustration: FIG. 276.—SWORD OF ROMAN AUXILIARY.]

[Illustration: FIG. 277.—ROMAN SWORD (Musée d’Art.).]

The third form, which is most generally identified with the Roman
soldier, greatly resembles that which was introduced into the French
army by, not without financial benefit to, Marshal Soult. The average
length may be assumed at twenty-two inches, with a grip of six inches
and a cross-bar (not always present) four inches and a half long and
four lines thick. Some specimens show a distinct hilt-plate (fig.
274, 2). A mid-rib ran along the blade, which was either straight or
slightly narrowing, and it ended in the bevelled point (_langue de
carpe_).[909] This thick heavy blade, used _cæsim et punctim_, was
most efficient for hand-to-hand work, and the Roman soon mastered the
truth, unknown to most Orientals, that ‘the cut wounds and the thrust
kills.’[910] Accordingly they soon learned to despise the old Sword,
short and crooked. The national weapon must have been used by Æmilius
at the Battle of Telamon (B.C. 225), for Polybius notes that the Roman
blade could not only deliver thrust but give the cut with good effect.

Shortly after that fight the Romans, during their earliest invasions
of the Spanish Peninsula (B.C. 219), intended to subvert Carthaginian
rule, adopted the Gladius Hispanus, including the _pugio_ (fig. 280);
and the change from bronze to steel became universal after the battle
of Cannæ. The superior material aided them not a little in conquering
their obstinate rivals. The Roman Proconsul M. Fulvius captured
(B.C. 192) Toledo (Τώλητον), Toletum, ‘a small city, but strong in
position;’[911] and the superior temper of the steel, attributed with
truth, I believe, to the Tagus-water, recommended it to the conquerors.
A later conquest of the Regnum Noricum[912] (Styria, B.C. 16) gave
them mines of equal excellence. From Pliny and Diodorus Siculus[913]
we know perfectly how the Celtiberians prepared their iron ores. Of
this material was made the Spatha[914] or Iberian blade, a name adopted
under the Empire, especially under Hadrian (A.D. 117–138). Long,
two-edged, and heavier than the short Xiphos-Gladius, it added fresh
force to the _impetus gladiorum_.

[Illustration: FIG. 278.—SWORD AND VAGINA (SHEATH).]

[Illustration: FIG. 279.—DITTO.]

[Illustration: FIG. 280.—THE PUGIO.]

In Cicero’s time the Sword must have been of full length to explain
the joke against his son-in-law; and Macrobius expressly tells us
that Lentulus was wearing a blade which justified the ‘chaff.’ During
the days of Theodosius (A.D. 378–394), the straight and strong weapon
of Hadrian’s time again shortened till it was not twice the size of
the hilt; in fact it became a ‘Parazonium.’ The General’s Sword (says
Meyrick) was called Cinctorium, because carried at the girdle that
surrounded the lorica, just above the hips; ‘it greatly resembled the
Lacedæmonian Sword.’

The Parazonium, _pugio_[915] or dagger, accompanied the Gladius under
the later Empire, and was carried in the same, or in another, belt,
generally on the opposite flank. It is the Greek ἐγχειρίδιον, and we
have seen its origin in Egypt. The metal was successively pure copper,
bronze and steel. The shape of this two-edged stiletto is either
lanceolate (fig. 280 _b_),[916] showing its descent from the spear,
or the straight lines converge to a point (_ibid._ _a_). It has a
notable resemblance to the daggers found in Egyptian tombs (_ibid._
_c_), and the weapon with the Z-section, still used in the Caucasus
and in Persia.[917] The tang is usually fitted to receive a wooden
plate on either side: a favourite substance was the heart of the Syrian
_terebinth_ (the ‘oak’ of Mamre).

[Illustration: FIG. 281.—TWO-EDGED ROMAN STILETTOS.]

The bronze hilt of the Gladius was retained long after the blade was
made of steel. The common grip was of wood set with metal knobs or
rivets; the richer sorts were of bone and ivory, amber and alabaster,
silver and gold. The heft ended in a _capulus_; this metal pommel[918]
was, in its simplest state, a plain mound or a stepped pyramid. But
presently the ‘little apple’ became the seat of decoration;[919] Pliny
moans over it, and Claudian speaks of _capulis radiantibus enses_.
This fashion lasted deep into the Middle Ages. The haft was often
capped with the head of some animal after Assyrian fashion, and that
of the eagle recurved was a favourite in Rome. In the Armeria Reale
(Turin)[920] there is a fine Roman chopper-blade with a peculiar
handle, and a ram’s head for hilt. The handle was usually without
guard-plate, and at most it had only a simple cross-bar or a small
oval.[921]

The original _vagina_ (sheath) was of leather or wood, ending in
a _fibula_ or half-moon-shaped ferule of metal. Some scabbards on
the monuments, where the Sword, like the helmet and the _pilum_, is
conventionally treated, show the scabbard with three opposing rings
on either side; and, as the belt had only one or two, it is not easy
to explain the use of the other five.[922] In the luxurious days of
the Empire, the sheath, like the heft, the pommel, and the ferule, was
made of gold and silver reliefs, _repoussée_-work, and incrustations
of precious stones disposed upon every part, made it a _chef-d’œuvre_
of art. Such is the ‘Sword,’ or rather ‘Parazonium, of Tiberius’ dug
up at Mayence in 1848, and now in the British Museum. The scabbard,
the mouth, the rings on either side, and the ferule are strengthened
and beautified by reliefs in gold and silver, and the central field
bears the portrait of the beautiful ‘Biberius.’ Another Parazonium
(Anglo-Rom. Coll.) has an iron blade and a bronze scabbard.

[Illustration: FIG. 282.—SWORD OF TIBERIUS.]

A reform of this over-luxury ensued under Constantius II. (A.D. 350),
and under the noble and glorious Julian[923] ‘the Apostate.’ The
latter took a lesson from the Eastern Persian, Parthian, and Sarmatian
(Slav?); moreover, he adopted the iron face-guard known at Nineveh,
and the mail-coat found upon the Trajan column. These revivals and
improvements extended deep into the Age of Chivalry.

The Sword was carried in the _balteus_, an Etruscan word applied
indifferently, it would appear, to the bauldric (τελαμών), or to the
waist-‘belt’ (ζώνη or ζωστήρ, _cingulum_). Both were of cloth or
leather, either plain or decorated with embroidery, with metal plates,
splendid and elaborate rings and fibulæ, and buckles and brooches of
the most precious material. It is generally said that the Gladius, and
its successor the long cut-and-thrust Spatha, were worn belted to the
right, as amongst the Persians. The old Ensis, on the other hand, was
slung to the left, like the Egyptians, Assyrians, Hindús, and other
‘barbarians.’[924] The latter fashion enabled the Swordsman to draw
his weapon safely by passing hand and forearm across his body under
the shield. He would also in this way grip the hilt with the thumb at
the back of the blade, where it should ever be held, especially when
delivering the cut. I believe, however, that the Sword was worn by the
Romans, as amongst the Greeks, on either flank.[925]

We have no knowledge, except from books, of Roman fancy-Swords. Such,
for example, was the _Cluden_ or juggler’s ‘shutting’-Sword, which ran
up into the hilt. ‘So great is your fear of steel,’ says Apuleius in
his defence, ‘that you are afraid to dance with the “close-Sword.”’

Roman blades of iron are not often found, and yet they must have been
made by the million. Captain Grose[926] figures a leaf-shaped blade,
like that of the modern Somal, taken from the Severn near Gloucester.
Meyrick tells us[927] that Woodchester produced an iron Sword-blade
resembling a large and broad knife (the oldest form of Gladius?) and a
dagger (_pugio_), nearly one foot long, and much resembling the modern
French bayonet. He mentions another iron Gladius nineteen and a half
inches long, with a fibula of brass. Rev. T. Douglas, in his ‘Nænia
Britannica’[928] shows the find in a Kentish barrow. The Sword measures
thirty-five and a quarter inches from pommel to point; the iron blade,
thirty inches by two inches broad, is flat and two-edged. The wooden
grip had decayed; the scabbard was of wood covered with leather and
the weapon hung by a leather strap to the left side. Excavations at
South Shields produced, says the Rev. J. Collingwood Bruce,[929] five
Roman Swords, two to three feet long, with wooden scabbards and bronze
crampets or ferules.

If Greece produced the golden youth of European civilisation, Rome
bore the men of antiquity. She taught by example and precept the
eternal lesson of individual and national dignity, of law and justice,
and of absolute toleration in religious matters. She had no fear
of growing great, and scruples about ‘territorial aggrandisement’
were absolutely unknown to her. The _quondam_ Masters of the World
effected their marvels of conquest and colonisation with these arts,
urged by a forceful will, a will so single-viewed and so persistent
that it levelled every obstacle. A similar gift of determination and
perseverance made the Turks and Turcomans of a former generation, mere
barbarians on horseback, bear down all opposition: hence the Arab still
says: ‘Mount your blood mare and the Osmanli shall catch you on his
lame ass!’ In virtue of an equal obstinacy, the Kelto-Scandinavian (I
will not call him an ‘Anglo-Saxon’), the modern Englishman, has trod
worthily in the footsteps of the old Italian, and from his ‘angle of
the world,’ his scrap of bleak inclement island, has extended his sway
far beyond the orb known to his Cæsars. May he only remember the word
‘Forwards!’ and take to heart the fact that to stand still is to fall
back.

The Roman of the Republic was incomparably the first soldier of his
age; and he equalled the best of the moderns in discipline, in loyalty
to his loaders, and in enduring privations, hardship, and fatigue.
But a glance at any of his campaigns—the famous ‘Commentaries’
suffice—shows how completely dependent he was upon the quality of his
commander. Handled by second- and third-rate men, such as generals
mostly have been, are, and will be, he was ignobly defeated, in
his most glorious days, by the barbarous Gauls of Brennus; by the
half-servile hordes of Hannibal; by the degenerate Greeks of Pyrrhus
with their ‘huge earth-shaking beasts,’ and by the armed mob which
the Cheruscan Arminius (Ormin or Hermann) led against the incompetent
Varus. His campaigns, invariably successful in the end, were marked
by many reverses; and in cases of sudden and sinister emergencies he
was too often scared and put to flight. In fact, he could not fight a
‘soldier’s battle’; nor has any race done this effectively in modern
days except the English and the Slavs.

But when following military genius, the Roman soldier performed
prodigies of gallantry and valour. A Julius Cæsar, a conqueror in fifty
pitched battles, whose practice was to order _venite_ not _ite!_ whose
military instinct could cry at the spur of the moment in the Pharsalian
fight, _faciem feri, miles!_ and who could reduce mutineers to reason
by one word, _Quirites!_ never failed to point the way to victory.
We learn from the Great Epileptic[930] himself the secret of his
unexampled success; the care with which he cultivated the individual.
‘He instructed the soldiers (when exposed to a new mode of attack), not
like the general of a veteran army which had been victorious in so many
battles, but like a Lanista training his gladiators. He taught them
with what foot they must advance or retire; when they were to oppose
and make good their ground; when to counterfeit an attack; at what
place and in what manner to launch their javelins.’[931]

His very arrogance was effective in making him a ruler of men, as when
on receiving bad tidings he struck his Sword-hilt, saying, ‘This will
give me my rights!’ And of his ‘politiké’ (as the Greeks call it) we
may judge by what Polyænus[932] tells us of him. ‘The Romans had been
taught by their commanders that a soldier should not be decorated with
gold or silver, but place his confidence in his Sword,’ says Livy.[933]
But Divus Cæsar encouraged his men to decorate their weapons with all
manner of valuables for a truly soldier-like reason, that they might
be the less ready to part with their property in flight. And though he
plundered freely and rifled even the fanes of the gods, according to
Suetonius, he was careful, like a certain modern Condottiere, to see
that his men were well fed and regularly paid by means of the ‘loot.’

[Heading: _THE ROMAN SOLDIER._]

The Roman soldier had another valuable gift, which has not wholly left
the Latin race. He knew the ‘magic of patience,’ and was aware that
‘le monde est la maison du plus fort.’ So in the Napoleonic days the
Spaniards believed chiefly in General ‘No Importa’ (no matter), and
made little of defeat, hoping it might lead to victory. Nor did the
Roman soldier degenerate till the citizen set him the example. Velleius
Paterculus dated the decline of Roman virtue after the destruction of
Carthage, when civil disputes were decided by the Sword; others to
the invasion of luxury with Lucullus. Yet Pliny could boast of his
fellow-countrymen: ‘They have doubtless surpassed every other nation in
the display of valour.’

But the Roman soldier generally prevailed against races whom he
excelled in size, weight, and muscular strength. His superiority in
arms, like that of the Greek, was not conspicuous when he came into
contact with the ‘barbarians,’[934] especially with the northern
barbarians, after they had learned the moral training and confidence
of discipline and the practical art of war, as well as, if not better
than, himself. For the man of the higher European latitudes has ever
surpassed the Southron in strength of constitution, in stature, in
weight, in muscular power, and in the mysterious something called
vitality. Hence it is a rule in anthropology that the North beats the
South; in the Southern hemisphere the reverse being the case, as we see
in the wars of the Hispano-American republics, Chili _versus_ Peru. In
Europe I need only point out that the Northmen of Scandinavia conquered
Normandy and that Norman-French conquered England. The only exceptions
are easily explained. The genius of Divus Cæsar made his Romans
overcome, overrun, and subjugate Gaul. Napoleon the Great found the
road _à Berlin_ open and easy. But intellectual monsters like these two
are the rare produce of Time; and human nature requires a long period
of rest before repeating such portents.

Those who read history without prepossessions and prejudices are
compelled to conclude that the life and career of a nation are mainly
determined by its physical size and its muscular strength. We have only
to learn how many foot-pounds a race can raise and we can forecast its
so-called ‘destinies.’[935]




                             CHAPTER XIII.

        THE SWORD AMONGST THE BARBARIANS (EARLY ROMAN EMPIRE).


Most works on Arms and Armour, when treating of Rome, describe the
weapons of her European neighbours ‘upon whom she sharpened the sword
of her valour as on a whetstone.’[936] The extent of the subject will
here confine me to a general glance, beginning with the Dacians on
the east and ending with the British Islands. I must reserve details
concerning the Kelts, the Scandinavians, the Slavs, and other northern
peoples for Part II., to which they chronologically belong.

The Dacians, especially of Dacia Trajana, Hungary, and Transylvania,
Moldavia, and Wallachia, are known to us chiefly by the bas-reliefs on
the Trajan Column. It was built by that emperor, who, like Hadrian,
followed in the footsteps of Divus Cæsar, to commemorate the conquests
of A.D. 103–104; and it dates three years before his death in A.D. 114.
The Dacian Sword was somewhat sickle-shaped, with an inner edge, like
the oldest Greek and its model, the Egyptian Khopsh. A Dacian Sword on
the trophy belonging to Dr. Gregorutti, of Papiriano, is a curved sabre
without a cross-bar.

I have elsewhere noticed the Thracian Sword. Dr. Evans[937] mentions
the fragment of a remarkable bronze blade from Grecian Thera; it has a
series of small broad-edged axes of gold, in shape like conventional
battle-axes, inlaid along the middle between two slightly projecting
ribs. The same author, speaking of the beautiful bronze Sword in the
Berlin Museum, reported to have been found at Pella in Macedonia,
mentions the suspicion that it may belong to the Rhine Valley.[938]

Ancient Illyria has transmitted the Roman Gladius to comparatively
modern ages. Bosnian tombs of Slavs, Moslem, and Christian, show the
short straight thrusting Sword, with simple cross-bar and round pommel.
It looks as if it had been copied from some classical coin.

[Heading: _THE OLD KELTIC SWORD._]

The ancient cemetery at Hallstadt in the Salzkammergut, occupied by the
Danubian-Keltic Alanni or Norican Taurisci, is especially interesting
for two reasons. It shows the Bronze Sword synchronous with the Iron,
and it proves that the change of metal involved little of alteration
in the form and character of the weapon. This, however, was to be
expected, as both were adapted for the same purpose—the thrust, not the
cut. Of the twenty-eight long Swords, six were of bronze, nineteen
of iron, and three with bronze hefts and iron blades; there were also
forty-five short Swords, iron blades with bronze or ivory handles.
The blade, about one mètre long, is leaf-shaped, two-edged, and
bevel-pointed. The small and guardless grip of 2·5 centimètres, when
made of bronze, meets the blade in a hollow crescent, like the British
Sword in the Tower, and is fastened with metal rivets. The pommel is
either a cone of metal or a crutch with a whorl ending either arm.

[Illustration: FIG. 283.—GERMAN OR SLAV SWORD. (From a bas-relief,
Halberstadt.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 284.—SCRAMASAX FROM HALLSTADT. (Jähns.)]

[Illustration: FIG. 285.—DANISH SCRAMASAX. (Ninth Century, Copenhagen.)]

Dr. Evans[939] mentions that in one instance the hilt and pommel of an
iron Sword are in bronze, in another the pommel alone; the hilt-plate
of iron being flat and rivetted like the bronzes. In others the pommel
is wanting. He has a broken iron Sword from this cemetery, the blade
showing a central rounded rib, with a small bead on either side. Also a
‘beautiful bronze Sword from the same locality, on the blade of which
are two small raised beads on either side of the central rib, and in
the spaces between them a three-fold wavy line punched in or engraved.
In this instance a tang has passed through the hilt, and was formed of
alternate blocks of bronze and of some substance that has perished,
possibly ivory. A magnificent iron Sword from Hallstadt, now in the
Vienna Museum, has the hilt and pommel of ivory inlaid with amber.’
Other grips were of bronze, wood, or bone. The sheaths were mostly
of wood, which seemed to have been covered with leather. Most of the
blades were buried without scabbards, and the bronze had been purposely
broken.

The forty-five short Swords represent the Ensis Noricus (μάχαιρα
Κέλτικα), and were in use till the Roman days. The iron-blades are
either leaf-shaped or formed like the peculiarly English anelace or
anlas, more or less conical and sharp-pointed; and the grip of bronze
or ivory ended in a simple crutch. Amongst them is a distinct Scramasax
which may be compared with the late Danish weapon.

Bronze blades are comparatively rare in Italy, although the use was
long retained and the weapon is often mentioned by Latin writers in
verse and prose.[940] This seems to decide the question against the
Roman origin of the North-European Sword: of course it is possible
that, like the Runic alphabet, they might have been copied from coins;
but there are other points which militate against this view. Dr. John
Evans[941] notes a peculiarity which he has often pointed out by word
of mouth, but which has not as yet been noticed in print. ‘It is, that
there is generally, though not universally, a proportion between the
length of the blade and the length of the hilt-plate; long sword blades
having, as a rule, long hilt-plates, and short sword blades short
hilt-plates. So closely is this rule of proportion preserved, that the
outline of a large sword on the scale of one-sixth would in some cases
absolutely correspond with that of one which was two-thirds of its
length if drawn on the scale of one-fourth.’ This suggests derivation,
as if an original _modulus_ of the weapon had appeared in a certain
racial centre and thence had radiated in all directions. Nor have we
any difficulty in determining that this centre was the Nile Valley.

The bronze Swords of Italy present varieties not found in Britain.[942]
The blade-sides are more nearly parallel, and many have a slender tang
at the hilt, sometimes with one central rivet-hole, sometimes with two
rivet-holes forming loops at either side of the ‘spine.’ In others the
blade slightly narrows for the tang, and each side has two semicircular
rivet-notches. In many Italian and French Swords the blade is drawn
out to a long tapering point, so that its edges present a sub-ogival
curve. On an Italian _quincussis_ or oblong bronze coin, six inches
and five-eighths by three inches and a half, and weighing about three
pounds and a half, is the representation of a leaf-shaped Sword with a
raised rib along the centre of the blade.[943] Upon the reverse appears
the figure of a scabbard with parallel sides and a nearly circular
chape. Another coin of the same type, engraved by Carelli,[944] has an
almost similar scabbard on the reverse, but the Sword on the obverse
is either sheathed or is not leaf-shaped, the sides being parallel:
the hilt is also curved, and there is a cross-guard. In fact upon the
one coin the weapon has the appearance of a Roman Sword of iron, and
on the other that of a leaf-shaped Sword of bronze. Those pieces,
says Dr. Evans, were no doubt cast in Umbria, probably in the third
century B.C., but their attribution to Ariminum is at best doubtful.
From the two varieties of Sword appearing on coins of the same type,
the inference may be drawn, either that bronze blades were then being
superseded in Umbria by iron, or that the original type was some sacred
weapon, subsequently conventionalised to represent the article in
ordinary use.

The iron Swords of the Italian tribes are rarely mentioned, and then
cursorily. Diodorus Siculus, for instance, tells us (v. 33) that the
Ligures had blades of ordinary size. They probably adopted the Roman
shape, which had proved itself so serviceable in the field.

[Heading: _THE CELTIBERIAN AND OLD SPANISH SWORD._]

[Illustration: FIG. 286.—BLADE AND HANDLE OF BRONZE WITH PART OF EAGLE
(Kessel).]

Proceeding further westward we find Diodorus Siculus (v. cap. 33)
dwelling upon the Celtiberian weapons.[945] ‘They had two-edged Swords
of well-tempered steel; besides their daggers, a span long, to be used
at close quarters. They make weapons and iron in an admirable manner,
for they bury their plates so long underground as is necessary to eat
away the weaker part; and, therefore, they use only that which is firm
and strong. Swords and other weapons are made of this prepared steel;
and these are so powerful in cutting, that neither shield nor helm nor
bone can withstand them.’ Plutarch[946] repeats this description, which
embodies the still prevalent idea concerning the Damascus (Persian)
scymitar and the Toledo rapier. Swedenborg[947] introduces burial
among the different methods of making steel; and Beckmann, following
Thunberg, declares that the process is still used in Japan.

General A. Pitt-Rivers’ collection has two Swords from Spain. The
first is a bronze, sub-leaf-shaped, with a thin protracted point. The
length is twenty-one inches; the breadth at the swell two inches,
thinning near the handle to one inch and a quarter; the tang is broken,
and there are two rivet-holes at the shoulder, which is two inches
wide. The other, which the owner calls a ‘Kopis,’ also twenty-one
inches long, and two inches and a half in width, has a broad back and
a wedge-section. The cutting part is inside, and the whole contour
remarkably resembles the Kukkri or Korah of Nepaul, and, in a less
degree, the Albanian Yataghan and the Kabyle ‘Flissa.’ The Kopis,
however, has a hook-handle as if for suspension; and there is a
swelling in the inside of the grip.

‘As the Celtiberians,’ continues Diodorus, ‘are furnished with two
Swords,’ (probably _espada y daga_), ‘the horsemen, when they have
routed their opponents, dismount, and, joining the foot, fight as its
auxiliaries.’ The Lusitanians, most valiant of the race, inhabited
a mountain-land peculiarly rich in minerals. Justin[948] speaks of
the gold, copper, lead, and vermilion, which last named the ‘Minho’
river. Of the iron he says: ‘It is of an extraordinary quality, but
their water is more powerful than the iron itself; for the metal being
tempered in it becomes keener; nor is any weapon held in esteem among
them that has not been dipt in the Bilbilis or the Chalybs.’[949]
Strabo[950] represents Iberia as abounding in metal, and arms the
Lusitanians with poniard and dagger, probably meaning dirk and knife.

[Heading: _THE SWORD OF THE OLD GAULS._]

[Illustration: FIG. 287.—GALLIC SWORD OF BRONZE (Jähns).]

The Northern neighbours of the Celtiberians—the warlike old Keltic[951]
Gauls—were essentially swordsmen: they relied mainly upon the
Claidab.[952] When they entered Europe they had already left behind
them the Age of Stone; and they made their blades of copper, bronze,
and iron. The latter, as we learn from history, entered into use during
the fourth or fifth century B.C., the later Celtic Period, as it is
called by Mr. Franks. The material appears to have been, according to
all authorities, very poor and mean. The blade was mostly two-edged,
about one mètre long, thin, straight, and without point (_sine
mucrone_); it had a tang for the attachment of the grip, but no guard
or defence for the hand.

Yet their gallantry enabled the Gauls to do good work with these bad
tools. F. Camillus, the dictator,[953] seeing that his enemy cut mostly
at head and shoulders, made his Romans wear light helmets, whereby the
Machairæ-blades were bent, blunted, or broken. Also, the Roman shield
being of wood, he ‘directed it for the same reason to be bordered with
a thin plate of brass’ (copper, bronze?). He also taught his men to
handle long pikes, which they could thrust under the enemy’s weapons.
Dionysius Halicarnassus introduces him saying, while he compares Roman
and Gaulish arms, that these Kelts assail the foe only with long
lances and large knives (μάχαιρας κοπίδες)[954] of sabre shape (?).
This was shortly before his defeating and destroying Brennus and the
Senonian[955] Gauls, who had worsted the Romans (B.C. 390) on the fatal
_dies Alliensis_,[956] and who had captured all the capital save the
Capitol.

The Gauls of Cæsar’s day[957] had large iron mines which they worked
by tunnelling; their ship-bolts were of the same material, and they
made even chain-cables of iron. They had by no means, however,
abandoned the use of bronze arms. Pausanias[958] also speaks of
ταῖς μαχαίραις τῶν Γαλατῶν. Diodorus[959] notes that the Kelts wore
‘instead of short straight Swords (ξίφους), long broad blades (μάκρας
σπάθας[960]), which they bore obliquely at the right side hung by iron
and copper chains.... Their Swords are not smaller than the Saunions
(σαυνίων[961]) of other nations, and the points of their Saunions are
bigger than those of their Swords.’ Strabo[962] also makes the Gauls
wear their long Swords hanging to the right. Procopius,[963] on the
other hand, notices that the Gallic auxiliaries of Rome wore the Sword
on the left.[964] According to Poseidonius,[965] the Gauls also carried
a dagger which served the purpose of a knife, and this may have caused
some confusion in the descriptions.

Q. Claudius Quadrigarius in Aulus Gellius,[966] noticing the
‘monomachy’ of Manlius Torquatus with the Gaul, declares that the
latter was armed with two gladii. Livy describes the same duel in
his best style. The Roman, of middling stature and unostentatious
bearing, takes a footman’s shield and girds on a Spanish Spatha—arms
fit for ready use rather than show. The big Gaul, another Goliah,
glittering in a vest of many colours, and in armour stained and inlaid
with gold, shows barbarous exultation, and thrusts out his tongue in
childish mockery. The friends retire and leave the two in the middle
space, ‘more after the manner of a theatrical show than according
to the law of combat.’ The enormous Northerner, like a huge mass
threatening to crush what was beneath it, stretched forth his shield
with his left hand and planted an ineffectual cut of the Sword with
loud noise upon the armour of the advancing foe. The Southron, raising
his Sword-point, after pushing aside the lower part of the enemy’s
shield with his own, closed in, insinuating his whole body between
the trunk and arms of his adversary, and by two thrusts, delivered
almost simultaneously at belly and groin, threw his opponent, who when
prostrate covered a vast extent of ground. The gallant victor offered
no indignity to the corpse beyond despoiling it of the _torques_,
which, though smeared with blood, he cast around his neck.

Polybius,[967] recounting the battle at Pisæ, where Aneroestes,
king of the Gæsatæ,[968] aided by the Boii, the Insubres, and the
Taurisci (Noricans, Styrians), was defeated by C. Atilius (A.U.C. 529
= B.C. 225), shows the superiority of the Roman weapons. He describes
the Machairæ of the Gauls ‘as merely cutting blades ... altogether
pointless, and fit only to slash from a distance downwards: these
weapons by their construction soon wax blunt, and are bent and bowed;
so that a second blow cannot be delivered until they are straightened
by the foot.’ The same excellent author,[969] when describing the
battle of Cannæ (B.C. 216), tells us that Hannibal and his Africans
were armed like Romans, with the spoils of the preceding actions; while
the Spanish and Gaulish auxiliaries had the same kind of shield, but
their Swords were wholly unequal and dissimilar. While the Spanish
Xiphos was excellent both for cutting and thrusting, the long and
pointless Gallic Machæra could only slash from afar. Livy[970] also
notices the want of point and the bending of the soft and ill-tempered
Keltic blades.

When Lucius Manlius attacked the Gauls, B.C. 181, the latter carried
long flat shields, too narrow to protect the body.[971] They were
soon left without other weapons but their Swords, and these they had
no opportunity of using, as the enemy did not come to close quarters.
Phrensied with the smart of missiles raining upon their large persons,
the wounds appearing the more terrible from the black blood contrasting
with the white skin; and furious with shame at being put _hors de
combat_ by hurts apparently so small, they lost many by the Swords of
the Velites. These ‘light bobs’ in those days were well armed; they
had shields three feet long, _pila_ for skirmishing, and the _Gladius
Hispanus_, which they drew after shifting the javelins to the left
hand. With these handy blades they rushed in and wounded faces and
breasts, whilst the Gallic Swords could not be wielded without space.

Passing from books to monuments, we see on an Urban medal of Rimini,
dating from the domination of the Senones, a long-haired and
moustachio’d Gaul, and on the reverse a broad Spatha, with scabbard and
chain. This is repeated on another coin of the same series, where a
naked Gaul, protected by an oblong shield, assails with the same kind
of Sword. A third shows the Gaul with two _gladii_, one shorter than
the other.[972] The scabbards and chains were of bronze or iron.

According to Diodorus,[973] the Gauls advanced to battle in
war-chariots (_carpentum_, _covinus_, _essedum_). They also had
cavalry;[974] but during their invasions of Italy they mostly fought
on foot. They had various kinds of missiles, javelins, and the Cateia
or Caia (boomerang, or throwing-club), slings, and bows and arrows,
poisoned as well as unpoisoned. They then rushed to the attack with
unhelm’d heads, and their long locks knotted on the head-top. In many
fights they stripped themselves, probably for bravado, preserving only
the waistcloth and ornaments, torques, leglets, and armlets. They
cut off the heads of the fallen foes; slung them to their shields or
saddlebows, and kept them at home as trophies, still the practice
of the Dark Continent. Their girls and women fought as bravely as
the men; especially with the _contus_ or wooden pike, sharpened and
fire-hardened. The waggons ranged in the rear formed a highly efficient
‘lager.’ The large Keltic stature, their terrible war-cries, and their
long Swords wielded by doughty arms and backed by stout hearts, enabled
them more than once to triumph over civilised armies.

Divus Cæsar, who is severe upon Gallic _nobilitas_, _levitas_, and
_infirmitas animi_, employed nine years in subduing Gaul (B.C. 59–50).
Before a century elapsed, the people had given up their old barbarous
habits and costume, their fur-coats, like the Slav and Afghan _postín_,
with sleeves opening in front; their saga-cloaks or tartan-plaids[975]
which were probably imitations of the primæval tattoo;[976] their
copper torques and their rude chains and armlets. Gallia Comata
shore her limed and flowing locks, and Gallia Bracchata (Provincia,
Provence) doffed the ‘_truis_’ (trews or trowsers) which were strapped
at the waist and tied in at the ankles.[977] Their women adopted Roman
fashions, and forgot all that Ammianus Marcellinus had said of them:
‘A whole troop of foreigners could not withstand a single Gaul, if
he called to aid his wife, who is usually very strong and blue-eyed,
especially when, swelling her neck, gnashing her teeth, and whirling
her sallow arms of enormous bulk, she begins to strike blows, mingled
with kicks, as if they were so many missiles sent from the string of a
catapult.’ Of their old and rugged virtue we may judge by the tale of
Ortiagon’s gallant wife and the caitiff centurion.[978] Thus Gaul was
thoroughly subdued by Roman civilisation and the Latin tongue; she
contributed to literature her quotum of poets and rhetoricians; her
cities established schools of philosophy, and she saw nothing to envy
in Gallia Togata—Upper Italy.[979]

[Heading: _THE OLD GERMAN SWORD._]

[Illustration: FIG. 288.—FOUND AT AUGSBURG (66 centimètres long. In
Sigmaringen Museum).]

The Alemanni or Germans (Germani) cast of the Rhine inhabited, at the
time of the Roman conquests, a dismal land of swamps and _silvæ_: even
in the present day a run from Hamburg to Berlin explains the ancient
exodus of tribes bent upon conquering the ‘promised lands’ of the
south, and the modern wholesale emigration to America. These ‘warmen’
were formerly surpassed by the Gauls in bravery,[980] but they had
none of the Keltic levity or instability. The national characteristic
was and is the steadfast purpose. Till lately the German Empire was
a shadowy tradition; yet the Germans managed to occupy every throne
in Europe save two. They never yet made a colony, yet cuckoo-like
they hold the best of those made by others; and their sound physical
constitution, strengthened by gymnastics, enables them to resist
tropical and extreme climates better than any European people save the
Slavs and the Jews. In the great cities of the world they occupy the
first commercial place, the result of an education carefully adapted to
its end and object; and their progress in late years seems to promise
‘Germanism’ an immense future based upon the ruins of the neo-Latin
races.

We have the authority of Tacitus for the fact that the Germans of his
day did not (like the Kelts)[981] affect the short straight sword:
‘rari ... gladiis utuntur.’[982] The national weapon was the spear[983]
of a peculiar kind; ‘hastas vel ipsorum vocabulo frameas gerunt angusto
et brevi ferro.’ The derivation of the word and the nature of the
weapon are still undetermined.[984] Modern authorities hold the oldest
_framée_ to have been a long spear, with a head of stone, copper,
bronze, or iron, shaped like a Palstab or an expanding ‘Celt;’ and
Demmin[985] shows the same broad shovel-shaped base in the Abyssinian
lance. It was either thrown or thrust, and the weapon must not be
confounded with the enormous _hastæ_ of Tacitus,[986] in whose day the
Roman spear was fourteen feet long. It was a formidable weapon; those
who knew it spoke with awe of ‘illam cruentam victricemque frameam’;
and the Germans long preserved the saying ‘one spear is worth two
Swords.’ Yet, strange to say, it is rarely found in graves, where the
throwing-axe of stone and bronze, pierced or unpierced, one-edged or
two-headed (πέλεκυς ἀμφιστόμος, bipennis), is so common.

[Illustration: FIG. 289.—BRONZE.

  75 centimètres long; Pommels of bronze and bone. From Hallstadt
  Diggings.]

In time the word _framea_ was apparently applied to wholly different
weapons. Thus Augustinus makes it an equivalent of _spatha_ or
_rhomphaia_; and Johannes de Janua (‘Glossary’) explains it as ‘glaive
aigu d’une part, et d’autre espée.’

Iron, according to Tacitus,[987] was known to the Germans, but was not
common. His statement is supported by ‘finds’ in the old tumuli and
stone rings, known as Riesenmauer, Hünnenringe,[988] Teufelsgraben,
Burgwälle, and others. The myths of giants, dwarfs, and serpents
suggest an Eastern origin for the metal. Bronze blades, on the other
hand, are common. A typical specimen from the Elbe valley in the Klemm
collection is thus described by Jähns.[989] The whole weapon is 23·25
centimètres long, the blade being 18·5, with a maximum breadth of
1·625. The shape is conical, tapering to the point; a high and rounded
mid-rib is subtended on either side by a deepened line which runs to
the end. Between shoulders and blade the front view shows on either
side a crescent-shaped notch. The grip is narrower at the middle, where
there is a long oval slit for making fast the handle; and there are
two rivet holes on either side of the shoulders, whence the mid-rib
springs. It shows no pommel, the place being taken by a shallow crutch.

Iron Swords are rare: even in the second century B.C., when the Romans
had given up the softer metal, the Gauls and Germans preserved it. This
is especially noticed when Germanicus marched against Arminius, B.C.
15;[990] and as late as the days of Tacitus, Germany could not work the
raw metal.[991] Remains of iron _Spathæ_ have mostly been found in very
bad condition; the material also is poor and badly made. The Held or
champion used two kinds of blades; and the mètre-long two-edged German
Sword is not to be distinguished from that of the Kelts. The Spatha
was especially affected by three tribes: the Suardones (Sworders?),
the Saxones (Daggermen)[992] and the Cherusci; in process of time it
reached the Goths,[993] and at last _wafan_ (weapon) applied only
to the Sword. The blade (_blat_, _blan_, in Mid. Germ. _valz_), with
its two edges (_ecke_, _egge_), was often leaf-shaped, as if copied
directly from the bronze Sword. Others were smaller in the middle than
at heft or point, for facility of unsheathing. The tang reached the
pommel end, and the grip or hilt[994] was lined with wood (birch or
beech), bone, and other material, covered with leather, fishskin, and
cloth. There was no cross-bar, but the crescent extending over the
shoulders, and serving to contain the rivets, was sometimes supplied
with a guard-plate (_die Leiste_).[995] The weapon had a solid
scabbard, often of iron, even when the blade was bronze, and was hung
by riems or leathern straps to the warrior’s left.

[Illustration: FIG. 290.—THE SPATHA OF SCHLESWIG.]

[Illustration: FIG. 291.—SHORT KELTIC SWORD. 40 centimètres long. Iron
blade, bronze grip. From Hallstadt. (Vienna Cabinet of Antiquities.)]

The other German blade was single-edged and curved: it was a
semi-Spatha, half the size of the Spatha, and it hung to the warrior’s
right side. This weapon was probably the Sahs,[996] Seax, Sax, the
favourite of the Saxons; also called Breitsachs and Knief (knife), and
at later times, _scramasaxus_, Scramasax.[997] A large iron knife, with
a yataghan curve, it was used either as a dirk or a missile. Some of
these throw-Swords had a hook by way of pommel for better securing
the hilt. The Schwertstab (Sword-staff) or Prachtaxt is described and
figured by Jähns[998] as a kind of _dolch_[999] or dagger, attached
to a long hollow metal haft, like that of a Persian war-axe. It is a
rare article, and its rarity leads him to believe it was symbolic of
the Saxnot (Sword-god) Zio, Tui, or Tuisco. Dr. Evans[1000] considers
the weapon ‘a kind of halberd or battle-axe;’ others, a commander’s
staff or _bâton_ of honour; but the article is too widely used to be so
explained. A fine specimen of the Schwertstab with handle and blade of
bronze, was found at Årup in Scania, and an analogous form is shown in
a Chinese blade.

History, even written by their enemies, shows that the Ancient Germans
were an eminently military and martial people. The bridal present
consisted of a caparisoned horse, a shield, a spear, and a Sword. At
their festivals, youths danced naked before the Sword-god, amidst
drawn blades and couched spears. Their lives were spent in hunting and
warfare. Despite their barbarism, a thorough topographical knowledge of
their bogs and bushes, mountains and forests, enabled them to inflict
more than one crushing defeat upon the civilised Romans.

The highly-developed Teutonic brain also invented a form of attack
which suited them thoroughly. It was theirs, as the Phalanx, borrowed
from the Egyptians, became Greek, and its legitimate outcome, the
Legion, was Roman; and, subsequently, the Crescent, adopted by
the Kafirs, was Moslem. ‘Acies,’ says Tacitus,[1001] ‘per cuneos
componitur.’ The Keil or Wedge was not unknown to the Greeks and
Romans;[1002] but they used it subordinately, whilst with the Germans
the ‘Schweinskopf,’ the ‘Svinfylking’ of the Scandinavians, was
national: they attributed its invention to Odin, the country god. The
apex was composed of a single file,[1003] and the numbers doubled in
each line to the base; while families and tribesmen, ranged side by
side, added moral cohesion to the tactical formation.[1004] It lasted
a thousand years; and it played a conspicuous part in the Battle of
Hastings, where the Normans attacked in wedge, and finally at Swiss
Sempach. During its long life it underwent sundry modifications,
especially the furnishing of the flanks with skirmishers; evidently
the Wedge was admirable for the general advance against line or even
column; but it was equally ill-calculated for a retreat.

Most writers now consider the Cimbri a Keltic people, and possibly
congeners of the Cymry or Welsh. Yet in the second century B.C. we find
them uniting, as Pliny tells us,[1005] with the German Teutones or
Teutoni (Thiudiskô, Teutsh, Deutsch). The ‘Kimpers’ of Italian Recoaro,
the supposed descendants of the invaders who escaped the Sword of
Marius (B.C. 102), undoubtedly spoke German.

[Illustration: FIG. 292.—DANISH SWORD.

  (Bronze; 85 centimètres long. Copenhagen.)]

Plutarch[1006] describes the Cimbrian Sword as a large heavy
knife-blade (μεγάλαις ἐχρώντο καὶ βαρείαις μαχαίραις), They had also
battle-axes, and sharp, bright _degans_ or daggers: the latter were
highly prized, and their cuneiform shape caused them to be considered
symbols of the deity,[1007] As usual amongst barbarians, the weapons
of the chiefs had terrible names, so as to strike even the hearer with
fear.[1008] Their defensive weapons were iron helmets, mail coats, and
white glittering shields. Eccart holds that these arms and armour must
have been taken from the foe: their barrows, in Holstein and elsewhere,
having produced only stone-celts and spear-heads with a few copper
Sword-blades, but no iron.

The Scandinavian Goths (Getæ) and Vandals were held by the ancients to
have been originally one and the same people.[1009] Their Bronze Age is
supposed to have begun about B.C. 1000, and to have ended in Sweden at
the opening of the Christian era. They used short Sword-blades, which
made them, unlike the Kelts, formidable in close combat, and the Goths
claimed to have introduced the spear[1010] to cavalrymen. Identical
weapons were used by the Lemovii of Pomerania and their kinsmen the
Rugii. The latter lived on the southern shores of the Baltic about
Rugenwald, and this place, one of the focuses of the Stone Age,[1011]
preserves, like the Isle of Rugen, the old barbaric name. The Danes
mostly affected the long-handed _securis Danica_ (_hasche Danoise_).
The Fenni (Finns) of Tacitus had neither Swords nor iron: they used
only bows and stone-tipped arrows.[1012] The bronze Sword from Finland
‘with flanged hilt-plate and eight rivet-holes,’[1013] must have found
its way there.[1014]

[Heading: _THE OLD BRITISH SWORD._]

We now proceed to the Keltic population of the ‘Home Islands of Great
Britain,’ and find there evident offshoots of the Gauls. We have
no metal remains of the pre-Keltic ‘aborigines’ (Iberians? Basques?
Finns?) except their palæoliths; and the history of our finds commences
with the two distinct Keltic immigrations advocated by Professor Rhys,
the Goidels (Gauls) who named Calyddon or Caledonia (_Gael doine_ or
_Gael dun_ = forest district) and the Brythons.

The authentic annals of England, says Mr. Elton[1015] begin with the
days of Alexander the Great, that is, in the fourth century B.C.; the
next historical station being the invasion of the Anglo-Saxons[1016] in
the middle of the fifth century A.D. He does not trace any continuity
of race in Kelt or Saxon with the palæolithic men of the Quaternary
Age, or with the short dark-skinned neolithics who succeeded them. The
two were followed by a big-boned, round-headed, fair-haired family
which brought with them a knowledge of bronze and with it the Sword.

Colonel A. Lane-Fox has summarised the four principal theories[1017]
concerning the source of bronze in Great Britain. Dr. Evans[1018]
prudently finds ‘a certain amount of truth embodied in each of those
opinions’; but he also concludes that No. 4 must commend itself to
all archæologists. I quite agree with this view, provided that the
common centre be Egypt, and that Western Asia be held only a line of
transit. We have full proof of the immense antiquity of bronze in the
Nile region, whence the art would radiate through the world. But the
almost identical proportions of the alloy (nine copper to one tin) and
the persistent forms suggest that a wandering race of metal-workers,
somewhat like the Gypsies of a later age, are the originators of the
_Stations_, the _Fonderies_, and the _Trésors_. The first step from
Egypt would be to Khita-land and Phœnicia; and these ‘Englishmen of
Antiquity’ would carry the art far and wide. Sir J. Lubbock opines that
the Phœnicians were acquainted with the mineral fields of Cornwall
between B.C. 1500–1200; somewhat niggard measure, for the Bronze Age in
Switzerland is dated from B.C. 3000. On the other hand, Professor Rhys
absolutely denies that there are any traces of Phœnician art in England.

Dr. Evans[1019] assumes the total duration of the Bronze Period in
Britain at between eight and ten centuries. He would divide this sum
into three several stages,[1020] and to the last, which produced the
bronze Sword, he assigns a minimum duration of four hundred to five
hundred years. This was followed by the Early Iron Age, or later Keltic
Period. The metal may have been used in southern Britain, peopled long
before Cæsar’s time by immigrant Belgii, not later than the fourth or
fifth century B.C., the approximate date of the earliest iron Swords in
Gaul.[1021] Lastly, by the second or third century B.C. the exclusive
use of bronze for cutting implements had practically ceased in Belgic
Britain; the Roman historians do not lead us to suppose that the
weapons, even of the northern Britons, were anything but iron.

It has been suggested that the bronze Swords found in Britain were
either Roman, or at all events of Roman date. The discussion began
as early as 1751,[1022] on the occasion of some bronze blades, a
spear-head, and other objects being discovered near Gannat, in the
Bourbonnais. It opened with greater vigour between the German and
Scandinavian antiquaries in 1860, and the late Thomas Wright was
an ardent advocate of the ‘Italian view.’[1023] Dr. Evans, who has
carefully considered the question, concludes:[1024] ‘The whole weight
of the argument is in favour of a pre-Roman origin for these swords in
western and northern Europe.’ And he notices, apparently with scant
respect, the three provinces to which the bronze antiques of Europe
have been assigned. These are the Mediterranean with Græco-Italic
and Helveto-Gallic subdivisions; the Danubian, including Hungary,
Scandinavia, Germany, and Britain; and the Uralian, comprising the
Russian, Siberian, and Finn regions. Finally he quotes the bronze
socketed sickle, the tanged razor, the two forms of Sword, the shield
with numerous concentric rings, with sundry other articles specially
British, to show that Britain was one of the great centres of the
bronze industry.

Lead-bronze, well known in ancient Egypt, is found extensively in
Ireland, where some specimens of ‘Dowris metal’ have as much as 9·11
parts in 99·32.[1025] The Phœnicians would certainly teach the use of
an article which takes a fine golden lustre. Dr. Evans[1026] notes the
remarkable prevalence of lead in the small (votive) socketed celts
supplied by Brittany. Professor Pelligot found some of them containing
28·50 per cent. and even 32·50 per cent. of lead, with only 1·5 per
cent., or a smaller proportion, of tin. In others, with a large
percentage of tin there was from eight to sixteen per cent. of lead.
Some of the bronze ornaments of the opening Iron Period also contain a
considerable proportion of lead; in the early Roman _As_ and its parts
the figures are from twenty to thirty per cent. A socketed celt from
Yorkshire gives, copper 81·15, tin 12·30, and lead 2·63 per cent. In
this case, Mr. J. A. Phillips expresses an opinion that ‘the lead is,
no doubt, an intentional ingredient.’[1027]

Apparently the Roman invaders unduly depreciated the ancient Britons.
Strabo[1028] declares them to be cannibals; yet he includes amongst
their produce gold, silver, iron, and corn. Cæsar[1029] makes them use
the ring money of Egypt, but Dr. Evans[1030] has proved that England
had a gold coinage in the first century B.C. It is an old remark
that a people can hardly be savages when they employ the _currus
falcatus_ or scythe war-car, the ᵹꞃıom carbad or ‘Carbad scarrda’ of
the Irish, the Welsh _kerbyd_, borrowed from the Gallic Kelts.[1031]
Pomponius Mela also assures us that they had cavalry, besides _bigæ_
and _currus_.[1032] Their works in glass, ivory, and jet, and their
incense cups suggest extensive intercourse, commercial and social, with
the Continent. During the ninety years which separated Julius Cæsar
and Claudius, the Britons had made progress in letters, and had built
important towns. The amount of Latin blood introduced into England has,
perhaps, been undervalued by our writers; but the discovery of Roman
ruins, which rapidly proceeds and succeeds, will draw the attention of
the statistician, and that ‘new man, the anthropologist,’ to a highly
interesting subject.[1033]

The bronze Swords of the ancient Britons are of two kinds: the
leaf-blade and the Rapier, both well cast. The total length of the
former is about two feet, the extremes being sixteen inches to thirty,
and in rare cases more. The blades are uniformly rounded, but with the
part next the edge slightly drawn down so as to form a shallow fluting.
The breadth appears greatest at the third near the point, and this
would add to the facility of unsheathing. In almost all cases they
are strengthened by a rounded mid-rib more or less bold; or they show
ridges, with and without beading, or parallel lines that run along the
whole blade or the greater part near the edges. Some combine mid-rib
and ridges. The shoulders are either plain, notched, or flanged. In
rare instances the outer part of the hilt is of bronze: Dr. Evans
engraves[1034] a specimen of this kind. The total length of the weapon
is twenty-one inches, of which the globular pommel and the grip, made
for a large hand, occupy five. The hilt has the appearance of being
cast upon the blade: it seems to have been formed of bronze of the same
character, and there are no rivets by which the two castings could be
attached. The shallow crescent, whose hollow faces the mid-rib (fig.
293), is a characteristic feature, and endures for ages in the northern
bronzes.

[Illustration: FIG. 293.—BRITISH SWORD, BRONZE. (Tower.)]

The handle of the leaf-blade usually consisted of plates of horn,
bone, or wood, riveted on either side of the hilt plate. The latter
differs considerably in form, and in the number and arrangement of
the rivets, by which the covering material was attached. Some have as
many as thirteen piercings; they seldom, however, exceed seven. The
apertures are either round holes or longitudinal slots of greater or
lesser extent. There is a pronounced swelling in the grip when the tang
is of full length. At the end it expands, evidently for the purpose of
receiving a pommel formed by the material of the hilt. This tang end is
a fish-tail more or less pronounced. One illustrated by Dr. Evans[1035]
has two spirals attached to the base of the hilt, a rare form in
England, but common in Scandinavia. Another[1036] pommel-end has a
distinct casting, ‘and is very remarkable on account of the two curved
horns extending from it, which are somewhat trumpet-mouthed, with a
projecting cone in the centre of each.’ This manilla-end appears to me
Irish.

We have seen the rapier in Mycenæ and Etruria.[1037] It reappears in
northern Europe, England, and France, perfectly shaped; and, though
of rare occurrence in hoards, it seems to belong to the period when
socketed celts were in use. There is no difficulty in tracing the
intermediate steps between the leaf-shaped dagger and the rapier. The
latter measures from twenty to twenty-three and a half, and even thirty
and a quarter inches, with a breadth of five-eighths inch, widening at
the base to two and three-eighths to two and nine-sixteenths inches.
The largest have a strong projecting mid-rib, while their weight is
diminished by flutings along either side. Another form of blade is more
like a bayonet, showing a section nearly square; while a third has a
flat surface where the mid-rib would be, a form not yet obsolete. Few
are tanged;[1038] mostly we find the base or shoulders of the blade
provided with drill-holes or with notches, to admit the nails; and in
some the wings are broadened for this purpose.[1039]

During the Late Celtic Period the Britons, like the Gauls, were armed
with _gladii sine mucrone_, which Tacitus[1040] calls _ingentes_ and
_enormes_, These Spathæ must have grown out of the bronze rapier. A
monument found in London and preserved at Oxford shows the blade to
have been between three and four feet long.[1041]

All history declares the Ancient Britons to have been of right warlike
race; and Solinus[1042] relates of them a characteristic trait. ‘When a
woman is delivered of a male child, she places its first food upon the
father’s Sword, and gently puts it to the little one’s mouth, praying
to her country gods that its death may be, in like manner, amidst arms.’

The ancient Irish seem to have been rather savages than barbarians,
amongst whom the wild non-Celts long prevailed over the Goidels or
Gaels. Ptolemy calls the former _Ivernii_, and it has been lately
suggested[1043] that this may have been the racial name throughout the
British Islands. The same savage element, which is still persistent,
was noticed by Tasso, when speaking of the Hibernian crusaders:

    Questi dall’ alte selve irsuti manda
    La divisa del mondo ultima Irlanda.[1044]

The modern Irish, who in historical falsification certainly rival, if
they do not excel, the Hindús, claim for their ancestry an exalted
grade of culture. They found their pretensions upon illuminated
manuscripts and similar works of high art; but it is far easier to
account for these triumphs as the exceptional labours of students who
wandered to the classic regions about the Mediterranean. If ancient
Ireland ever was anything but savage, where, let us ask, are the ruins
that show any sign of civilisation? A people of artists does not pig in
wooden shanties, surrounded by a rude vallum of earth-work.

Ireland, like modern Central Africa, would receive all her civilised
weapons from her neighbours. The Picts of Scotland would transmit a
knowledge of iron-working and of the Sword to the Scotti or Picts of
the north-east of Hibernia.[1045] This is made evident by the names
of the articles. Claiꝺeam or claiꝺim, the Welsh _kledyv_, is simply
_gladius_; and ꞇuca is ‘tuck’ or a clerk’s Sword. So lann, the lance
head, derives from the Gaulish spear (_lanskei_) which Diodorus Siculus
terms λαγκία, a congener of the Greek λόγχη and of the low Latin
_lancea_ or _lanscea_, meaning either spear (_hasta_) or Sword.


                              CONCLUSION.

We have now assisted at the birth of the Sword in the shape of a bit
of wood, charred and sharpened. We have seen its several stages of
youth and growth to bone and stone, to copper and bronze, to iron and
steel. When it had sufficiently developed itself Egypt gave it a name,
SFET; and this name, at least fifty centuries old, still clings to it
and will cling to it. In the hands of the old Nilotes the Sword spread
culture and civilisation throughout adjoining Africa and Western Asia.
The Phœnicians carried it wide and side over the world then known to
man. The Greeks won with it their liberty and developed with it their
citizenship. Wielded by the Romans, it enthroned the Reign of Law, and
laid the foundation for the Brotherhood of Mankind. Thus, though it
soaked earth with the blood of her sons, the Sword has ever been true
to its mission—the Progress of Society.

In Part II. we shall see the Sword attain the prime of life, when no
genius, no work of art was too precious to adorn it; and when, from
a weapon of offence, it developed exceptional defensive powers. Here
begins the Romance of the Sword.




                                INDEX.


  Abderites, 212

  Abella, sword and shield of the people of, 264 _n_

  Abraham and the Egyptians, 103;
    his origin, 150 _n_

  Abyssinia, native copper from, 63 _n_

  Abyssinian lance, 270

  — Sword, 163 _sq._, 237

  _Acacia detinens_ (‘Wait-a-bit’), 6

  _Acanthurus_ (‘surgeon’ or lancet-fish), 10

  Accad inscription (Babylonia), 199

  Accensi Velati (Roman soldiers), 245

  Achæans of the Caucasus, 195 _n_

  Achæmenes, 208

  Achilles’ shield, 212, 223

  — spear pointed with chalcos, 55 _n_

  ‘Acies instructa’ and ‘sinuata’ (Roman army), 245

  Acies (of a weapon), 107 _n_

  Acinaces, not a scymitar, 227 _n_

  Acinaces, Persian, 210;
    with golden ornaments, 212

  Aclys (archaic weapon), 35 _n_

  ‘Adaga’ of mediæval writers, 12

  Adam Kadmon, 2

  Adam primus, 2 _n_

  Adam, the Hebrew, 149

  Adámas (steel), 221

  Adargue (Moorish), 12 _n_

  Adder-pike or sting-fish (_Trachinus vipera_), 11

  Adonis (= Tammuz), 187

  Adscriptii (Roman soldiers), 245 _n_

  Adze, 20 _n_;
    of copper, 67

  — blades of shells and pinna, 47

  Æs corinthiacum, 85 _n_;
    ægineticum, 87;
    demonnesium, _ib._;
    nigrum, _ib._;
    deliacum, _ib._;
    caldarium, 88;
    græcanicum, _ib._

  Ægyptus (meaning of the word in Homer), 145 _n_

  Æolipylæ (αἰόλου πύλαι), 31 _n_

  Ærugo (or verdigris) from a spear (Achilles’), 60

  _Æs_ and _Æris metalla_ (their meaning in Pliny), 58 _n_

  Afghan Charay, 212

  — language, 210 _n_

  Africa (its mineral wealth unexplored), 63

  — the Sword in, 162

  African antelopes, 9

  — bellows, 120 _sq._

  — Telak (arm-knife), 162

  Africo-Arab weapons, 163

  ‘Afterthought,’ 1

  Afzal Khan (Moslem General of Aurangzeb), 8

  Agate splinter (for wooden Swords), 47

  Agave (American), 6;
    used for paper-making, 50 _n_

  ‘Age of Wood’, 31

  ‘Ages’, 22 _n_

  Agesilaus, army of, 241

  Ἀγκύλη (Greek throw-stick), 34

  ‘Agmen pilatum’ and ‘quadratum’ (Roman army), 245

  Agreutic (age of primitive Archæology), 5 _n_

  Agriculture in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Ahasuerus (= Xerxes), 210

  Airain (derivation), 84

  Aji (black stone), Japanese use of, for weapons, 52

  Aka, Akhu (Ancient Egyptian axe), 89, 158

  Akkad (= Upper Babylonia), 104 _n_

  Ἀκινάκης, 90 _n_

  Alabaster pommels at Mycenæ, 231, 233

  Albanian castes, 241 _n_

  — yataghan, 265

  Alemanni (Germani), weapons of the, 270

  Alexander the Great, 209

  Alfânge (Iberian; El-Khanjar), 29

  Algebra in Assyria, 202 _n_

  Alipes (Mercury), 1

  Alkinde (Ondanique), 110

  Alle-barde (Teutonic weapon), 92

  Allophyllian or Agglutinative Turanian, 146

  Alloy (derivation of the word), 74 _n_

  Alloys of copper, 53, 57

  — proportions of, 83;
    table of alloys in common use, 83 _sq._

  Aloe (Socotrine), 6

  Alorus, king of Babylonia, 199

  Aluminium, 81 _n_

  Alyattes, tomb of, 194

  Alphabet (whence it came), 51 _n_, 147

  — Hindú, 219 _n_

  — of Troy, 193

  Amber, 48, 87

  Ambidexter Swordsmen, 185

  Ambrum (= amber), 87

  American broad-axe, 128

  Amestris (= Esther), 210 _n_

  Amphictyony of the Ionians, 194

  Amukta (class of weapons: Hindú), 214

  Amun Ra, 149 _n_

  Amygdaloid greenstone (‘toad-stone’), 103 _n_

  Analysis of a copper knife-blade, 69;
    of so-called ‘bronzes,’ 70;
    of Assyrian bronze, 81

  Anchor, the original, 119 _n_

  Ancient Britain, centre of bronze industry, 276

  — Britons, account of the, 277

  — Cypriote characters, 225

  — German method of warfare, 273

  — Greece, extent of, 242 _n_

  — Hellas, metallurgy of, 220

  — Indians, 213

  — Indian anthropology, 213

  — Irish, character of the, 279

  — Roman army (its constitution), 245

  — Rome (her _rôle_ in history), 244

  Ancile (sacred shield) of _æs_, 56

  Andahualas valley (meaning of the name), 67 _n_

  Andamanese (unable to kindle fire), 2 _n_

  Andanicum (Ondanique), 110

  Andena (ductile and malleable iron: Avicenna), 107

  Andes (derivation of the name), 67

  Andromeda legend, the, 180 _n_

  Andro-Sphinx (Egypt), 190 _n_

  Anelace, 263

  Angels, the weapon of the, 237

  Angle of cutting instruments, 131 _sq._

  — of resistance, 132

  Anglo-Saxon invasion of England, 275

  ‘Anguimanus’ (the elephant), 3 _n_

  Animals in Assyrian bas-reliefs, 203

  — (lower) born armed, 2

  Anjan (iron-wood), 112

  Anlas, 263

  ‘Annæus’ monument, 258 _n_

  Annals of Babylon, 200

  Anta (copper: Quichua), 67

  Antelope (Indian) horns used for daggers, 11

  Antelopes’ horns used in fishing, 27;
    as lance-points, 28

  Antepilani (Roman soldiers), 247 _sq._

  Antesignani (Roman soldiers), 247

  Anthropology, Ancient Indian, 213

  — of the pagans, 21 _sq._

  Antimonial bronze, 81 _n_

  Antiquity of bronze in the Nile region, 275

  — of iron and steel, 98

  Antiseptic charcoal, 250 _n_

  Antler of red deer as a thrusting-weapon, 28

  Anvils, 120

  Aor (= Sword, in Homer), 222;
    etymology of the word, 224 _n_

  Apes, 2

  Aphrodite or Venus, account of, 187 _n_

  Apis-tombs of Memphis, 190 _n_

  Apollo and Python, 180

  Apophis (serpent: Egypt), 183

  Arabian weapons, 185

  Arabic name for sabre, 123

  Arab scymitar belonging to King of Kishakkha, 162

  Arabs and Egyptians, contrast of, 144

  Aram wine, 173 _n_

  Ararat of Noah’s ark, the, 202

  Arbotana, 14 _n_

  Arblast (enlarged _arcus_), 19

  Arch, Egyptian, 201

  Archæology, primitive, 5 _n_

  Archaic names of metals, table of, 122

  — tools from Wari Gaon, 110

  Archal (= _aurichalcum_), 85 _n_

  Archangels (whence borrowed), 149

  Archer (fish: _Toxotes_), 7

  Archers (Ancient Egyptian army), 154

  — Assyrian, 206

  — in Homer, 222

  Archery, Scythian, 19 _n_

  Architects, Ancient Roman, 245

  Architecture, Assyrian, 201

  — in Ancient Egypt, 148

  — in Hellas, 241

  — origin of, 15

  Arcubalista (crossbow), 19

  Argentiferous copper (liquation of, in Japan), 83

  — galena, 88

  Argus-pheasant (Indian bird), 9

  Aries (sea-ram; _Delphinus orca_), 7

  Aries-shaped Sword, 141

  Ariminium, coins cast in, 265

  Arithmetic in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Arjuna’s Sword, 217

  Arka (_Calatropis gigantea_), 218

  Arme blanche, 6

  Armes d’hast, 6, 246 _n_

  Armenia, 209 _n_

  Armenian inscriptions, 200

  Armidoctores, 249 _n_

  Armilla of bronze, Etruscan, 196

  Armlets of bronze (Etruscan), 30

  Armorial badges (= rank), 141 _sq._

  Armour (derivation of the word), 244

  — made in Cyprus, 188

  — of Ancient Egyptian soldiers, 152 _sqq._

  Armour of elephants, 216

  — of Goliath, 186

  Arms among the Ancient Romans, 244 _sq._

  — and Armour of Ancient Roman soldiers, 246 _sqq._

  — manufactory in Etruria, 198

  — of Hannibal and his troops, 268

  — of the Keltic Gauls, 266 _sq._

  — of Persian troops, 210

  Army of the Ancient Egyptians, 152 _sqq._

  Ἅρπη (sharp sickle), 180

  Arrows, 11, 154

  — made of reed, 28

  Arrow-heads in Ancient Gallic and German graves, 274 _n_

  — of deer-horn, 24;
    of bone, 25;
    of bamboo, 26;
    of flint-flakes, _ib._;
    of pinna and shells, 47

  Arrow-piles of copper, 65

  Arrow-throwers (epithet of the Argives), 222

  Art and science in Ancient Egypt, 147

  Art of the Hittites, 176

  ‘Artemis’ (Diana) of the Ephesians, 192 _n_

  Articulate language (origin of), 74 _n_

  Artificial calamine, 86

  — malachite, 72

  Aryan (language), 146 _n_

  Aryans, 76

  _Asclepias gigantea_, 111

  Asclepius (Berytus), 75

  Ashanti Sword-knife, 167

  Ashur (Assyrian), 200, 207

  Ashuth (fused or cast metal; Hebrew), 103

  Asia, ancient mines of copper and lead in, 63

  Asidhenu (dagger: Hindú), 215

  Asidevatá (Sword-god produced by Brahma), 214

  Askelon (site of), 186 _n_

  Asp (Cobra di capello; _Coluber Haja_), 33 _n_

  Ass (its method of defence), 7

  Assegai used as a razor by the Amazulu, 14

  Assyria (etymology of the word), 177

  Assyrian architecture, 201

  — bas-reliefs, 176, 201

  — books, 201 _n_

  — bronzes, 104 _n_

  — daggers, 159, 205

  — executioner, 207

  — fashion of wearing the Sword, 206, 239

  — fortifications, 203

  — hand-daggers, 185

  — inscriptions (Bayrut), 200 _n_

  — invasion of Egypt, 200

  — magic, 202 _n_

  — metallurgy, 81, 202;
    bronze, 81

  — names for the Sword, 123

  — robe, 175

  — skill in arts, 202

  — soldiers, 206

  — Sphinx, 190 _n_

  Assyrians of Xerxes’ army (their weapons), 105

  Astrolabe in Assyria, 202 _n_

  Astronomy in Ancient Egypt, 148

  — of Mesopotamia, 200 _n_

  Asuras (mighty demons: Hindú), 213

  Atacamite (submuriate of copper), 68

  Athenæus on the Sword, 242 _sq._

  Athletics, Ancient Roman, 249

  Athor or Hathor (‘goddess of copper’), 62, 69

  Atlantis, 85 _n_

  Attábo, King Blay of, 142

  Auctoramentum (pay of the Bestiarii), 253

  Augustin’s rendering of ‘framea,’ 271

  Aurichalcum, 85

  Aurochs, 30 _n_

  Australian club (development), 39

  Authentic annals of England, beginning of the, 275

  Autochthones of Cyprus, 187

  Avicenna’s description of iron, 106

  Axe (as a weapon), 20, 90 _sq._;
    of copper and stone, 67

  — (derivation of the word), 91 _n_

  Axe-heads of pure copper, 57

  Ayri (cutting instruments; Peru), 67

  ‘Azagay’ (in Spanish and Portuguese), 42 _n_

  Azure (in heraldry; derivation), 140 _n_


  Baal Suteckh (Hittite War-god), 173

  Baal-Zephon, site of, 175 _n_

  Babanga (Sword; Gaboon), 165

  Babel, Tower of, 55

  Baboons, 2

  Babylon, conquest of, 209

  Babylonia, account of, 199 _sq._;
    civilisation in, 200

  Babylonian chronology, 199 _n_

  Backsword, 123;
    Chinese, 64

  Bagpipe, origin of the, 120

  Báhuyuddha (class of weapons, Hindú), 214

  Baïonette Gras, 94, 134

  _Balanitis Aegyptiaca_ (= Persea; Egyptian ‘Tree of Life’), 202 _n_

  Balawat, bronze gates of, 202

  Baldur the Beautiful, 178

  Baleares (‘Slinging-Isles’), 19 _n_

  Balestarius (= crossbow-man), 185

  Balistæ (Roman artillery), 19, 249

  _Batistes capriscus_ (‘file-fish’), 9

  Ballistics, 16

  Balloons, 31 _n_

  Ball-steel (Chinese), 114

  Bamboo (blades made of), 12, 14 _n_;
    arrow-heads, 26

  ‘Bamboo-grass,’ 12

  ‘Bantu’ (Folk), 3 _n_

  Ban Umha (white copper: Keltic), 65

  ‘Barbarian,’ history of the word, 261 _n_

  Barbarism of the ancient Germans, 273

  Bards of Greece, the age of the, 220

  Barylithic (glacial Drift) age, 5 _n_

  Barrows, Cimbrian (finds in), 274

  Barzil (iron: Hebrew), 103

  Basalt-splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Basket-hilt of a Sword, 124, 126 _n_

  Bas-reliefs of Assyria, 176, 201

  — of Khorsabad, 209

  — of Persepolis, 209

  Baswa knife (Upper Congo), 170

  Bâton ferré, 20

  Battering-ram, Assyrian, 203

  Battle-axe of pure copper, 70

  Battle-gear of gold, 212

  Battle-scene in sculpture (Cuttack), 216

  Bauldric, 206

  Beaked axe, 95

  Bears, polar, 3

  Bechwana club-axe, 93

  Bedstead of iron (of Og, King of Bashan), 103

  Beheading fallen foes (Gallic custom), 269

  Beheading Sword, Cutch, 168

  Behistun Inscription, the, 209 _n_, 226

  Belagerungs-balister, 19

  Belemnites (‘thunder-stone’), 21 _n_

  Bel and the Dragon, 180, 183

  ‘Bell-metal,’ 84

  Bellows, invention of, 119

  Bellows of bullock’s hide, 111

  Bellows-nozzles of copper, 68

  Bells on a Sword-sheath, 169

  Βέλος, 6

  Benipe (meaning of the word), 99, 101

  Bent Swords, Javanese, 218

  _Beny Adam meshood_, 2

  Bergbarthe (mine-picks; German), 91

  Berytus (Asclepius), 75

  Bestiarii (gladiators), 251, 253

  Bhawáni (Sívají’s Sword), 8 _n_

  Bibasis (gymnastic dance), 239

  Bíchwa (weapon used by Sívají), 8 _n_

  Bilbilis (river: Lusitania), 266 _n_

  Bil-Kan (Assyrian god), 182

  Bill (derivation of the word), 94 _n_

  Bill-hooks of copper, 67

  Birds (their methods of attack and defence), 9

  Bird’s-head-shaped missiles, 37

  Birth of literature in Greece, 202 _n_

  Bisarme or Guisarme, 95

  ‘Biscayan’ shape (of Swords), 135

  Bitumen used to fix flint-chips in wooden weapons, 49

  ‘Black chalcos,’ 77

  Black Pagoda (Madras), wrought iron in, 109

  Black sand, 102

  Blade of a Sword, 124

  Blasrohr (blow-tube), 14 _n_

  Blende (sulphuret of zinc), 84;
    derivation of the word, 84 _n_

  Bloma ferri, 114 _n_

  Bloom (of iron), 114 _n_

  Bloomary (= bloomery), 114 _n_

  Bloomeries (ancient furnaces), 114 _n_

  Blow-pipe, 14;
    of copper, 67

  Blue basalt, 100

  Blue-stone (sulphate of copper, blue copperas), 60

  Boars’-hoofs used as armour, 29 _n_

  Boar, wild (its method of attack), 12

  Boians (Etruria), 196

  Bolas (slings), 19

  Bombola (birthplace of Martial), 266 _n_

  ‘Bone Age,’ 23

  ‘Bone-and-stone-using people,’ 23

  Bone as a base to carry trenchant substances, 27

  Bone-club of Nootka Sound Indians, 25

  Bone-handles for Swords and daggers, 27

  Bone-knives, 26;
    -daggers, 26, 27

  Bone-points to weapons, 23

  Boomerang, 19;
    derivation of the word, 33 _n_;
    Indian specimens, 35;
    its movement explained, 35 _sq._

  Boomerang-sword, 39;
    in Ancient Egypt, 155

  Boot (derivation of the word), 175

  Borax used for soldering, 85 _n_

  Boundaries demarked by the axe, 91

  Bouterolles of a Sword, 124 _n_

  Bowie-knife bayonet, 134 _n_

  Bow (derivation of the word), 19 _n_

  — of a Sword, 125

  — of Vishnu, the, 213

  — the, in Ancient Gaul and Germany, 274 _n_

  — and arrow among the Ancient Hindús, 215

  Bows and arrows used by the Ancient Romans, 245

  Bows, ancient Egyptian, 154

  Boxing, 7

  ‘Boycotting’ St. Paul, 185

  Bracchæ (breeches), 269 _n_

  Bracelet of copper, 73 _n_

  ‘Brave Master Shoe-tye, the great traveller’ 3 _n_

  Brande or Bronde (Sword), 123

  Braquemart, 123

  Brass early in Christian era, 84;
    derivation of the word, 85

  ‘Brass’ guns, 56

  ‘Brass’ in the A. V. of the Bible, 56

  Breast-belt, gladiatorial, 253

  Breastplates of copper, 68

  Breeches (etymology of the word), 269 _n_

  Breitsachs (Ancient German weapon), 272

  Brennus, 267

  Bridal presents of Ancient Germans, 273

  Bridle of gold, 212

  Brise-épées, 138

  Britain (‘Ynis Prydhain’ Island), 77 _n_

  British Sword in the Tower, 263

  Broad-axe (American squatters’), 128

  Broadsword, various forms of, 96, 123

  Bronze, 22 _n_, 74 _sqq._

  ‘Bronze Age,’ 22 _n_, 23 _n_

  — Age in Britain, 275

  — Age in Switzerland, 275

  — Age of Scandinavian Goths, 274

  — armlets, Etruscan, 30

  — armour, 80

  — armour-suit (Roman cavalry), 248

  — arms of the Gauls, 267

  — arrow-heads, Carthaginian, 181

  — casting in, 80

  — chisels, 79

  — daggers, 78 _n_, 80

  — defensive armour (Roman), 254

  — derivation of the word, 77

  — door-sockets, Assyrian, 202

  — hardening of, 53

  — hatchets in wooden handles, 154

  — in Great Britain, source of, 275

  — knives, 80

  — lancehead at Mycenæ, 230

  — nails, 82

  — parazonium, 239

  — quadriga, 80

  — rapier in Ireland, 279 _n_

  — sabres, 80

  — socketed sickle (British), 276

  — statues (Etruscan), 80

  — Swords, 45, 78 _n_, 80;
    found in Britain, 276 _sq._;
    Gallic, 266;
    found at Hallstadt, 262 _sq._;
    of Italy, 264;
    at Mycenæ, 229 _sq._

  — Sword-hilt (Etruscan), 197

  — supplied from Phœnicia to Europe, 78 _n_

  — tablet, Hittite, 176

  — work, Assyrian, 202

  Buccinatores (musicians: Roman), 248

  ‘Buccularius clypeus’ (= buckler), 246 _n_

  Buckler (etymology of the word), 246 _n_

  — of ox-hide, Roman, 248

  Bucklers of osier (for recruits: Roman), 249

  Buckles of a Sword, 124 _n_

  Buddhism, 213

  Budil, King of Assyria, 208

  Buffalo, its manner of attack, 9;
    arrows made of buffalo-horn, 28

  Bull-fights, Spanish, 253

  Bull (wild), its manner of attack, 9

  Bulwark (portable bridge for sieges), 154

  Burbur inscriptions (Babylonia), 199

  Burgwälle, 271

  Burial as a method of making steel, 265

  Burmese Dalwel (Sword), 219

  Burying of iron, 107 _n_, 112

  Buttons of gold in Troas, 193

  Byzantine (?) finds at Mycenæ, 106


  Cabiri (Kabeiroi), 74 _sq._

  Cadmeian (old Phœnician) characters, 225

  _Cadmia fossilis_ (natural calamine), 86

  Cadmian stone, 86

  Cadmus (_El-Kadim_, or _El-Kadmi_), 60

  Cæsar’s treatment of his soldiers, 260

  Caillouteurs (flint-knappers), 45 _n_

  Calamine (carbonate of zinc), 71, 84;
    derivation of the word, 84

  Calasiri (Egyptian bowmen), 152

  Caledonia (etymology of the word), 275

  Calisthenics, Greek, 239

  Callua (paddle), 42

  Calones (camp-followers: Roman), 249

  Caltrops (bamboo splints of Gaboon-land), 14

  Camel (the kick of the), 7

  Cambyses, 209, 211

  Camp-followers (Roman), 249

  Campidoctores, 249 _n_

  Canaanite (meaning of the word), 175 _n_

  Canaanites, 182

  Cane bows and arrows, Ancient Indian, 211

  Canes used as bellows, 68

  Canna (κάννα; whence ‘cannon’), 14 _n_

  Cannelure (of a Sword), 132

  Cannon (derivation of the word), 14 _n_

  — of iron first cast, 117 _n_

  Cannons of gold (Baroda), 162 _n_

  Canticles of Solomon, the, 147

  Capoeira (Brazilian fashion of fighting), 254

  Capulus (Sword-pommel: Roman), 257 _n_

  ‘Carbad scarrda’ (Irish war-car), 277

  _Carcharias vulpes_ (fox-shark), 7;
    derivation of _Carcharias_, 7 _n_

  Carchemish inscription, 177

  Carian weapons, 211;
    (?) at Mycenæ, 231 _n_

  — words, 231 _n_

  Carpenter’s tools of copper, 67

  Carpentras Inscription, the, 209 _n_

  Carpentry in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Carpentum (war-chariot), 269

  Carpicanna, 14 _n_

  Carthaginian mining operations, 107

  — names, 181

  — Sword-blades, 181

  _Caryota urens_ (_Nibong_; sago-wood), 6, 23

  Cartouche (_cartuccia_; meaning of the word), 40 _n_

  Cast-copper axe, 69

  Caspians, 210

  _Cassia auriculata_, 111

  Cassiterides, 78 _sq._

  Cassowary (its method of attack), 12

  Casting (of metal) among the Ancient Greeks, 221

  Cast-iron slab in Sussex (14th century), 117 _n_

  — steel, 114 _n_

  Catalan forge, 102 _n_, 111;
    furnace, 107

  Catamaran (Tasmania), 40

  Catapults (of Roman army), 248 _sq._

  Cateia (boomerang club), 35, 269

  — meaning of the word, 35 _n_

  _Catoblepas Gnu_, 9

  Cats (domestic, among the Nile-dwellers), 3 _n_

  Cavalier and Roundhead, 277 _n_

  Cavalry, Hittite, 176

  — in Ancient Egypt, 154

  — Roman, 246 _n_, 248

  Caverns (as dwellings, storehouses, sepulchres), 15 _n_

  — French and Belgian, 1 _n_

  Cave-temples (Indian), the Sword in, 216

  Celestial Empire, the annals of the, 112 _sq._ _n_

  Celt, of gold, 212;
    expanding, 270;
    transition from, to paddle-spear and Sword forms, 41

  Celte (in Job), 20 _n_

  Celtiberian iron Swords, 107;
    weapons, 265

  Celtis (or _celtes_ = a chisel), 20 _n_

  Celts (the proper orthography), 20 _n_;
    celts of copper, 57;
    of stone, 154

  Census, Hebrew, 185

  Centre of percussion, 129

  Centurion’s cuirass, 248

  Ceramics in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Cerbotana, 14 _n_

  Ceretolo, sepulchre at, 196

  Cestus (knuckle-duster of the classics), 7

  Cestus-play, 254

  Cetian or Keteian (in Homer), 172

  Cetra (Roman shield), 246

  Chætodon (archer fish of Japan), 7

  Chakarini (war-quoit), 39 _n_

  Chakrá (war-quoit), 39

  Chalcitic (copper and bronze) Age, 5 _n_

  Chalcedony dagger-blade, 46;
    splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Chalcolibanon, 85

  Chalcos (= Sword, in Homer), 222

  Chaldæan gods, 207

  Χαλκός (meaning of the word), 58

  Χάλκεος οὐδός (‘copper threshold’), 55

  Chalybes (iron-workers), 76

  ‘Chalybian stranger’ (= the Sword), 97

  Chalybs (river), 97 _n_

  Chalyps (steel), 221

  Character of Ancient Gauls, 269 _sq._

  Charay (Afghan Sword), 212

  Charms (Chinese) of copper, 64

  Chape of a Sword, 124;
    of a dagger, 124 _n_

  Charay (one-edged knife: Afghan), 161 _n_

  Charcoal in iron-smelting, 107

  Chariot-corps (Ancient Egypt), 154

  Chariots of iron, 103

  Chairs in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Charonion of Antioch, 241 _n_

  Chasing (of metals), 81

  Chayantanka (tin: Peruvian), 83

  Chelidonian sabre (χελιδόνιος ξίφος), 141

  Chemosh (Moabite god), 192 _n_

  Chereb (Hebrew weapon), 180, 183, 184

  Chert arrow-heads, 25

  Chert-splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Cherubim (etymology of the word), 183

  Cherusci (ancient German tribe), 271

  Chess (showing Hindú form of attack), 218, 273 _n_

  Chess in Ancient Egypt, 148

  ‘Chevaucher,’ meaning of, and Greek equivalents, 242 _n_

  Chevaux-de-frise, 14

  Chile copper the toughest, 68

  Chinese (ancient) arms of metal, 63

  — form of Sword-staff, 273

  — iron-works, 115

  — language, 113

  — methods of working iron, 114

  — sabre-knife, 139

  — steel for Swords and knives, 115

  — Sword of copper (afterwards of iron), 64

  — words for iron, 112 _sq._

  Chisels of chalcos, 63;
    of stone and copper, 67

  — of iron (Etruscan), 197

  Chittim (= Cyprus: Hebrew), 187

  Chlorite splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Chonta wood (_Guilielma speciosa_), 42

  Chopper-blade (Roman), 257

  — knife, Hittite, 176

  Choppers, Egyptian, 161

  Chopper-shaped blade at Mycenæ, 229

  Christianity in the Indian Peninsula, 219 _n_

  Chrysaor, 180

  Chrysochalcos (‘the king of metals’), 86 _n_

  Chrysocolla (derivation of the word), 85 _n_

  Cidaris or tiara, Persian, 209

  Cimbri, a Keltic people, 273

  Cinctorium (Roman general’s Sword), 257

  Cingulum (waist-belt: Roman), 258

  Cinyras (legendary Tyrio-Cyprian king), 188

  Circumcision an African practice, 150

  — stone knives used in, 46, 69

  City of Priam (Troas), 190

  Cladibas (claidab), 266 _n_

  Claidab (= Spatha), 196

  Classes of Hindú weapons, 214

  Claymore, 123, 130

  Cleaver of the Habshi people, 170

  ‘Close-Sword,’ Roman, 258

  Clothes-pins in the Troas, 191

  Club, 20, 32

  — development into the Sword, 39 _sq._

  Club-Swords, 32 _n_;
    Queensland, 44

  Clubs of copper, 67

  Cluden (juggler’s Sword), 258

  Clypeus (Roman shield), 246 _n_

  Cobalt (in Ireland), 65

  Cock-fighting in the Canary Islands, 254 _n_

  Codicilli (tablets), 225

  Coffins of granite, 81

  Cohorts (of Roman army), 246 _n_

  Coin of copper and zinc, 84

  Colchians, 210

  Cold-wrought (hammered) copper weapons, 65

  Colichemarde blade, 135

  ‘Collery’ (throwing-stick), 38

  Colophonium (resin used for soldering), 85 _n_

  Colossal Greek statues, 241 _n_

  _Coluber Haja_ (Cobra di Capello; asp), 33 _n_

  Combats of various animals, 9

  Comb found in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Combinations (earliest) of metals, 74 _sqq._

  Comitialis morbus, 260 _n_

  Comparison of Man and the lower animals, 5

  Confederacy of Etruscan cities, 194

  Cong copper mines, 169

  Congo Sword, 165

  Contus (Roman cavalry spear), 246, 248

  Contus (wooden pike), Gallic, 269

  _Convolvulus lanifolius_, 111

  Coot (its method of attack), 12

  Copenhagen scramsahs, 272 _n_

  Copper, 22 _n_, 30;
    alloys, 53, 57;
    the art of hardening it, 53 _sq._;
    cutting instruments of, 54 _n_;
    copper prior to iron, 55

  Copper Age (of weapons), 53;
    anterior to bronze, 72

  — and brass (alloy), 84

  — and gold (alloy), 83

  — and tin (alloy), 81

  — arms and armour, Ancient Hellenic, 222

  — arrow-piles, 65

  — bracelet, 72 _n_

  — celts, 57, 72

  — coinage (Chinese), 64;
    of the Hindus, 70

  — hatchets, 65;
    rakes and hammers, _ib._;
    vases, 68

  — in Europe, 64;
    in America, 65 _sqq._

  — knives, Trojan, 191

  — mines, Chile, 68;
    Midian, 102;
    of South-Eastern Africa, 170 _n_

  — nails (Greenland, &c.), 65

  — placed in a corpse’s mouth, 68

  — sheets for flooring (ancient), 55

  — statuettes (coated with precious metals), 67

  — Swords, 70;
    in Troas, 192

  — tools in Egyptian hieroglyphs, 69

  — trumpets, 221

  Copper-trade of Cyprus, 188

  ‘Cops’ (of metal), 111

  Coptic language, 146

  Coquimbite (Pampua or white copperas), 68

  Core-casting (of metal), 221

  Cornicines, 248

  Cornu (musical instrument: Roman), 248

  Cornwall, mineral fields of, 275

  Coronarium (copper coated with ox-gall), 87

  Corrugated iron blades, 119 _n_

  Corrugated Sword of Africa, 171

  Corsican forge, 102 _n_

  Corundum in Midian, 171 _n_

  Corybantes, 74 _sq._

  Cosmogony, Hebrew, 148 _sq._

  Cotton dresses, Ancient Indian, 211

  _Cottus diceraus_, 10

  Counterfeit pearls in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Counterguard of a Sword, 125, 138

  Coupe-choux Sword, 134, 164

  Coustilliers, 185

  Coustrils or Custrils, 185

  Couteau-de-chasse, 210

  Covinus (war-chariot), 269

  Cow (its method of defence), 7

  Crane, white (American bird), 9

  Crannog (its derivation), 27

  Crease (= Krís, Malay weapon), 137, 166

  Creation, Hebrew idea of, 148 _sq._

  Cremation in the Early Bronze Age, 96

  — (of bodies) at Mycenæ, 234

  Crepitaculum (sacred rattle), 151

  Crests (in heraldry), 40 _n_

  Cretans (ἀεὶ ψεῦσται), 97 _n_

  Crickets (_cicadæ_) as ornaments at Mycenæ, 233

  Crimea, Scythian graves in the, 227

  Cross of the Coptic Christians, 192 _n_

  Crossbow, 19 _n_, 165

  — rat-trap, 37 _n_

  Cross guard of a Sword, 125

  Crucibles (at Schliemann’s Troy), 82

  — four-footed, in the Troas, 191

  Crucifixion (Assyrian punishment), 203

  Cruelties of the Assyrians, 203

  Cruithing (= Picts; origin of the name), 279 _n_

  Crusade, the First, 218

  Crutch and dagger (combined) of antelope horn, 12

  Crux ansata (Egyptian Cross), 192 _n_

  Crystal chips on spears, 51

  — lens (Nineveh), 202

  Crystal-cutting in Cyprus, 188

  Cuchillo (Spanish clasp-knife), 39

  Cuirass, Roman centurion’s, 248

  Cultellarii, 185

  Culture in Troy, 193

  Cuneiform inscriptions (Bayrut), 200 _n_

  — syllabarium, 200 _n_

  — symbol for iron, 104

  Cuneus (tactical formation), 273 _n_

  Cupel (crucible; derivation of the word), 111 _n_

  Cupriferous sandstones, 67

  Cup-sling, 19

  Curetes, 74 _sq._

  Curium treasure, the, 189

  Currus falcatus (scythe war-car: Ancient Britain), 276

  Curtle-axe (= cutlass), 140

  Curved broadsword, 96

  — type of Sword, 127 _sq._

  ‘Curved thrust,’ 133 _sq._

  Cushito-Asiatic (Ethiopian) tribes, 188

  Cuspis (point of a Sword: Roman), 255 _n_

  Customs of the Ancient Germans, 273

  Cut-and-thrust weapons, 123

  Cutlass, 123, 140, 211

  Cutting edge of a Sword, 129

  — or trenchant weapons (origin of), 12

  Cyanus (steel), 221;
    Dr. Schliemann’s translation of, 222 _n_;
    of Pliny (lapis lazuli), _ib._

  Cybele (Dea Multimamma), 192 _n_

  Cyclopes, 75 _sq._

  ‘Cyclopean Wall’ (in the Argolid), 76

  Cylinder of gold at Mycenæ, 229

  Cymbals at the feast of Rhea (in Varro), 58

  Cymbals of tin and copper, 81 _n_

  Cynocephali, 2

  Cyprian dagger, 173

  — Venus (worship of), 188 _n_

  Cypriote (Ancient) characters, 225

  — art, 187

  — contingent of Xerxes’ army, 188

  — manufacture of arms and armour, 188

  — names of places, 188

  — syllabary, 188 _sq._

  Cyprus, its epithet _ærosa_, 58;
    derivation of the name, 59;
    account of, 186 _sq._

  Cyrus, 209


  Dacians on Trajan’s column, 262

  Dacian Sword, 262

  Dagger (derivation of the word), 215 _n_

  Dagger-formed knives, 169 _n_

  Dagger-forms from Persepolis, 211

  Dagger-Swords, 166;
    Assyrian, 204

  Daggers, Assyrian, 205

  — of bone, 26

  — of bronze, 78 _n_

  — of copper, 79

  — of iron (Egyptian), 100

  — used by the Persians, 210

  — with rapier-blade (Theban), 195 _n_

  Dagon (etymology of the word), 181

  Dah (= Dáo: Burmah), 140

  Dahome, Swords of the King of, 167

  Dalwel (Burmese Sword), 219

  Damascened steel, Cypriote, 188

  Damask-work (on weapons), 83, 110 _n_, 112, 151 _n_

  ‘Damascus blade,’ 132, 142

  Damascus (Persian) scymitar, 265

  Damnameneus, 75

  Danish Scramasax, 263

  — Swords, 236

  ‘Danisko’ (African weapon), 163, 237

  Dankali Sword, 165

  Dáo (weapon of the Nága tribe, Assam), 140

  Darius the Mede, 209

  Dark Continent, chief weapons of the, 162

  Darts and stones (ancient Lybian weapons), 16

  David’s sling, 19;
    his copper helmet, 70

  Deadbook, the, 147

  Dearg Umha (red copper; Keltic), 65

  Decalogue derived from the Dead-book, 150

  Decimal and duodecimal systems in Assyria, 202 _n_

  Deer-horn arrow-heads, 24

  Defensive armour of bronze, Roman, 254

  Defensive weapons (of Animals and Savages), 6

  — of the Cimbri, 274

  Degan (dagger: Cimbrian), 274

  Degen (kind of dagger: German), 215 _n_

  Degeneration of Roman soldiers, 261

  Deinotherium, 4

  Deities standing on animals, 176

  Denderah Zodiac, 155 _n_

  Densare (meaning of the term), 107

  Description of bronze Swords of Ancient Britons, 277 _sq._

  — of the Ancient Britons, 275, 277

  Devanagari alphabet, 189

  Development of Man, 5 _sq._

  — of the celt, 88 _n_

  Devil, the, 181

  Dha or Dhow (Indian knife), 219

  Dhanu (personification of the bow: Hindú), 214

  Dhanurvidya (Bow-Science: Indian), 213

  Dies Alliensis, 267

  Dimacheri (gladiators), 252

  _Diodon_, 44

  Diorite axe bored by means of a bow, 191 _n_

  Diorite (? basalt) implements at Mycenæ, 53 _n_

  — in Ancient Egypt, 171 _n_

  Dioscuri, 75

  ‘Distaff-side’ relationship, 188 _n_

  Divination in Assyria, 202

  ‘Doctored’ bullets, 26 _n_

  Dolche (daggers), 30, 273

  Dolls in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Dolphins in the Nile, 9

  Door-hinges in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Door-sockets of bronze, Assyrian, 202

  Double balteus (Roman), 258 _n_

  Double-edged Sword blades (Wahumla tribe), 169

  Double-headed eagle (at Eyub), 176

  Double-sided comb in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Dowris bronze, 87

  — copper, 53

  ‘Dowris metal,’ 181, 276

  Dragon’s blood, 87 _n_

  Dress-pins (women’s) of copper, 67

  Draughts (game of) in Ancient Egypt, 148

  ‘Drawing-cut,’ 131

  Duel of Manlius Torquatus and the Gaul, 267

  — origin of, 267 _n_

  Duelling weapons, 135

  Dumb-bells, 250

  ‘Dunner-Saxen’ (Lower Saxony), 272 _n_

  Düsack (weapon), 123


  Eagle, imperial, 246 _n_

  Early Iron Age in Britain, 276

  — — — of weapons, 97

  Ears of a Sword, 124

  Eastern heraldry, 140

  Edge of a Sword, 124

  EGYPT (Ancient), geography of, 145

  — architecture in, 148

  — art and science in, 147 _sq._

  — heraldry in, 147 _sq._

  — its military system, 152 _sqq._

  — its monotheism, 149

  — law code of, 147

  — music, painting, and sculpture in, 148

  — the cradle land of language, 146

  — the fountain head of knowledge, 147

  Egyptian arch, 201

  — choppers, 161

  — cutlasses, 211

  — daggers, 157

  — flag (five-rayed star on), 147 _n_

  — gilding (on bronze), 81

  — metallurgy, 80

  — names for the Sword, 123, 155 _sq._

  — phalanx, 155

  — Sphinx, 190 _n_

  — Swords, 157;
    in Cyprus, 189

  — word-roots, 146 _n_

  Egyptians (Ancient), their origin, 143 _sq._

  El-darakah (Arabic shield), 12 _n_

  Electricity, the marvellous displays of in Central Africa, 119

  Electrum (derivation of the word), 86 _n_

  Elephants armed with Swords, 216

  — Indian and African, 3 _n_

  Elephant-Sword, 216

  Elephant-trunk ornaments, 67 _n_

  Elephant (use of a weapon by), 3;
    its stroke or blow, 7

  El-Khauf maksum, 6

  El-Khizr (the Green Prophet), 179

  Emblems of the Egyptian nomes, 147

  Emu, 4

  Enamel, Assyrian, 202

  Enfield Sword-bayonet, 134 _n_

  ‘Englishmen of Antiquity,’ 275

  English gladiatorism, 253

  Engraving on copper plates, 55 _n_

  Ensigns in Ancient Roman army, 246 _n_

  Ensis, 247;
    etymology of the word, 254

  Entering angle, 132

  Enthytonon, 19

  Epitaph of Eshmunazar, 179

  ‘Epos of Peutaur,’ 101, 147

  Erin (etymology of the name), 192 _n_

  Ἐριόκομοι, 144 _n_

  ‘Erythræans,’ the original, 182 _n_

  Escrime (fencing: derivation of the word), 272 _n_

  Essedum (war chariot), 269, 277 _n_

  Eshmunazar (King of the Sidonians), 179

  Eskimos, 3

  Espadon, 123, 161

  ‘Esquimaux’ (origin of the word), 3 _n_

  Estain (= stannum: Gall.), 65

  Esther (= Amestris), 210 _n_

  Ἑστία, 1 _n_

  Ethiopian stone-tipped arrows, 154 _n_

  Etruscan and Latin affinities with Lydian, 194

  — armilla of bronze, 196

  ‘Etruscan Bologna,’ 196

  Etruscan commerce, 197

  — inscriptions, 197

  — iron lance-point, 196

  — œnochoe, 196

  — razors, 202 _n_

  Etruscans (account of the people), 195

  Eucalyptus-wood sabres, 44

  Eunuchs, 206, 207 _n_

  Exchange of war-prisoners, Roman, 241

  Executioner, Assyrian, 207

  Executioner’s Sword, 139

  Exodus of tribes from Ancient Germany, 270

  Expanding celt, 270

  Experiments in alloys, 83


  Fabri (Sappers: Roman army), 249

  Face-guard of iron, 258

  Facon or Cuchillo (Spanish clasp-knife, as a missile), 18

  Falchion of Ashanti, &c., 139;
    of Ancient Egypt, 155 _sq._

  — of Cilicia, 182

  — of gold, 212

  Falchion-shaped weapons, 32

  Falconry in Ancient Egypt, 148

  ‘Falling on the Sword,’ 184 _sq._

  Falx (origin of the falchion), 253 _n_

  Famagosta (etymology of the name), 190

  Famous Swordsmen of old, 240 _n_

  Fancy Swords, Roman, 258;
    weapons, 204

  ‘Fans’ (= Mpangwe negros, Gaboon River), 37 _n_

  Feathers as military decorations, 247 _n_

  Fecial College, the, 244 _sq._

  Felidæ (their strokes or blows), 7

  Fencing-foil, 123

  Fencing-schools, Roman, 249, 251

  Fenni (Finns), 274

  Ferentarii (Roman soldiers), 245

  Ferro-manganese, 108

  Ferrum (= Sword; Roman), 254

  — candidum, 108

  — indicum, 107, 109, 110

  — sericum, 109

  Fenekh (= Phœnicians), 178

  Fibrolite-splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Fibulæ of copper, 72

  Field-marshal’s bâton, 33

  Figg (English prize-fighter), 253

  Fighting-cocks in Ancient Greece, 254 _n_

  Fil (of a Sword), 137

  Fil et pointe (cut-and-thrust weapons), 123

  Finds in Cimbrian barrows, 274

  — in old tumuli, 271

  — of Cyprian weapons, 188 _sqq._

  — of Dr. Schliemann in the Troas, 190 _sq._

  Fingal’s war-cars (Ossian), 277 _n_

  Fir-bolgs (bag-men, Belgæ?), 64

  Fir-cone, the, as an architectural ornament, 201

  Fire, 1, 2 _n_, 20

  Firearms among the Ancient Hindus (?), 214 _n_

  ‘First Highlander,’ the, 217

  Fist-sword (stiletto), 215

  First lesson in iron, 99

  Fishes (their means of attack or defence), 9 _sq._

  Five-rayed star (on Egyptian flag), 147 _n_

  Flagellum (gladiatorial scourge), 253

  Flail, 20

  Flails used as weapons, 95

  Flamberg, Flammberg, Flamberge, 123, 136

  ‘Flaming Sword’ (of the Cherubim: Eden), 183

  ‘Fleam-money’ (among the Fans), 118

  Flint-ateliers (ancient), 102

  Flint-flakes, 13;
    knives, 20;
    ‘Swords,’ 45

  Flint-knappers (_caillouteurs_), 45

  Flint poniards, 46;
    hatchet-sabre, _ib._

  Flissa (weapon: North Africa), 123, 163, 237, 265

  ‘Flood,’ the, 149

  Fluxing (method of treating ores), 65

  Foil with French guard, 133

  Foining weapon, 123

  ‘Fonderia di Bologna,’ 196 _n_

  ‘Forethought,’ 1

  Forges, 102

  Forked blade, 141

  Forked Sword (Assyria), 141

  Fortifications, Assyrian, 203

  Fox-shark (Thresher; _Carcharias vulpes_), 7

  Framea (derivation of the word), 270 _n_

  Framée, the oldest, 270

  Francisque or taper axe, 94

  Frankish Italians, 270 _n_

  — spear-blade, 171

  Franks (meaning of the name), 271

  French fencing-foil, 124

  Fronstetten scramsahs, 272 _n_

  Fuel used in iron-smelting, 121

  Funda (sling of the Etruscans), 245

  Funeral urns of copper, 69

  Fur-coats, Gallic, 269

  Furnace-calamine (impure oxide of zinc), 86

  Furnaces (Indian) for iron-smelting, 111 _n_

  Fuscina (gladiatorial weapon), 253

  Fusil Gras, 134

  Fussängel, 1

  Fustanella (kilt), 247 _n_

  ‘Fustibale’ (fustibulus), 19

  Future state, Egyptian ideas of a, 150

  Fylfot (crutched cross: North of Europe), 202 _n_


  Gabbro-Splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Gæsum (Roman weapon), 246 _n_, 268

  Gæsatæ (= hastati), 268 _n_

  Galatæ (= Roman term _Galli_), 238 _n_

  Γαλάται (etymology of the word), 266 _n_

  Galla Sword, 163

  Gallia Comata, 269;
    Bracchata, _ib._;
    Togata, 270

  Gallic daggers, 267

  — Italians, 270 _n_

  — javelins, 268

  — machairæ-blades, 266

  — manner of battle, 269

  ‘Gallic Sword,’ 254, 266

  Gallic women in battle, 269

  Gallo-Greek (= Galatians, Keltic Gauls), 238 _n_

  — Swords, 238

  Ga-ne-u-ga-o-dus-ha (Iroquois deer-horn war-club), 28

  Gardening in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Gasterosteus (‘stickleback’), 10

  Gastrapheta, 19

  Gath (its site), 186

  Gaulish element in Etruria (?), 196 _sq._

  Gaza (site of), 186

  Gem-engraving, Assyrian, 202

  — in Cyprus, 188

  General ‘No Importa’ (Spanish), 261

  Generals, first duty of, 260 _n_

  Genii of Death (Egyptian), 149

  Geography of Ancient Egypt, 145

  Geometry in Ancient Egypt, 148

  — in Assyria, 202 _n_

  Georgic (age of primitive Archæology), 5 _n_

  German Empire, 270

  — main-gauche, 136

  — silver (_packfong_; of China), 64 _n_

  Germani (Alemanni), weapons of the, 270

  Germania, Ancient (its land and people), 270

  Germanism, 270

  Gessum (meaning of the word), 268 _n_

  Getæ (Scandinavian Goths), 274

  Gharapuri (cave-town; Bay of Bombay), 217

  Gilding bronze, 81

  Giraffe (its kick), 7

  Girding on the Sword, 185

  ‘Giving point,’ 127

  Gizzin (Assyrian weapon), 204 _n_

  Glacial Drift Age, 5 _n_

  Gladius, 247;
    etymology of the word, 254

  — Hispanus, 256, 268

  Gladiatorial shows, 249, 251 _sq._

  Gladiatorism, 249 _sq._

  Glaive (origin of the weapon), 89 _n_, 123;
    leaf-shaped, 165

  Glaives edged with sharks’ teeth, 49

  Glass (derivation of the word), 48 _n_;
    used on spears, 48;
    the fable of its discovery by the Sidonians, 54

  Glass-cutting in Cyprus, 188

  Glass-making in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Gleditschia, 6

  Globe-fish, spines of, 24

  Glove, Hittite, 176

  Gnu (its method of defence), 9

  Goat standing on the top of a pin (figure at Mycenæ), 233

  Goat’s horns as volutes, 201

  Goddesses with mural crowns, 176

  God kings (= ‘Dynasty of the Gods’: Egypt), 145

  ‘God save the King,’ of Egyptian origin, 149 _n_

  Goidels (Gauls), 275

  Gold and silver ornaments in Cyprus, 188

  Gold Coast Swords, 167

  — coined by the Lydians, 194

  — dust at Mycenæ, 229

  — Egyptian words for, 151

  — esteemed (by the ancients) less valuable than copper, 56

  — its representation in Egyptian hieroglyphs, 69

  ‘Golden axe’ of Ashanti, 167 _n_

  Golden bridle, 212

  — calf, the, 183

  — cannons (Baroda), 162

  — celt, 212

  — falchion, 212

  — hatchet, 89

  — plated wooden Sword-handle (Mycenæ), 228

  — scymitar, 212

  — shoulder-belts (Mycenæ), 228, 231

  — Sword-belt, 212

  — tiara, 212

  Goldsmith’s work at Mycenæ, 233

  Goliath of Gath (his armour of copper), 70

  Golîyo (weapon: Baghirmi), 163, 237

  Gonfanon (its etymology), 246 _n_

  Gorillas, 2

  Goths, Scandinavian, 274

  ‘Græcia mendax,’ 226

  Græco-Italic race, the, 186, 270 _n_

  Granite coffins, 81

  Γράφειν (its original meaning), 225

  Graver (pick?) in rock tablets (Wady Magharah), 61

  Graving-points, 171 _n_

  ‘Great Armenia,’ 209 _n_

  Great Pyramid, the, 147

  Greaves, 247;
    of copper, 70

  Grecian Sphinx, 190 _n_

  Greek accents, 220 _n_

  — bronzes (analysis of), 82

  — cavalry Swords, 248

  — combatants, 240

  — epigraphs at Mycenæ, 225

  — fashion of carrying the Sword, 239, 248

  — infantry Sword, 237

  — metallurgy came from Egypt, 105

  — statues, colossal, 241 _n_

  — tactics, 241

  — warfare, 241

  Greeks, the, as soldiers, 242

  ‘Green copper’ (= bronze: Chinese), 64

  Greenstone- (diorite-) splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Greenwood fuel used in iron-smelting, 112

  Grey copper ore (in Ireland), 65

  Grip of a Sword, 124

  Γροσφὸς (= throw-stick), 34

  Guanaco, 7

  Guanches (Wánshi; origin of the word), 16 _n_

  Guard plates (Sword), in Gaul, 257 _n_

  Guards of a Sword, 124

  _Guilielma speciosa_ (chonta-wood), 42

  Guilloche-scroll (architectural ornament), 202

  Guillons, 51

  Guisarme (Gisarme or Bisarme), 95

  Guitar (etymology of the word), 187 _n_

  Gules (in heraldry; derivation), 140 _n_

  Gunnar’s bill, 95

  Gunpowder age (of weapons), 20 _n_;
    use of gunpowder, 31 _n_

  Gymnasia, Hellenic, 239

  Gymnastics of the Spartans, 240

  Gyno-Sphinx (Egypt), 190 _n_


  Hâches votives, 89

  Hades (derivation of the word), 221

  Hæmatite-splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Haft-Júsh (‘seven boilings’ of metal: Persian), 221

  Hair-dyes in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Hairpins of bronze, 30

  Hair-shears (Roman) of _æs_, 56

  Halberts of copper, 67

  Hall-bard (Icelandic weapon), 91

  Hallstadt, finds of ancient weapons at, 262

  Halteres (dumb-bells: Roman), 250

  Hamasti (Sword-blade: Assyrian), 204 _n_

  Hamata (Roman armour), 248 _n_

  Hamathite Inscriptions, the, 177

  Hamatum (barb-head spear), 181

  Hammered iron-work in Mesopotamia, 104

  Hammers of copper, 67

  Hammer-wrought plating, 81

  _Hamus ferreus_, 14 _n_

  Hand-celts, 20

  Hand-hatchet, 88

  Hand-stones, 2;
    among the Hottentots, 17;
    among modern Syrians and Arab Bedawin, _ib._

  Hand-thrusting instruments, 133

  Hanger, 123

  Hankow-steel, 115

  Harbah (a dart: Arabic), 184

  Harness (derivation of the word),] 97

  Harpé (Ἅρπη: etymology of the word), 180

  — of Cronos (Perseus’ weapon), 180

  Harpoon-heads of reindeer-horn, 29 _n_

  Hastarii (Roman soldiers), 246

  Hastati (Roman soldiers), 246

  Hastile (Roman javelin: Virgil), 246 _n_

  Hatchet-boomerang, 38;
    -sabre, 46

  Hatchet of gold, 89

  Hatchets of iron in the ‘Odyssey,’ 225

  ‘Hathi’ (‘the handed’: Hindoo epithet for the elephant), 3

  Hauberks, Assyrian, 203

  Hauranic stone doors, 264 _n_

  Hawk-beaded Horus, 181

  Haye (military term), 245

  Heads of fallen foes kept as trophies (Gallic custom), 269

  Headsman’s weapon, 139

  Hebrew arms and armour, 183

  — Iron Age, 103

  — lepers in Ancient Egypt, 174 _n_

  — metallurgy, 183

  — tenets borrowed from Egypt, 148 _sq._

  Heft of a Sword, 124

  Hegesias or Stasinus: his ‘Kypria,’ 221 _n_

  Held (champion: German), 271

  Heliolatry of the Andes, 67 _n_

  Hellenes, their character, manners and customs, 239 _sq._

  Hellenic gymnasia and palæstræ, 239

  — reading of the Bards, 220 _n_

  Helmet of iron, in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Helmets, Roman, 246

  Henna-shrub (of Cyprus; _Lawsonia inermis_), 49

  Hephæstus (derivation of the word), 62 _n_

  Heraldry, Eastern, 140 _n_

  — in Ancient Egypt, 147

  Hercules, 75

  Hercules’ shield and Sword, 222

  Hereba (Phœnician weapon: = Harpé), 180

  Hermotybians (Egyptian soldiers), 152

  Hern (its method of defence), 9

  Herodotus (character of his work), 225 _sq._

  — on the age of Homer and Hesiod, 220

  Heroes of Greece, the age of the, 220

  ‘Hero’s arm,’ the (Virgil), 254

  Herse (military term), 245

  Hesiod, age of, 220

  Hide-scabbard, 160

  Hierarchy, Jewish (whence borrowed), 150

  Hieroglyphic signs for iron, 99

  Hilt of a Sword, 124

  Hilts of Ancient German Swords, 272

  Hilt-guards of a Sword, 124

  Hilt-plate of a Sword, 124

  Hindiah or Hindiyáneh (= ferrum indicum), 107

  Hindú alphabet, 219 _n_

  — copper coinage, 70

  — metaphysics, 214

  — mythology, 219 _n_

  — names for steel, 110 _n_

  — sabre, 215

  — trial of Sword-metal, 110 _n_

  — warriors, 215

  Hippopotamus, its method of attack, 9;
    home of the, 205 _n_

  Hiram of Tyre, 182

  Hisárlik, the finds at, 106, 190 _sqq._, 227

  History of Ancient Egypt, 144 _sq._

  Hithism, 176

  Hittites, 172 _sqq._

  Hittite boots, 176

  — bronze tablet, 176

  — hieroglyphs, 176 _sq._

  — language, 177 _n_

  — phalanx, 175

  — representation of the human figure, 176

  — seals, 176

  — syllabary, 176

  Hoang-ta-tie (the Chinese ‘literary blacksmith’), 115

  Holosphyraton (hammer-work), 221

  ‘Holy City’ of Miletus, 242 _n_

  ‘Holy-water sprinkler,’ 20

  Homa (Assyrian ‘Tree of Life’), 202

  Homer, age of, 220

  Homeric names for the Sword, 222

  Homo Darwiniensis, 5

  — sapiens, 5

  Honeysuckle as an architectural ornament, 202

  Hoofs of animals used as armour, 29 _n_

  Hooked-edge (of a Sword), 138

  Hoplites (heavy-armed Greek soldier), 240

  Hoplology, 1;
    orders of, 6

  Hoplomachi (gladiators), 252

  Hoplotherium, 4

  Hor-Apollo (= Harpocrates), 191 _n_

  Hormuzd and Ahriman, 180

  Horn-helmet, 29 _n_

  Horn war-clubs, 24;
    other instruments, 27;
    horn-arm in Homer, 27;
    various implements, 29

  Horse, its method of defence, 7;
    known to the Ancient Egyptians, 152 _n_

  Horse-hoofs used as armour, 29 _n_

  Horus (Egyptian god), 178

  Hottentots, 3 _n_;
    origin of the word, 17

  House-furniture in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Human-headed bull, Assyrian, 203 _n_

  Human sacrifices in Ancient Egypt, 156 _n_

  ‘Hunga munga’ (weapon: Lake Chad), 37

  Hünnenringe, 271

  Hunting among the Ancient Germans, 273

  — Assyrian, 203

  Hunting-dresses in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Hurud (iron; Chaldæan), 104

  Hydraulic pressure (an ancient form of), 54

  — — for hardening bronze, 81

  Hydraulics in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Hyksos (Shepherd-kings), 103, 173, 186 _n_


  Iapetus, legend of, 1

  Iberian Alfânge (El-Khanjar), 29

  — blade (Spatha), 256

  Iberic blade in Rome, 197

  Icelandic Hall-bard, 91

  Ida (derivation of), 106 _n_

  Idæi Dactyli, 74 _sq._, 106

  ‘Iliad,’ metal-working tools in the, 221

  Ili (hand-sword: Hindú), 215

  Imbricated armour, Assyrian, 203

  Imitation and Progress, 5

  Impedimenta (baggage: Roman army), 249

  Indian architecture, 219 _n_

  — gold coinage (?), 214 _n_

  — legendary myths, 213

  — sabres, 137

  — steel, 109, 218 _sq._

  — weapons, 185

  ‘Indo-European’ (applied to a language), 193 _n_

  ‘Ineffable Name,’ the (its origin), 149

  Infantry ‘regulation’ sword, 129

  Inflated skins (as floats for soldiers: Assyrian), 203

  Ingots of tin (Mexican), 82

  Inlaid iron saucer, 106 _n_

  ‘Inner Sea,’ 179

  Innuit, 3 _n_

  Inscription (Assyrian) on a Sword at Nardin, 207

  Inscriptions (rock) traced with flint flakes, 49 _n_

  ‘Inside-edge’ weapons, 235, 237

  Intaglio’d gold at Mycenæ, 229 _sqq._

  Invasion of England by Anglo-Saxons, 275

  Iphicrates’ improvement of Greek arms and armour, 237

  Iranian (language), 146 _n_

  Irish copper swords, 57

  Irish race (their origin), 65 _n_

  ‘Iron Age,’ 22 _n_, 23 _n_

  Iron among the Aryans, 108

  Iron among the Romans, 107

  ‘Iron-built’ cities of the Ancient Hindús, 219 _n_

  Iron cannon first cast, 117 _n_

  — chain-armour, Assyrian, 203

  — chisels (Etruscan), 197

  — dirk worshipped by the Scythians, 226

  — face-guard, 258

  Iron-flakes, surface (Cape of Good Hope), 119

  Iron glance (specular iron, oligiste), 107

  — hasps and nails, 100

  — in Africa, 117

  — in Assyria, 105

  — in China, 112 _sq._

  — in Egypt, 100

  — in German myths, 271

  — in Homer, 108

  — in India, 108 _sq._

  — in Madagascar, 116

  — in the Pentateuch, 103

  — in Tacitus, 225

  — introduction of in Greece, 69, 97;
    derivation of the word, 97 _n_

  — keys at Mycenæ, 106

  — knives, 100, 106

  — known to Homer and Hesiod, 221

  — on the American continent, 116

  — rare in ancient Germany, 271

  — sheaths for Swords, 222

  — sickle, 100

  — sling-bullet, 191

  Iron-smelting on the Libanus, 103

  Ironstone in ancient Bashan, 103

  — weapons, 52

  Iron Swords, Etruscan, 195

  — — of Italian tribes, 265

  — treated of by Aristotle, 106

  Iron-wood, 40

  Iron-working Age of India, 109

  — in Japan, 115 _sq._

  Italian foil, 124

  — poison daggers, 51

  Italy (modern), its two races, 270 _n_

  Iverapema (‘Iwarapema’), 42

  Ivernii (Irish non-Celts: Ptolemy), 279

  Ivory-carving, Assyrian, 202


  Jacaná (_Parra_; American bird), 9

  Jaculum (Roman javelin), 246 _n_

  Jade Pattu-Pattus, 25, 47;
    derivation of ‘jade,’ 47 _n_

  Jadite (and jade) splinters for wooden swords, 47

  Janghiz Khan, 227

  Japanese blade, 139

  — copper, 64

  — ingots, 64

  — iron, 116

  — liquation of argentiferous copper, 83

  — stone-chopper, 52

  Jauhar (‘jewel’ or ribboning of a ‘Damascus’ blade), 112

  Javanese blade, 215

  — sculptures, 218

  Javelineers, Roman, 248

  Javelins, 20, 66, 90;
    Ancient Roman, 246 _n_

  — for recruits, Roman, 249

  Javelin of the Samnites, 266 _n_

  Jáyá (mother of all weapons: Hindú), 214

  Jeanne d’Arc’s Sword, 184 _n_

  Jehovah (Yahveh), its etymology and mystic meaning, 149 _n_

  Jewish coinage of copper, 70

  ‘Jewish face,’ the, 150 _n_

  Jewish manner of wearing the Sword, 184

  Jízeh Pyramid, 100

  Joseph’s position in Egypt, 103

  Judgment after death, Egyptian ideas of, 150

  Julian the Apostate (his armour), 258

  Julius Cæsar as a general, 260

  Jumbiyah (crooked dagger of the Arabs), 29

  Jumbul-wood, 112

  Jutland, celts, &c., of, 274 _n_


  Kabeiroi (Cabiri), 74 _sq._

  Kabyle Flissa, 265

  Kachhá (pig-iron), 111

  Kadesh, site of, 174 _n_

  Kakhi (brass), 87

  Kakku (Assyrian weapon), 204 _n_

  Káma-Shastra (_Ars amoris_: Hindú), 215

  Kanaruc, Temple of, 109

  Kangaroo (its method of defence), 12

  Κάννα (Lat. _canna_; whence ‘cannon’), 14 _n_

  Kan-top, Indian, 204

  Kasabet (brass), 87

  Kasios (Zeus), 1 _n_

  Kaskara (Swords: Baghirmi), 162

  ‘Kassiteros,’ in Homer, 227

  Katuriyeh (? = Cateia: Gujarát), 38

  ‘Kawas’ (hand-stone), 18

  Keil (wedge: cuneus) form of attack, 273

  Kelan (Hittite slingers), 175

  Kelmis, 75

  Κέλται (etymology of the word), 266 _n_

  Keltic aborigines of the British Isles, 275

  — (?) finds at Mycenæ, 106

  — Gauls, weapons of, 266

  — miners’ tools, 107 _n_

  Κελτικὸν θράσος, 266 _n_

  Kelto-Scandinavian swords (miscalled Anglo-Saxon), 139

  Kemi (meaning of the word), 145 _n_

  Kemite copper mines (in Midian), 102

  Keteian or Cetian (in Homer), 172

  Ketos (_Canis Carcharias_), 180

  Kettles of copper, 69

  Key-pattern (architectural ornament), 202

  Keys of iron at Mycenæ, 106

  Khadga (Hindú Sword), 214 _sqq._

  Khanjar, 266

  Khanjar-dagger, 212

  Khanjar (Georgian weapon), 159

  — of Persia and India, 29

  Khesbet (metal connected with tin), 87

  Kheten (war-axes; Egyptian), 154, 158

  Khita (Hittites), 200

  — people, description of, 175;
    their armour, weapons, &c., _ib._

  Khita-land, the Sword in, 172 _sq._

  Khoi-Khoi, 3 _n_, 17

  Khnemu (gnomes), 75

  Khopsh (kopis; Egyptian Sword), 156, 266

  Khorasáni blades, 114 _n_

  Kilt, ancient, 247 _n_

  King Blay of Attábo, Sword made by, 142 _n_, 168

  King-crab (_Limulus_), 24

  King Koffee’s umbrella, 167 _n_

  Kinnúr (Hebrew lyre), 187 _n_

  Kinyá (arm-knife: Baghirmi), 162

  Kirab-sar (Hittite writer of books), 173

  Kiry (Kerry: Kafir weapon), 28

  Kitár (Hindú weapon), 140

  Kleydv (Welsh Sword), 279

  Klingenthal Sword-manufactory, 132

  Κνήστεις (Athenian weapons), 237

  Knief (ancient German weapon), 272

  Knife-Sword (Ancient Egyptian), 155

  Knife, the (preceded the saw), 13;
    as a missile, 18

  Knights of Malta: their Swords, 162

  Knives edged with sharks’ teeth, 49

  — of iron at Mycenæ, 106

  Knobkerries, 32 _n_

  Knob-stick (development into the Sword), 44

  Knuckle-duster (cestus of the classics), 7

  Kobongs (Australian tribal ‘crests’), 40 _n_

  Κοπίς, not mentioned in Homer, 224;
    = Egyptian ‘Khopsh,’ 235;
    the weapon of the Giants, and of the Amazons, 235 _sq._;
    peculiarity of the weapon, 236

  Kopis of the Gauls, 266 _n_

  — Spanish, 265

  Korah (Nepaul weapon), 265

  Koran-reading, 220 _n_

  Kordofan, rude kind of bellows in, 120

  Krís (= crease: Malay weapon), 137, 166, 212

  Kukkri blade of Ghurkas, 236

  Kukkri or Gurkha Sword-knife, 39, 217 _n_, 265

  Kulbeda (weapon of the Nyam-Nyams), 37

  Κύων, 1 _n_

  Κύπρος (meaning of the word), 58

  ‘Kurs’ (bloom: of metal), 112

  Kurush (= Κῦρος, Cyrus), 209 _n_

  ‘Kypria’ of Stasinus, the, 221 _n_


  Labarum (Roman standard), 246 _n_

  Λάβρα (= πέλεκυς: Lydian), 89

  Labrandian Jove, 89

  ‘La boxe Française,’ 254

  Lacquer or varnish (on metals), 84

  Lance, Assyrian, 202

  Lances of sago-wood, 23

  Lancehead of bronze at Mycenæ, 230

  — of fish-bone, 23

  — of pure copper, 57

  Language, articulate (three periods of), 74 _n_

  Lanista (Roman _maître d’armes_), 249

  Lapis lazuli (= cyanus in Pliny), 222 _n_

  Laqueatores (Roman gladiators), 210 _n_

  Larissa (lance, Middle Ages), 182

  Larnaca (etymology of the name), 187

  Lasso, the, in Ancient Egypt, 210 _n_

  — of the Roman gladiators, 210 _n_

  — South American, 210 _n_

  Lassos of plaited thongs (Persian), 210

  Lát (iron pillar of Delhi), 109

  ‘Latchen’-blade, 135

  Lateral blades (of a Sword) moved by a spring, 136

  Laterite, 118

  Latin blood in English race, 277

  Latrunculi (Roman game), 218

  Latten (derivation of the word), 85

  Laufi or Laf (Sword), 123

  Lava-splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  _Lawsonia inermis_ (‘kopher,’ henna-shrub), 59

  Laws of the Visigoths, weapons in the, 272 _n_

  Lead, scoriæ of, 82

  — and silver in Spain, 107

  Lead-bronze in Ireland, 276

  Leaf-shaped dagger and the rapier, connection of, 278

  Leather sheath (for Swords), 160

  Lebes-chauldron, 192

  Legion of the ancient Roman army, 245 _sq._

  Leiste (guard-plate: German), 272

  Lemovii (Pomerania), 274

  Length of Ancient Greek Swords, 238

  — of Ancient Indian Sword, 216 _n_

  — of Egyptian Swords, 159

  — of Roman spear (Tacitus), 271

  Leowel (pick), 37

  Lepers, Hebrew, in Ancient Egypt, 174 _n_

  Leptolithic age, 5 _n_

  Libyan (Ancient) weapons, 162

  ‘Life,’ 261 _n_

  Ligaunians (Etruria), 196

  Lignarii (Sappers: Roman army), 249

  Limulus (king-crab), 24

  Linen at Mycenæ, 232

  ‘Line of direction’ in a Sword, 129

  Lingua di bove (Sword shape: Italian), 166, 239

  Lion (its stroke or blow), 7

  Liquation of argentiferous copper (in Japan), 83

  Lisán (‘tongue’-weapon), 32, 154

  Λισσότριχοι, 144 _n_

  Litholatry, 1 _n_

  ‘Live iron’ (= loadstone), 102

  Livy’s Phalanx, 246 _n_;
    Legion, _ib._

  Lixæ (camp-followers: Roman), 249

  Llama, 7

  Loadstone in the Troas, 191

  Long-handed Danish Sword, 274

  Long-hefted axe (Norman), 90

  Longobards, 271

  Long-straight Sword, 158

  Long-Sword, 161

  Lord High Treasurer’s white rod, 33 _n_

  — Marshal of England’s gold truncheon, 33 _n_

  — Steward of the Household’s white staff, 33 _n_

  ‘Lords of Asia’ (the Persians), 209

  ‘Lost Tribes,’ the, 151 _n_

  Lotus, the, as an architectural ornament, 201

  Lucky and unlucky marks on Eastern horses, 216

  Ludus gladiatorius, 249

  Lusitania, abundance of metal in, 265 _sq._

  Lusitanian weapons, 266

  Lycian weapons, 182, 211

  — tongue, the, 187 _n_

  Lydians, account of the, 194

  Lydian stone splinters for wooden Swords, 47


  Macaná, 42

  Macedonian phalanx, weapons of the, 237

  Mace in rock tablets (Wady Magharah), 61

  Machabees (etymology of the word), 185 _n_

  Machæra (= Sword, in Homer), 224

  Machairæ-blades, Gallic, 266, 268

  Μάχαιραι (Angl. Sax. Meche), 161

  _Machairodus latidens_ (sabre-toothed tiger), 9

  Madagascar iron, 116

  Mádu or Máru (horn dagger), 11

  Mahquahuith set with obsidian teeth, 67

  Magic in Assyria, 202 _n_

  — mirror of Perseus, 180

  Magnet (loadstone), 102

  Mail-coat on the Trajan column, 258

  Mail-coats of iron in the Rig Veda, 108

  Main-gauche, German, 136

  Malachite (derivation of the word), 62 _n_

  Malay krís (weapon), 137

  Malga war pick, 37, 38

  Mall (weapon), 88

  Mallet in rock tablets (Wady Magharah), 61

  Malleable bronze, 57;
    copper, 66;
    iron, 98

  Maltese cross, 192 _n_

  Manchette, 12 _n_

  Maniples (of Roman army), 246 _n_

  Mantis (the fights of), 13

  Mantramukta (class of weapons: Hindú), 214

  Manufacture of arms and armour in Cyprus, 188

  Manyuema Swordlet, 169

  Maracá (sacred rattle: Brazilian Tupis), 151

  Marave iron-smelting furnace, 118

  ‘Mar Jiryús’ (Cappadocian saint), 181

  Mars worshipped by the Scythians, 227

  Martel-de-fer, 28

  _Martinezia ciliata_, 42

  Máru or Mádu (horn dagger), 11

  Maruduk (= Mars: Assyrian God), 207

  Marzabotto blade, the (Etruscan), 195

  Masks (papier-mâché) in Ancient Egypt, 148

  ‘Master Shoe-tye,’ 3 _n_

  Materialism, 261 _n_

  Mathematics in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Maushtika (fist-sword; stiletto: Hindú), 215

  Mawingo-wings (_Pennisetum Benthami_), 12

  Mayence blade, 238

  Media, 209 _n_

  Mediæval sabres, 136

  — split Swords, 142

  Medicine in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Medinah Habu, temple of, 175

  _Melaleuca_ (swamp tea-tree), 40

  Melkarth (Phœnician god), 179

  Μελίη (ash-tree = a bow), 254 _n_

  Memnonium, the, 175

  Meri (New Zealand weapon), 26, 47

  Merodach (Babylonian god), 183

  Mesopotamia, iron work in, 104

  Mesopotamian astronomy, 200 _n_

  Metal in the Hissarlik remains, 106

  — replaces bone and stone in weapons, 50

  — scabbards, 222 _n_

  Metal-workers, a wandering race of, 275

  Metal-working (discovery of), 51

  — in China, 115

  Metallic value of Dr. Schliemann’s finds, 233

  Metallo-lithic Age, 22 _n_

  Metallurgic δαίμονες, 74

  Metallurgy, Assyrian, 202

  — developed by ancient Egyptians, 151

  — extension of from Egypt, 63

  — of the Exodists, 56 _n_;
    origin of, 74

  Metals, archaic names of, 122

  — in Ancient Cyprus, 186

  — in Ancient Hellas, 220

  — in the Troas finds, 191

  Metamorphosis, 2

  Meteoric-iron chips for wooden weapons, 51

  Meteoric iron, 99

  Meteorolites, 99 _n_

  Method of warfare, Ancient German, 273

  Mica-schist dagger (natural formation), 47

  Mica-schist, mould of, 82, 191

  Midas-myth, the, 187 _n_

  Midian copper mines, 102

  Mihhili Mezzir (= Sahs), 272 _n_

  Milanese (modern), 270 _n_

  Milesians (origin of the name), 65 _n_

  Miletus, ‘Holy City’ of, 242 _n_

  Militarism of the Ancient Romans, 252

  Military discipline under the Roman Empire, 249

  — mining (Ancient Egypt), 154

  — tactics of Ancient Hindús, 218

  Milites (etymology of the word), 245

  Mimosa, 6, 32

  Mineral fields of Cornwall, 275

  ‘Miners’ hammers (= stone-pounders; Ireland), 65

  Miölner (hammer of Thor), 35

  Mirmillones, 251

  Mirrors (polished) of copper, 67

  Missile fishes, 7

  — weapons, 2, 6

  Missiles in the _Iliad_, 222

  ‘Mixing bloods,’ 227 _n_

  Modern Irish, character of, 279 _n_

  Mohammed’s Sword, 141

  Mokume (ornamental alloys), 83

  ‘Money swords’ (Chinese talismans), 64

  Mongol, a special race, 227 _n_

  Monkeys, (use of missiles by), 2

  Monomachia (intaglio of gold) at Mycenæ, 234

  _Monodon monoceros_ (Narwhal or sea-unicorn), 11

  Monotheism of Egypt, 149

  ‘Morning star,’ 20

  Morra (the game) in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Moses’ cradle, 149

  Moslem two-headed eagle (heraldry), 176 _n_

  Mosul (the original Ararat), 202

  ‘Mound-builders,’ 66, 116

  ‘Mountain copper’ (ὀρειχάλκον), 85

  Movable tower (for sieges), 154

  Mucro (edge of a Sword: Roman), 255 _n_

  Mud bricks, Assyrian, 201

  Muffle (crucible), 111 _n_

  Muktámukta (class of weapons: Hindú), 214

  Muktasandhárita (class of weapons: Hindú), 214

  Mulciber (= Malik Kabir: Phœnician), 179

  Multibarbed or serrated weapons, 13

  Mummies, Quichuan, 67 _n_

  Mummy bodies at Mycenæ, 228

  — skulls, 144

  Music connected with Lydia, 194

  — origin of, 15

  — in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Mussel-shell (the original spoon), 47 _n_;
    and as a tip to a (thrusting) wooden Sword, 48

  Muzak (wrought metal: Hebrew), 103

  Mycenæ, the discoveries at, 73, 82, 106, 227 _sq._

  ‘Mycenæ spiral,’ 233 _sq._

  Mycenian goldsmiths, 85 _n_

  Mythological degradation on of Egyptian mysteries, 151


  Naharayn (Mesopotamia), 104, 172

  Nails of copper, 65

  ‘Naki-ka-kausti’ (a _spectaculum_ at Baroda), 8 _n_

  Names become by-words, 65 _n_

  Napoleon Buonparte and the Arabs, 186 _n_

  Naphtuhim (Thuhi = ‘the fair people’), 102 _n_

  Narwhal or sea-unicorn (_Monodon monoceros_), 11

  _Naseus fronticornis_, 10

  National weapon of ancient Germans, 270

  ‘Native brass’ opposed to ‘yellow copper’ (English) 56

  Native iron, 99;
    steel, _ib._

  Natural alloys, 66, 69

  Náyin (Mpangwe crossbow), 37 _n_

  Nebo (Mercury), 207

  Necklace-beads (Mycenæ), 228

  Necropolis at Marzabotto (Bologna), 195 _sq._

  — in Valdichiana, 197

  Neo-Latin names for the Sword, 123

  — races, the, 270

  Neolithic age, 5 _n_

  Nephrite meri, 47;
    nephrite a cure for kidney disease, 47 _n_

  Nero, character of, 252 _n_

  Nickeliferous iron, 99

  Niello (_nigellum_), 83, 152

  Nile-dwellers, 3 _n_

  Nilotes, characteristics of the, 144 _n_

  Nimrúd, Palaces of, 202 _sq._

  Nineveh, 200;
    discoveries at, 201

  Ninus, date of, 199 _n_, 200

  Nippers of copper, 68

  Njiga (weapon: Baghirmi), 163, 237

  Noah (original of the name), 149

  Noah’s ark, 149

  Noahitic Deluge, the, 144 _n_, 149 _n_

  North beats South, 261

  North-European Sword not of Roman origin, 264

  Northumberland stone, the, 267

  Novacula, Cyprian, 189

  Nuggets (copper) as bell-clappers, 67

  Nuggets of iron, in Africa, 119

  Nuguit (Greenland weapon), 25


  Obelisks (method of forming them), 54

  Obsidian daggers, 46;
    splinters for wooden Swords, 47;
    black obsidian spear-head, 50

  Ocreæ (greaves or leggings), 247

  Odysseus (etymology of the word), 224

  ‘Odyssey,’ the, wrought iron in, 224

  Œnochoe, Etruscan, 196

  Offensive weapons (of animals and savages), 6

  Old Coptic language, 146

  Old Persian Sword, 139

  Old Spanish Swords, 265

  Oligiste (iron glance, specular iron), 107

  Ollaria (pot copper), 88

  ‘Omphalos of the earth,’ 192 _n_

  Onager, 4;
    origin of the name, 20 _n_

  Ondanique (= ferrum indicum), 107

  One-handed Swords (Mexican), 67

  Onomatopœia, 4

  ‘Oran-Banua’ (men of the woods: Malaccan negrito aborigines), 14 _n_

  Ὀρειχάλκον, 85

  Ore smelting (discovery of), 51

  Orichalcum, 85

  Orientation of corpses, 234 _n_

  Oriflamme, 246 _n_

  Original alphabet, the, 146 _sq._

  Origin of the Ancient Egyptians, 143 _sq._

  — (suggested) of the smelting-process, 118

  Orissa Sword (two-bladed), 141

  Or molu, 87

  Ornamental alloys (applied to Swords), 83

  Ornamentation, Greek, 221

  Ornaments in sepulchres at Mycenæ, 234

  — set in bone, 29

  Osier-bucklers (for recruits: Roman), 249

  Osiris and Typhon, 180

  Osiris’ ark, 149

  Ostrich-feather head-gear, 158 _n_

  Ostrich throwing stones, 3

  Οὐλότριχοι, 144 _n_

  Ourshol (= Melkarth), 179


  Pacho (club: South Sea Islanders), 48

  Pack-fong, 68

  Pactyans, 210

  Paddle (or original oar), 32, 40;
    paddle and spear combined, _ib._;
    development into the Sword, 42

  Paddle-sword (Peruvian), 66, 68

  Pagaya (sharpened paddle), 42

  Painting in Ancient Egpyt, 148

  — (origin of) 15

  Pakká (crude steel), 111

  ‘Palace of the Atreidæ’ at Mycenæ, 233

  Palace of the Forty Columns, 211

  Palaces of Nimrúd, finds in, 202 _sq._

  ‘Palace of Priam’ (Troas), 191 _sq._

  Palæolithic flints, 45 _n_

  Palæoliths of Kelts of the British Isles, 275

  Palæstræ, Hellenic, 239

  _Palameda_ (Horned Screamer), 9

  Palestine (etymology of the word), 177

  Palintonon, 19

  Palladium of Troy, 1 _n_

  Palm-wood Swords, 43

  Palstab, 270

  Palstave, 20;
    derivation, 30 _n_

  Paludamentum (Roman officer’s cloak), 245 _n_

  Palus, 250

  Πάμφαινον (explanation of the epithet), 223

  Panimukta (class of weapons: Hindú), 214

  Papacha (Quichuan god), 67 _n_

  Paphlagonians, 210

  Παρὰ μηροῦ (meaning of the expression), 239

  Parazonia (weapons), 161

  ‘Parazonium’ dagger, 239, 246

  Parazonium of bronze, 239

  Parchment, Assyrian, 201 _n_

  Parian (Arundelian) Chronicle, 105

  Parma (Roman shield), 246 _sq._

  Parmularians, 252

  Parrying-shields, 38

  Parrying stick (Africa and Australia), 12

  Partisan (mediæval weapon), 183 _n_

  Pas d’âne, 125 _n_, 166

  ‘Paternoster’ blade, 136

  Pathros (meaning of the word), 145 _n_

  Pattisha (two-bladed battle-axe: Hindú), 215

  Patrick, St., 180

  Pattu-Pattus, 25, 47

  Pavoise (in sieges: Ancient Egypt), 154

  Pea-shooter, 14 _n_

  Pedila, 1

  Pelasgo-Hellenic race, the, 186

  Πέλεκυς, 89, 90

  — ἀμφιστόμος (_bipennis_), 271

  Pelusium (etymology of the word), 177

  Pennations (in sabres: Eastern and mediæval), 136

  _Pennisetum Benthami_ (Mawingo-wingo), 12

  Pennons, Assyrian, 203

  Pentaur (scribe of Ramses II.), 101, 147

  Percussion, centre of, 129

  Persea (Egyptian ‘Tree of Life,’) 202 _n_

  Perseus, 179 _sq._

  Persia, 209

  Persian cidaris or tiara, 209

  — akinakes, 210

  — archer, 209

  — cuneiform, 201, 203

  — headdress, 209

  — helmet, 209

  — origin of heraldry, 140 _n_

  — sculpture, 209

  — shield, 209

  — Sword (old), 139

  — war-axe, 273

  — warrior, 209

  Persepolis sculptures, 208

  Persians of Herodotus, the, 226

  Peruvian army, 66;
    nation, 66 _n_;
    derivation of ‘Peru,’ _ib._

  Peshawar sculptures, 218

  Phalangæ, 32

  Phalanx of the Hittites, 175

  — Ancient Egyptian, 154

  — in Livy, 246 _n_

  Phalarica (fire-missile: Roman), 248

  Phaleræ (military decorations), 248

  Phallic theories, 114

  Pharaoh (meaning of the word), 145

  Pharsalia, Cæsar at, 260

  Phásganon (= Sword, in Homer), 222, 230;
    etymology of the word, 223

  Philistia, plain of, 186

  Philistine (modern use of the word), 185 _n_

  — weapons, 185

  Phœnicia (etymology of the word), 178

  Phœnician art in England, 275

  Phœnicians, 178

  Phosphor-bronze, 53, 80

  Phosphorus mixed with copper, 81 _n_

  Phrygian tongue (a congener of Greek), 76 _n_

  Phrygian-type cap, 175

  Picks made of reindeer-antlers, 29 _n_

  Picrous Day (a Cornish festival), 79

  Picts (origin of the name), 279 _n_

  Pierced blade and sheath (Sword), 136

  ‘Piercing-stone’ (Babylonian Inscriptions), 171 _n_

  Piedmontese (modern), 270 _n_

  Pigeon-shooting, 253 _n_

  Pilani (Roman javelineers), 248

  Pile (arrow-head; derivation), 25 _n_

  Pile-dwellings of Olmütz, 24;
    of Laibach, 29

  Pilum (Roman weapon), 248 _n_

  Pilus (division of Roman army), 247

  Pinna used as arrow-heads and adze-blades, 47

  Pirhua (the first Ynka deified to a Creator), 66 _n_

  Piromis (meaning of the word), 144 _n_

  Pir (sun-heat), 1 _n_

  Pisoliths, 102

  Pivot-theatres, 250

  Plating (or sheeting) on wood or stone, 55

  Ploughshare (Roman) of _æs_, 56

  Plover of Central Africa (carries weapons in its wings), 9

  Plumbiferous scoriæ in Spain, 108

  Plumbum argentarium (tin and lead), 88

  ‘Plummets’ in the Western Mounds, 116

  Point of a Sword, 139

  Poison daggers, 51

  — trees, 6

  Poisoned arrows, 26;
    bullets, 26 _n_;
    weapons, 9, 11

  Pokwé or Poucue (weapon: Lunda), 169

  Poland (derivation of the name), 92

  Pole-axes, 92;
    Egyptian, 154

  — of silver, copper, gold, 67

  Pole, discovery of the, 200 _n_

  — (pillar: etymology of the word), 114 _n_

  Poles of war-cars armed, 277 _n_

  Polished mirrors of copper, 67

  Polyænus on Julius Cæsar, 260

  Polybius (his character as a writer), 245 _n_

  Pommel of a Sword, 123, 140, 159, 165

  Poniards of flint, 46

  Popular sports, 253

  Porcelain in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Porcupines ‘shooting their quills,’ 3 _n_

  Pork, Jewish hatred of, 150

  Portable African bellows, 121

  — bridge (for sieges; Ancient Egypt), 154

  — shrines of Ancient Egypt, 150

  Postín (Slav and Afghan dress), 269

  Pot-copper, 88

  Pottery, in the Maydúm Pyramid, 61;
    of the Quichuans, 67 _n_

  Potter’s wheel, invention of the, 119

  Poucue (weapon; Lunda), 169

  Prachtaxt (ancient German weapon), 273

  Prahiunamif (son of Ramses II.), 174

  Pramantha, 1 _n_, 202

  Prasa (spear: Hindú), 215

  Prasine faction, 252

  Pre-Adamites (Moslem), 2 _n_

  Precious stones on Swords, 258

  Predatory fishes, 4, 7

  Prehistoric Ilium, 194

  Prester John, 163 _n_

  Primæval language (Egyptian), 146 _sq._

  Primitive man, 3 _sqq._

  Primordial shipbuilders (the Cabiri), 75

  Principes (Roman soldiers), 247

  Prisse Papyrus, the, 147

  _Pristis_ (Saw-fish), 13

  Processes of making steel, 117 _n_

  Processional axe (German), 91

  Proci (Roman soldiers), 248

  Produce of Ancient Britain, 277

  Promachoi (Greek soldiers), 248

  Prometheus, 1

  ‘Promised Land,’ the, 178

  Prong-edge (of a Sword), 138

  Proportions of alloys, 83

  Proportion in length of blade and hilt-blade, 264

  — of man to animals, 5 _n_

  Proto-chalcitic Age (of weapons), 53

  Proto-sideric Age, 5 _n_

  — or Early Iron Age of weapons, 97

  Provinces of the bronze antiques of Europe, 276

  Prydhain (god worshipped in Britain), 77 _n_

  Pteropedilos (Mercury), 1

  Ptolemies, the, 209

  Ψευδάργυρος, 85

  Pucuna, 14 _n_

  Pugio (Ancient Roman weapon), 210, 256;
    derivation of the word, 257 _n_

  Pukhtu or Pushtu (Afghan language), 210 _n_

  Punctured wounds, danger of, 127

  ‘Pundonor,’ 267

  Punishing prisoners by torture (Assyrian), 203

  Πῦρ, 1 _n_

  ‘Purple copper’ (Chinese), 64

  Pygmalion in Cyprus, 187

  Pyracmon (the Cyclop), 75

  Pyramid of Copan (Yucatan), 67 _n_

  — the Great, 147

  Pyrites, 1 _n_

  Pyropus (copper and gold alloy), 86 _n_

  Pyrodes, 1 _n_

  Pyrrhic dance, 239


  Quadrangular thrusting-blade, 136

  Quadriga of bronze, 80

  Quagga (its kick), 7

  ‘Quarrel’ (bolt of a crossbow), 25 _n_

  Quarter-staff among the Ancient Hindús, 215

  Quartz (and quartzite) splinters for wooden Swords, 47

  Quaternary Age in England, 275

  Quella (Khellay, iron: Peru), 67 _n_

  Quenching (of metal) with water, 165;
    with oil, 165 _n_

  Quichua language, 67 _n_;
    characteristics of the people, _ib._;
    mummies, _ib._

  Quillons of a Sword, 125, 164

  Quincussis (bronze coin), 264

  Quiris (= Hasta: Ancient Roman weapon), 246 _n_


  Races, changes in the conditions of, 243

  Racial names, 194

  _Raia trygon_ and _R. histrix_ (sting-rays), 11

  Rakes of copper, 67

  Rakshasas (demons: Hindú), 213

  Ram (in sieges: Ancient Egypt), 154

  Ramayana Epic, 190

  ‘Ramrod-back’ Sword, 133

  Ramses II., tablets of (Bayrut), 200 _n_

  ‘Rank,’ man of (derivation of ‘rank’), 140

  Ranseur or Ronçeur, 95

  Rapier, 123

  Rapier-blades, Etrurian, 195, 278

  Rapier in Ancient Britain, 278

  Rat-trap, crossbow, 37 _n_

  Razors, Assyrian, 202 _sq._

  ‘Razor-women’ of King Gezo (Dahome), 168

  Recruit-drill, Roman, 249

  ‘Red bronze,’ 72

  Reed arrows, 28

  Regnum Noricum, 256

  ‘Regulation’ Sword (infantry), 129, 133

  Regulus (of metal), 107 _n_, 111

  Reindeer-antlers used as picks, 29 _n_

  — period, 27, 29

  Relief in gold and silver on Swords, 258

  Religion in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Repoussée work at Mycenæ, 233

  — work on Swords, 258

  Respect for the dead, 5 _n_

  Retiarii (Roman gladiators), 210 _n_, 251

  Rhinoceros-horn used for weapons, 28

  Rhinoceros (its armature), 9

  Riesenmauer, 271

  Riding practised by Ancient Romans, 249

  Rig Veda, mention of iron in the, 108

  Ring-money, 151 _n_

  Ritual of the Dead, Egyptian, 184

  Rock-inscriptions at Ibriz, 176

  Rock-inscriptions traced with flint-flakes, 49 _n_

  — tablets at Wady Magharah, 61

  Roman alloys, 84

  — fashion of wearing the Sword, 258

  — fashions adopted by Gauls, 269

  — helmets, 246

  — iron, 107

  — jurisprudence, 244

  — lacquered or varnished brass, 84

  — method of hardening and tempering tools, &c., 107

  — mining operations, 107

  — names for the Sword, 254

  — shield bordered with brass, 266

  Romans smelted copper in England, 71

  Roman soldiers, 259 _sqq._

  — Swords in England, 259

  Ῥομφαία (Thracian weapon), 237

  Ronçeur or Ranseur, 95

  Rorarii (Roman soldiers), 245

  ‘Rosa mystica’ (of Byzantine art), 202

  Rosette, the, as an architectural ornament, 201

  ‘Royal Commentaries of the Ynkas,’ 67

  Royal Swords, Assyrian, 205 _sq._

  Rubbings of Pharaohnic stone, 102 _n_

  Ruby copper, 85

  Rudis (rod or wooden Sword: Roman), 250

  Rugii (Baltic), 274

  Rumpia (weapon mentioned by Gellius), 237

  Runes engraved on a Scramasax, 272 _n_

  Runic inscriptions on Cimbrian weapons, 274 _n_


  ‘Sabbatic River’ (Pliny, Josephus), 178 _n_

  Sabbation (fabled river), 178 _n_

  Sabbaths, Assyrian, 200 _n_

  Sabine shields, 253 _n_

  Sabre, ancient forms, Greek and barbarian, 12;
    its origin, 32

  Sabres of eucalyptus-wood, 44

  Sabre-toothed tiger (_Machairodus latidens_), 9

  Sacæ (Shakas; Nomades: Scythians), 226

  Sacrificial blades, 217 _n_

  — knives of flint, 46

  — knives of iron, 100

  Σάγαρις, 90

  Sagartian Nomades, 210

  Sagina gladiatoria, 250

  Sago-tree (_Nibong_; _Caryota urens_), 23

  Sagum (Roman soldier’s cloak), 245 _n_

  Sahs, Seax, Sax (Saxon), 272

  Sailor’s cutlass, 140

  Sakkarah pyramids, 144 _n_

  Samians, casting and soldering among the, 221

  Samnite weapons, 253

  Samnites, javelin of the, 266 _n_

  Samson’s weapon, 24;
    tomb, 186 _n_

  Samurai (Japanese two-sworded man), 252 _n_

  Sandal of Perseus, 179

  Sanskritists and philology, 191 _n_

  Sanskrit, terms for iron in, 108

  Sappers of Ancient Roman army, 249

  Sarbacane, 14 _n_

  ‘Sardian electrum,’ 87

  Sardones (Shardona), 175

  ‘Sardonian linen,’ 175

  Sarissa (spear), 182, 237

  Sarpedon’s targe, 192

  Satrap (etymology of the word), 226 _n_

  Sattára (= Sát-istara, the Pleiades), 8 _n_

  Satzuma copper (the best in the world), 64

  Saucer, inlaid iron, 106 _n_

  Saunion (Samnite javelin), 266 _n_

  Sauromatæ (northern Medes and Slavs), 227

  Savage worship of weapons, 162 _n_

  Saw-bayonet, 51, 137

  Saw, double-handed, of iron or steel, in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Saw-fish (its armature), 13;
    teeth of, 24

  Saw-kerf, 29

  Saws, Assyrian, 203

  Saxnot Zio (German Sword-god), 273

  Saxo (weapon of the Saxon or Sacæ), 90 _n_

  Saxon blade, 135

  Saxones (ancient German tribe), 271

  Scabbard of pearl, 212

  Scæan gates (Troas), 191

  Scaling-ladder, Ancient Egypt, 154;
    Assyrian, 203

  Scalping described by Herodotus, 227 _n_

  Scandinavian Goths and Vandals, 274

  — tactical formation, 273

  Scarabæi of diorite (Egyptian), 53 _n_

  ‘Scatterer’ (Sanskrit Astara), 38

  Sceptre-heads of copper, 68

  Scheme of battle, Homeric, 241

  Σχήνη ἱερὰ (portable tent of the Carthaginians), 150

  Scherma (fencing: derivation of the word), 272 _n_

  Schläger (German weapon), 135 _n_, 139

  Schlegel on the ‘Brazen’ Age, 56

  Schleswig, spatha of, 272

  Schliemann’s excavations in the Troas, 190

  ‘Schweinskopf’ (Ancient German tactical formation), 273

  Schwertstab (Sword-staff), 273

  Science in Egypt, 147 _sq._

  Scilly Islands (origin of the name), 78 _n_

  Scipio’s fleet, arms supplied to, 198

  Scissors (etymology of the word), 272

  — of copper, 79

  Sclepista (Roman sacrificial knife) of copper (or bronze?), 56

  Scoriæ of lead (at Schliemann’s Troy), 82

  Scorpion (or onager), 19, 20 _n_

  — (whip-goad: Ancient Egypt), 157

  Scourge, Assyrian, 206

  Scramasax, Scramma Scax, 94, 223, 235;
    (derivation of the word), 272 _n_

  — from Hallstadt, 263

  Scramsahs, Copenhagen, 272 _n_

  Sculpture in Egypt, 148

  — (origin of), 15

  Sculptures of Chehel Munar, 211

  Scutum (Roman shield), 247, 253

  Scymitar, 123, 130, 139;
    etymology of, 126 _n_

  — among the Peruvians, 68

  — of gold, 212

  Scymitar-shaped Sword, 133

  Scythe-shaped Swords, 72, 95

  Scythes of copper, 72

  — used as weapons, 95

  Scythe war-car (of Ancient Britons), 276

  Scythian weapons, 227

  Scythians, 226

  Seals, Hittite, 176

  Sea-unicorn (Narwhal; _Monodon monoceros_), 11

  Seax (weapon = Saxo), 90 _n_

  Second chalcitic age of alloys, 74 _sqq._

  Sections of Sword-blades, 131

  — of thrusting Swords, 135

  Securis, 90;
    Danica, 274

  Semiramis, 207

  Semitic (language), 146 _n_

  Senonian Gauls, 267

  Sentinum, war-cars of Gauls at the battle of, 277 _n_

  Sepulchres at Mycenæ, 228 _sqq._

  Sequence of metals—copper, bronze, brass, 57

  Serpentine (stone), 47

  Serrated or saw-edged instruments, 13

  Set (Satan, the Evil Spirit of Egyptian religion), 149

  Sesostris, weight of the statue of, 54;
    derivation of the name, 174 _n_;
    date of, 199 _n_

  Seven-rayed star (on Turkish flag), 147 _n_

  Shairetana (Syrian people), 179

  Shah and Shahanshah (derivation of the word), 210 _n_

  Shak-ari (‘foe to the Shakas’), 226

  Sham-fights, Roman, 249

  Shapes of Ancient Egyptian Sword-blades, 161

  — of cutting instruments, 132

  — of Sword blades, 126

  Shardana (Sardones), 175

  Sharks’ teeth used to edge Swords, 49

  Sharpened stake, 21

  ‘Shave-grass,’ 12

  Shear-steel, 114 _n_

  Sheeting (or plating) on wood, 55

  Sheet (or plate) iron-work, Assyrian, 105

  Shell-lac, 87 _n_

  Shell of a Sword, 124

  Shells as arrow-heads and adze-blades, 47

  Shepherd-kings (Hyksos), 103, 173

  ‘Shepherd’s plaid’ in Central Africa, 269 _n_

  Shield, Australian, 20

  Shield-handles, 105

  Shield of Achilles, 223

  — of Ajax, 222

  — of Hercules, 222

  — with concentric rings (British), 276

  Shield-umbo, 248

  Shields as heraldic badges, 40 _n_

  — Hittite, 175

  Shinar, Plain of, 199

  Shotel (Abyssinian Sword), 163

  Shoulder-belts of gold (Mycenæ), 228, 231

  Shovel-shaped base of spear, 170

  Sica (short Sword: Roman), 252

  Sicarii, 185

  Sicarius (‘assassin’), 252 _n_

  Sicily (derivation of the name), 252 _n_

  Sickle of chalcos, 55 _n_

  Sickle-Sword (Ancient Egypt), 155, 161

  Sickle-throwing (in the Roman Campagna), 19

  Sickles used as weapons, 95;
    of iron, 100

  Sicula (= English ‘sickle’), 252 _n_

  Sideros indikos, 108

  Siderite (loadstone), 101

  Σιδηρίτις λίθος (magnet), 101

  Σίδηρος (wrought iron), Hellenic, 221;
    etymology of the word, 221 _n_

  — ἐργασμένος (worked iron of Aristotle), 107

  Signa, in Ancient Roman army, 246 _n_

  Signet-ring in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Sigurd’s Sword, 95

  Silepe (Basuto weapon), 94

  Sih-tárah (Persian lyre), 187 _n_

  Silex, 1 _n_;
    Silex religiosa, _ib._

  Silex arrow-heads, 102 _n_

  Silex-flake knives, Hebrew, 184

  Silex-flake ‘Swords,’ 45

  Silk-spinning in Ancient Egypt, 148

  Silver and lead in Spain, 107

  — coinage at Ægina, 194 _n_

  — dagger, Cyprian, 189

  — in Ancient Egypt, 151

  — in Midian, 151

  — its representation in Egyptian hieroglyphs, 69

  — lead, 88

  — mines (ancient) of Peru, 67 _n_

  _Siluri_ (Welsen), 29

  Siljukian monsters, 176

  Simiads (use of missiles by), 2

  Sindi (Gypsies), 76

  Singhauta (horn dagger), 11

  Single-grooved claymore, 132

  Single-stick among the Ancient Hindús, 215

  Sinties (Sinti or Saii), 74, 76

  Sion, iron Sword discovered at, 197

  Sívají (Prince of Maráthá-land), 8

  Skeyne (Irish _scjan_), 27

  — (Sword), 123

  Skull-cap (namms), Ancient Egyptian, 204

  Slav (or German) Sword, 263

  Sling-bullet of iron, 191

  Slingers, Hittite, 175

  — in Ancient Egyptian army, 154

  Slings (various kinds), 19, 49

  Small handles of bronze Swords, 264 _n_

  Small-Sword, 123, 135

  Smelting, 65, 88

  Smith (derivation of the word), 77

  Snake (sacred), 1 _n_

  Socketed celt (Yorkshire), 276

  Socotrine Aloe, 6

  ‘Solar myth,’ 191 _n_

  Solder (ancient), 85 _n_

  Soldered blades at Mycenæ, 233

  Soldering among the Ancient Greeks, 221

  Soldering in Ancient Egypt, 151

  Soldiers’ headdresses, Assyrian, 203

  Soldier’s position in Hellas, 241

  Soleret (boot; 16th century), 175

  Solid scabbard of metal (German), 272

  Solomon Islands (nondescript weapon used in), 12 _n_

  Solomon’s Temple, 182

  — Temple (the ‘brass’ in), 56

  Soma (_Asclepias gigantea_), 202 _n_

  Somal, 259

  Source of bronze in Great Britain, 275

  South American lasso, 210 _n_

  Southern Italians (modern), 270 _n_

  Sow-metal, 107

  Spade, 20

  Spalling (method of treating ores), 65

  Spanish (Ancient) Swords, 265

  — bull-fights, 253

  — Xiphos, 268

  Spartan Sword-blade, 238

  Sparth (= battle-axe: Chaucer), 235 _n_

  Spata or Spatha, 123, 142, 156

  Spatha of Schleswig, 272

  — pennata, 267 _n_

  — Roman, 258 _n_

  Spathæ, Ancient British, 279

  — of iron, German, 271

  Spathe (= weaver’s lath), 235 _n_

  Σπάτι (Romaic sabre: etymology of the word), 235 _n_

  Spear, 20;
    origin of, 31;
    in Homer, 223

  — and paddle combined, 40;
    spears armed with flints, 48

  Spear, favourite weapon of the Dark Continent, 162

  Spear-head, Assyrian, 203

  Spear: its name in various languages, 274

  Spear of the ancient Germans, 270

  Spearmen, Roman, 247

  — Hittite, 176

  Spectacula, Roman, 251

  Specular iron (iron glance, oligiste), 107

  Σπέρμα πυρός, 1

  Spelter (copper and zinc), 84

  Spetum (Spieclo or Spit), 95

  Sphinxes, 176

  Sphyraton (plate work), 221

  Spiculum (Roman javelin), 246 _n_

  Split-bone implements, 29

  Split Swords, 142

  Spodium, 86 _n_

  Spur-edge (of a Sword), 138

  Spud, 20

  _Squalus centrina_ or _Spinax_, Linn., 9, 23

  Squamata (Roman armour), 248 _n_

  Stabbing Swords of copper, 72

  Stag-horn axes, 27;
    inserted in wooden truncheons, 49

  ‘Stahl-bronce’ = steel (_i.e._ hardened) bronze, 53 _n_

  Stamped-clay literature (Assyrian), 201

  Stan (Irish term for tin), 65

  Standard-bearer (German), station of, 273

  Standard-bearers, Assyrian, 203

  Standards in Ancient Roman Army, 246 _n_

  ‘Standard Inscription,’ 55

  Staple of Cyprus, 188

  Star (derivation of the word), 221 _n_

  Star-shaped weapon of copper, 68

  Stasinus or Hegesias: his ‘Kypria,’ 221 _n_

  Stater (gold coin) of Crœsus, 194 _n_

  Staves of copper inlaid with figures, 68

  Steam, motive power of, known to Ancient Egyptians, 148

  ‘Steel bronze,’ 53

  Steel (Chinese) for Swords and knives, 115

  — early known, 98

  — in China, 113

  — its representation in Egyptian hieroglyphs, 69

  — processes of making, 117 _n_

  — Swords, Roman, 256

  — treated of by Aristotle, 106

  — wheel (Chakrá; war-quoit), 39

  St. George and the Dragon, 180 _sq._

  ‘Stickleback,’ (_Gasterosteus_), 10

  Stick-sling, 19

  Stiletto, 11

  — Hindú, 215

  — Italian (derivation of the word), 215 _n_

  Stilettos, two-edged (Ancient Roman), 257

  Sting-fish or adder-pike (_Trachinus vipera_), 11

  Stoccado, 123

  Stómoma (steel), 106, 109, 110

  ‘Stone Age,’ 22 _n_, 23 _n_

  Stone anchors, 119 _n_

  Stone-axe, 20 _n_

  Stone-hatchets, 14 _n_

  Stone spear-heads, 26;
    implements, 30

  Stone-splinters in wooden Swords, 47

  Stone-tipped arrows (Ethiopian), 154 _n_

  Stone-throwing, 7

  Stone-weapons of the Romans, 21 _n_

  Stones as weapons, 16 _sq._

  Stork’s-head-shaped weapon, 37

  Storm-caps of iron, 102

  St. Michael, weapon of, 237

  St. Paul and the Sicarii, 185

  Stratagems (of Animals and Savages), 6

  ‘Straw-death’ (Scandinavian), 185

  Stream-gold, 54

  Stream-tin, 59, 78

  String-sling, 19

  Strokes or blows of various animals, 7

  Stylus or Stilus, 15 _n_

  Suardones (ancient German tribe), 271

  Subligaculum (gladiatorial apron), 253

  Succinum (amber), 87

  Suffetes (Carthaginian magistrates), 181

  Suit of Cypriote armour, 188

  Suits of iron armour, 102

  Sumir (= lower Babylonia), 104

  Sumpitan (Borneo), 14 _n_

  Sun-dial, discovery of the, 200 _n_

  Sun, the, in Egyptian religion, 149

  Superimposed settlements of Troy, 193

  Superiority of the curved blade, 129

  Supernumerarii (Roman soldiers), 245 _n_

  Surface ironstone of Africa, 117, 119

  ‘Surgeon’ or lancet-fish (_Acanthurus_), 10

  Suvóroff and his soldiers, 260 _n_

  Svasti (Hittite symbol), 202 _n_

  ‘Svinfylking’ (Scandinavian tactical formation), 273

  Swallowing Swords (by jugglers of old), 238

  Swallow-tailed blades, 141

  Swallow-wort (_Calatrapis gigantea_), 218

  Swimming (two ways of), 40 _n_

  Swamp tea-tree (_Melaleuca_), 40

  SWORD—
    Abyssinian Sword, 237
    acinaces (Persian), 210 _sq._;
      with golden ornaments, 212
    Afghan Charay, 212
    ancient Greek infantry Sword, 237
    among the Barbarians, 262 _sqq._
    — — Scythians, 226
    Arjuna’s Sword, 217
    as a weapon for point, 133
    Asidevatá (‘Sword-god’: Hindú), 214
    Assyrian fashion of carrying the Sword, 239
    — Swords, 199, 204 _sq._
    as the instrument of punishment in Persia, 211
    blades of gold given _honoris causâ_, 212
    blades, shapes of, 126
    bronze swords of Italy, 264
    — — (Scythian) in the Crimea, 227
    Burmese Dalwel (fighting-Sword), 219
    Carthaginian blades, 181
    Celtiberian and Old Spanish Swords, 265
    Ceretolo, Etruscan Sword found at, 196
    Cilician, 211
    cinctorium (Roman general’s Sword), 257
    club-Sword (Assyrian), 204
    cluden (juggler’s sword: Roman), 258
    Cypriote Swords, 188
    dagger-Swords, 204
    Danish Swords, 236
    definition of the weapon, 123
    derivation of the word, 123 _n_
    description of Roman Sword, 254 _sq._
    double-bladed, 141
    double Sword (Assyrian), 204
    ‘Dunner-Saxen’ (thunder-Sword), 272 _n_
    edged with sharks’ teeth, 49
    elephant-Sword, 216
    ensis noricus, 263
    ethnological view of Sword-distribution, 128
    Etruscan Sword, 195 _sqq._
    executioner’s, 139
    ‘falx supina’ of the Thracians, 253
    fancy Sword (Assyrian), 204
    ‘ferrum,’ ‘gladius,’ ‘ensis,’ 254 _sq._
    fist-Sword (stiletto: Hindú), 215
    flesh-knife Sword (Egyptian), 212
    forged by Hephaistos (in Aristophanes), 223 _n_
    forked, 141
    from Mithras group, 210
    German or Slav Sword, 263
    gladiators’ Swords, 252 _sq._
    Greek fashion of carrying the Sword, 239
    Hercules’ Sword, 222
    hereba-blade, 181
    Hittite, 175
    in Ancient Rome, 247 _sqq._
    in Britain, 275 _sqq._
    in Greek literature, 242
    in Homer, 222
    in India, 213 _sqq._
    in Moslem Africa, 162
    in Persia, 209 _sqq._
    in relief (Persepolis sculptures), 210
    in the Dark Continent, 162, 166
    in Troas, 193
    its parts described, 124 _sq._
    Khadga, As, or Asi (Hindú Sword), 214, 216
    Keltic Sword, 272
    length of Ancient Greek Swords, 237
    Marzabotto blade, the, 195
    Mayence Sword, 255
    maushtika (fist-Sword; stiletto: Hindú), 215
    Mohammed’s, 141
    names for the Sword in Homer, 222
    of Alexander the Great, 188
    of Ancient Illyria, 262
    of bronze, 78 _n_, 82
    of copper, 57, 72;
      copper and zinc, 84
    of copper (Cimbrian), 274
    of Goliath, 184
    of Greek cavalry, 248
    of iron (of the Celtiberians), 107
    of iron discovered at Sion, 197
    of iron in Ancient Germany, 270
    of iron-wood and obsidian, 49
    of Isernia, 197
    of Jeanne d’Arc, 184 _n_
    of justice, 139
    of Misanello, 195 _n_
    of Perseus (Ἅρπη), 180
    of Scandinavian Goths, 274
    of scymitar shape, 133
    of Sigurd, 95
    of the Alanni, 262 _sq._
    of the Alemanni (Germani), 270 _sq._
    of the Ancient Egyptian army, 155
    of the Ancient Hebrews, 182, 184
    of the Bosnians, 262
    of the Cherubim (Eden), 183
    of the Cimbrians, 274
    of the Dacians, 262
    of the Danes, 274
    of the Early Bronze Age, 96
    of the Fenni, 274
    of the Gold Coast, 167
    of the Irish, 276
    of the Keltic Gauls, 266
    of the King of Dahome, 167
    of the Lemovii (Pomerania), 274
    of the Ligures, 265
    of the Lycians, 182
    of the Phœnicians, 179, 181
    of the Rebo (Syria), 179
    of the Rugii (Baltic), 274
    of the Ruthens (Syria), 179
    of the Scotti, 279
    of the Shairetana (Syria), 179
    of the Thracians, 262
    of the Tokkari (Syria), 179
    of the Welsh, 279
    of Tiberius, 258
    of Vandals, 274
    of Victor Emmanuel, 257 _n_
    of Vul-nirari I. (Assyrian), 208
    of wood, 31;
      palm-wood, 43
    of wood and stone combined, 47
    of wood with stone edges, 49
    on Italian (ancient) coins, 264, 268
    ornamented with alloys, 83
    Persian Swordlet (περσικὸν ξιφίδιον), 211
    royal Swords (Assyrian), 205 _sq._
    ‘rudis’ (rod or wooden Sword), 250
    Samnite Sword, 253
    Sa-pa-ra (Assyria), 204
    Saul’s Sword, 185
    scythe-shaped, 72, 95
    sections of Sword-blades, 131
    Spanish Xiphos, 268
    swallowing Swords (by jugglers of old), 238
    swallow-tailed or forked, 141
    Sword and the Dove (Assyrian emblem), 184
    Swords found at Mycenæ, 228 _sqq._
    Swords found in ancient cemetery at Hallstadt, 262
    ‘Sword of God’ (Jeremiah), 185
    Thracian Swords, 222 _sq._
    with blades like Aries (astronomical sign), 141
    with iron blades (Roman), 258
    with saw blade, 51
    with wood- and horn-points, 49
    women (Hindú) instructed in the use of the Sword, 215
    wooden Swords in sham-fights (Roman), 249
    zacco-Sword of Emperor Leo, 272 _n_

  Sword and spear of copper or bronze (Theseus’), 105

  Swords and Sword-handles in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Sword-bayonet, Enfield, 134 _n_

  Sword-belt and scabbard of Darius, 212

  Sword-belts, Assyrian, 206

  Sword-blades of copper, 72

  Sword-breakers, 138

  Sword-cutlers, Hebrew, 185

  Sword-dagger, two-edged, 184

  Sword-daggers (Ancient Egyptian), 159, 161

  Sword-dance, 163, 165

  Sword-distribution, ethnological view of, 128

  Sword-exercise among the Ancient Greeks, 240

  Sword-fish (_Xyphias_), 11;
    its horn as a spear-head, 24

  ‘Sword-grass,’ 12

  Sword-knife (Kukkri), 39;
    of Ashanti, 167

  Sword-like weapon of Borneo, 112

  Sword-play of North Africa, 163

  Sword-makers, 77

  Sword-metal, Hindú trial of, 110 _n_

  Sword-pommels at Mycenæ, 231, 233

  ‘Sword-side’ relationship, 188 _n_

  Swordsmen of old, famous, 240 _n_

  Syenite (hieroglyphics engraved on), 53

  Syllogistic puzzle of Eubulides, 97 _n_

  Syphilis, traces of, in prehistoric bones, 150

  Syria (etymology of the word), 177

  Syrian terebinth, 257


  Tabáshir (silicious bark of bamboo), 31

  Tabernacle, the Jewish (whence imitated), 150

  Table of alloys in common use, 83 _sq._

  Table of archaic names of metals, 122

  Tacapé (paddle), 42

  Tac et taille (cut-and-thrust), 126

  Tactical formation of Ancient Germans, 273

  Tactics in Ancient Greece, 241

  Talaria, 1

  Talismans (Chinese) of copper, 64

  Talwar (Hindustan sabre), 131 _sq._

  Tamarana (paddle), 42

  Tamarang (Australian parrying-shield), 38

  Tammaraka (sacred rattle; Brazilian Tupis), 151

  Tangapé (paddle), 42

  Tang (tongue) of a Sword, 124

  Tanged dagger, 278

  — razor (British), 276

  Taper-axe, 91, 94

  ‘Targe’ or ‘Target’ (derivation of), 12 _n_

  Taru (Egyptian war-pike), 158

  Tasso’s description of the Irish, 279

  Tattooing (its origin), 269 _n_

  Tax levied on iron in China, 114

  ‘Tears of the Heliades’ (= amber), 87

  ‘Tears of the sun,’ 67

  Tectosages (Phrygia), war-cars of the, 277 _n_

  Telak (African arm-knife), 162

  ‘Telamon,’ at Mycenæ, 231 _sq._

  Telchines, 74, 76

  Telluric iron, 99

  Tempering (of iron) by cold immersion, 112, 165;
    by oil, &c., 165 _n_

  Temple-caves of Elephanta (Bay of Bombay), 217

  Temple of Baal at Marseille, 181 _n_

  — of Belus (_vulgò_ Tower of Babel), 55

  — of Kanaruc, 109

  Temples of Babylonia, 199

  Τενέδιος πέλεκυς (origin of the proverb), 90

  Terebinth, Syrian (‘oak’ of Mamre), 257

  Terra cottas in Cyprus, 190;
    in Troy, 193

  Testudo (in sieges; Ancient Egypt), 154

  Teufelsgraben, 271

  Thane (derivation of the word), 215 _n_

  Thapsus, Cæsar at the battle of, 260 _n_

  The ‘First Highlander,’ 217

  Thera (Grecian), bronze Sword from, 262

  Thermutis (the princess who found Moses), 174 _n_

  Thiudiskô (= Teutons), 274

  Thong-sling, 19, 68

  Thraces, 252

  Thracian dance (in arms), 163 _n_

  ‘Thracian Magic,’ 238 _n_

  Thracians, 210

  Thracian Swords, 222 _sq._, 262

  — weapons, 253

  Three-sided blades, 66

  Thresher (fox-shark: _Carcharias vulpes_), 7

  Throw-spears of the Ancient Romans, 245

  Throw-stick, 32, 40 _n_

  Throw-Swords, German, 273

  Thrusting blades, 134 _sq._

  ‘Thrusting cut,’ 134

  Thrusting weapons (origin of), 12

  Thuhi (= Naphtuhim), 102

  Tiara of gold, 212

  Tiger (its stroke or blow), 7;
    the sabre-toothed tiger, 9

  Tin, 54;
    origin of the word, 77;
    mines (ancient), 78

  Tinkal (borax: India), 85 _n_

  Tin-ore of Peru, 83

  ‘Tin-stone’ (native peroxide of tin), 71

  Tilaniferous ores, 102

  Toadstone (= todstein: German), 103 _n_

  Tokkari (Syria), 179

  Toletum (Spanish tradition of its origin), 256 _n_

  Toledo blade, 107, 132;
    rapier, 265

  Tomahawk, 14 _n_, 36

  Tombac (copper and gold alloy), 86, 87 _n_

  Tombat (Australian weapon), 36 _n_, 38

  Tomb of Alyattes, 194

  — of Samson, 186 _n_

  Tomb-stones at Mycenæ, 232

  Tomeang (Malaccan weapon), 14 _n_

  Tools of bronze, Assyrian, 202

  Toothed-edge (of a Sword), 138

  Topographical lists of Thut-mes III., 178

  Tormenta (artillery: Roman), 248

  Tormentum, 19, 20 _n_

  Torques (Gallic ornament), 268

  Tower of Babel, 55

  ‘Tower of Ilios’ (Troas), 191

  Toxotes (Archer fish), 7

  Toys in Ancient Egypt, 148

  _Trachinus vipera_ (sting-fish or adder-pike), 11

  Training for warfare, Roman, 239, 249

  Transparent glass, Assyrian, 202

  Transplanting full-grown trees (Ancient Egypt), 148

  ‘Treasury of Priam’ (Troas), 192

  Treble-grooved claymore, 132

  ‘Tree-planting’ (= vivi-interment: Assyrian), 203

  Trenchant or cutting weapons (origin of), 12, 13

  Τρία κάππα κάκιστα, 97 _n_

  Trialamellum, 135

  Triangular small-Sword, 135 _n_

  Triarii (Roman soldiers), 245 _n_

  Tribulus, 15 _n_

  Tribute-articles of Yu (Chinese), 112 _sq._

  Tribute paid in copper, 68

  Tridens (gladiatorial weapon), 253

  Trident-like weapon in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Trilingual Behistun Inscription, the, 209 _n_

  Trimarkisia (class of cavalry: Gaul), 269 _n_

  _Triodon_, 24

  Triumphal Arch of Orange, 268 _n_

  Troas, site of, 190

  Trojan alphabet, 193

  — battle-axes of copper and tin, 82 _n_

  — Sphinx, 190 _n_

  — war, date of, 220

  — weapons, 191

  Trombash (Abyssinian weapon), 36

  Trowel-form blade, 159

  Trowels of copper, 68

  Troy, the age of, 193

  Trumpets of copper, 72, 221

  Truncheons (wooden) with stag-horn inserted, 49

  Truth-telling races, 209 _n_

  Tuba (Etruscan trumpet), 248

  Tubal-Cain (etymology of the name), 182

  Tubicines, 248

  Tuck (rapier), 32, 123, 279

  Tuisco or Tyr (regent of Tuesday), 270 _n_

  Tumuli, finds in, 271

  ‘Turanian’ blade, 140

  Turanian (Chinese) element in Babylonia, 200

  — language, 146

  Turkish flag (seven-rayed star on), 147 _n_

  — scymitar, 139, 161, 166

  Turquoise, 62

  ‘Tuscan’ border (architectural ornament), 202

  Tutenag (zinc from India), 84 _n_

  Tutiya (oxide of zinc), 86

  Twastu, 1 _n_

  Tweezers of copper and stone, 67

  Twelve Tables, the, 244

  Two-bladed Sword, 141

  Two-edged axe (at Schliemann’s Troy), 82

  — bronze Swords at Mycenæ, 230 _sq._

  — German Sword, 271

  — knives (pokwé), 170

  — Roman stilettos, 257

  — Spanish Swords, 265

  — Sword-dagger, 184

  Two-handed espadon (mediæval), 161, 166

  — Swords, 67, 138

  Two-headed eagle (Moslem heraldry), 176 _n_

  ‘Two-river’-land (Naharayn: Mesopotamia), 172

  Two-wheeled war-cars, 277 _n_

  Typhon (in Egyptian religion), 149

  Tyr or Tuisco (regent of Tuesday), 270 _n_

  Πρᾶγμα (? corruption of _onager_), 20 _n_


  Ὕδωρ, 1 _n_

  Uma or Umha (copper: Keltic), 65

  Umbrella, King Koffee’s, 168 _n_

  Umbria, coins cast in, 264 _sq._

  Unicorn (on the Royal Arms), 11 _n_

  Unyoro dagger-Sword, 166

  Urim and Thummim (whence derived), 149

  _Ursus spelæus_ (remains of), 24

  Uruckh (= ‘pater Orchamus’), 199 _n_

  ‘Usem’-metal, 87

  Uses of the Sword, 128

  Utensils of bronze, Assyrian, 202

  — in sepulchres at Mycenæ, 234


  Vagina (Sword-sheath: Roman), 256

  ‘Valai Tadi’ (Madura throwing-stick), 38

  Valley of Caves (Wady Magharah), the most ancient mines in the
    world, 60

  Vandals, Scandinavian, 274

  Various forms of Swords found at Hallstadt, 262 _sq._

  — names for Aphrodite, 187 _n_

  — names for the Sword, 123

  Vases of copper and of stone, 68

  Velati (Roman soldiers), 245 _n_

  Velites (Roman soldiers), 245

  Venetian weapons at Famagosta, 190

  Venus (of alchemy: = ♀), 57

  Verdigris from a spear (Achilles’), 60

  Vericulum (Roman javelin), 246 _n_

  Verutum (Roman javelin), 246 _n_

  Vexillarii (Roman soldiers), 249

  Vexillum (Ancient Roman standard), 246 _n_

  Viaticum (provisions for the dead), 234

  Virtue of the Ancient Gauls, 269

  Visigoths, weapons of the, 272 _n_

  Vitriol (blue), 60

  ‘Vivisection,’ 225

  Volcanic mud, 118

  Voulge, 95


  Waddy clubs (Australian), 38

  Wady Magharah (Valley of Caves), the most ancient mines in the
    world, 60

  Waggons, military, as a ‘lager’ (Gallic), 269

  Wágh-nakh (Hindú weapon), 8

  Wait-a-bit (_Acacia detinens_), 6

  Wall-cramps, in Nimrúd’s palace, 105

  Walrus (how killed by polar bears), 3;
    its method of attack, 9;
    its tooth as a spear-point, 24

  Wandering race of metal-workers, 275

  Wánshi stone-throwers, 16

  War-axes, 66, 154

  War-clubs, 24, 32, 154

  War-deities of Ancient Egypt, 152

  Warfare (primitive), 4 _sq._

  War-flails, 20 _n_, 154

  War-hatchets (English), 91

  Warlike character of Ancient Britons, 279

  ‘War-lions of the king’ (Ramses II.), 3 _n_

  Warmen (Germani), 270

  War-prisoners, treatment of, by Greeks and by Romans, 241, 249

  War-quoit, 39

  War-scythe, 95

  Wasa or Wassaw (Sword), 168

  Wattle and dab (huts of), 63

  Wave-edged dagger, 137

  Wave-pattern (architectural ornament), 202

  ‘Wayland Smith,’ the legend of, 121

  WEAPONS—
    in the Laws of the Visigoths, 272
    in sepulchres at Mycenæ, 234
    of Ancient Rome, 245 _sqq._
    of Animals and Savages, 6
    of bronze, Assyrian, 202
    of gold, as royal presents, 212
    of the Alemanni (Germani), 270
    of the Ancient Egyptian soldiers, 152 _n_
    of the Ancient Hindús, 214 _sq._
    of the Ancient Irish, 279
    of the Ancient Picts, 279
    of the Ancient Scots, 279
    of the Ancient Welsh, 279
    of the Arabians, 185
    of the Assyrians, 203
    of the Carthaginians, 181
    of the Cherusci, 271
    of the Cimbri, 273
    of the East Indians, 185
    of the Fenni (Finns), 274
    of the Gauls, 266, 269
    of the Goths, 274
    of the Lemovii (Pomerania), 274
    of the Philistines, 185
    of the Phœnicians, 179 _sq._
    of the Rugii (Baltic), 274
    of the Samnites, 253
    of the Saxones, 271
    of the Suardones, 271
    of the Syrians, 179
    of the Thracians, 253
    of the Vandals, 274
    of the warriors of Mycenæ, 234 _sq._
    St. Michael’s weapon, 237

  Weapon-making, 1

  Weapon-symbol of Merodach, 183

  Weapon-throwing in Homer, 222

  Wedge-form tactical formation (Ancient German), 273

  Welsen (_Siluri_), 29

  ‘Welsh of the Horn,’ 78

  West and East, Egyptian, 191 _n_

  Whale (its method of attack), 7

  Wheel-drill and emery for alt-reliefs, 81

  Wheeled tower, Assyrian, 203

  ‘White copper’ (South African name for gold), 62

  ‘White lead’ (of Pliny), 78, 79 _n_

  Whorl, combined forms of the, 233

  Wigs (of the Nilotes), 158 _n_

  Winged bulls, Assyrian, 201 _n_

  — Celts (or palstave), 71

  — circle, the, as an architectural ornament, 201

  — sphinxes in Cyprus, 189 _n_

  Wing-wader of Australia (carries weapons in its wings), 9

  Women instructed in the use of the Sword, &c. (Hindú), 215

  Women’s dress-pins of copper, 67

  Wood, Age of, 31

  Wooden blades with metal edges, 51

  — clubs spiked with iron, 105

  — handles to bronze hatchets, 154

  — sabres, 44;
    chopper, _ib._;
    knife, _ib._;
    rapier-blade, 45

  — Sword of Egypt, 39

  — Sword-sheaths (Mycenæ), 228

  — weapons with meteoric-iron chips, 51

  Wootz or Wutz (‘natural Indian steel’), 110, 111

  Word-compounding languages (Iranian), 146

  Word-developing languages (Arabian), 146

  Worked flints, 45 _n_

  — hæmatite, 116

  Worship offered to weapons, 162 _n_

  Writing on leaden plates, 225 _n_

  — on linen cloths, 225 _n_

  Wrought iron in the ‘Odyssey,’ 224


  Xerxes’ army, Cypriote contingent in, 188

  — army of, 210

  _Xiphias_ (Sword-fish), 11

  Xiphos, Xiphidion (= Sword, in Homer), 222, 230

  Xiphos-Gladius, 256

  Xiphos, Spanish, 268

  Ξυήλαι (Lacedæmonian weapons), 237

  Ξυστοφόροι, 237


  Yahveh (Jehovah), its etymology and mystic meaning, 149 _n_

  Yantramukta (class of weapons: Hindú), 214

  Yataghan-bayonet, 134 _n_, 164

  Yataghan (weapon), 123, 134, 163, 166, 265

  ‘Yellow copper’ opposed to ‘native brass’ (English), 56

  Yellow frankincense, 85 _n_

  Ynka mines of iron, 116

  Ynkas, ‘Royal Commentaries of’ the, 67

  Yucatan (origin of the word), 65 _n_

  Yunan (= Ionia), 209


  Zanzibar Swords, 166

  Zarabatana, 14 _n_

  Zebra (its kick), 7

  Zeno, the Stoic, in Cyprus, 187

  Zeus-Jovi (= Jupiter), 183

  Zeus Kasios, 1 _n_

  Zinc, 57;
    alloy with copper, 84;
    derivation of the word, 84 _n_

  Zinciferous ore imported from the East, 84

  Zio (Saxnot: German Sword-god), 273

  Zodiac, Denderah, 155 _n_

  Ζωστήρ (meaning of the word), 239

  Zú’l-Fikár (Mohammed’s Sword), 141




                              FOOTNOTES:

[1] I refer to a vivacious but one-sided article on ‘The Sword,’ in
_Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine_, May 1881.

[2] _The Past in the Present_, &c. (Edinburgh: Douglas, 1880.)

[3] Frederick the Great declared that an army moves like a serpent,
upon its belly. According to Plutarch, the snake was held sacred
because it glides without limbs, like the stars. Fire, says Pliny
(_Nat. Hist._ vii. 57, and xiii. 42), was first struck out of the stone
by Pyrodes, son of Cilix—_silex_, or flint, the match of antiquity;
and hence it was called πῦρ; and Vincent de Beauvais explains: ‘Silex
est lapis durus, sic dictus eo quod ex eo ignis exiliat.’ It is the
Sanskrit शिल (_shila_), a stone, both words evidently deriving from a
common root, _shi_ or _si_. The ‘religiosa silex’ of Claudian (_Rapt.
Proserp._ i. 201) was probably a block of stone like those representing
Zeus Kasios, the Paphian Venus, not to mention the host of stones
worshipped in Egyptian and Arab litholatry, and the old Palladium of
Troy transported to Rome. ‘Prometheus,’ who taught man to preserve
fire in the ferule, or stalk, of the giant fennel, was borrowed by
the Hindus and converted into Pramantha. ‘Pramantha,’ however, is
the upright fire-stick, first made by Twastu, the Divine Carpenter,
who seems to have been a brother of Ἑστία, the Hearth; and hence it
has been held to be the male symbol. According to Plato, πῦρ (whence
pyrites = sulphuret of iron), ὕδωρ, and κύων are Phrygian words; and
evidently they date from the remotest antiquity. _Pir_ (sun-heat) is
found even in the Quichua of Peru, and enters into the royal name
‘Pirhua.’ The French and Belgian caverns prove that striking fire by
means of pyrites was known to primitive man.

[4] There are still races which are unable to kindle fire. This is
asserted of the modern Andamanese by an expert, Mr. H. Man, _Journ.
Anthrop. Inst._ Feb. 1882, p. 272. The same was the case with the
quondam aborigines of Tasmania.

[5] This Adam Primus was of both sexes, the biune parent of Genesis (v.
3)—‘male and female created He them;’ hence the pre-Adamites of Moslem
belief. The capital error of Biblical readers in our day is to assume
all these myths and mysteries as mere historical details. Men had a
better appreciation of the Hebrew _arcana_ in the days of Philo Judæus.

[6] I have noted his labours in the list of ‘Authorities.’

[7] Chap. iii. p. 43, translated for the Hakluyt Society by Clements R.
Markham, C.B. (London, 1869). It is regretable that a senile Committee
of exceeding ‘properness’ cut out so much of this highly-interesting
volume. The Spaniard travelled in A.D. 1532–50, published the first
part of his work in 1553, and died about 1560. Readers who would study
the most valuable anthropological parts of the book are driven to the
French translation quoted by Vicente Fidel Lopez (_Les Races Aryennes
du Pérou_, p. 199. Paris, Franck, 1873).

[8] We need not go to the classics, Greek and Roman, for the idea of
metamorphosis. It is common to mankind, doubtless arising from the
resemblance of beast to man in appearance, habits, or disposition;
and it may date from the days when the lower was all but equal to the
higher animal.

[9] _Seven Years in South Africa_, 1872–79, vol. i. p. 245, and vol.
ii. p. 199 (Sampson Low and Co., 1881). The Simiads were African
baboons, which fear man less than those of other continents.

[10] Wilkinson, I. 1. Unruliness was punished by ‘stick and no supper.’
The old Nile-dwellers, like the Carthaginians and the mediæval Tartars,
were famous for taming and training the wildest animals, the cat o’
mountain, leopards, crocodiles, and gazelles. The ‘war-lions of the
king’ (Ramses II.) are famed in history. They also taught domestic cats
to retrieve waterfowl, and decoy-ducks to cater for the table.

[11] Thus Lucretius (v. 1301) calls the elephant ‘anguimanus.’ As is
well known, there is a quasi-specific difference between the Indian and
the African animal. The latter is shorter, stouter, and more compactly
built than the former; the shape of the frontal bones differ, the tusks
are larger and heavier, and the ears are notably longer. The latter
trait appears even in old coins. Judging from the illustrated papers, I
should not hesitate to pronounce the far-famed Jumbo to be an Asiatic,
and not, as usually held, an African.

[12] The word wrongly written ‘Esquimaux,’ which suggests a French
origin, is derived from the Ojibwa _Askimeg_, or the Abenakin
_Eskimantsic_, meaning ‘eaters of raw flesh.’ Old usage applies it
to the races of extreme North America, and of the Asiatic shore
immediately opposite. _Innuit_, a more modern term, signifies only
‘the people,’ like _Khoi-khoi_ (‘men of men’), the Hottentots, and
like ‘Bantu’ (Folk), applied, or rather misapplied, to the great South
African race. _Innuit_, moreover, is by no means universal. The Eskimos
supply a valuable study; amongst other primæval peculiarities, they
have little reverence for the dead, and scant attachment to place.

[13] ‘Brave Master Shoe-tye, the great traveller’ (_Measure for
Measure_, iv. 3). The tale of porcupines ‘shooting their quills at the
dogs, which get many a serious wound thereby,’ is in M. Polo (i. 28).
Colonel Yule quotes Pliny, Ælian, and the Chinese. The animal drops its
loose quills when running, and when at bay attempts, hedgehog-like, to
hide and shield its head. It is, as the Gypsies know, excellent eating,
equal to the most delicate pork; only somewhat dry without the aid of
lard.

[14] Ammianus Marcellinus (xxiii. chap. 4), quoted in chap. 2.

[15] _Odyss._ xviii. 130, 131. ‘Qui multum peregrinatur, rarò
sanctificatur,’ said the theologians. Hence the modern:—

    Whoso wanders like Ulysses
    Soon shall lose his prejudices.

[16] Sir John Lubbock has calculated that among the North American
savages the proportion of man to the animals which feed him is 1 to
750; and, as the hunter is at least four times as long-lived as his
prey, the ratio might be increased, 1 to 3000. If this were so, and
all the bones were preserved, there would be 3,000 bestial skeletons
to one human. Without assuming with Mr. Evans (p. 584) that ‘respect
for the dead may be regarded as almost instinctive in man,’ and that
human remains would be buried, we here find one cause of the present
insufficiency of the geologic record.

[17] M. Eduard Pietri distributes Prehistoric Archæology proper into
two ages, the Agreutic and the Georgic. Under the former he classifies
the Barylithic (glacial Drift age) and the Leptolithic. Under the
Georgic are included the Neolithic, the Chalcitic (copper and bronze),
and the Proto-sideric.

[18] _Essay on Man_, iii. 172–6.

[19] The sepia (squid, cuttle-fish, _Loligo vulgaris_) defends itself
by discharging its ‘ink-bag’ embedded in the liver, and escapes in the
blackened water. This is as true a defence as a shield.

[20] From the Greek τὸ τόξον, the bow (and arrow, _Iliad_, viii. 296),
which seems to be a congener of the Latin _taxus_, the yew-tree, a
favourite material for the weapon. Hence _taxus_, like the Scandinavian
_îr_ or _ŷr_, the Keltic _jubar_, and the Slavonian _tisu_, all meaning
the yew-tree, denote the bow as well. The Skalds called the bow also
_almr_ (elm-tree), and _askr_, or mountain-ash, the μελία, which the
Greeks applied to the spear. From τόξον came τοξικὸν, ‘arrow-poison,’
the Latin _toxicum_, whose use survives in our exaggerated term
‘intoxicating liquors.’

[21] This I know to my cost, having offended a Guanaco at Cordova,
in the Argentine Republic; it straightway spat in my face with
unpleasantly good aim.

[22] Strutt, _Sports and Pastimes_, ii. chap. 2.

[23] Not unlike the name of a certain Australian Wagga-Wagga which has
been heard in the English law-courts.

[24] In _Land and Water_ doubts have been thrown upon these single
combats of the whale and thresher. See the late Mr. Buckland’s papers
(October 2, 1880); Lord Archibald Campbell’s sketch; and the same
paper, February 26, 1881. Those on board the wrecked cruiser H.M.S.
_Griffon_, myself included, witnessed a fight between whale and shark
in the Bay of Biafra (1862?). The Carcharias family takes its name from
the sharp and jagged teeth, ἀπὸ τῶν καρχαρῶν ὀδόντων.

[25] _Anthrop. Collection_, p. 180. Demmin, however, is additionally
incorrect by making the article ‘two and a half feet in length’ (_Arms
and Armour_, p. 413, Bell’s edition, London, 1877). In _Catalogue of
Indian Art in the South Kensington Museum_, by Lieut. H. H. Cole, R.E.
(p. 313), Sívají is made to murder the Moslem with the ‘bíchwa,’ or
scorpion, a ‘curved double blade.’ This probably refers to the dagger
which made ‘sicker.’

[26] P. 402, where he calls ‘Sívají’ _Sevaja_.

[27] Elphinstone’s _History_, ii. 468.

[28] It is, they say, adored at the old fortress and Maráthá capital,
Sattára (= Sát-istara, the seven stars or Pleiades). Here, too, is
Sívají’s Sword ‘Bhawáni,’ a Genoa blade of great length and fine
temper. Mrs. Guthrie, who saw the latter, describes it (vol. i. p.
426) as a ‘fine Ferrara (?) blade, four feet in length, with a spike
upon the hilt to thrust with.’ She also notices the smallness of the
grip. The Indian Museum of South Kensington contains a bracelet of
seven tiger’s-claws mounted in gold, with a claw clasp (No. 593, 1868).
M. Rousselet, who visited Baroda in 1864, describes in his splendid
volume one of the Gaekhwar or Baroda Rajah’s favourite _spectacula_,
the ‘naki-ka-kausti’ (kushti). The nude combatants were armed with
‘tiger’s-claws’ of horn; formerly, when these were of steel, the death
of one of the athletes was unavoidable. The weapons, fitted into a kind
of handle, were fastened by thongs to the closed right hand. The men,
drunk with Bhang or Indian hemp, rushed upon each other and tore like
tigers at face and body; forehead-skins would hang in shreds; necks and
ribs would be laid open, and not unfrequently one or both would bleed
to death. The ruler’s excitement on these occasions often grew to such
a pitch that he could scarcely restrain himself from imitating the
movements of the duellists.

[29] Pliny, xxxii. 6.

[30] Thompson’s _Passions of Animals_, p. 225.

[31] _Comparative Anatomy and Physiology of Vertebrates_, i. 193.

[32] _Prim. Warfare_, i. p. 22.

[33] _Prim. Warfare_, i. p. 21.

[34] _Ibid._ ii. p. 22.

[35] The spiral horn is shown by Colonel Yule (_Marco Polo_, ii. 273,
second edition) in an illustration as ‘Monoceros and the Maiden.’
The animal, however, appears from the short tail to be a tapir, not
a rhinoceros. That learned and exact writer remarks that the unicorn
supporter of the Royal Arms retains the narwhal horn. The main use of
the latter in commerce is to serve as a core for the huge wax-candles
lighted during the ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Church.

[36] So it is called in the Catalogue of the India Museum at South
Kensington; the derivation is evidently from the Hindostani _singh_, a
horn.

[37] Boutell (_Arms and Armour_, fig. 61, p. 269) engraves a parrying
weapon with a blade at right angles to the handle. He calls it a
‘Moorish Adargue’ (fifteenth century). The latter word (with the
_r_) is simply the Arabic word _el-darakah_, a shield, the origin
of our ‘targe’ and ‘target.’ The adaga (not _adarga_, cantos i. 87,
viii. 29) with which Camoens in _The Lusiads_ (ii. 95, &c.) arms the
East Africans is a weapon of the Mádu kind. I have translated it
‘dag-targe,’ because in that part of the world it combines poniard and
buckler. The savage and treacherous natives of the Solomon Islands (San
Christoval, &c.) still use a nondescript weapon, half Sword and half
shield, some six feet long.

[38] Captain Speke’s _Dictionary of the Source of the Nile_, p. 652
(Edinburgh: Blackwoods, 1863).

[39] In the form called _Manchette_, or cutting at hand, wrist, and
forearm with the inner edge. It is copiously described in iv. 45–54 of
my _New System of Sword Exercise_, &c. (London: Clowes, 1876).

[40] _Primitive Warfare_, p. 24.

[41] Sir Charles Lyell, _Geological Evidences of Antiquity of Man_,
p. 13 (London: Murray, 1863). Dr. W. Lauder Lindsay (_Proc. Soc. Ant.
Scot._ vol. v. p. 327) says of the Maori _tokis_ or stone-hatchets,
they were used chiefly for cutting down timber and for scooping
canoes out of the trunks of forest trees; for driving posts for huts;
for grubbing up roots, and killing animals for food; for preparing
firewood; for scraping the flesh from the bones when eating, and
for various other purposes in the domestic arts. But they were also
employed in times of war as weapons of offence and defence, as a
supplementary kind of tomahawk.

[42] The French _sarbacane_, the Italian and Spanish _cerbotana_, the
Portuguese _gravatana_, and the German _Blasrohr_ (blow-tube) is,
according to Demmin (p. 468), _arbotana_, or rather _carpicanna_,
derived from ‘Carpi,’ the place of manufacture, and the Assyrian
(_Kane_), Greek and Latin κάννα (_canna_), whence ‘cannon.’ This tube,
spread over three distinct racial areas in Southern Asia, Africa,
and America, is used either for propelling clay balls or arrowlets,
poisoned and unpoisoned. It is the sumpitan of Borneo, where Pigafetta
(1520) mentions reeds of this kind in Cayayan and Palavan Islands.
The hollow bamboo is still used by the Laos of Siam, and is preserved
among the Malagasy as a boyish way of killing birds. Père Bourieu notes
it among the Malaccan negrito aborigines, whom the Moslem Malays call
‘Oran-Banua’ (men of the woods); the weapon they term _tomeang_. It is
known in Ceylon, in Silhet, and on both sides of the Bay of Bengal.
Condamine describes it among the Yameos (South American Indians);
Waterlow and Klemm, in New Guinea, and Markham among the Uapes and
other tribes on the Amazonas head-waters. In the New World it is of two
varieties: the long heavy zarabatana, and the thinner, slighter pucuna.
Finally, it has degraded to the ‘pea-shooter’ of modern Europe. The
principal feature of the weapon is the poisoned dart; it is therefore
unknown amongst tribes who, like the Andamanese, have not studied
toxics (_Journ. Anthrop. Inst._ p. 270, February 1882).

[43] See the _hamus ferreus_ pointed at both ends in Demmin (p. 124);
and the German _Fussängel_ (p. 465). The larger caltrop was called
_tribulus_, _stylus_ or _stilus_ (Veget. _De Re Mil._ iii. 24). The
knights of mediæval Europe planted their spurs rowels upwards to serve
the same purpose.

[44] ‘Make your hand perfect by a third attempt,’ said Timocrates in
Athenæus, i. cap. 4.

[45] ‘Hitherto,’ remarks Colonel A. Lane Fox, ‘Providence operates
directly on the work to be performed by means of the living animated
tool; henceforth it operates indirectly on the progress and development
of creation, first through the agency of the instinctively tool-using
savage, and, by degrees, of the intelligent and reasoning man.’

[46] J. F. Rowbotham: ‘Certain reasons for believing that the Art of
Music, in prehistoric times, passed through three distinct stages of
development, each characterised by the invention of a new form of
instrument; and that these stages succeeded one another in the same
order in various parts of the world’ (_Journ. Anthrop. Inst._ May
1881). The author states that the Veddahs (properly Vædiminissu, or
‘sportsmen’) of Ceylon, the Mincopis (Andamans), and the people of
Tierra del Fuego ‘have no musical instruments at all.’

[47] _Opuscula fidicularum_, &c. (London: Mitchell and Hughes).

[48] _Specus erant pro domibus._ Caverns appear to be divisible into
three classes: dwelling-places—including refuges, where, as Prometheus
says (i. 452), ‘Men lived like little ants beneath the ground in the
gloomy recesses of grots’—storehouses, and sepulchres. All were in
Lyell’s third phase. The first was when the rock began to form the
channel by dissolution; the second, when a regular river flowed; and
the third, when earth and air, instead of water, filled the bed.

[49] Aristotle Darwin holds (sorrow! that we should say ‘held’): ‘Our
male semi-human progenitors possessed great canine teeth,’ as is still
shown by a few exceptional individuals. Hence we derived the trick of
uncovering the eye-tooth when sneering or snarling at ‘Brother Man.’

[50] Quoted from Mr. Edward T. Stevens in _Flint Chips_; Col. A. Lane
Fox (_Catal._ p. 158).

[51] _History of the Discovery and Conquest of the Canary Islands_,
which dates from 1792. The unfortunate ‘master-mariner’ (see my
_Wanderings in West Africa_, i. 116) borrows from the Spanish of
Abreu-Galindo. Mr. F. W. Newman (_Libyan Vocabulary_: Trübner, 1882)
has illustrated the four Libyan languages—the Algerian Kabáil (ancient
Numidian), the Moroccan Shilhá (Mauritanian), the Ghadamsi (of which we
know little), and the Tuárik (guides), or Tarkiya (Gætulian). ‘Guanche’
is a corruption of _guan_ (Berber _wan_), ‘one person,’ and _Chinet_,
or Tenerife Island; _guan-chinet_, meaning ‘a man of Tenerife.’ I have
returned to this subject in my last book on the Gold Coast (i. chap. 5).

[52] The word, also written ‘Hüttentüt,’ and originally Dutch, is
supposed to be an uncomplimentary imitation of the cluck-like or
smack-like ‘sonant,’ which characterises their complicated and
difficult language, and which has infected the neighbouring sections
of the great South African family of speech. The Hottentots had
already reached the pastoral stage when first visited by Europeans;
whereas the Bushmans then, as now, were huntsmen. Some derive the
Hottentot-Bushman ‘click’ from the Egyptian article T (á). But
Klaproth found it in Circassia, Whitmee amongst the Melanesian
Negritos, and Haldeman amongst certain North American tribes. Professor
Mahaffy notices that ‘old women among us express pity by a regular
palatal click.’ On the continent of Europe it expresses a kind of
‘Don’t-you-wish-you-may-get-it?’ Dr. Hahn, who has lately published a
scientific work upon the Khoi-Khoi, favourably reviewed by Professor
Max Müller in the _Nineteenth Century_, has treated the subject
exhaustively.

[53] I can bear personal witness to the prowess of the ruffians of
Nazareth, who call themselves, most falsely, Greeks. In 1871, when
encamped near the village, three of my servants were so severely
wounded with hand-stones that one was nearly killed.

[54] Prof. Maspero, of Bulak, told me that he had some doubts about
the correctness of Wilkinson’s illustration showing ‘ancient Egyptians
throwing knives.’

[55] The _facon_ (faulchion) is about two feet long. Both weapons are
thrown in two ways. The more common is to lay the blade flat on the
palm, which is narrowed by contracting the thumb and the _musculus
guinearum_ at the root of the little finger. The other is by holding
the handle and causing the dart to reverse, so as to strike point
foremost. The best guard is a revolver.

[56] _Critical Enquiry into Antient Armour_, &c., by Sir Samuel Rush
Meyrick, Kt., preface, p. viii. (4to, 1842).

[57] It is not, as usually supposed, a ‘bastard French word,’ from
_fustis_, a staff, and βάλλειν, to throw.

[58] Our ‘bow’ is the Gothic _bogo_ (a bender?), Scand. _bogi_,
Dan. _buc_, and Old Germ. _poko_. (Jähns, p. 18.) The ancients
made fine distinctions in slings: thus the three-thonged weapon of
Ægeum, Patræ, and Dymæ was held far superior to that of the Baleares
(‘Slinging-Isles’), which had only one strap (Livy, xxxviii. 30).

[59] Pliny, vii. 57. The legend points to the excellent archery of the
Scythians (Turanians) and the Persians.

[60] Even in modern days Dr. Woodward suggests that the first model of
flint arrow-heads was brought from Babel, and was preserved after the
dispersion of mankind. This is admirably archaic.

[61] The crossbow is apparently indigenous amongst various tribes of
Indo-China, but reintroduced into European warfare during the twelfth
century (Yule’s _Marco Polo_, ii. 143).

[62] The military engines of the ancients were chiefly on the torsion
principle; those of the mediævals were of two types, the sling and the
crossbow. The ‘tormentum’ was so called because all its parts were
twisted; the ‘scorpion’ (or catapult), because the bow was vertically
placed, like the insect’s raised tail; and the ‘onager,’ because the
‘wild asses, when hunted, throw the stones behind them by their kicks,
so as to pierce the chests of those who pursue them, or to fracture
them.’ So at least says A. Marcellinus (_Hist._ xxiii. 4). I cannot but
suspect that Anna Comnena’s τζάγρα is a corruption of _onager_ (Yule’s
_Marco Polo_, ii. 144).

[63] The National Museum of Prague, Old Graben Street, now Kolowrat,
contains a fine collection of war-flails, especially the huge ‘morning
star’ of John Zsizka, generally called Ziska.

[64] Mostly, not always, as I learnt to my cost.

[65] In a subsequent work (_Bronzes_, &c., pp. 27–30) Dr. Evans
discusses the suggestions of Beger and of Mr. Knight Watson (_Proc.
Soc. Ant._ 2nd S. vii. 396) that _celte_ in Job is a misreading for
_certe_. He justly reprobates the fashion of writing ‘Kelt,’ and
the newly-coined French plural _celtæ_. The truth is that not a few
antiquaries have confounded the instrument with the Keltic or Celtic
tribes. The word, meaning a stone axe, adze, or chisel, has been
erroneously derived from the Celts, properly Kelts, and by older
philologists _a cælando_, which would convert it into a congener of
_cælum_. It is the Latin _celtis_ or _celtes_, a chisel, possibly a
relative of the Welsh _cellt_, a flint. The word is found, according
to Mr. Evans, only in the Vulgate translation of Job, in Saint Jerome,
and in a forged inscription. He first met with its antiquarian use in
Beger’s _Thesaurus Brandenburgicus_ (1696), where a metal _securis_
(axe) is called _celtes_.

[66] In 1650 Sir William Dugdale (_Hist. of Warwickshire_) spoke of
stone celts as the weapons of the Ancient Britons, and in 1766 he was
followed by Bishop Lyttelton. In 1797 Mr. Frere drew the attention
of the Society of Antiquaries to the Drift (palæolithic) instruments
occurring at Hoxne, Suffolk, together with remains of the elephant
and other extinct animals. He was one of several; but, as usually
happens, the wit of one man collected and systematised the scattered
experience of many. The man was M. Boucher de Perthes, whose finds in
the drift-gravels of St. Acheul, near Amiens (1858), appeared in the
_Antiquités Celtiques et Anté-diluviennes_, and made an epoch, changing
the accepted chronology of mankind.

[67] The stone-weapon was also called _betulus_, _belemnites_, and
_ceraunius_ (thunder-stone), _ceraunium_ and _ceraunia_. So Claudian
(_Laus Serenæ_, v. 77)—

                  Pyrenæisque sub antris
    Ignea flumineæ legere ceraunia nymphæ.

‘Fuerunt auctores’ (says Aldovrandus) ‘qui hunc lapidem ceraunium,
nempe fulminarem, indigitaverunt.’ According to Skulius Thorlacius,
the stone-axe typified the splitting; the hammer, the shattering; and
the arrow, the piercing, action of the bolt (Om Thor og hans Hammer).
People carried these belemnites about their persons, because lightning
was supposed never to strike twice in the same place.

[68] According to Suetonius, the Roman Cæsar presided over the senate
with a Sword by his side and a mail-coat under his tunic.

[69] _De Rer. Nat._ v. 1282. He speaks of Italy, where copper and
bronze historically preceded iron.

[70] _Sat._ i. 3.

[71] Leading to the fourth, or Historic, and the fifth, or Gunpowder,
age of weapons. In these ‘ages’ we have a fine instance of hasty
and indiscriminate generalisation. They originated in Scandinavia,
where Stone was used almost exclusively from the beginning of man’s
occupation till B.C. 2000–1000. At that time the Bronze began, and
ended with the Iron about the Christian era. Thomsen, who classified
the Copenhagen Museum in 1836; Nilsson, the Swede, who founded
comparative anthropology (1838–43); Forchhammer and Worsäae, the Dane,
who illustrated the Bronze Age (1845), fairly established the local
sequence. It was accepted by F. Keller, of the Zurich Lake (1853), by
Count Gozzadini, of Bologna (1854), by Lyell (1863), and by Professor
Max Müller (1863, 1868, and 1873), who seems to have followed the
Swiss studies of M. Morlot (_Bulletin de la Soc. Vaudoise_, tome vi.
etc.) Unhappily, the useful order was applied to the whole world, when
its deficiency became prominent and palpable. I note that Mr. Joseph
Anderson (_Scotland in Early Christian Times_, p. 19) retains the
‘three stages of progress’—stone, bronze, and iron. Brugsch (_History_,
i. 25) petulantly rejects them, declaring that Egypt ‘throws scorn
upon these assumed periods,’ the reverse being the case. Mr. John
Evans (_The Ancient Stone Implements, &c., of Great Britain_, p. 2)
adopts the succession-idea, warning us that the classification does not
imply any exact chronology. He finds Biblical grounds ‘in favour of
such a view of gradual development of material civilisation.’ Adam’s
personal equipment in the way of tools or weapons would have been but
insufficient, if no artificer was instructed in brass and iron until
the days of Tubal Cain, the sixth in descent when a generation covered
a hundred years. Mr. Evans divides the Stone Age into four periods.
First, the Palæolithic, River-gravel, or Drift, when only chipping
was used; second, the Reindeer, or Cavern-epoch of Central France,
and an intermediate age, when surface-chipping is found; third, the
Neolithic, or surface stone-period of Western Europe, in which grinding
was practised; and, lastly, the Metallo-lithic age, which attained the
highest degree of manual skill.

[72] In Denmark the division is marked even by the vegetation. The
Stone Age lies buried under the fir-trees; the oak-stratum conceals the
Bronzes, and the Iron Age is covered by birch and elders (Jähns, p. 2).

[73] Yule’s _Marco Polo_, ii. 208.

[74] Servius, ad _Æneid._ ii. 44, ‘Sic notus Ulysses.’

[75] Col. A. Lane Fox (_Prim. War._, p. 24) notices the bone implements
of the French caves and their resemblance, amounting almost to
identity, with those found in Sweden, among the Eskimos, and the
savages of Tierra del Fuego.

[76] _Mittheilungen der Wien. Anthrop. Gesellschaft._ Vienna, 1874.

[77] _Pfahlbau_ (_pfahl_ = _palus_) was originally applied to the
pile-villages of the Swiss waters (_The Lake-Dwellings of Switzerland_,
by Dr. Ferdinand Keller).

[78] Wilkinson opines that the Egyptian Khons or Khonsu, the new moon
of the year which appeared at the autumnal equinox when the ‘world was
made,’ becomes the Biblical Sem, and that ‘Sampson’ is Sem-Kon, or
Sun-fire. Jablonski (_Pantheon Egyptiorum_) supported the theory that
Son, Sem, Con, Khons, or Djom was the god or genius of the summer sun.

[79] _Travels into Indo-China_, &c. ii. 147, by Henri Mouhot, 1858–59.

[80] ‘Pile,’ applied to the arrow-head (as ‘quarrel’ to the bolt of
the crossbow), is a congener of the German _pfeil_, an arrow. The
Scandinavian is _pila_, the Anglo-Saxon _pil_, apparently a congener of
the Latin _pilum_.

[81] _Ulster Journal of Archæology_ for 1857.

[82] The Dacota tribe is said still to ‘doctor’ the bullet by filling
with venom four drilled holes, which are covered by pressing down the
projecting lips or rims of the metal. Unfortunately, travellers tell us
that the venom is the cuticle of the cactus, which is quite harmless.
The Papuans tip their arrows with a human bone, which is poisoned
by being thrust into a putrid corpse. Hence, they say, Commodore
Goodenough met his death.

[83] P. 258, _Descriptive Catalogue of the Antiquities in the Royal
Irish Academy_, by the late (Sir) William R. Wilde. The Greeks, from
the days of Homer, followed by the Romans, considered the use of
poisoned arrows a characteristic of the barbarian.

[84] The learned author adds, ‘thus confirming the opinion (deduced
from the size of the hafts of our bronze Swords) that the hands of the
race who used them were very small.’ I can hardly agree with him, and
will give reasons in a future page.

[85] Wilde writes: ‘_Sceana_, which is the plural of _scjan_, a knife,’
the Scotch _sgian-dhu_, or _skene_ (Rev. Paul O’Brien’s _Practical
Grammar and Vocabulary of the Irish Language_, Dublin: Fitzpatrick,
1809).’

[86] It is better to write Crannog, lest the word be pronounced
‘crannoje.’ It derives from the Irish _crann_ (a tree, e.g. _crann ola_
= an olive-tree), and properly means a platform or plank-floor.

[87] Pliny, the grumbler, complains (xxxiii. 54): ‘Our very soldiers,
holding even ivory in contempt, have their _capuli_ (sword-hilts)
inlaid or chased (_cælentur_) with silver; their _vaginæ_ (scabbards)
are heard to jingle with their silver _catellæ_ (chains), and their
belts with the plates of silver (_baltea laminis crepitant_) that
inlay them.’ It will be seen that Divus Cæsar had juster and more
soldier-like views. Scipio the younger, when shown a fine shield by a
youth, said: ‘It is really beautiful; but a soldier should rely more on
his right arm than on his left arm.’

[88] Of Lund, Sweden. _The Primitive Inhabitants of Scandinavia_, &c.,
translated by Sir John Lubbock. Nilsson is quoted and illustrated by
Col. A. Lane Fox (_Prim. War._ p. 135), and by Wilde (p. 254) from the
_Scandinaviska Nordens Ur-Invanare_, 1843.

[89] Chapter III.

[90] A commentator volunteers the information that the bow was tipped
with ram’s-horn. Nor is there any need to translate ‘goat’ by _ibex_.

[91] Pemberton, _Travels_.

[92] Hakluyt’s edit., p. 43. The index to this publication is very
defective: one must look through the whole volume for a line of
quotation. I shall again notice it in the next chapter.

[93] Wilkinson (Sir J. Gardner), _A Popular Account of the Ancient
Egyptians_, i. chap. 5, mentions only tips of hard wood, flint, and
metals.

[94] The _Roteiro_ or _Ruttier_ of the _Voyage of Vasco da Gama_ (p. 5,
Lisboa, Imprensa Nacional) speaks of tribes about the Cape of Good Hope
armed with horn-weapons ‘worked by fire’ (_huuns cornos tostados_). I
should suggest that ‘_cornos_’ is an error for _páos_ (wooden staves).

[95] The khanjar proper is shaped like a yataghan, of which more
presently.

[96] I avoid treating of armour in a book devoted to the Sword; but
the Horn Age compels me to show, in a few words, how that material,
combined with hoofs, gave rise to scale armour. Pausanias, confirmed
by Tacitus, informs us that the Sarmatians (Slavs) prepared the
horse-hoofs of their large herds and sewed them with nerves and
sinews to overlap like the surface of a fir-cone. He adds that this
lorica was not inferior in strength or in elegance to the metal-work
of the Greeks. The Emperor Domitian wore a corslet of boars’-hoofs
stitched together; and a fragment of such horn-armour was found at
Pompeii. Ammianus Marcellinus describes the Sarmatians and the Quadi as
protected by loricas of horn-flakes planed, polished, and fastened like
feathers upon a linen sheet. A defence composed of the hoofs of some
animal, made to hold together without the aid of an inner jerkin, and
used in some parts of Asia, is represented in Meyrick (plate iii.). A
stone figure of old type similarly defended, and bearing an inscription
in a dialect cognate with Greek, appears in vol. iii. _Journ. Archæol.
Assoc._ Herodotus (vii. 76) tells us of a people, whose name has
disappeared, that, in addition to their brazen helmets, they wore the
ears and horns of an ox in brass. This horn-helmet shows the savage
practice of defending the head with the skins of beasts and their
appendages.

[97] The _Pfahlbauten im Laibacher Moraste_ were first noticed in the
_Neue Freie Presse_, August 27, 1875; secondly, by the _Neue Deutsche
Alpenzeitung_, of Vienna, Sept. 4, 1875; thirdly, by Herr Custos
Deschmann (to whom the discovery is attributed) in his paper _Die
Pfahlbauten auf dem Laibacher Moore_ (Verhand. der Wiener K. K. Geolog.
Reichsanstalt, Nov. 16, 1875); and, fourthly, by Carl Freiherr von
Czoernig, whose study (_Ueber die Vorhistorischen Funde im Laibacher
Torfmoor_) was read at the Alpine Society of Trieste on December 8,
1875. Between that time and 1880 the subject has been illustrated by
many writers. The course of discovery also has been ‘forwards;’ and the
whole moor was about to be drained in 1881.

[98] Perhaps this may explain the ‘pierced implements of unknown use’
found with harpoon-heads of reindeer-horn in a cavern near Bruniguel,
France. Two picks made of reindeer-antlers were produced by the ‘Grimes
Graves,’ Westing Parish, Norfolk.

[99] The animal remains were of bears, wolves, lynxes, beavers, badgers
(probably the cave-species), hogs, goats, sheep (differing in the
jaw-bone from _ovis_), dogs (common, and not eaten), and cattle with
small teeth like those of the aurochs. The bird-bones resembled those
of the common duck. Man was rare, suggesting that the pile-villagers
buried on the adjacent slopes; the only human ‘find’ was an inferior
maxilla with teeth much worn.

[100] The word _paalstab_, _palstab_, or _palstave_ is usually
translated ‘labouring-staff,’ from _at pula_ or _pala_, to labour,
_labourer_. Dr. John Evans (_Bronzes_, &c., p. 72) prefers
‘spade-staff,’ the verb being _at pæla_, to dig, and the noun _pall_,
a spade, spud, shovel; the Latin _pala_, the French _pelle_, and our
(baker’s) _peel_, or wooden shovel. He confines the term ‘pal-stave’
to two forms; the first is the winged celt with the lateral extensions
hammered to make a socket; the second is the spud-shaped form, with a
thinner blade above than below the side-flanges.

[101] M. Kugelmann, of Hamburg—a wholesale merchant, who kindly showed
me his warehouse—prefers the horns of the North American and Japanese
stag, especially when buttons are to be made of the crown.

[102] _Reports on the Discovery of Peru_, by Clements R. Markham, C.B.,
p. 53 (London: Hakluyt Soc. 1872).

[103] Oldfield’s ‘Aborigines of Australia’ (_Trans. Eth. Soc._). The
author was employed (1861) in collecting specimens of timber for the
International Exhibition.

[104] Commissioner for Victoria at the Geographical Congress of Venice,
September 1881.

[105] It is instructive to note the novel application of old inventions
to general use when the necessities of the age demand them. The
detonating and explosive force of gunpowder was known, in the form
of squibs and fireworks, centuries before firearms were required.
The power of steam, as a whirling toy and a copper vessel prove, was
familiar to the old Egyptians, and perhaps to the Greeks and Romans
under the name of _æolipylæ_ αἰόλου πύλαι. But only at the end of the
last century its motive force attracted general attention; it became a
necessary of civilised life, and at once superseded the sailer and the
stage coach. And by aid of the Past we may project the Future. Man will
bungle over the balloon, but he will never fly straight till railways
and steamers become too slow for him: when ‘levitation,’ in fact, shall
become a necessity. Now the mode of transit would be an unmitigated
evil to humanity.

[106] In the Monuments Civils of the Salle de l’Est, Vitrine A. H., at
the south side. I can give only the old arrangement, which was changed
in 1879–80. During my last visit (November 1882) the new order had not
been completed. These club-swords are accompanied by throw-sticks,
hatchets, and knob-kerries. The old Lisáns from Thebes are illustrated
by Wilkinson (_loc. cit._ i. 5). The name, however, is _not_ ‘lissan,’
and they are _not_ made of acacia, a soft wood that readily perishes.
Why will writers confound acacia and mimosa?

[107] The arrangement of the Swords when I last visited the collection
(August 1878) was temporary till classified. The wooden blades referred
to were in the Petrie Section (Case 21) to the east.

[108] So the sovereign of England appointed his Lord High Treasurer by
handing over to him a white rod, and the Lord Steward of the Household
by presenting a white staff with the words: ‘Seneschall, tenez le bâton
de nostre hostiell.’ Holding the staff was equivalent to the royal
commission, and when not in the presence it was carried by a footman
bareheaded. On the death of his liege lord the great functionary broke
the staff over the corpse, and his duties were at an end. The Lord
Marshall of England was expressly permitted to bear a gold truncheon
with the royal arms at one end, and on the other his own enamelled in
black. The king solemnly gave the ‘Marshall’s rod’ into the hands of
Maude, daughter of the Earl of Pembroke, who made it over to her son,
Earl Roger.

[109] It derives from _booroomooroong_; and the latter denotes, among
the Maoris, a part of the ceremonies practised when the boys are being
made men. The symbol, we are told (Collins, _New South Wales_, p. 346),
is knocking out a tooth with the aid of a throwing-stick. Mr. Howard
Spenseley (_loc. cit._) makes the average boomerang 60 centimètres long
by 0·6 broad and 0·15 thick: he gives it a flight of 100 mètres.

[110] Strangers in Egypt often suppose the true asp to be the
_Cerastes_, or horned snake. As the hieroglyphics and the monuments
prove, it is invariably the cobra de capello (_Coluber Haja_), an
inhabitant of Africa as well as of Asia. The colour of this deadly
thanatophid—which annually kills thousands in India—varies with its
habitat from light yellow to dull green and dark brown. The worst I
ever saw are upon the Guinea Coast.

[111] Anthrop. Soc. July 11, 1882. General Pitt-Rivers, I believe,
would localise the boomerang to the neighbourhood of the Indian Ocean,
and deny it to Europe and America.

[112] _Loc. cit._ vol. i. chap. iv. pp. 235, 236, 237, in the abridged
edition.

[113] Lib. iv. 4, § 3.

[114] _Pragmateia_, vi. 22, § 1; a fragmentary but admirable account of
the Roman army.

[115] _Trans. Irish Assoc._ vol. xix. The Romans also called it _aclys_
(_Æn._ vii. 730), which the dictionaries render as a ‘kind of dart.’
It was an archaic and barbarian weapon; and Virgil (_Æn._ vii. 730)
attributes it to the Osci:—

                  Teretes sunt aclydes illis
    Tela: sed hæc lento mos est aptare flagello.

This would mean that after the weapon is thrown it might be drawn back
again with a leather thong. Possibly the _cateia_ of Isidore (_cateia_,
to cut or mangle, and _catan_, to fight; the Irish caꞇ̇ and the Welsh
_kad_, a fight or a corps of fighters, Latin _caterva_), survives in
the tip-_cat_. In the Keltic dialect of Wales _catai_ is a weapon.

[116] See his learned note (p. 410) on the weapon and on Isidore
(_Orig._ xviii. 7): ‘Hæc est cateia quam Horatius cajam dicit.’ The
disputed word probably derives from the Keltic _katten_, to cast, to
throw.

[117] _Nile Tributaries_, by Sir Samuel W. Baker, p. 51. The word has a
curious likeness to the ‘tombat,’ a similar weapon in Australia (Col. A
Lane-Fox, _Anthrop. Coll._ p. 31).

[118] The ‘Fans’ of M. du Chaillu, a corruption unfortunately adopted
by popular works. In _Gorilla-Land_ (i. 207) I have noticed the
Náyin, or Mpangwe crossbow (with poisoned _ebe_, or dwarf bolt),
which probably travelled up-Nile like the throw-stick. The _détente_
and method of releasing the string from its notch are those of the
toy forms of the European weapon. The Museum at Scarborough contains
a crossbow from the Bight of Benin. The people of Bornu (North-West
Africa) also use a crossbow rat-trap.

[119] It is called _chakarani_ in the _Coasts of East Africa and
Malabar Coast_, by Duarte Barbosa or Magellan (?). The Jibba negroes of
Central Africa wear a similar weapon as a bracelet, sheathed in a strip
of hide.

[120] Col. A. Lane-Fox, _Anthrop. Coll._, p. 33. For a comparative
anatomy of the boomerang the reader will consult that volume, pp.
28–61. I have here noticed only the most remarkable points.

[121] The Sword stood in Case 2 of the Salle du Centre, numbered 695;
and was described in p. 225 of the late Mariette Pasha’s catalogue.
I cannot quite free myself from a suspicion that it was also a
boomerang of unusual size. Some of the South African tribes still use
throw-sticks a yard to a yard and a half long. ‘They are double as
thick at one end as they are at the other,’ says Herr Holub (ii. 340),
‘the lighter extremity being in the usual way about as thick as one’s
finger.’

[122] This meaningless word (_cartuccia_, a scrap of paper) was
applied by Champollion to the elliptical oval containing a group of
hieroglyphics. It is simply an Egyptian shield (Wilkinson, _loc. cit._
i. chap. 5), and the horizontal line below shows the ground upon which
it rested. The old Nile-dwellers, like the classics of Europe and
the modern Chinese, use the shield for their characteristics, their
heraldic badges, &c. The same was the case with our formal heraldry,
which originated about the time of the Crusades, personal symbolism
being its base. As Mr. Hardwick shows, the horse, raven, and dragon
were old familiar badges; many of our sheep-marks are identical with
‘ordinaries,’ and the tribes of Australia used signs to serve as
_kobongs_, or crests. Thus, too, in fortification the shield became
the crenelle and the battlement, and it served to ‘iron-clad’ the
war-galleys of the piratical Norsemen.

[123] So there are two ways of swimming. The civilised man imitates
the action of the frog, the savage the dog, throwing out the arms and
drawing the hands towards his chest.

[124] _Journ. Anthrop. Inst._ vol. iii. pp. 7–29, April, 1873.

[125] An illustration is given in Mr. J. G. Wood’s _Natural History of
Man_. He also quotes Mr. F. Baines, who describes the paddles of the
North Australians with barbed and pointed looms.

[126] Capt. James Mackenzie, in a paper read before the Ethno. Soc. by
Mr. G. M. Atkinson (_Journal_, vol. ii. No. 2, of July 18, 1870. The
paddle is figured pl. xiv. 2).

[127] Translated for the Hakluyt Society (1874) by Mr. Albert Tootal,
of Rio de Janeiro, who wisely preserved the plain and simple style of
the unlettered and superstition-haunted gunner.

[128] In Bacon’s day (_Aphorisms_, book ii.) gummy woods were supposed
to be rather a Northern growth, ‘more pitchy and resinous than in warm
climates, as the fir, pine, and the like.’ They are as abundant near
the Equator, where the viscidity preserves them from the alternate
action of burning suns and torrential rains; moreover, they are harder
and heavier than the pines and firs of the Temperates.

[129] _Historia Geral do Brazil_, by F. Adolpho de Varnhagen, vol. i.
p. 112 (Laemmert, Rio de Janeiro, 1854).

[130] M. Paul Bataillard (p. 409, _Sur le Mot Pagaie_, Soc. Anthrop.
de Paris, 1874) is in error, both when he calls the people of Paraguay
‘Pagayas,’ or ‘carriers of lances,’ and when he identifies Pagaya
(not a spear, but a paddle-sword) with the ‘sagaia or assagai.’ The
latter word is of disputed origin, and it is meaningless in the
tongues of South Africa. Space forbids me to touch its history, except
superficially. ‘Azagay,’ a lance, or rather javelin, appears in
Spanish history as far back as the days of Ojeda (1509); and in 1497
the Portuguese of Vasco da Gama’s expedition use the term ‘azagayas’
(p. 12, Roteiro or Ruttier, before alluded to). I believe both to
be derived from the Arabic _el-khazúk_, a spit—in fact, the Italian
_spiedo_, lance.

[131] Markham (p. 203, Cieça de Leon) makes ‘Macaná’ a Quichua word; it
also belongs to the great Tupi-Guarani family.

[132] _Antiquarian Researches_, quoted by Markham, _loc. cit._ p. 181.

[133] The Godeffroy Collection has produced a huge Catalogue of 687
pages (_Die ethnographisch-anthropologische Abtheilung des Museum
Godeffroy in Hamburg_, vol. i. 8vo (L. Friederichsen u. Co. 1881).
It was shown to me by Dr. Graeffe, the naturalist often mentioned
in ‘_South Sea Bubbles_, by the Earl and the Doctor.’ As a rule the
Samoans had clubs and spears, but few Swords.

[134] This part of Melanesia has been familiar to the home reader by
the life, labours, and death of Bishop Patterson.

[135] Case 21, Petrie, No. 142.

[136] The village of Abu Rawásh, north of the Pyramids of Jízah, still
works this material in large quantities; and its _caillouteurs_, or
flint-knappers, have produced excellent imitations of the so-called
prehistoric weapons. I have described the flint finds of Egypt in the
_Journ. Anthrop. Instit._ (Feb. 1879), and shall have something more to
say about them. A Mr. R. P. Greg, who writes in the same Journal (May
1881) on the ‘Flint Implements of the Nile Valley,’ is not aware of
the fact that I found worked flints near the larger petrified forest
(Cairo). Since that time General Pitt-Rivers made his grand discovery
of ‘Chert Implements in stratified Gravel in the Nile Valley’ (_Journ.
Anthrop. Inst._ May 1882). In March 1881, when visiting the Wady,
near Elwat El-Díbán (Hill of Flies) amongst the cliffs of Thebes, he
came upon palæolithic flints, flakes worked with bulbs and facets
embedded in the hardened grit, six and a half to ten feet below the
surface. In the same strata tombs had been cut, flat-topped chambers
with quadrangular pillars. The fragments of pottery enabled Dr.
Birch to pronounce these excavations ‘not later than the eighteenth
dynasty, and perhaps earlier.’ The New Empire in question was founded
by Amosis (_Mah-mes_, or Moon-child) _circ._ B.C. 1700; it included
the three great Tothmes, and lasted about three hundred years, ending
with the heretic Amun-hotep IV., slave of Amun, _circ._ B.C. 1400,
and Horemhib, the Horus of Manetho. The worked flints may evidently
date thousands of years before that period. This is a discovery of the
highest importance, and we may expect, with Mr. Campbell, that the
‘works of men’s hands will be found abundantly underlying the oldest
history in the world, in the hard gravel which underlies the mud of the
Nile-hollow from Cairo to Assouan.’ At any rate, this find disposes
of the scientific paradox that Art has no infancy in Nile-land. The
strange fancy has been made popular by the Egyptologist, who threatens
to become as troublesome as the Sanskritist.

[137] It is figured (p. 8) by Dr. John Evans (_Ancient Stone
Implements_, &c.), who offers another ‘poniard’ (perhaps a scraper) on
p. 292. On p. 308 he notes the large thin flat heads called ‘Pechs’’
(Picts’?) knives.’

[138] Nephrite is so called because once held a sovereign cure for
kidney disease. Jade is found in various parts of Europe (Page); in the
Hartz (or Resin) Mountains; in Corsica (Bristowe), and about Schweinsal
and Potsdam (Rudler). Saussurite, the ‘Jade of the Alps,’ appears about
the Lake of Geneva and on Monte Rosa. Mr. Dawkins limits Jade proper
in the Old World to Turkestan and China. _Jade_, the Chinese _you_, is
popularly derived from the Persian _jádú_ = (the) magic (stone).

[139] I need hardly notice that the mussel-shell was the original
spoon, still a favourite with savages.

[140] Humboldt (_Pers. Narr._ vol. i. p. 100) makes the Guanches call
obsidian ‘tabona’; most authors apply the word to the Guanche knife of
obsidian.

[141] Neuhoff, _Travels_, &c. xiv. 874.

[142] Our word ‘glass’ derives from _glese_ (_gless_, _glessaria_),
applied by the old Germans to amber (Tacit. _De Mor. Germ._ cap. 45).
Pliny (xxxvii. chap. 11) also notices _glæsum_ (amber) and Glæsaria
Island, by the natives called Austeravia.

[143] Stephens, _Yucatan_, i. 100.

[144] The curious and artistic rock inscriptions and engravings of the
South African Bushmen were traced in outline by triangular flint-flakes
mounted on sticks to act as chisels. The subjects were either simple
figures; cows, gnus, and antelopes, a man’s bust and a woman carrying
a load; or compositions, as ostrich and rider, a jackal chasing a
gazelle, or a rhinoceros hunting an ostrich.

[145] See Chap. I.

[146] _Voyage Pittoresque autour du Monde_, par M. Louis Choris,
Peintre, 1822.

[147] _Trans. Ethno. Soc._ vols. i. and ii. p. 290.

[148] Quoted by Col. Lane Fox, _Prim. War._ i. 25.

[149] _Prehistoric Man_, by Daniel Wilson (vol. i. pp. 216–17).

[150] _Incidents of Travel in Central America_, &c., p. 51; by J. Lloyd
Stephens. The work is highly interesting, because it shows Egypt in
Central America. Compare the Copan Pyramid with that of Sakkarah; the
Cynocephalus head (i. 135) with those of Thebes; the beard, a tuft on
the chin; the statue and its headdress (ii. 349); the geese-breeding
at the palace (ii. 316); the central cross (ii. 346) which denotes
the position of the solstices and the equinoxes and the winged globe
at Ocosingo (ii. 259). In Yucatan the _Agave Americana_ took the
place of the papyrus for paper-making. Indo-China also appears in the
elephant-trunk ornaments (i. 156).

[151] _Prim. War._ ii. p. 25.

[152] The two latter are in Demmin, p. 84.

[153] A specimen is in the British Museum, Department of Meteorolites.
(_Prim. War._ p. 25.)

[154] The distinguished physicist, Prof. Huxley, extends on purely
anthropological grounds, the name ‘Australioids’ to the Dravidians of
India, the Egyptians, ancient and modern, and the dark-coloured races
of Southern Europe. I have ventured to oppose this theory in Chap.
VIII. Mr. Thomas, curious to say, would make letters (alphabet, &c.)
arise amongst the Dravidian quasi-savages.

[155] _Trans. Anthrop. Inst._ May 1881. Mr. Milne brought home some
fine specimens of worked stones, one of which (No. 17, pl. xviii.) is a
chopper in the shape of the Egyptian flint-knives.

[156] Mr. Heath (who directed the Indian Iron and Steel Company) opined
that the tools with which the Egyptians engraved hieroglyphics on
syenite and porphyry were made of Indian steel. The theory is, as we
shall see, quite uncalled for.

[157] For instance, the magnificent life-sized statue of Khafra
(Cephren or Khabryes) in the Bulak Museum, dated B.C. 3700–3300
(Brugsch, _History_, vol. i. p. 78). Scarabæi of diorite can be safely
bought in Egypt, the substance being too hard for cheap imitation
work. Dr. Henry Schliemann constantly mentions diorite in his _Troy
and its Remains_ (1875); for instance, ‘wedges’ (i.e. axes) large and
small, (pp. 21, 28, 154): he speaks of an immense quantity of diorite
implements (p. 75); of a Priapus of diorite twelve inches high (p.
169); of ‘curious little sling bullets’ (p. 236), and of hammers (p.
285). At Mycenæ he found ‘two well-polished axes of diorite.’ But as
he also calls it ‘hard black stone,’ I suspect it to be basalt, as his
‘green stone’ (_Troy_, p. 21) may be jade or jadeite.

[158] Casting the cannon called after the late General Uchatius is
still kept a secret; and I have been unable to see the process at the
I. R. Arsenal, Vienna.

[159] _Stahl-bronce_ = steel (i.e. hardened) bronze. The
misunderstanding caused some ludicrous errors to the English press.

[160] I reported to the _Athenæum_ (August 16, 1879) this ‘recovery’
of the lost Egyptian (and Peruvian) secret for tempering copper and
bronze, which had long been denied by metallurgists. Copper hardened
by alloy is described in the _Archæologia_, by Governor Pownall. Mr.
Assay-Master Alchorn found in it particles of iron, which may, however,
have been in the ore, and some admixture of zinc, but neither silver
nor gold.

[161] Of this I shall have more to say in Chap. V.

[162] This was the weight of the statue of ‘Sesostris,’ Ramses II.,
and his father Pharaoh Seti I.; see Chap. IX. The overseer standing
upon its knee appears about two-thirds the length of the lower leg
(Wilkinson, Frontisp. vol. ii.). Pliny treats of colossal statues,
xxxiv. 18.

[163] _Les Métaux dans l’Antiquité_, par J. P. Rossignol. Paris:
Durand, 1863.

[164] So Professor F. Max Müller, _Lectures on the Science of
Language_, asserted, with a carelessness rare in so learned a writer
(vol. ii. p. 255. London: Longmans, 1873), that ‘the ancients knew
a process of hardening that pliant metal (copper), most likely by
repeated smelting (heating?) and immersion in water.’ This latter is
the common process for _softening_ the metal.

[165] Cieza de Leon (Introd. p. xxviii.): ‘Humboldt mentions a cutting
instrument found near Cuzco (‘_the_ City’) which was composed of 0·94
parts of copper and 0·06 of tin. The latter metal is scarcely ever
found in South America, but I believe there are traces of it in parts
of Bolivia. In some of the instruments silica was substituted for tin.’
The South American tin is mostly impure; still it was and can be used.

[166] Apparently there are two forms of ‘Núb’ (gold), the necklace and
the washing-bowl. See Chapter VIII.

[167] Pliny, xxxvi. 65.

[168] Here Elton, like others of his age, mistranslates Chalcos by
‘brass’:

    Their mansions, implements, and armour shine
    In brass,—dark iron slept within the mine.

[169] Engraving on copper-plates is popularly attributed to Maso
Finiguerra, of Florence, in 1460; but the Romans engraved maps and
plans, and the ancient Hindus grants, deeds, &c. on copper-plates.

[170] I regret the necessity of troubling the learned reader with these
stock quotations, but they are essential to the symmetry and uniformity
of the subject.

[171] Sophocles and Ovid make Medea, and Virgil makes Elissa, use a
sickle of chalcos. Homer, as will be seen, uses the same material
for his arms, axes, and adzes. Pausanias follows him, quoting his
description of Pisander’s axe and Meriones’ arrow; he also cites
Achilles’ spear in the temple of Athene at Phaselis, with its point
and ferrule of chalcos, and the similar sword of Memnon in the temple
of Æsculapius at Nicomedia. Plutarch tells us that the sword and
spear-head of Theseus, disinterred by Cymon in Scyros, were of copper.
Empedocles, who (B.C. 444)—

                ardentem frigidus Ætnam
    Insiluit—

was betrayed by his sandal shoon with chalcos soles.

[172] See Macrob. _Sat._ vi. 3.

[173] Or ‘a furbisher (whetter, sharpener = _acuens_) of every cutting
tool of copper and iron.’ See Chap. IX.

[174] I can hardly understand why Dr. Evans (p. 5) insists upon these
sockets being bronze, as they could ‘hardly have been done from a metal
so difficult to cast as unalloyed copper.’ He greatly undervalues
the metallurgy of the Exodist Hebrews, who would have borrowed their
science from Egypt.

[175] Lead is also mentioned, but not tin.

[176] A certain Herr Dromir patented in Germany a process for making
malleable bronze. He added one per cent. of mercury to the tin, and
then mixed it with the molten copper.

[177] For Irish copper swords see the _Archéologie_, vol. iii. p. 555.
They will be exhaustively described in Part II.

[178] So Chalcis in Mela (ii. 7), now Egripos (Negroponte).

[179] The confusion with iron appears in the Sanskrit (Pali?) _ayas_;
Latin _æs_ for _ahes_ (as we find in _aheneus_); the Persian _áhan_
(آهن); the Gothic _ais_, or _aiz_; the High German _er_ (which is the
Assyrian _eru_ and the Akkadian _hurud_), and the English _iron_. J.
Grimm (_Die Naturvölker_) connects Ἄρης with _æs_. That _æs_ and _æris
metalla_ in Pliny mean copper, we learn from his tale of Telephus (xxv.
19), which, by the by, is told by Camoens (Sonnet lxix.) in a very
different way.

[180] χαλκεύειν δὲ καὶ τὸ σίδηρεύειν ἔλγον, καὶ χαλκέας τοὺς τὸν
σίδηρον ἐργαζομένους. Jul. Pollux, _Onomasticon_, viii. c. 10.

[181] The full term was _æs cyprium_, which Pliny apparently applies
to the finer kind; then it became _cyprium_, the adjective, which
expressed only locality; and lastly _cuprum_. The third is first used
by Spartianus in the biography of Caracalla (No. 5), _Cancelli ex ære
vel cupro_ (doors of _æs_ or copper). Ælius Spartianus dates from the
days of Diocletian and Constantine (Smith, _sub voc._). When Pliny
writes _in Cypro prima fuit æris inventio_, he leaves it doubtful if
_æs_ be copper or bronze; but we should prefer the former. So he makes
the best ‘Missy’ (native yellow copperas) proceed from the Cyprus
manufactories (xxxiii., iv. 25, and xxxiv., xii. 31). The word _misí_
or _missí_ is still used in India for a vitriolic powder to stain the
teeth. Cypros, the wife of Agrippa, was possibly named from Kafar =
the henna plant: the Cyprus of Pliny (xii. 51) is also the _Lawsonia
inermis_.

[182] _Frag._ tom. i. p. 226. Edit. Bipont.

[183] The island will be further noticed in Chap. VIII.

[184] _Cyprus_, &c., by General Louis Palma (di Cesnola). London:
Murray, 1877. The author excavated from 1866 to 1876, and opened some
15,000 tombs, mostly Phœnician.

[185] Quoted in the _Kypros_ of W. H. Engel (vol. i. p. 14). The two
volumes are a mine of information; much of it now antiquated, but
useful to later students who have less leisure to accumulate learning.

[186] ‘In Cyprus, where the manufacturers of the stone called chalcitis
(copper-smelters) burn it for many days in fire, a winged creature,
something larger than a great fly, is seen walking and leaping in the
fire.’ A brother of the salamander!

[187] Some commentators (Strabo, vi. 1) confound this place with
Ausonian Temĕsa, or Tempsa, in the land of the Brutii, with Temése of
Cyprus.

[188] Herodotus (iii. 23) tells us that, copper being of all metals
the most scarce and valuable in Æthiopia, prisoners were there bound
with golden fetters. As will be seen, copper has lately been found in
Abyssinia.

[189] An awful list of his works is given in Diogenes Laertius.

[190] This ærugo was artificially made by the Ancients with acetic
acid, converting copper to a green salt (Beckmann, _sub v._ ‘Verdigris
or Spanish Green’). The green rust of the carbonate of copper is still
erroneously termed verdigris (acetate of copper).

[191] Ample information is given by Brugsch (_Egypt under the
Pharaohs_, vol. i. p. 64) of Senoferu; of the valiant Khufu or Suphis
(Cheops); of the Pharaoh Sahura, or Sephris; of Menkauhor (Mencheres)
and Tat-ka-ra (Fifth Dynasty); of the bas-reliefs at Wady Magharah
dating from King Pepi (Sixth Dynasty); of Thut-mes III. or the Great,
and his sister Hashop (Eighteenth Dynasty before B.C. 1600), one of
whose expeditions produced among other things ninety-seven Swords
(Brugsch, i. 327), and who mentions ‘gilt copper’; of Amon-hotep III.,
also ‘the Great’ (Eighteenth Dynasty, about B.C. 1500); and of other
Pharaohs who worked these diggings.

[192] Pottery has lately been found embedded in the bricks of the
Maydúm Pyramid.

[193] The Souphis I. of Manetho is the second king of the Fourth
Dynasty following Soris. Souphis II. is the Khafra of the Tables and
the Cephren of the Greeks.

[194] The hieroglyphic is of several forms;

  [Hieroglyphs]

may serve as a specimen.

[195] ‘Malachite’ is the Greek _molochotis_, from the molokhe, or
marsh-mallow; whence the Arabic _mulukhíyeh_. In Poland, malachite and
turquoise preside over the month of December.

[196] Meaning the Beloved of Ptah, the Opener, the Artificer God. The
word is found in the Arabic _fath_. It is a better derivation for
_Hephæstus_ than ‘Vaishravana’; but Sanskrit is so copious that any
given word can be derived from it.

[197] _O Muata Cazembe_, by Monteiro and Gamitto, describes the copper
works in South-East Africa long known to the natives. I am told by Mr.
Hooker, C.E., that he has lately seen (_pace_ Herodotus) ‘magnificent
specimens of native copper sent from Abyssinia.’

[198] R.N., C.B., &c., _Across Africa_, vol. i. pp. 134, 319; and vol.
ii. pp. 149, 329.

[199] _Viagens dos Portuguezes, Colecção de Documentos_, &c.

[200] Layard’s _Nineveh_, i. 224, ii. 415; 6th edit. 1854.

[201] Hence our _packfong_, or German silver, of China, an alloy of
copper (50 per cent.), nickel, and zinc (25 per cent. each).

[202] The _Chinese Repository_ gives a hundred illustrations of the
implements in use by the Chinese and the Japanese.

[203] _Fir_ or _fear_ (_vir_, a man), and _bolg_ (_Bolgi_, _Belgæ_),
a belly, bag, budget, or quiver. They occupied Southern Britain, and
formed the third immigrant colony preceding the ‘Milesians,’ sons of
Milidh or Miledh (Senchus Mor), evidently _Miles_, the soldier. He had
two sons, Emer and Airem, from whom the Irish race is descended. Emer,
says Prof. Rhys, may represent the Ivernii or pre-Celtic population
mentioned by Ptolemy; and Airem, which means ‘a farmer,’ the Iranian
race which introduced agriculture amongst a horde of hunters. The
fourth colony was the Tuatha (people, e.g. Tuatha-Eireann = people of
Erin), named from Danair, a stranger, foreigner, and properly a Dane.
We have lately been shown how much true history may be obtained from
these names, which had become bye-words, almost ridiculous to use.

[204] _Bán_ (our corrupted ‘bawn,’ as in ‘Molly Bawn’), white, is the
Latin _canus_. It is also a noun substantive, meaning ‘copper.’

[205] Wilde, _Catalogue_, pp. 58, 356.

[206] Meaning _Tectetan_ = ‘I don’t know.’ So the _M’adri_ on an old
English chart of the Euphrates.

[207] _Select Letters of Columbus_, &c. p. 201. Translated by R. H.
Major, Hakluyt Society, 1870.

[208] Humboldt, _Travels_, iii. 194.

[209] _Commentaries of the Yncas._ Translated by Clements R. Markham,
C.B. Hakluyt Society, 1871.

[210] Daniel Wilson’s _Prehistoric Man_, vol. i. chap. viii.; _The
Metallurgic Arts, Copper_ (pp. 231–79). Prof. Brush, of Yale College,
calculated that 6,000 tons were yielded in 1858.

[211] R.E., _Spanish America_, &c. (Philadelphia: Abraham Small, 1819),
p. 49.

[212] It was divided, like the Greek and Roman, into centuries
(_pachacas_), chiliarchies (_hurangos_), and inspectorships
(_tokrikrok_), generally under royalties. The organisation was due
to the Ynka Inti-Kapak (the Great), B.C. 1500–1600. There was a
large fleet (‘magna colcharum classis’) of ships not smaller than
the contemporary European, ‘navigiis velificantur nihili vestris
minoribus,’ says P. Martyr (_Decad._ ii. lib. 3). Neither traveller nor
historian has explained how this mighty organisation crumbled to pieces
at the touch of a few European adventurers.

I have read with interest the able work of M. Vicente F. Lopez, _Les
Races Aryennes du Pérou_ (Paris: Franck, 1871): he derives the word
from Pirhua, the first Ynka deified to a Creator. He adopts (p. 17)
against Garcilasso de la Vega, who gave the Ynkarial Empire 400 years,
the opinions of the learned Dr. Fernando Montésinos el Visitador, of
the later sixteenth century, who is set aside by Markham, _Narratives
of the Yncas_ (Hakluyt, 1873). Montésinos derives the Peruvians from
Armenia five centuries after ‘the Flood,’ and assigns 4,000 years
with 101 emperors to the dynasty; it begins with Manko Kapak, son of
Pirhua Manko; and Sinchi Roka (No. xcv. of Montésinos) is Garcilasso’s
official founder (p. 25).

But I cannot follow M. Lopez in his theories of ‘Aryanism’ (Zend and
Sanskrit) or ‘Turanianism’ (Chinese and Tartar). The Quichua wants
the peculiar Hindu cerebrals (which linger in English), and lacks the
‘l,’ so common in ‘Indo-European’ speech; ‘Lima,’ for instance, should
be ‘Rima.’ It has no dual, and no distinction between masculine and
feminine. But with the licence which M. Lopez allows himself, any
language might be derived from any other. For instance, _chinka_ from
_sinha_, ‘the lion’ (p. 138); _hakchikis_ = _hashish_, ‘intoxicating
herb’; _kekenti_, ‘humming-bird,’ from _kvan_, ‘to hum’; _huahua_,
‘son,’ from _su_, ‘to engender,’ _sunus_, &c., (when in Egypt we have
_su_); and _mama_, ‘mother,’ from _mata_, μήτηρ, _mater_, when we have
_mut_ and _mute_ in Nile-land. For _mara_, ‘to kill,’ ‘death,’ the old
Coptic preserves _mer_, _meran_, ‘to die’; and for _mayu_, ‘water,’
_mu_.

I thus prefer the monosyllabic Egyptian for Quichua roots, noting the
two forms of pronoun, isolated (_nyoka_ = I = _anuk_) and affixed
(_huahua-í_, ‘my son;’ _huahua-ki_, ‘thy son;’ _huahua-u_, ‘his son’).
The heliolatry of the Andes was that of the Nile Valley; _Kon_ is the
Egyptian _Tum_, ‘the setting sun.’ The god Papacha wears on his head
the scarabæus of Ptah, or Creative Might. The pyramids and megalithic
buildings are also Nilotic. The pottery shows three several styles,
Egyptian, Etruscan, and Pelasgic. The population was divided into
the four Egyptian castes (p. 396), priests (_mankos_ and _amautas_),
soldiers (_aucas_, _aukas_), peasants (_uyssus_), and shepherds or
nomads (_chakis_). According to Cieza de Leon (p. 197) they thought
more of the building and adorning of their tombs than of their houses;
their mummies were protected by little idols, and the corpse carried
the ferryman’s fee. The pyramid of Copan (Yucatan), 122 feet high, with
its 6-feet steps, is that of Sakkarah. The Yucatan beard in statues
is Pharaohic. The elephant-trunk ornaments (Stephens, ii. 156) are
Indo-Chinese. The geese-breeding (ii. 179) is Egyptian. See also the
Toltec legend of the House of Israel (ii. 172).

[213] The ‘lovely valley, Andahualas,’ is from Anta and Huaylla,
pasture—i.e. ‘copper-coloured meadow.’ Anta in Cieza de Leon appears to
be copper, whereas other writers make it bronze.

[214] _Peruvian Antiquities_, by Don M. E. de Rivero and J. J. von
Tschudi.

[215] They abandoned the native silver mines when the ore became too
hard, and they smelted it in small portable stoves. They knew also
the chemical combinations, sulphate, antimonial, and others; and they
worked quicksilver. They had mines of Quella (Khellay, or iron), but
they found difficulty in extracting it. Besides smelting, they could
use the tacana (hammer), cast in moulds, inlay, and solder.

[216] Ewbank, of whom more presently, sketches a well-cast axe (p.
455). He translates _anta_ by bronze (p. 455).

[217] Doubtless copied from Old-World articles. On the west side of
Palenque the Sword is distinctly Egyptian (Stephens, _Yucatan_). I
have attempted to show how easily castaway mariners could be swept by
currents from Europe, Asia, Africa, and America. See ‘Ostreiras of the
Brazil’ in _Anthropologia_, No. 1, October 1873.

[218] _Antiquarian, Ethnological, and other Researches._ By William
Bollaert. London: Trübner, 1860. We must probably change ‘brass’ into
‘bronze’ when he says (p. 90) that ‘the Peruvians used tools of brass.’

[219] Appendix to _Life in Brazil_ (Sampson Low, 1856).

[220] This white copperas was detected by Scacchi on the fumaroles
after the Vesuvian eruption of 1855.

[221] Gold was shown by yellow, and silver by white. Dr. Evans
(_Bronze_, &c. p. 7) suggests that the round blue bar used by butchers
(Wilkinson, iii. 247) was not of steel; but his reasons are peculiarly
unsatisfactory. The file is a common implement amongst savages,
doubtless derived from the practice of cross-hatching wooden grips
and handles. Mr. A. H. Rhind (_Thebes_, &c.) attributes little weight
to the diversity of colours employed by ancient Egyptians to depict
metallic objects, and he finds red and green confused.

[222] Thus we have a blue war-helmet of ring-mail (Lepsius,
_Denkmäler_, iii. 115 &c.), a blue war-hatchet with wooden handle,
and spears pointed with brown-red and blue (copper and iron) in the
tomb of Ramses III. The war-car of an Æthiopian king, in the days of
Tutankamun, has blue wheels and a body of yellow (gold). Lepsius,
however, adds: ‘It is very remarkable that in all the representations
of the old empire, blue-painted instruments can scarcely be traced.’
This simply proves that iron and steel were rare.

[223] _Prehistoric Man_, chap. viii.

[224] It was analysed by Mr. E. Tookey, with the following results:

  Copper                     97·12
  Arsenic                     2·29
  Iron                        0·43
  Tin, with traces of gold    0·24
                            ——————
                            100·08

The presence of the tin may have been accidental. The proportion of
arsenic (2¼ per cent.) might have been expected to harden the metal,
yet it was so soft as to be almost useless.

[225] See chap. ix.

[226] It is equivalent to the Roman’s ‘Aliud clausum in pectore, aliud
in lingua promptum habere.’

[227] So amongst the Jews the sharp knives for circumcision (_Josh._ v.
2–3) were of the silex which they learned from the Egyptians; and the
custom continued long after the invention of metal blades.

[228] It was opened by Herr Ramsauer, and carefully described in _Das
Grabfeld von Hallstatt_, by Baron E. von Sacken. I shall have more to
say of it in chap. xiii.

[229] Prinseps’ _Essays_ (London, 1858), vol. i. p. 222, pl. xliv. fig.
12, and _Journ. R. As. Soc. Bengal_, vol. vii. pl. xxxii. fig. 12.
Long descriptions of copper smelting in India are found in _Science
Gleanings_, pp. 380 _et seq._, No. 36, Dec. 1831, Calcutta, and in
Percy (_Metall._ p. 387); the latter by Mr. H. F. Blanford, of the
Geol. Survey, who made especial studies in Himalayan Sikkim and the
Nepaulese Tirhai. The workmen, who are of low caste, win the stone
in small blast-furnaces about three feet high, burning charcoal and
cow-chips. They work not only the easily reducible carbonates, but
sulphuretted ores, copper pyrites, with a mixture of mundic (iron
pyrites).

[230] Scales are apparently implied by _kaskassin_ (_1 Sam._ xvii.),
which in Leviticus and Ezekiel applies to fish-scales.

[231] The shekel is usually estimated at 220 grs. (Troy), which
would reduce the weights to 22·91 and 190·97 lbs. respectively; but
Maimonides makes it = 320 grains of barley = as many grains Troy.
See Parkhurst (_Lex._, _s.v._ ‘Amat’). Either figure would form a
fair burden for a horse; and the spear would have been a most unhandy
article, unless used by a man ten feet tall. I shall notice the
Gathite’s Sword in chap. ix.

[232] _Ethnology of the British Islands._ We also read: ‘Copper Swords
have been found in Ireland; iron among the Britons and Gauls; bronze
was used by the Romans, and probably by the Egyptians; and steel of
varying degrees of hardness is now the only weapon employed.’ (J.
Latham: see chap. vii.)

[233] _Trans. Edinb. Philos. Soc._ Feb. 1822.

[234] J. A. Phillips, F.C.S. _Memoirs of the Chemical Soc._ vol. iv.

[235] _Archæology and Prehistoric Annals of Scotland_, p. 246.

[236] See Sir W. Wilde’s _Cat. Metallic Materials—Celts_, Museum of
Royal Irish Academy.

[237] _History of Kerry_, p. 125.

[238] Yet Æschylus (_Agamem._) uses both _chalcos_ and _sideros_
generically for a weapon.

[239] _Ilios_, &c. (London, Murray, 1880).

[240] Some small objects are reported as wheel-made; but this requires
confirmation, according to a writer in the _Athenæum_ (Dec. 18, 1880).

[241] The copper bracelet (_Troy_, p. 150, No. 88) with its terminal
knobs is the modern trade ‘manilla’ of the West African coast. This
survival will again be noticed in chap. ix.

[242] The word in its older form was written ‘allay.’ Johnson derives
it from _à la loi_, _allier_, _allocare_: it appears to me the Spanish
_el ley_, the legal quality of coinable metal. We have now naturalised
in English _ley_, meaning a standard of metals. (Sub voc. _Dict. of
Obsolete and Provincial English_, by Thomas Wright; London, Bell and
Daldy, 1869.)

[243] _Recherches sur les Mystères_; and _Mémoire pour servir à la
religion secrète_, &c. &c.

[244] The ‘Aglaophemus,’ so called from the initiator of Pythagoras. I
see symptoms of a revival in assertions concerning a ‘highly cultivated
beginning, with the arts well known and practised to an extent which,
in subsequent ages, has never been approached; and from which there
has not anywhere been discovered a gradual advancement; but, on the
contrary, an immediate and decidedly progressive declension.’ This,
however, is a mere question of dates. Man’s civilisation began long
before the Mosaic Creation; and science has agreed to believe that
savage life generally is not a decadence from higher types, not a
degeneracy, but a gradual development.

[245] We now divide language into three periods: 1st, intonative,
like the cries of children and lower animals; 2nd, imitative, or on
onomatopoetic; and 3rd, conventional, the civilised form.

[246] _Axieros_ (the earth-goddess), _Axiokersa_ (Proserpine of the
Greeks), _Axiokersos_ (Hades), and _Casmilos_ (Hermes or Mercury).
Ennemoser may be right in making the Kabeiroi pygmies (i.e. gnomes),
but not in rendering Dactyloi by ‘finger-size.’

[247] The lame and deformed ‘artificer of the universe,’ who became
Hephæstos (Vulcan) in Greece, and Vishvakarma in India. Sokar has left
his name in the modern ‘Sakkárah.’

[248] The Assyrian cuneiforms allude to ‘the (Great) Bear making its
crownship,’ that is, circling round the North Pole.

[249] The temples of the Cabiri have lately been explored by Prof.
Conze for the Austrian Government at Samothrace, and we may expect to
learn something less vague concerning these mysterious ancients.

[250] The Rev. Basil H. Cooper believes that the Phrygian was the
original Ida, which gradually passed to Crete; and here the Idæi were
priests of Cybele. He is disposed to connect with it the Greek Σίδ(ηρο);
the German _Eisen_ (and our iron), and the _Ida feldt_ and
_Asi_ of the Norse myths (Day, p. 133).]

[251] The name is derived by Bochart from Heb. _Lub_ or _Lelub_,
חיקלוב, chiefs of the Libu or Ribu, as the old Egyptians called the
Libyans. Hence the Prom. Lilybæum (_Li-Lúb_) and the Sinus ad Libyam or
Lilybatanus.

[252] We have satisfactory details concerning the Chalybes, who border
on Armenia, in the _Anabasis_ (iv. 5, &c.). They dwell two days
from Cotyora, the colony planted by Sinope; they are subject to the
Mossynœci, and they subsist by iron-working (v. 5). Though few, they
are a most warlike people, full of fight. Their armour consists of
helmets, greaves, and cuirasses of twisted linen cords, reaching to the
groin. They carry spears about fifteen cubits long, ‘having one spike’
(i.e. without ferule); and at their girdles a short faulchion, as large
as a Spartan crooked dagger, with which they cut the throats of all
whom they can master; and then, lopping off their heads, bear them away
(iv. 7). Strabo makes the Chalybes the same as their neighbours the
Chaldæi.

[253] The well-known inscription on the tomb of Midas, and another
given by Texier (_Asie Mineure_, ii. 57) show the Phrygian tongue to
have been a congener of Greek. Even the _Békos_ of Herodotus (ii. 2)
is allied to our ‘bake,’ and _Bédu_ to our ‘water.’ We are greatly in
want of further information about Phrygia, and it is to be hoped that
Colonel Wilson and Mr. W. M. Ramsay will complete the labours of Texier
and Hamilton.

[254] The Aryans of Herodotus, about the Arius river (_Heri-rúd_), are
an undistinguished tribe, a mere satrapy. Strabo’s Aria (xi. 9) is a
tract about 250 by 40 miles. In Pliny (vi. 23) Ariana includes only the
lands of the Gedrosi (Mekran), the Arachoti (Kandahár), the Arii proper
(Herat), and the Parapomisadæ (Kabul). It has been truly said that even
if Aryan and Turanian man (first) centred in and emerged from these
areas (the table-lands of Asia), the so-called history is entirely
based on the philological discoveries of the Sanskritist school.

[255] Therasia and Therassia, now Santorin. Here have been found ruins
of prehistoric cities buried by the great central volcano. According to
most geologists the latter was exhausted in B.C. 1800–1700.

[256] I have personally noticed this, and described it in _Midian
Revisited_, vol. i. p. 143.

[257] Beckmann (_s.v._ ‘Tin’) tells us that the metal ‘never occurs in
a native state.’ He forgets stream-tin. He also denies that the oldest
‘cassiteron’ and ‘stannum’ were tin; and considers them to mean the
German _Werk_, a regulus of silver and lead. His _vasa stannea_ are
vessels covered with tin in the inside. In the fourth century ‘plumbum
candidum’ or ‘album’ was superseded by ‘stannum.’ Speaking of electrum,
Beckmann asserts that ‘the ancients were not acquainted with the art of
separating gold and silver.’ ‘Britain,’ Ynis Prydhain Island, where the
god Prydhain was worshipped, or rather ‘Isle of the Brythons,’ has been
fancifully derived by the energetic Semitiser from Barrat-et-Tanuk =
Land of Tin.

[258] Ezekiel tells us that the Tyrians received tin, as well as other
metals, from Tarshish, or Western Tartessus, in the Bay of Gibraltar.

[259] M. Emile Burnouf, ‘L’Age de Bronze,’ _Revue des Deux Mondes_,
July 15, 1877, also brings tin from Banca. The island is about 150
miles long by 36 broad; it has no mountain backbone, but the peak
of Goonong Maras rises some 3,000 feet above the sea-level. Chinese
coolies still work the mines of Mintok, and in 1852 the yearly yield
was some 50,000 piculs (each = 133⅓ lbs.) at the cost of nine rupees
per picul.

[260] Beckmann (_loc. cit._), like Michaelis, is surprised at the
Midianites possessing tin in the days of Moses. These were the views
of the last century. I have suggested (_Athenæum_, Nov. 24, 1880) that
the old Nile-dwellers extended through Midian to El-Hejáz and El-Yemen,
where they worked the mines which became known to the Hebrews.

[261] In 1866 De Rougemont made Phœnicia supply bronze to Europe, the
copper being brought from Cyprus. Besides the Mediterranean, we find a
Uralian and a Danubian branch of the industry. Before 1877 France had
supplied 650 bronze Swords and daggers, Sweden 480, and Switzerland 86.

[262] _Alias_ the Œstrymnides. Borlase was of opinion that the group
formed one block, with several headlands, of which ‘Scilly’ was the
highest, outermost, and most conspicuous. He conjectures the original
name to be _Syllé_, _Sulla_, or _Sulleh_, a flat rock dedicated to the
sun; hence the Lat. _Siliræ_, _Silures_, and _Sigdeles_; the Engl.
_Sylley_, _Scilley_, and lately _Scilly_; the Fr. _Sorlingues_; and the
Span. _Sorlingas_. The Keltic name of the chief feature was Inis Caer.

[263] _Archæology and Prehistoric Annals of Scotland_, Part II. ‘The
Archaic or Bronze Period.’ Daniel Wilson.

[264] Pliny represents the Cassiterides as fronting Celtiberia. He
considers it a ‘fabulous story’ that the Greeks fetched ‘white lead’
from the islands of the Adriatic.

[265] _Prehistoric Times_, by Sir John Lubbock, 4th edit. (London:
Williams and Norgate, 1878.)

[266] The identification is not settled; some propose the Isle of
Thanet.

[267] Beckmann, _sub voce_ ‘Tin.’

[268] According to Messrs. Wibel, Fellemberg, and Damour, who
investigated even 10/1000 parts, the average proportions were ⅒ tin
to 9 copper; and ¼ tin for hard metal, as chisels, &c. M. E. Chauntre,
_Age de Bronze_. 3 vols. (Paris: Baudry.)

[269] The late General Uchatius, who ‘trusted in princes,’ and whose
tragical death was greatly lamented by his friends, always declared
that he had rediscovered (not discovered) the hardening of copper and
bronze; and that he hoped to arrive at other secrets. His career was
cut short before he learned to make the metal and the alloy resilient.

[270] _Thut_, _Tuth_, _Toth_, _Thoth_, &c., the moon-god who became
Hermes Trismegistus.

[271] Phosphor-bronze, for whose manufacture companies are now
established in London and elsewhere, has the ordinary composition with
the addition of red or amorphous phosphorus dropped upon the melted
metal in the crucible. Berthier (_Traité des Essais_, ii. 410) states
that a very small quantity of phosphorus renders copper extremely
hard and suitable for cutting instruments. Percy (_Metallurgy_) found
that copper will take up 11 per cent. of phosphorus; the metal, which
assumes a grey tint, is quite homogeneous, and so hard that it can
scarcely be touched by the file. The addition of phosphorus promotes
the reduction of the oxides, and enables an exceedingly sound and
durable casting to be made; but if it exceed ½ per cent. the metal
becomes very brittle. Dr. Percy has described phosphor-silver,
phosphor-lead, and phosphor-iron. The phosphorus is, according to some
authorities, apt to volatilise with time. At present a new form of
bronze, the antimonial, in proportions of 1–2 per cent., is coming into
fashion: it is said to be malleable and ductile, and to resist torsion
in a high degree. Another new bronze is the aluminium, whose price
has been reduced from 1,000_l._ to 100_l._ per ton by Mr. Webster, of
Hollywood, near Birmingham.

[272] So called from Cape Emeri in Naxos.

[273] Appendix to Layard’s _Nineveh and Babylon_ (London: Murray).
The proportions are nearly those of our day. We may assume our common
bronze at 11:100 for large, and 10:100 for small objects. Cymbals
and sounding instruments, however, contain tin 22:copper 78.

[274] Analysed by Mr. Robinson of Pimlico (Day, p. 110).

[275] Schliemann’s _Troy_, p. 361 (London: Murray, 1875).

[276] Sir W. Gell found the bronze nails in the ‘Treasury of Atreus’
composed of 12 tin to 88 copper. The Trojan battle-axes, according to
Dr. Schliemann, yielded only 4, 8, and 9 per cent. of the former metal.

[277] According to Helbig, the Palafittes and Terramare villagers had
spears but not Swords.

[278] For the tin-ore of Peru see _Ethnolog. Journal_, vol. lxx. pp.
258–261. Rivero, p. 230, and Garcilasso, vol. i. p. 202.

[279] _Amer. Journ. of Science, &c._ v. 42; July 1866.

[280] From descriptions and drawings by Mr. J. H. Godfrey, Mining
Engineer-in-Chief to the Imperial Government of Japan.

[281] M.D., F.R.S., ‘Observations on some Metallic Arms and Utensils,
with Experiments to determine their Composition.’ Royal Soc. London,
June 9, 1796. _Philosophical Transactions._

[282] Taken from Dr. Evans (_Bronze Impl. &c._ chap. xxi.). He compiled
it from Martineau & Smith’s _Hardware Trade Journal_ (April 30, 1879).

[283] Wilkinson remarked that the Egyptian proportions of half tin and
half copper were whitish.

[284] Lord Rosse, in casting specula, preferred using copper and tin in
their atomic proportions, or 68·21 per cent. copper to 31·79 per cent.
tin.

[285] _Speltrum_ was introduced by Boyle. During the last century much
zinc was imported from India (possibly supplied by China), and was
called tutenag.

[286] Bohn’s _Trans._ ii. 32–45. The learned German begins by stating
that zinc was not known to the Greeks, Romans, and Arabs, and then
proceeds to prove that it was. The word ‘zinc’ (from _zenken_
or _zacken_, nails, spikes?) first occurs in the works of the
Iatro-chemist, Paracelsus, who died in A.D. 1541.

[287] _Blende_ is a generic word, from _blenden_, to dazzle.

[288] Mongez, _Mém. de l’Institut_.

[289] At Goslar, however, according to Lohnriss, brass was made in A.D.
1617.

[290] Pliny, xxxiii. 27. The solder (χρυσός and κόλλα, glue, or
κόλλησις) is attributed by Herod. (i. 25) to Glaucus of Chios, a
contemporary of Alyattes. The word _kóllesis_ is variously rendered
‘soldering,’ ‘brazing,’ ‘welding,’ and ‘inlaying.’ Kóllesis was used
to agglutinate metals, and treated with a peculiar alkali (Pliny,
xxxiii. 24). The ‘gold glue’ (_chrysocolla_) is usually understood to
be a hydrosilicate of copper; not to be confounded with the χρυσόκολλα
or borax. The Mycenian goldsmiths soldered with the help of borax
(borate of soda): Professor Landerer, of Athens, found this salt on
an old medal from Ægina. It was called in the Middle Ages, Borax
Venetus, because imported by the Venetians from Persia; and it is the
Tinkal of modern India. According to Pliny, lead cannot be soldered
without tin, or tin without lead, and oil invariably must be used.
Later usage substituted for the latter colophonium and other resins:
we now solder by means of electricity. The same writer makes Nero
use chrysocolla-powder (a siliceous carbonate of copper, a kind of
blue-stone which would turn green by exposure to damp) for strewing the
circus, to give the course the colour of his favourite faction, the
_Prasine_ (green).

[291] The Germans, who delight in German derivatives for European
words, would find _leiton_, &c., not in _luteum_, but in _löthen_
= to unite. There is little doubt, however, that the first English
manufactory of calamine brass at Esher, in Surrey, was set up in the
seventeenth century by Demetrius, a German. In Grimm’s _Dictionary_,
as noticed by Demmin (chap. i), bronze is erroneously called _messing_
(brass).

[292] Derived from ὄρος, οὖρος (mountain), or from Ὀρείος, the
discoverer. Metallic names in Greek are mostly masculine; in Latin and
modern usage, neutral. _Oreichalcum_ or _aurichalcum_, a hybrid word,
became _aurochalcum_ in the ninth century: the last corruption (middle
of the sixteenth century) was _archal_.

[293] _De l’Orichalque._ J. P. Rossignol (_loc. cit._).

[294] Some translate this word ‘yellow frankincense’ (λίβανος)
colour; others derive it from Λίβανος, the Lebanon, and make it male,
_argurolibanus_, while _leucolibanus_ (white) was female. Finally, the
word was explained by the old interpreters to be = ὀρείχαλκος = brass
of Mount (Lebanon).

[295] The tradition of Atlantis, a middle-land in the Atlantic, has
strong claims to our acceptance. The identity of the site with the
‘Dolphin’s Ridge,’ a volcanic formation, and the shallows noted by
H.M.S. ‘Challenger,’ have been ably pleaded in _Atlantis_ (Ignatius
Donnelly; London: Sampson Low, 1882). Perhaps we may trace the vestiges
in Saint Paul’s Rocks, the remarkable group of rocky islets situate in
the equatorial mid-Atlantic. Mr. Darwin supposed the group to be an
isolated example of non-volcanic oceanic insularity; but Prof. Renard
finds the ‘balance of proof decidedly in favour of the volcanic origin
of the rock.’ It will be remembered that Atlantis was dismembered by
earthquakes, eruptions, and subsidence.

[296] Quoted by Percy from Watson’s _Chemical Essays_ (iv. p. 85, 1786).

[297] The artificial mixture of copper (four fifths) and gold
(one-fifth) was called _pyropus_ (Pliny, xxxiv. 2), from its fiery red
tint; it was also made of gold and bronze, and termed _chrysochalcos_,
‘the king of metals.’ _Æs corinthiacum_ (Pliny, xxxiv. 3), or
Corinthian brass, used for mirrors, composed of copper, silver (steel?
zinc?), and gold, was more valuable than gold. According to Pausanias
(ii. 3, § 3), this malleable and ductile metal was tempered in the
Fountain of Pyrene. The vulgar legend, refuted by Pliny, who tells
the tale (xxxiv. 6), dates it from the days of Mummius (B.C. 146). A
medal of Corinthian brass was analysed by the Duc de Luynes. Pliny
(xxxiv. 3) mentions three kinds, _candidum_, _luteum_, and _hepatizon_
(liver-colour), of equal quantities of metal; this probably resembled
our own alloys. Beckmann (_sub voc._ ‘Zinc’ and ‘Tin’) gives a list
of these and other compositions, Mannheim gold, Dutch gold, Prince’s
metal, Bristol brass, &c.

[298] Possibly the Armenian bole (Bol-i-Armani), used in the East as
a flux from time immemorial. The ‘dropping’ or ‘distilling’ (_per
descensum_) must allude to a distillatory or condensing apparatus, and
the ‘false silver’ cannot be mercury, lead, or tin.

[299] Hence _tutaneg_ and _tutanego_, which sometimes meant an alloy
of tin and bismuth. M. Polo (i. 21) describes ‘tutia’ as very good for
the eyes; and his notice of it, and of spodium, reads, according to
Colonel Yule, almost like a condensed translation of Galen’s pompholyx,
produced from cadmia or carbonate of zinc; and spodos, the residue
of the former, which falls on the hearth (_De Simp. Med._ p. ix.).
Matthioli makes pompholyx commonly known in the laboratories by the
Arabic name ‘tutia.’ The ‘tutia’ imported into Bombay from the Gulf is
made from an argillaceous ore of zinc, moulded into tubular cakes, and
baked to a moderate hardness.

[300] Masc. and fem.; the neut. ἤλεκτρον is the purest form. Dr.
Schliemann, noticing that it also means ‘amber’ (_Mycenæ_, p. 204),
derives it from ‘_elek_, signifying resin in Arabic (?), and probably
also in Phœnician (?).’ He found earrings of electrum in the so-called
‘Trojan Stratum,’ 30½ feet below the surface (_Troy_, p. 164). The
_guanin_ or _gianin_ of the Chiriquis was an aururet (electrum) of
19·3 per cent. of pure gold, with specific gravity 11·55. The _tombac_
or _tombag_ of New Granada, used for statuettes, was also a gold of
low standard: 63 gold, 24 silver, 9 copper. Usually ‘tombac’ applies
to an alloy like Mannheim gold; the manufacture was introduced into
Birmingham, still its chief seat, by the Turner family, A.D. 1740.

[301] ‘Elektron,’ however, is generally translated ‘amber’; and it
may be the _harpax_, or drawer, for it occurs in the same verse with
ivory. Amber beads and weapon-handles were amongst Dr. Schliemann’s
finds. Rossignol (p. 347) supposes that electrum, the pale-yellow or
amber-coloured alloy of gold and silver, gave a name to the gum amber.

[302] This text, stating a truth concerning native gold, suggests
amongst many that the ancients knew the _départ_, or separation, of
metals. It has been vehemently doubted whether they could mineralise
the white metal; that is, convert it to sulphide and allow the gold to
subside.

[303] Rossignol quotes Zonaras, Suidas, and John Pediasimus to prove
this position.

[304] We now lacquer with shell-lac dissolved in proof-spirit and
coloured with ‘dragon’s blood.’

[305] The lead was found in even larger proportions. See chap. xiii.

[306] In my commentary on Camoens (_Camoens: his Life and his
Lusiads_), and again in _To the Gold Coast for Gold_ (i. 17), I have
attempted to identify Western Tarshish or Tartessus with Carteia in
the Bay of Gibraltar. Newton makes Melcarth ‘King of Carteia’; but the
word may mean either ‘city-king’ (_Malik-el-Karyat_), or ‘earth-king’
(_Malik-el-Arz_).

[307] The well-known anthropologist, M. G. de Mortillet, holds that
the oldest type of bronze celt in France, Switzerland, and Belgium, is
that with straight flanges at the sides. This was followed by the celt
with transverse stop-ridge, by the true winged tool, by the socketed
adaptation, and, lastly, by the simple flat tool wanting rib or flange,
wing or socket, and formed of pure copper as well as of bronze.
Archæologists usually determine the last form to be the earliest; but
M. de Mortillet judges otherwise from the conditions under which the
finds occur.

[308] This weapon (_gladius_) is a Sword-blade, double-edged or
single-edged, straight or curved, and 4–9 inches long, much used in the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. It originated from the old practice
of binding the sickle, scythe, axe, hatchet, or Sword to the end of a
pole and thus forming a pike.

[309] The Amazons of the Mausoleum (Newton, _Halicarnassus_, p. 235)
are armed with axe, bow, and Sword; the Greeks with javelins and Swords.

[310] The Massagetæ (greater Jats or Goths) are opposed to the Thyssa
(or lesser) Getæ, and both used the _sagaris_. But while some authors
translate the word _securis_, others call it a ‘kind of Sword,’ and
others confuse it with the ἀκινάκης, the _acinaces_ which the Greek
mentions separately (iv. 62, viii. 67). Strabo (xi. 8) connects the
Massagetæ (Goths) with the _Sacæ_ (Saxons), and Major Jähn derives
_Sacæ_ (the _Shaka_ of the Hindus) from _Saighead_ = _Sagitta_. The
term ‘_Saxones_’ was later than the age of Tacitus, and we first
find it in the days of Antoninus Pius. ‘Brevis gladius apud illos
(_Saxones_) _Saxo_ vocatur’ suggests that the _Seax_ was connected with
the race of old (_Trans. Anthrop. Instit._ May 1880).

[311] _Loc. cit._ p. 43.

[312] Egypt. _akhu_, Lat. _ascia_, Germ. _Axt_. The oldest form is
‘_aks_’ (_securis_), the bipennis, ‘_dversahs_,’ and the dolabrum
‘_barte_.’ In Lower Saxon _axt_ is ‘_exe_,’ a congener of our ‘axe.’

[313] The word is variously written and explained.

[314] A _silepe_ from the armoury of King Mosesh was shown at the
National Exhibition amongst objects from Natal (Col. A. Lane Fox,
_Cat._ p. 145).

[315] Par Lacombe (Paris, Hachette, 1868).

[316] I have again noticed the _sahs_, _seax_, _sax_, and _scramasax_
in chap. xiii.

[317] Our ‘bill’ is the German _Beil_, the _securis_, or axe. Both
words appear to me congeners of the Greek βέλος, Sword or dart, showing
a missile-age, from βάλλειν, to throw; not, as Jähn thinks, from the
Sanskrit _bhil_. Robert Barret (1598) preferred the pike, although
owning that the bill had done good service. Even of late years Messrs.
John Mitchel and Meagher (‘of the Sword’) advised the wretched Irish
peasants to make pikes out of reaping-hooks.

[318] _Prehistoric Times_, p. 20. The Dublin Museum contains 1,283
articles of the Bronze Age.

[319] I assume as a type, the bronze Sword (Tafel iv.) in _Die
Alterthümer von Hallstätten, Salzburg, &c._ by Friedrich Simony (Wien,
1851).

[320] Pliny, xxxiv. 39.

[321] The word comes from the root which gave the Persian _áhan_; the
Irish _iaran_ or _yarann_; the Welsh _hiarn_; the Armorican _uarn_; the
Gothic _eisarn_; the Danish _iern_; the Swedish _iarn_; the Cimbric
_jara_; the German _Eisen_, and the Latin _ferrum_, with the neo-Latin
_ferro_, _hierro_ (Span.), &c. From _iaran_ also we derive _Harnisch_,
harness.

[322] The unfortunate Cretans gained the name of ‘ever liars’ (ἀεὶ
ψεῦσται) for telling what was probably the truth. They showed in their
island the grave of Jupiter, who must have been originally some hero or
chief deified after his death—evidently one of the origins of worship.
The evil report began with Callimachus (_Hymn. in Jov._ 8); and was
continued in the proverbial τρία κάππα κάκιστα (Krete, Kappadocia, and
Kilikia). Hence the syllogistic puzzle of Eubulides: ‘Epimenides said
that the Cretans are liars: Epimenides is a Cretan: _ergo_, Epimenides
is a liar: _ergo_, the Cretans are not liars: _ergo_, Epimenides is not
a liar.’

[323] Chap. iv. The Chalybs of Justin (xliv. 3) is a river between
the Ana (Guadiana) and the Tagus; called by Ptolemy and Martianus,
Κάλιπους or Κάλιπος. Æschylus alludes to the original Chalybes when
he personifies the Sword as the ‘Chalybian stranger,’ and in the same
tragedy (_Seven against Thebes_) he entitles it ‘the hammer-wrought
Scythian steel.’

[324] ‘To the abundance of iron we may attribute the fact that the
Africans appear to have passed direct from the stone implements, that
are now found in the soil, to those of iron, without passing through
the intermediate bronze period which, in Egypt and other countries,
intervened between the ages of stone and iron.’—_Anthropol. Coll._ pp.
128–134.

[325] ‘The High Antiquity of Iron and Steel,’ a valuable paper read
before the Philos. Soc. Glasgow, printed in _Iron_ (1875–76), and
kindly sent to me by the editor, Mr. Nursey; also _The Prehistoric Use
of Iron and Steel_ (Trübner, London, 1877), from which Mr. Day has
allowed me to make extracts.

[326] The question is to be determined by facts, not theories. Hitherto
we are justified in believing, from the skeletons dug up at great
depths, or found in caves associated with the mammals which they
destroyed, that Man in prehistoric times was of a low physical, and
therefore mental type. We shall believe the opposite view when we are
shown ancient crania equal, if not superior, to those of the present
day—relics that will revive the faded glories of ‘Father Adam’ and
‘Mother Eve.’ But, meanwhile, we cannot be expected to believe in _ipse
dixits_, inspired or uninspired.

[327] For instance, in North-Western Europe, the early iron age began
about A.D. 250, according to Konrad Englehardt (_Denmark in the early
Iron Age_, p. 4, London, 1866), quoted by Mr. Day.

[328] _Egypt’s Place in Universal History_, vol. v.; London, Longmans,
1867, with additions by Samuel Birch, LL.D.

[329] When Laplace made meteorolites ejections from lunar volcanoes,
Chladni suggested that they were masses of metallic matter, moving in
irregular orbits through interplanetary, and possibly interstellar,
space.

[330] This word is tortured by non-Orientalists into various ill-forms.
The Arabs write it جيزة (_Jízeh_), and the Egyptians pronounce it
_Gízeh_, not _Ghizeh_.

[331] A full-sized drawing appeared in vol. vii. of _Proceedings of the
Phil. Soc. Glasgow_; and was repeated by Mr. Day in his book, Pl. II.
he also gives Belzoni’s sickle, Pl. I.

[332] When visiting the ‘Tombs of the Soldans,’ Cairo, I found a slab
of blue basalt bearing the cartouche of Khufu, used as a threshold for
one of the buildings. The characters had been partly erased; but the
material was too hard for the barbarians who had misused it.

[333] I have elsewhere noticed (chap. iv.) the colours of metals in the
painted tombs of Thebes, and the blue (cyanus-colour) of the butcher’s
steel. The history of this homely article is instructive. For hundreds
of years it retained, in England and elsewhere, its original shape, an
elongated cone. At last some ‘cute citizen had the idea of breaking the
surface into four edges, and of hardening it with nickel. The simple
improvement now fits it for sharpening everything from a needle to a
razor: it thus frees us from the ‘needy knife-grinder,’ who right well
deserved to be needy, as he disadorned everything he touched.

[334] _Antiquity of the Use of Metals, especially Iron, among the
Egyptians_, p. 18 (London, 1868). Also _Ueber die Priorität des Eisens
oder der Bronze in Ostasien_, by Dr. M. Müller (_Trans. Vienna Anthrop.
Soc._ vol. ix.).

[335] I assume this date because it marks when the spring equinox
(vernal colure) occurred in the Taurus-sign. The earliest of the six
epochs proposed by Egyptologists is B.C. 5702 (Böckh), and the latest
is B.C. 3623 (Bunsen); the mean being B.C. 4573, and the difference a
matter of 2079 years (Brugsch, i. 30).

[336] The Table of Sakkarah (Memphis), found about the end of 1864
by the late Mariette Pasha, dates from Ramses the Great (thirteenth
century B.C.), and makes Mibampes the first of his fifty-six ancestors.
No. 2 is the new tablet of Abydos, discovered, also in 1864, by Herr
Dümmichen; it enabled scholars to supply the illegible name in No.
3, the priceless Turin Papyrus, the hieratic Canon of the Ptolemies.
Mirbampes, Mirbapen, or Mi-ba of the monuments is, called in Manetho
‘Miebides, son of Usarphædus’ (_Cory’s Fragments_, p. 112).

[337] Of Ramses II., who, with his father Seti, represents the Greek
Sesostris, the Sesesu-Ra of the monuments. (Brugsch, _Hist._ ii. 53–62:
see my chap. viii.) Prof. G. Ebers has made this Egyptian proto-Homerid
the hero of his romance, _Uarda_ (i.e. Wardah, ‘the Rose’).

[338] _De Iside et Osiride._ He quotes Manetho the Priest, who wrote
during the reign of the first Ptolemy, and who told unpleasant truths
concerning Moses, the Hebrews, and the Exodus.

[339] The limestones of Carniola produce heaps of pisoliths, which
require only smelting; and hence, probably, the early Iron Age of
Noricum and its neighbourhood.

[340] They suggest the magnetic and titaniferous iron sands of Wicklow,
of New Zealand, of Australia, and of a variety of sites mentioned in
_To the Gold Coast for Gold_, ii. 111.

[341] The Naphtuhim of Scripture.

[342] _Percy’s Metallurgy_, p. 874, first edit.

[343] _Proc. Soc. Antiq._ second series, vol. v., June 1873. Mr.
Hartland added rubbings of various Pharaohnic stones, hoping to ‘show
how little the mind of civilised man has developed during 3,000 years.’
A pleasant lesson to humanity! But after all thirty centuries are a
mere section of the civilisation which began in Egypt.

[344] The Corsican is simply a blacksmith’s forge. The Catalan has a
heavy hammer and blowing-machine; if the _trompe_ be used, a fall of
water is required for draught. The Stückofen is a Catalan extended
upwards in the form of a quadrangular or circular shaft, 10–16 feet
high.

[345] It is to be noted that flint implements were found all about
these works: Mr. Hartland brought home from them silex arrow-heads.
The late lamented Professor Palmer observed them in other parts of
the Pharan peninsula, and I made a small collection in Midian. In the
_Journ. of the Anthrop. Soc._ 1879, I showed, following Mr. Ouvry,
Sir John Lubbock, and others, that Cairo is surrounded by ancient
flint-ateliers. M. Lartet explored them in Southern Palestine; I picked
them up near Bethlehem (_Unexplored Syria_, ii. 289). The Abbé Richard
and others traced them at Elbireh (in the Tiberiad); between Tabor and
the Lake; and, lastly, at Galgal, where Joshua circumcised. Lastly, my
late friend Charles F. Tyrwhitt-Drake, when travelling with me, came
upon an atelier east of Damascus. I have noticed General Pitt-Rivers’
great Egyptian discovery in chap. ii.

[346] _Hek_ or _hak_ (chief) has a suspicious resemblance to _Shaykh_
and _sos_ to _sús_, the mare, characteristically ridden by the Bedawin.
In old Egyptian _sos_ is a buffalo.

[347] Movers (_Phönicier_, ii. 3), quoted by Dr. Evans (_Bronze, &c._
5), finds bronze (copper?) 44 and iron 13 times in the Pentateuch, and
he theorises upon the later introduction of the latter. But when was
the Pentateuch written in its present form?

[348] Rougemont, _L’Age du Bronze_, pp. 188 _et seq._

[349] Volney, _Travels_, ii. 438.

[350] Much of it, however, was the amygdaloid greenstone, called in
English ‘toad-stone,’ a corruption of the Germ. _Todstein_.

[351] _Speaker’s Commentary_, i. 831.

[352] This term seems first to have been used by Orosius (i. 2) in our
fourth century.

[353] In chap. ix. I shall attempt to show that Naharayn (the dual of
Nahr, a river) is also applied to Palestine in such phrases as ‘Tunipe
(Daphne-town) of Naharayn.’

[354] Dr. Percy found that certain Assyrian bronzes had been cast round
a support of the more tenacious metal, thus combining strength with
lightness.

[355] M. F. Lenormant (‘Les Noms d’Airain et du Cuivre dans les
deux Langues ... de la Chaldée et de l’Assyrie, _Trans. Soc. Bibl.
Archæology_, vi. part 2) renders _parzillu_, iron; _abar_, lead;
_shiparru_ (Arab. صفر, brass), bronze; _anaku_, tin; _eru_ or _erudu_,
copper or bronze (Arab. ايار, copper or brass); _kashpu_, silver;
and _kurashu_, gold. The learned author discovers in the cuneiforms
repeated mention of the ‘ships of Mákan’ and the Kur Makannata
(mountain of Makná), which he translates ‘Pays de Mákan’: finding
it a great centre of copper, he is inclined to confound it with the
so-called Sinaitic Peninsula. I have only to refer readers to ‘Makná’
in my three volumes on the Land of Midian.

[356] Akkad is upper, Sumir lower Babylonia.

[357] _The Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World_, vol. i.
p. 62. London, 1871.

[358] The first period extended from B.C. 1500 to 909. The second from
B.C. 909 to 745: the most marking names being Assurnazirpal = ‘Ashur
(arbiter of the gods) protects his son,’ who built the north-west
palace of Nimrúd, B.C. 884; and his son Shalmanezer II. of the Black
Obelisk (Brit. Museum), B.C. 850. The third period (B.C. 745–555)
numbered Tiglath-Pileser II., B.C. 745–727 (a single generation before
the first Olympic, B.C. 776, when the mythic age of Greece emerges
into the historical); Sennacherib (705–681); Esarhaddon (680–668),
Assur-bani-pal (668–640); Nebuchadnezzar in 604–561, a contemporary of
Solon (B.C. 594); Nergalsharuzur (B.C. 557); and the last Nabonidus
(B.C. 555). Herodotus (B.C. 450) wrote about a century after the end
of the third period, Ctesias in B.C. 395, and Berosus in B.C. 280. We
have, it is clear, absolutely no historic proof that ‘the patriarchal
system of communities first locally developed itself at the mouth of
the Euphrates Valley,’ or began in any part of the great Mesopotamian
plain.

[359] Rev. B. H. Cooper (_loc. cit._) would derive ‘Ida’ from the
Semitic יר (_yad_, hand), and make the Daktyls, or fingers, its peaks.

[360] I shall reserve for chap. xi. notices of iron by the classic and
sacred poets of Greece.

[361] _Troy and its Remains_, p. 362; the analysis by M. Damour of
Lyons.

[362] The theory of Stephani, Schulze, and others concerning the
Byzantine date and Herulian origin of the Mycenæan graves, has been
treated in England with some respect by Mr. A. S. Murray and Mr. Perry.

[363] According to Pausanias, Alyattes, the Lydian king (ob. B.C. 570),
dedicated to his god, amongst other offerings, an inlaid iron saucer.

[364] Neither from this nor from any other passage can we ascertain
whether the Chalybes tribe gave its name to _chalybs_ (steel), or
whether the material worked named the workmen.

[365] Colonel Yule (_M. Polo_, ii. 96) remarks that in the Middle Ages
steel was regarded as a distinct natural species made of another ore,
and relates how a native to whom an English officer had explained the
process of tempering replied, ‘What, would you have me believe that if
I put an ass into the furnace it will come out a horse?’

[366] _Acies_ is properly the edge, that is, the steeled or cutting
part of an instrument, which may be case-hardened. Hence the later
words _aciare_, to steel, and _aciarium_, sharpening steel; hence, too,
the neo-Latin _acier_, _acciaio_, &c.

[367] See chap. xiii. Dr. Evans (_Bronze_, 275) says, ‘How far their
process of burying iron until part of it had rusted away would, in the
case of charcoal iron, leave the remaining portion more of the nature
of steel, I am unable to say.’ It will appear that this burying is
often spoken of; I have never seen it practised.

[368] Regulus (the ‘little king’) is the residue of pure metal purged
of its dross; the old alchemists so entitled it because they ever
expected to find the great king—Gold.

[369] At the Anthropological Congress of Austrian Salzburg (Aug. 1881)
the tools attributed to the ‘Keltic’ miners were almost the same as
those which I had seen near the Wrekin.

[370] Ingénieur des Mines: ‘Gisements métallifères du District de
Carthagène (Espagne),’ Liège, 1875; a contribution to the _Proc.
Geolog. Soc. Belgium_; and the result of extensive geological and
mineralogical observation. The coloured map shows the strata-sequence
(actual and in ideal order) to be tertiary limestone, iron-ore
(carbonated, manganiferous, or plumbiferous); schistes; blende;
schistes; silicated iron and schistes.

[371] _Lectures on the Science of Language_, pp. 254–55, vol. ii.,
edit. 1873.

[372] _Chips from a German Workshop_ (set up in England), p. 47, vol.
ii., edit. 1868.

[373] Mr. Day (_General Table of Terms_, given at end of this chapter)
quotes as ‘oldest Sanskrit’ two names of iron, आर (_ár_ or _ára_),
meaning the planet Mars (_Ares_) or Saturn; iron (oxide of iron,
ironstone?), brass (copper?); and अयस्, _áyas_ (whence _ayaskant_,
a loadstone, and _ayaskár_, a smith), a word already noticed in
connection with _æs_. But Mr. Day adds to his ‘oldest Sanskrit’
‘probably B.C. 1500’; and here again we recognise the master-touch of
the subtle race—

                      ‘for profound
    And solid lying much renowned.’

[374] Report of Gen. A. Cunningham (Archæolog. Survey, 1861–62). It
speaks highly for Anglo-Indian _vis inertiæ_ and incuriousness when we
are told that the ‘whole length of the pillar is unknown,’ and when
every observer’s account of it differs in essentials.

[375] The _savant_ who first translated the inscription _Indian
Antiquities_, vol. i. p. 319. The dates vary between the tenth century
B.C. and A.D. 1052 (!).

[376] The Persian _haft-júsh_ (seven boilings), referred to by Ibn
Batutah in Colonel Yule’s letter, p. 145 (Day, p. 153).

[377] Quoted by Mr. Day (p. 24) from the _United States Railroad and
Mining Register_.

[378] Mr. Day (quoting Fergusson’s _Illustrations of Ancient
Architecture in Hindostan_, London, 1848) cautions his readers that
‘Mr. Fergusson’s dates are not to be relied on, however important his
writings unquestionably are in other respects’ (p. 168). Here again
we see the misleading influence of the Sanskritists, who have allowed
themselves to be cozened by the ‘mild Hindu.’ Mr. Day inclines (p. 151)
to the tenth century B.C. (!), when the peoples of India were, we have
reason to believe, the merest savages.

[379] The modern Hindus call steel _Paldah_, from the Persian _Pulád_,
the Arab. _Fulád_. They apply to Spanish steel the terms _Ispát_,
_Sukhela_ and _Tolad_. Their favourite trial of Sword-metal is with a
bar of soft gold, which should leave a streak.

[380] Colonel Yule does not consider the word genuine, and with reason,
as the Indo-Phœnician (‘Safá’) alphabet has no _w_ and no _z_. The
word first appears in ‘Experiments and Observations to investigate the
Nature of a Kind of Steel manufactured at Bombay, and there called
_Wootz_,’ ... by G. Pearson, M.D. (paper read before the Royal Soc.,
June 11, 1795). He notes that ‘Dr. Scott of Bombay, in a letter to
the President, acquainted him that he had sent over “specimens of a
substance known by the name of wootz, which is considered to be a
kind of steel, and is in high esteem among the Indians”’ (p. 322). In
Wilkinson’s _Engines of War_ (1841) we read (pp. 203–206), ‘The cakes
of steel are called _wootz_.’

Dr. E. Balfour states that _uchhá_ and _níchhá_ (in Hindustani ‘high’
and ‘low’) are used in the Canarese provinces to denote superior and
inferior descriptions of articles, and that _Wootz_ may be a corruption
of the former. Colonel Yule and his coadjutor in the _Glossary of
Indian Terms_, the late lamented Dr. Burnell, hold that it originated
in some clerical error or misreading, perhaps from _wook_ representing
the Canarese _ukku_ = steel.

[381]

  C. {combined               1·333
     {uncombined             0·312
  Si.                        0·045
  S.                         0·181
  As.                        0·037
  Fe. (by difference)       98·092
                           ———————
                           100·000

Phillips, _Metallurgy_, p. 317. Faraday found in Wootz 0·0128–0·0695
per cent. of aluminium, and attributed the ‘damask’ of the blades to
its presence. Karsten, after three experiments, and Mr. T. H. Henry,
failed to detect it, and suggested that it may have been derived from
intermingled slag containing silicate of alumina (Percy, _Iron, &c._
pp. 183–84).

[382] _Archiv. Port. Oriental._ fascic. iii. p. 318.

[383] M. Keller (_Pres. Soc. Ant. Switz._) notes that crudely formed
lumps and quadrangular blocks of malleable iron, double pyramids
weighing 10–16 lbs., have been found in prehistoric sites. They were
probably produced in primitive Catalans. Pieces of iron slag worked by
the Kelts were discovered in 1862 on the Cheviot Hills.

[384] The cupel (of old copel) is the French _coupelle_, little coupe.
The muffle is a metal cupel.

[385] This is the process of working Wootz given by Mr. Heath; others
pack the metal with finely-chopped stalks of asclepias as well as
cassia. Mr. Mallet has described the Indian manufacture of large iron
masses in _The Engineer_, vol. xxxiii. pp. 19, 20. Beckmann (_loc.
cit. sub v._ ‘Steel’) notices the bloomeries or furnaces. The _Penny
Cyclopædia_ and Ure’s _Dict. of Chemistry_ (the latter the best),
London, Longmans, 1839, may also be consulted. Dr. Percy gives a
long account (pp. 254–66) of iron-smelting in India from Mr. Howard
Blackwell. He notes three kinds of furnaces:—

  1. Rude, like chimney-pots; used by the hill-tribes of Western
  India, the Deccan, and the Carnatic.
  2. Simple Catalan forge    } Central India and the
  3. Early form of Stückofen } N.W. Provinces.

The anvil is a square iron without beak. Three kinds of Indian bellows
are noticed (pp. 255–56). The people, who love _stare super antiquas
vias_, ignore the hot blast: this contrivance causes a more active
combustion, an ‘ultimate fact’ as yet unexplained.

[386] Report of 1852.

[387] The dialect is much more ancient than we usually suppose:
it existed long before Akbar the Great and his ‘Urdú zabán’ (camp
language), for we find that the poet Chand wrote in it during the
twelfth century.

[388] As will appear in Part II. there are many processes for making
the Damascus; the exact markings, however, are best produced by that
noticed above.

[389] Pp. 270–3, from the descriptions of Mr. W. T. Blanford, of the
Geol. Survey of India.

[390] Pp. 273–5; borrowed from _Travels in Borneo_, by Dr. C. A. L. M.
Schauer during 1843–47, p. 109.

[391] The Swords of the Borneo Dyaks and the islanders of Timor and
Rotti are photographed by the Curator of the Christy Collection.

[392] Mr. Day quotes, book i., the Tribute of Yu, Legge’s _Chinese
Classics_, vol. iii. part i. p. 121 (Trübner, London, 1865).

[393] The ‘Celestial Empire,’ according to her annals, began B.C.
100,000–80,000; the date being probably astronomical, or rather
astrological, founded, like the four Hindu æras, upon retrograde
calculations. The first cycle of 60 years is attributed to the Emperor
Hwang-tí, and its initiation to the 61st year of his reign, in B.C.
2637 (the Twelfth Dynasty of Egypt?). The first historical dates are
given in B.C. 651, a century after the foundation of Rome: these
figures afford a curious contrast between pretensions and proof. But as
Englishmen after long residence ‘grow black’ in Africa, and have become
semi-Hinduised in India, so in China they have allowed themselves
to be imposed upon by the ‘magna fabulositas,’ the marvellous
self-sufficiency of astute semi-barbarians. ‘China is a sea that salts
all the rivers which flow into it.’ Yet I am curious to ascertain
by actual travel if China ever possessed a centre of civilisation
independent of what she received from the West; in other words,
non-Egyptian.

[394] Of the 214 keys or radicals. The first three arithmetical figures
are lines disposed horizontally, while the Egyptians wrote them
vertically. In his Terminal Table (affixed to this chapter) Mr. Day
assigns Chinese to the ‘Sporadic or Allophyllian family.’ I believe it
to be the oldest and, as far as we know, the original form of Turanian
speech, a kind of _tertium quid_ deduced from the so-called ‘Aryan’ and
‘Semitic’ elements of Egyptian.

[395] _Trans. Bib. Archæol._ 1879. Sayce’s _Grammar_ gives 522 Assyrian
characters.

[396] The lump of iron worked into a mass more or less rectangular
is called a bloom, from the Saxon _bloma_, metal in mass (Bosworth):
_Bloma ferri_ occurs in the Domesday Book. Hence ancient furnaces were
called _bloomeries_; the Elizabethan spelling is a _bloomary_. The
blooms were beaten out to bars.

[397] In Persia I was told that this was one of the ‘secrets’ of making
the finest Khorasáni blades.

[398] It followed the Mongols and preceded the Manchow Tartars, who
still reign.

[399] This process of converting iron to steel is first described in
‘_Alchemiæ Gebri_ (El-Gabr), _Arabis philosophi solertissimi, Libri,
&c._, Joan. Petreius Nurembergen̄. denuo Bernæ excudi faciebat. anno
1545.’ The Arab, known to Albertus Magnus, flourished in the eighth
to the ninth century. According to Beckmann, he noticed the ore
_cineritii_ (cupellation) _et cementi_ (cementation) _tolerans_. The
mixture is usually of sal ammoniac, borax, alum, and fine salt: the
many varieties are described by Percy, Ure, and a host of others.
Compare also Ure’s account of cast-steel and of shear-steel, the latter
so called because cloth-shears were forged of it.

[400] At least it would so appear from the following passage (p. 176):
‘When we examine the etymology of ‘pole,’ or ‘pillar,’ thus—Saxon,
_pol_ or _pal_; German, _Pfahl_; Danish, _paal_ or _pol_; Swedish,
_pale_; Welsh _pawl_—we arrive at the Latin _palus_, which, besides
signifying a pole or stake, is also the φαλλός of the Greeks,
_Mahadeva_ (?) or _Linga_ (?) of the Hindoos, _Bel_ or _Baal_ (?)
of the Chaldeans, _Yakhveh_ (?) of the Canaanites, _Ti-mohr_ of the
ancient Irish, and _Teih-mo_ of the Chinese,’ &c.

[401] _Notes from Mr. Henderson’s Diary during a Ramble through Shansi,
in March 1874_, published by Mr. Day (Appendix D, p. 251). Colonel
Yule (_Marco Polo_, ii. 429), alluding to these enormous deposits of
coal and metal, says: ‘Baron Richtofen, in the paper which we quote
from, indicates the revolution in the deposit of the world’s wealth
and power, to which such facts, combined with other characteristics of
China, point as probable; a revolution so vast that its contemplation
seems like that of a planetary catastrophe.’

[402] _Les Mondes_, tome xxvi., Dec. 1871.

[403] _Polynesian Researches_ (Rev. William Ellis).

[404] _Researches into the Early History of Mankind_, p. 167.

[405] Unless greatly mistaken, I have seen iron tools made of hæmatite
near the old Gongo Socco gold-mines of Minas Geraes, in the Brazil.
Worked hæmatite is also mentioned in Cyprus by General Palma (di
Cesnola). See chap. ix.

[406] From _Nature_ (Sept. 30, 1875); quoted by Mr. Day (pp. 217–19).

[407] _Flint Chips_, by Edmund T. Stevens, p. 553 (London: Bell &
Daldy, 1870).

[408] The ‘plummet’ is figured (No. cxxxii.) in the _American
Naturalist_ (vol. vi. p. 643).

[409] The people of Camarones River, Bight of Biafra, work up old cask
and bale hoops into very creditable edge-tools and weapons, hoes,
knives, and Swords (Rev. G. Grenfell, _Proc. Roy. Geolog. Soc._ Oct.
1882).

[410] The origin of the modern process is still debated. Agricola
(_nat._ 1494, _ob._ 1555) notices both malleable and cast iron.
Dr. Percy (p. 578) quotes from Mr. M. A. Lower (_Contributions to
Literature, &c._ 1854) that Burwash Church, Sussex, contains a
cast-iron slab of the fourteenth century with ornamental cross and
inscription in relief. The same authority declares that iron cannon
were first cast at Buxted (Buckstead in Sussex) by Philip Hoge or Hogge
in 1543 (35 Henry VIII.); and that his successor, Thomas Johnson, made
ordnance pieces for the Duke of Cumberland weighing 6,000 lbs.

[411] Dr. Percy (pp. 764 _et seq._) notices the three processes of
making steel (iron containing carbon in certain proportions): 1. The
addition of carbon to malleable iron; 2. The partial decarburisation of
cast iron; and 3. The addition of malleable iron to cast iron.

[412] I borrow from O Muata Cazembe (Kazembe, the King) a rude sketch
(p. 38) of one of the better kinds of iron-smelting furnaces used by
the extensive Maráve race dwelling north of the Zambeze (River of
Fish), which Europeans persist in miswriting _Zambesi_. The bellows, it
will be remarked, are almost of European shape; but this peculiarity
may be attributed to the artist.

[413] _Travels_, pp. 275–77 (London, 1749).

[414] Colonel A. Lane Fox (_Prim. Warfare_, i. 38) believes that the
‘Fans and Kafirs (Caffres) are totally different races.’ But both
speak dialects of the same tongue, the great South African language.
Modern African travellers have traced community of customs from north
to south, and from east to west, suggesting extensive intercourse, in
former days, throughout the length and breadth of the Dark Continent.

[415] _Across Africa_, chap. xix., July 1874 (Daldy, Isbister & Co.,
London, 1877).

[416] _Missionary Travels_, p. 402 (London, 1857).

[417] _Anthrop. Coll._ pp. 128–134. ‘Specimens illustrating the
geographical distribution of corrugated iron blades, or blades with an
ogee section, double skin bellows, and iron work.’ As regards the ogee
section, the author should have compared it with the arrow-heads whose
plane sides are ‘bellied on a twist’ to cause rotation or rifling.

[418] Diogenes Laertius tells us of Anacharsis only that he ‘wrote also
about war.’

[419] As all savage races show, the original anchor was a stone first
bound round like a celt, and then pierced for a rope: hence the
‘fugitive stone’ used by the Argonauts as an anchor (Pliny, xxxvii.
24). In the spring of 1880 eight stone anchors of modern shape were
found in Piræus harbour, and were sent to the Nautical School at Athens.

[420] Wilkinson, i. 174. Mr. Day, pp. 86, 87.

[421] Hence, too, we see our ‘bellows’ = ‘bellies.’

[422] This word is curiously corrupted in Europe. It is formed upon the
model of Dár-Wadái, &c.; and means the abode, region, home (_Dár_) of
the For tribe. My lamented friend General Purdy (Pasha) formerly of the
United Slates Army, admirably surveyed it, and died at Cairo in 1881.

[423] _Vulgo_ Kattywár; described in 1842 by Captain (the late Sir G.
Le Grand) Jacob in his _Report on Guzerat_ (Gujarát).

[424] The sticks correspond with the strings on the bellows of the
Egyptian monuments.

[425] _Iron_, Jan. 8, 1876.

[426] I observe that M. Terrien de la Couperie has lately derived the
oldest civilisation of China from Chaldæo-Babylonia of the Akkadian
Ages, B.C. 2400–2300.

[427] Major Jähns (p. 416) would derive _Schwert_ (= _das Sausende_,
_Schwirrende_, i.e. whizzing) from the Sansk. _svar_, noise; and
considers it originally a missile pure and simple. He quotes Isidore,
who explains _rhomphæa_ by _wafan_; _Schwert_ and _framea_ = _asta vel
gladius_; _ensis_ = _hevas_, _hevassa_; _mucro_ = _swert_, _gladius_
= _wafan_; _culter_ = _wafansahs_, _sahse_. In the hebraising days
_Sword_ was derived from Sharat, to scratch, and _Sabre_ from Shabar,
to shiver.

[428] Of the Flamberge and the ‘flamboyant,’ or wavy blade, more
hereafter.

[429] Muratori (_Antiq._ ii. 487) notes, ‘_Spatam sive spontonem_, and
_sponto_, _spunto_, i.e. _pugio_’ (Adelung). Of _spatha_ more to come.

[430] Or ‘_die Schneide_,’ the older forms being _ekke_, _egge_; while
‘_valz_’ was the middle section of the two-handed Sword.

[431] ‘Chape,’ derived from _capa_, and a congener of ‘cap’ and ‘cape,’
is differently used by authors. Some apply it to the mouthpiece or ring
at the top of the sheath; others to the metal crampet, bouterolle,
or ferule at the scabbard-tip, and others to the guard-plate. In
Durfey (_The Marriage-Hater Matched_) we find ‘the hilt, the knot, the
scabbard, the _chape_, the belt, and the buckles’ (of a Sword). Skinner
explains it as _vaginæ mucro ferreus_. Mr. Fairholt defines _chape_
to be the guard-plate or cross-bar at the junction of grip and hilt.
Shakespeare, who knew the Sword, speaks of the ‘_chape_ of his dagger’
(_All’s Well &c._ iv. 3) and ‘an old rusty Sword with a broken hilt
and _chapelesse_’ (_Taming of the Shrew_, iii. 2). Commentators mostly
explain this by ‘without a catch to hold it.’ Dr. Evans (_Bronze, &c._
chap. viii.) has exhaustively described the bronze chapes (bouterolles)
in the British Islands.

[432] A congener of our ‘quill,’ from the Lat. _caulis_, a stalk.
Littré is not satisfactory: ‘Quillon (_ki-llon_, ll mouillées), s.m.
Partie de la monture du sabre ou de l’épée, située du côté opposé aux
branches, et dont l’extrémité est arrondie. Dérivé de quille’ (cone)
‘par assimilation de forme’ (in fact, incrementative of) ‘quille.
Etym. Génev. _quille_; de l’anc. haut-allem. _Kegil_; allem. _Kegel_,
objet allongé en forme conique, _quille_.’ Burn translates _quillon_
‘cross-bar of the hilt of an infantry or light-cavalry Sword.’

[433] This must not be written, as by some English authors, _pas
d’ane_. ‘_Pas d’âne_, instrument avec lequel on maintient ouverte
la bouche du cheval pour l’examiner.’ Littré has: ‘_Pas d’âne_, nom
donné, dans les épées du xvi^{ème} siècle, à des pièces de la garde
qui sont en forme d’anneau, et qui vont des quillons à la lame. “Le
Seigneur le prit et mit un pied sur la lame ... alors Collinet s’écria:
Venez voir, messieurs, le grand miracle que l’on fait à mon épée; je
l’ai apportée ici avec une simple poignée et sans garde défensive, et
voilà maintenant que l’on y met le plus beau pas d’âne du monde.”’
_Francion_, vi. p. 237: ‘Pas d’âne, nom vulgaire du tussilage, à cause
de la feuille.’

[434] The Scottish basket-hilt, however, requires improvement, as it
does not allow free play to hand or wrist.

[435] The word is originally the Persian _Shamshír_ (شمشير); but as
the Greeks have no _sh_ sound, it made its way into Europe curiously
disguised. Jean Chartier (temp. Charles VII.) says, ‘_Sauveterres ou
cimeterres qui sont manière d’espée à la Turque_.’ _Sauveterre_ became
in Italian _salvaterra_; and in England _scymitar_ was further degraded
to _semitarge_. I have no objection to _scimitar_, but _scymitar_ is
the older form.

[436] See note at the end of this chapter.

[437] As usual, the diagram is an exaggeration. It directs the
thrusting weapon too low, at the antagonist’s breast, not his eye; nor
is it necessary to raise the hand so high in order to deliver the cut.

[438] Quoted from Mr. John Latham by Colonel A. Lane Fox, _Anthrop.
Coll._ p. 171. Concerning the drawing cut and its reverse, the
thrusting cut, I shall have more to say when treating of the ‘Damascus’
blade in Part II.

[439] The section of the modern weapon shows that the _baïonnette Gras_
is fit only for the thrust; and, as it stops its own cut, it is useless
for the menial and servile offices in which the Yataghan-bayonet,
like the old _coupe-choux_ Sword, did yeoman’s service. I can see no
improvement upon the old-fashioned triangular bayonet, which amongst us
has been superseded by the short Enfield Sword-bayonet. To the latter
I should prefer even the bowie-knife bayonet, of which the Washington
Arsenal was once full, and which has been used even lately in the
United States. None but practical soldiers realise the fact that the
bayonet is meant to be a bayonet, not a Sword, nor a dagger, nor a
chopper, nor a saw.

[440] Mr. Wareing Faulder (Exhibition of Industrial Art, Manchester,
June and July, 1881, _Catalogue_, p. 24) suggests that the Colichemarde
‘fell into disuse probably in consequence of its costliness, combined
with its inelegant appearance when sheathed.’

[441] Captain George Chapman, in his _Foil Practice, &c._, a book which
will appear in the ‘Bibliography’ (Part III.), rightly distinguishes
between the triangular small-Sword, used only for thrusting, and the
bi-convex cut-and-thrust ‘rapier,’ a term applied by the Germans
to the _Schläger_, which has no point. In England most people use
‘small-Sword’ only in opposition to ‘broadsword’; but, as the Art of
Fencing may be considered a general foundation for swordsmanship, all
men-at-arms should understand and preserve the difference. The writer,
however, observes (Notes, pp. 4, 5), that, among the various actions
which may conveniently be executed with the triangular ‘Biscayan,’
there are many which cannot be so easily managed with a flat blade,
or with the usual weapon of modern combat, however light and handy.
Hence ‘fencers among military men should be cautioned against
_indiscriminately_ attempting with the Sword performances usually
taught in lessons with the foil.’

[442] It was also a proper name applied to the Paladin Renaud’s Sword.
The flamberge of the seventeenth century became a rapier-blade, and no
longer ‘flamboyant,’ and the difference is in the hilt, and especially
the guards. The latter were shallower and simpler than the rapier form,
and were more easily changed from hand to hand, as was the practice of
early fencers.

[443] There is another Dáo in the Eastern regions, a large, square,
double-edged blade, with a handle attached to the centre. The Dah of
Burma is originally the same weapon as the Nágá Dáo.

[444] In the _Bulletin de l’Institut Egyptien_ (deuxième série, No.
1, année 1880) there is an admirable paper on Eastern heraldry, ‘Le
blason chez les Princes musulmans,’ by E. T. Rogers Bey. He proves that
a heraldic scutcheon is known to the Arabs as _rank_, plur. _runúk_,
and that the word is the Persian _rang_, colour, from which he would
derive our (man of) ‘rank,’ a word hitherto unsatisfactorily explained.
As regards the tints, ‘azure’ is evidently the Persian _lájawardi_; and
‘gules’ is better derived from _gul_, a rose, than from Fr. _gueules_
(jaw), which is L. Lat. _gula_, reddened skin. These three words
suggest that for the origin of heraldry in its present form we must go
back to Persia. Of the Sword in European heraldry I shall have more to
say in Part II.

[445] Strange to say, these Sword-names are carefully omitted from
Liddell and Scott, 1869.

[446] The information was kindly forwarded to me by Captain F. M.
Hunter, Assistant Political Resident, Aden. Along the blade runs the
inscription, which will be quoted in Part II., and the characters
appear modern. My informant thinks that this Chelidonian does not
represent the original Zú’l-Fikár, which was two-edged.

[447] This trophy hangs against the staircase wall of the fine armoury
belonging to the Museo del Arsenale (Naval Arsenal), Venice. Here,
however, it has become a complicated affair with Koranic inscription
(ch. xl. vol. i.); open-jawed dragons’ heads at the hilt, and below the
handle a rosette with various complications of ‘Yá’ (Allah!).

[448] It is figured in the illustrations following the _Antiquities of
Orissa_, by Rajendra Lala Mitra.

[449] Capt. Cameron and I exhibited a specimen, made for us by good
King Blay of Attábo, at a special meeting of the Anthropological
Institute of London.

[450] The Austrian geographer, Dr. Josef Chavanne, estimates the mean
altitude of Africa at 2,170 feet (round numbers), or more than double
that of Europe (971 feet, M. G. Leipoldt).

[451] He makes his Ethiopians emigrate from India to Egypt—but
where? when? how? The ‘Asiatic Æthiopians’ of Herodotus lie between
the Germanii (Persian _Kerman_) and the Indus (iii. 93, &c.). The
bas-reliefs of Susiana show negroid types, and Texier found the Lamlam
tribe in the marshes round the head of the Persian Gulf to resemble
the Bisharin of Upper Egypt. Was _the_ Buddha one of these Cushite
Ethiopians?

[452] _Monumental History, &c._

[453] The late Mr. Lane, who was greatly attached to Cairo and its
population, insisted upon the Arab origin and kinship of the Egyptian.
To those who know both races they appear as different as Englishmen and
Greeks. Place an Arab, especially a Bedawi, by the side of a Fellah,
and the contrast will strike the least experienced eye.

[454] The first instalment was sent in May 1881 to the Royal College of
Surgeons for the benefit of Professor Flower and Dr. C. Carter Blake.
I am aware of the difficulty in determining mummy-dates, but the fact
of mummification shows a certain antiquity whose later limit is sharply
defined. The mummy of King Mer en Rá (Sixth Dynasty), found near the
Sakkarah pyramids, had been stripped of its bandages; but the marks
impressed upon the skin showed that the system was that of later years.
He can hardly be dated later than B.C. 3000; and, reckoning from that
period to A.D. 700, when mummifying ceased, we have a population of
embalmed bodies of some 730,000,000 in round numbers.

[455] The hair is of intermediate type between negro and Malay. The
Nilotes are οὐλότριχοι and ἐριόκομοι, with woolly locks, slightly flat
like ribbons, evenly distributed (not in peppercorns) over the scalp.
It is also a mistake to make the Nubians λισσότριχοι: none of the Nile
Valley races are lank-haired like Hindús, Chinese, and Australians.

[456] The full number of Herodotus is 52,000 years. Mr. Day (p. 59)
is scandalised by these dates, which argue for the ‘high antiquity
theory’; and appears astonished to find ‘anything placed centuries
previous to the Noahitic Deluge.’ Of this more presently.

[457] Each generation contained a ‘Piromis, son of a Piromis.’
The word, made equivalent to _Kalos k’ agathos_ (= _galantuomo_),
_Pe-Rome_, the man, opposed to _Pe-Neter_, the god.

[458] Mela has been blamed for repeating Herodotus without
understanding him. When he states that the sun twice set at the point
where it now rises (‘solem bis jam occidisse unde oritur’), he probably
means that the greater light left to the west the zodiacal sign which
presided at its rising.

[459] The word at first applied probably to the commander-in-chief.
Wilkinson’s day derived it from _Phra_ (_pa-Ra_), the sun; now it is
explained _Per-áo_, the Great House, in the sense of ‘Sublime Porte.’

[460] _Antiquité des Races Humaines._ Paris, 1862.

[461] The ‘black land,’ opposed to _Tesher_, the ‘red land’ (Edom,
Idumæa, Erythræa), the wilds of North-Western Arabia. It is also
called on the monuments _A’in_ (_Æan_ in Pliny) and _Ta-mera_ (_Mera_,
_Tomera_), the ‘inundation region.’ Another old name, _Aeria_, is
from יאר, _Yior_, the Nile. _Kemi_ must not be confounded with
_Khem_, _Chemmis_, universal nature, the generative and reproductive
principle—_Pan_. When Q. Curtius writes that Chemmis ‘_umbraculo_
maxime similis est habitus,’ I would change the first word to
‘umbilico.’ The stepped cone in the Elephanta Caves exactly explains
the latter.

[462] Hecatæus and Anaximander divided the globe into Europe (_Ereb_,
_Gharb_, the West) and Asia (_Asiyeh_, the East). Their successors
added Libya (Africa), a term derived from the Libu or Ribu tribes; and
the Father of History a most insufficient fourth—the Nilotic Delta. The
latter, however, is ethnologically correct: Egypt is neither Africa nor
Asia, but a land _per se_.

[463] In Homer, Ægyptus always applies to the Nile (_Od._ xiv. 268).
Manetho makes it the name of a king, Sethos = Seti I. M. Maspero
proposes as a derivation of the word, Ha Kahi Ptah (the land of the
god Ptah). Hence the Biblical Pathros = Ptah-land (_Ezek._ xxix.
14). Pathyris, the western side of Thebes, and the western Provinces
generally, may have named the πάταικοι (Herod. iii. 37), the obscene
dwarfs who made Cambyses laugh.

[464] Herodotus (vii. 66) specifies the Arians, a racial name then
synonymous with the Medes. This is not the place to enter upon the
subject of Aria’s enormous development.

[465] As a specimen of the roots—which are most remarkable when they
consist of single consonants, whose reduplication made the earliest
words—take ‘papa’ and ‘mamma.’ The former is from the Egyptian _pa-pa_
(root _p_), to produce, the original idea of the begetter; and the
latter is _ma-ma_ (root _m_), to carry, be pregnant, bear. _Mut_
becomes _mátá_, μήτηρ, _mater_, mother: _Mer_ (_a-mor_), love; _meran_
(_morior_), die, and _more_ (_mare_), the sea. In ‘Semitic’ we have
_má_, Heb. and Arab. _má_, water; and a long array of other words (as
_ia_, yes, yea; and _na_, nay) too extensive for notice.

[466] Characterised chiefly by post- instead of pre-positions, by
additions to the verb which make it causal, reflective, and so forth,
and by the peculiar form of sentences. Examples: the Finn-Ugrian-Magyar
and the Turk-Mongol-Tartar, both probably deriving from the ancient
_Sakas_ = Scythians.

[467] To Aryan I much prefer the older term ‘Iranian’; Iran (Persia),
which once extended from the Indus to the Mediterranean, being one
of the great centres where the ‘Aryo’-Egyptian element of language
developed itself, and where a typical race is still found. Nor is there
much objection to ‘Turanian,’ Turan being the non-Iranian regions to
the east, Tartary and China. But ‘Semitic,’ which contains a myth and
a theory, should be changed into ‘Arabian.’ Egypto-Arabic attained its
purest and highest development in the Peninsula; Hebrew is a northern
and somewhat barbarous dialect; Syriac is a north-western offspring;
Galla, a western; and so forth.

[468] For whose erection every ‘authority’ gives his or her own date.
Mr. Proctor’s calculation, based upon the precession of the equinoxes,
is B.C. 3350. It appears to me that we also obtain the date from the
position of the polar star (α Draconis), which looked down the axis of
the great entrance-passage before this long tube was blocked up. We may
thus assume between B.C. 3440 and B.C. 3350.

[469] _Records of the Past_, ii. 120; and _Trans. Bibl. Soc._ i. ii.
383–85.

[470] Brugsch, vol. ii. chap. xiv.

[471] One nome (_Tanis_) carried a crescent and one star, others had
two and three of the latter. The emblem passed over to the Byzantine
Empire, and now we see upon the Egyptian flag the crescent and Seb, the
five-rayed star. It is thus distinguished from the Turkish, which has
seven rays.

[472] See chap. viii.

[473] The popular conception of the Noachian Deluge is a study. There
have been millions of local and partial floods; but wherever and
whenever a traveller finds the legend of an inundation he incontinently
applies it to ‘the Flood.’ Dr. Livingstone could not refrain from
so doing at the petty Lake Dilolo. And it is to be noted that the
Egyptians, accustomed to annual freshets, utterly ignored one general
cataclysm as held by the Greeks.

[474] ‘Nuhu’ is found in the Nahrai tomb, Beni Hasan (Osburn, i. 239);
other names are Noum, Nouf, and Nef.

[475] Amun Ra (Hephæstus, Vulcan), the veiled Osiris, the ‘Hidden One
of Thebes,’ is thus addressed in a papyrus:—

    He is One only, alone sans equal,
    Dwelling above in the Holy of Holies.

Another describes him as ‘Maker of all things; whose beginning was the
beginning of the world; whose forms are various and manifold; the first
to exist; the one only Being, and the Parent of all who live.’

[476] Mr. Froude _metaphysicises_ when he tells us that the religion
of Egypt is the adoration of physical forces. Mankind do not worship
abstractions; they begin (and mostly end) by adoring man.

[477] Blind because she saw with insight, not physical vision. Her eyes
are hidden by blinkers or ‘goggles.’ Her usual name is Ma, and her
ideograph is the ell-measure.

[478] Even ‘God save the King’ must be referred back to them.

[479] It is an aorist from ‘Havah;’ so φύσις from φύω, and _natura_
from _nascor_. Mystically, _Ya_ is the past, _Ha_ the present, and
_Vah_ the future.

[480] My fellow-traveller, the Rev. W. Robertson Smith, has neglected
the derivation of the ‘Prophet’ grade by Jewry from Egypt; his
interesting volume (_The Old Testament, &c._) wants more Egyptianism.
The Prophets of Nile-land had their merits; they foretold that Pharaoh
Necho’s Suez Canal would be more useful to strangers than to natives.

[481] The High Priest’s robe in Jewry had 366 bells, symbolising the
days of the Sothic-sidereal year. In the times of the early Pharaohs,
the ‘Queen of the New Year’ appeared in coincidence with the beginning
of the solar year. The Sothic æra had been fixed from observations
before Thut-mes III. (Eighteenth Dynasty, circ. B.C. 1580).

[482] Yet the end of chap. xix. is distinctly teleological. Were there
two Jobs?

[483] Abraham, the legendary forefather of the Hebrews, was a Chaldæan
from Ur of the Chaldees. On the east bank of the Euphrates lies Uru-ki,
Erech, or Warká, fronted by Ur, Uru, or Mughayr: the Bedawin still
call the latter ‘Urhha’ in memory of ‘Ur.’ Thus Abraham was a hill-man
from the harsh and rugged regions fringing Southern Armenia. Hence the
‘Jewish face,’ with its strongly marked features and its wealth of hair
and beard, appears everywhere in the sculptures of ancient Babylonia
and Persia. Hence, too, the superficial observation that the Afghans
and hill-tribes west of the Indus are Jews because they have the
typical Jewish look. The reason is that all are derived from the same
ethnic centre, a great watershed of race.

[484] In this section of the nineteenth century three popular crazes
are producing a literature of vigorous growth. The first is the
Shakespearian; not Shakespeare, but Bacon, or some other Palmerstonian
pet, wrote Shakespeare. The second, apparently a by-blow of the Book of
Mormon, is the descent of John Bull from the ‘Lost Tribes,’ who were
never lost. The third is the Pyramid craze; and the rough common sense
of the public has embodied it in ‘the Inspired British Inch’: these
Pyramidists mostly forget that _the_ Pyramid is one of three greater
and some seventy lesser items which form the cemetery of Memphis.

[485] Yet it is remarkable, observes Brugsch (i. 212), that from
the earliest ages the curse of the Typhonic gods clings to gold.
So Plutarch (_Isis and Osiris_) tells us that the worshippers were
directed not to wear the noble metal; and this still is a general rule
in El-Islam.

[486] Silver, the ‘next folly of mankind,’ says Pliny (_Nat. Hist._
xxxiii. 31), showing his own, and rivalling Horace’s ‘aurum irrepertum
et sic melius situm.’ Strange to say, neither old Egypt nor Assyria
had a coinage, which Herodotus (i. 94) and a host of other writers
attribute to the Lydians, the forefathers of the Etruscans. Its
representative in the Nile Valley was the ring-money, which extended
to ancient Britain, and which is still preserved in many parts of
Africa. The golden ‘manillas’ discovered at Dali (Idalium) in Cyprus,
where the breaks of the circle are adorned with the heads of animals,
lions and asps, show what the now meaningless thickening of these parts
originally meant.

[487] ‘Lead is also united by the aid of white lead (tin); white lead
with white lead by the agency of oil’ (Pliny, xxxiii. 30).

[488] _The Captivity of Hans Stade_, p. 145.

[489] Properly speaking, to ‘damascene’ is confined to ‘grit’ or
inlaid iron or steel, the word evidently deriving from Damascus, once
so famous for Swords. Johnson (_Dict._, Longmans, 1805) explains the
word ‘damask,’ ‘linen or silk woven in a manner invented at Damascus,
by which part, by a various direction of the threads, exhibits flowers
or other forms.’ Percy (_Metal._ p. 185) inclines towards ‘Damascus’;
but he suggests that the ‘word “damask” applied to steel may have
been derived, not from the place of manufacture but from a fancied
resemblance between the markings in question and the damask patterns on
textile fabrics.’

[490] This process resembles our niello (nigellum) inlaying. The oldest
composition contained most silver and no lead. Percy (_Metallurgy_, p.
23) gives us its history: the first treatise by Theophilus, _alias_
Rugerus, a monk of the early eleventh century, was translated by Robert
Hendrick (London, 1847).

[491] Plutarch relates (_De Isid._ 2) of Ochus (Thirty-first Dynasty),
who, amongst other acts of tyranny, caused the sacred bull Apis to be
made roast beef, that he was represented in the Catalogue of Kings by a
Sword.

[492] _Ḳrsha_, _Krasher_, or _Krershra_. The determinative is a
squatting archer with bow and arrows. Marvellous to say, Brugsch (i.
51) mentions ‘clubs, axes, bows and arrows,’ utterly neglecting the
Sword.

[493] Egyptian national names give derivation to, but do not derive
from, Greek. According to Pollux (vii. 71), however, _Hemitybion_ is
Egyptian, evidently corrupted.

[494] The horse, apparently unknown to the First Dynasty of Memphis,
was familiar to the Second. Mr. Gladstone (_Primer of Homer_, p. 97:
Macmillan, 1878) supposes that the animal came from Libya or Upper
Egypt; but the African horse probably originates from Asia. The first
illustrations of horses and chariots are found at Eileithyias, _temp._
Aah-mes, Amos, Amosis, B.C. 1500.

[495] The pole-axe was three feet long, the handle being two; the blade
varied from ten to fourteen inches, and below it was a heavy metal
ball, some four inches in diameter, requiring a powerful arm. The club
in the British Museum, armed with wooden teeth, is not represented on
the monuments, and probably belonged to some barbarous tribe.

[496] I have already discussed the Stone Age in Egypt and in Africa
(chap. iii.). We must not, however, determine it to be pre-metallic
without further study. Herodotus first notices it when he tells us that
the Ethiopians in the army of Xerxes used stone-tipped arrows.

[497] I cannot but suspect the word of being a congener of our ‘chop.’
Mr. Gerald Massey, author of _A Book of the Beginnings_, favoured me
with his opinion upon the ‘scymitar Khopsh.’ He identifies it with the
hinder thigh ([Hieroglyphs], _Shepsh_, or [Hieroglyphs], _Khepsh_),
of the ‘old Genitrix’ of the Typhonian type, _Kfa_ or _Kefa_ (force,
power, might); the Goddess of the Great Bear and the place of birth.
Hence the [Hieroglyphs] (_Ru_) or ‘mouth’ of the Sword came to be
synonymous with the ‘edge’ of the Sword (Genesis xxxiv. 36). In the
Denderah zodiac, the central figure, the ‘old Genitrix,’ holds the
Khopsh-chopper or falchion with the right hand. The ‘thigh of Khepsh’
is also the Egyptian rudder-oar. The Great Bear Khepsh is one of
the earliest measures of the Seasons: the Chinese still say that at
nightfall the ‘handle of the northern bushel’ (tail of Ursa Major)
points east in spring, south in summer, west in autumn, and north in
winter.

Mr. Gerald Massey’s two fine volumes have secured him, and will secure
him, much bitter and hostile criticism from the many-headed who are
lynx-eyed as to details while they overlook the general scheme. His
object has been to show that religion and literature, science and art,
originated in Egypt; and here he is undoubtedly right. Relying upon
the self-evident fact that the language of the hieroglyphs contains
‘Semitic’ as well as ‘Aryan’ roots and derivative forms, he traces
these throughout the languages of the world. Whether we judge his work
conclusive or not, we cannot but admire and applaud the vast reading
and research which he has brought to bear upon the most interesting
subject.

And in another way Mr. Massey has done good. He has uttered a lively
and emphatic protest against the Sanskritists and their over-weening
pretensions. In vol. ii. (p. 56) he shows how shallow is the conclusion
that Ophir was in India because the produce brought back by Solomon’s
fleets had, according to Professor Max Müller, Sanskrit or Dravidian
names. ‘_Koph_’ the ape is _Kapi_ in Sansk.; but it is pure Egyptian,
_Kapi_, whence the Gr. κῆπ-ος or κῆβ-ος. ‘_Tukkiyim_’ (peacocks)
resembles the Toki of Tamil and the Togei of Malabar; but the root is
evidently the Egyptian _Tekh_ or _Tekai_, a symbolical bird. ‘_Shen
habim_’ (teeth of elephant = tusks) may derive from the Sansk. _Ibau_,
an elephant, but the latter is originally _Ab_ in Egyptian. These
erroneous views, coming from an authoritative source, are at once
accepted, copied into popular books, and find their way round the
world, to the confusion of true knowledge. They make it our hapless
fate to learn, unlearn, and relearn. See ‘ape’ in Smith’s _Dict. of
the Bible_, and, to quote one in dozens, the _Trans. Anthrop. Soc._ p.
435, May 1882,—‘the name for ape in “Kings” and in Greek authors, both
adopted from Sanskrit.’

Mr. Massey unfortunately has not studied Arabic, hence many views which
will hardly find acceptance. In interpreting the hieroglyphics he has
wisely preferred the ideographic symbolism and the determinatives
which, countless ages ago, preceded the phonetic and alphabetic forms.

[498] For further notice of the Kopis, see chap. xi.

[499] Also _v._ to decapitate: the Coptic form is _Sebi_ or _Sefi_.

[500] Bunsen, v. 758.

[501] Bunsen’s _Egypt_, v. 429. According to Castor, the two Swords
pointed at the throat of a kneeling man was the priest’s stamp denoting
pure beasts, fit for sacrifice. He has noted that this survival points
distinctly to human sacrifice in older days.

[502] Yet the tombs at Beni Hasan date 900 years before the popular era
of the Trojan war.

[503] _Monum._ 262 fol., plates 11, 15.

[504] Rosellini shows a long tapering blade with a mid-rib, apparently
sunken, and a raised surface on each side. The length is divided into
five parts, smooth and hatched (?).

[505] The Somal have retained three other notable peculiarities
of ancient Egypt; the wig (worn by the old Nilotes); the _Uts_
([Hieroglyphs]) or wooden head-stool acting pillow, which further north
was a half-cylinder of alabaster finely carved; and the ostrich-feather
head-gear The latter was a symbol of Truth among the old Egyptians,
because, says Hor Apollo, the wing-feathers are of equal length. The
Romans adopted it as a military decoration. ‘Your courage has not yet
given your helmet wherewithal to shade your face from the burning
sun,’ say the Kurds, who add to the crest a new feather for every foe
slain in fight. The Somal, after victory or murder, stick the white
variety in the mop-head. We still use the phrase ‘a feather in his
cap.’ The ‘Prince of Wales’ feather’ is an Egyptian ideograph of Truth.
Mr. Gerald Massey seems to think that Wilkinson’s ‘_Thmei_’ (II. chap.
viii.) is ‘only a backward rendering of the Greek “_Themis_”‘; that the
feathers are ‘_Shu_’ ([Hieroglyphs]), and that the goddess is ‘_Ma_’
([Hieroglyphs]), or ‘_Mati_.’ But surely the root of _Themis_ would be
in ‘_Ta-Ma_,’ _the_ Goddess (of Truth)?

[506] Compare _Raa_, Heb. and Ar., ‘he saw’; Gr. ὁράω, and Lat.
_Ra-dius_.

[507] Colonel A. Lane Fox remarks that the groove which is constant
in these Caucasian blades is a little out of the central line, and
does not correspond on each side, an alternation showing that it is
derived from the ogee form. I have suggested that the idea arose from
the arrow-head ‘bellied on a twist,’ and have figured the weapon in the
next page (fig. 170).

[508] _Bronze, &c._ p. 298.

[509] Chap. v.

[510] Returning from the exploration of Harar (1853), I sent a small
collection of Somali weapons to the United Service Institution.

[511] The form is accurately preserved in the formidable Afghan
‘Charay’ or one-edged knife.

[512] _A Critical Inquiry_, &c.

[513] I have shown that the heraldic Sword in the East preserves this
double sword-knot (chap. vii.).

[514] The Baghirmi, according to Denham, adore a long lance of peculiar
construction: this spear-worship is also practised by the Marghi and
the Musghu. It extended from ancient Rome to certain of the Pacific
Isles; while the Fijians worship the war-club. At Baroda in Gujarát
superstitious honours are paid to the Gaekhwar’s golden cannons with
silver wheels.

[515] English and Styrian razors are also largely imported.

[516] Chap. viii.

[517] Athenæus (i. 27) speaks of the Thracian dance in arms, ‘men
jumping up very high with light springs, and using Swords.’ At last one
of them strikes another, so that it seemed to everyone that the man was
wounded.

[518] _Marocco_, page 66 (Milano, Treves, 1876).

[519] Hence the ardent desire of the Abyssinians, when first visited
by Europeans, to obtain civilised Swords. Father F. Alvarez (_Hakluyt
Soc._ 1881), who lived in Abyssinia between 1520 and 1527, shows
the Barnagais (_Bahr-Negush_, or sea-ruler) begging the Portuguese
ambassador for his rich Sword and ornaments, ‘as the great lords
have few Swords’ (chap. xxx.). Prester John (the Negush or Emperor)
displays ‘five bundles of short Swords with silver hilts,’ taken from
the Moslems (chap. cxiii.). The King of Portugal sends as a present to
Prester John ‘first a gold Sword with a rich hilt,’ and a good fencer,
Estevam Pallarte.

[520] _Anthrop. Coll._ p. 184.

[521] _Gorilla-land_, p. 227.

[522] Quenching in oil or grease instead of water is a common practice.
The workman still ‘adds to the water a thin cake of grease, or pours
over it hot oil, through which the steel must pass before it enters the
water, for by these means it is prevented from acquiring cracks and
flaws.’ (Beckmann, _loc. cit._ ii. 330.)

[523] Specimens of all these weapons are in the Lane-Fox Collection,
Nos. 1088 to 1100.

[524] _The Cataracts of the Congo_, p. 234.

[525] I have noticed that arrant humbug, the celebrated ‘golden axe’
which, in 1880–81, caused the last ‘Ashantee scare’ (_To the Gold
Coast for Gold_, ii.). The thing sent to England was certainly not
the great fetish which is held to be the national Palladium. Another
memento of the last Ashantee war, ‘King Koffee’s umbrella, an article
of prodigious proportions, and of gaudy material,’ only returned to
where it was made. The type of the latter may be seen in most Italian
market-places, shading the old women’s fruits and vegetables; and
Manchester, I believe, had the honour of building it.

[526] _Through the Dark Continent_, i. 21.

[527] Described in my _Mission to Dahome_, _passim_.

[528] _Across Africa_, vol. i. pp. 121, 139; vol. ii. 104.

[529] The famous copper mines of the Congo region, whose yield, says
Barbot, was mistaken for gold, are noticed in _The Cataracts of the
Congo_, pp. 45, 46.

[530] Captain Cameron has brought home specimens.

[531] From _O Muata Cazembe_, which also contains a long and valuable
description of the copper mines in South-Eastern Africa, worked by the
people since olden time.

[532] According to Marco Polo (lib. iii. cap. 34), the men of Zanghibar
(Zanzibar) are ‘both tall and stout, but not tall in proportion to
their stoutness, for if they were, being so stout and brawny, they
would be absolutely like giants; and they are so strong that they will
carry for four men and eat for five.’

[533] _Anthrop. Coll._ p. 135.

[534] The _Journ. Anthrop. Inst._ (August 1883) has printed an
excellent paper ‘On the Mechanical Methods of the Ancient Egyptians.’
Mr. W. M. Flinders Petrie believes that they cut diorite with lathes
and jewel graving-points (diamond? or corundum abundant in Midian?);
and that the diamond was the ‘piercing-stone’ of early Babylonian
Inscriptions.

[535] Gen. xxiii. 18. In 2 Sam. xxiv. 6, ‘Aretz tahtim-hodshi’ should
be read, ‘Aretz ha-Hittim Kadesh,’ ‘the land of the Hittites of (city)
Kadesh.’

[536] _Trans. Soc. Bib. Archæology_, vol. v. part 2, p. 354. They were
then the paramount nation in Syria, from the Euphrates to the Libanus;
and the Assyrians knew the region as Mat-Khatte.

[537] Wild work has been made with this word. Some render it ‘large’
(i.e. whale-like); the scholiast calls the Cetians a people of Mysia;
others confound them with the Kittaians (Chittim = Cypriots) of
Menander in Josephus (_A. J._ ix. 14; Cory’s _Frag._, p. 30; London,
Reeves & Turner, 1876); others with the people of Kiti (the circle),
the Heb. Galil or Galilee.

[538] ‘Two-river’ (land) is mostly applied to the great Interamnian
plain, Mesopotamia. Here it must mean Syria proper; and Aram Naharayn
(Highlands of the Two Streams) admirably describes Palestine, which is
composed of a double anticlinal river-valley formed by the Iarunata
(Jordan) and the Arunata (Orontes). The whole length and breadth of the
country is distributed between the two, with the exception of the small
Litani watershed.

[539] The ‘Aram wine from Halybon’ was produced at Helbún (Halbáún,
the inhabitants call it), a gorge-village near Damascus. Being
Moslems, they no longer ferment their grape-juice; but the fruit is
still famous. The Helbún people speak the broadest dialect, and are a
perpetual laughing-stock to the Damascus citizens. The Aleppites derive
their ‘Halab’ (Aleppo) because Abraham there milked (_halaba_) a cow;
but the place is older than the Genesitic flood, _the_ Flood.

[540] This word is corruptly written Jerablus, Jorablus, Jirabis, &c.

[541] In Rawlinson’s _Herodotus_ (i. 463) we find that the Southern
Hittites numbered twelve kings.

[542] The decisive action is shown on an Egyptian tomb (Brugsch, i.
291).

[543] Ramses left as memorials of his invasion three hieroglyphic
tablets cut upon the rocks on the south side of the embouchure of
the Nahr el-Kalb (Dog or Wolf River, the Lycus), a few miles north
of the Venerable Bayrut (Berytus, &c.). They mark the ancient road
which ascended the rough torrent-gorge to its origin in Cælesyria
(El-Buká’a). Even since these pages have been written the coffins and
mummies of Ramses II. and his daughter have been found at Dayr el-Bahri
in Upper Egypt, and conveyed from Thebes to Bulak by Dr. Emil Brugsch.
The same collector has been equally lucky with the remains of Seti I.,
although Belzoni, who discovered the tomb, sent the sarcophagus to the
Sloane Museum.

[544] Sesostris derives from _Ses_, _Setesu_, _Sestesu_, or _Sestura_,
i.e. ‘Sethosis, also called Ramses’ (Seti-son?). The Greek Sesostris
combines, I have said, the lives of Seti and his son Ramses. According
to Brugsch, he is the ‘Pharaoh of the Oppression,’ and the son of
the unnamed Princess (Merris? Thermutis?) who ‘found Moses in the
bull-rushes.’

The Princess Thermutis, says Josephus, named Moshe (Moses) from _mo_
(_má_ = water) and _uses_, those who are saved out of it (_ses_ = to
reach land). Possibly it is _Mu-su_ = water-son. Josephus was sorely
offended by the ‘calumnies’ of Manetho; this Egyptian priest, who wrote
under Ptolemy Philadelphus about the time of the LXX, declared that the
Hebrews were a familia of leprous slaves who, when expelled from Egypt,
were led by a renegade priest called Osarsiph (Osiris-Sapi, god of
underworld); and that the number was swollen by Palestinian strangers
driven out by Amenophis. He gives the number of lepers and unclean at
250,000 (= 50,000 × 5), and the Hyksos, another impure race, number
also 250,000. The learned classics accepted this view, duly abusing
the ‘gens sceleratissima’ (Seneca), and the ‘odium generis humani’
(Tacitus).

[545] The site of Kadesh and the Buhayrat Hums (Tarn of Emessa) or
B. Kutaynah, a ‘broad’ or widening of the Orontes, was first visited
by Dr. Thomson of Bayrut in 1846. I rode about the ‘lake of the land
of the Amorites’ in 1870; but found no ruins, or rather ruins of no
importance everywhere. It was not then known to me that in A.D. 1200
the geographer Yakut (_Geogr. Dict._ edit. Wüstenfeld) had noticed the
water in his day as the ‘Bahriyat Kuds’ (Tarn of Kadesh). Since that
time the Palestine Exploration Fund (July 1881) identified the seat
of Atesh or Kadesh with the Tell Nabi Mendeh, a Santon’s tomb on the
highest part of the hill where the ruins lie. The site is on the left
bank of the Orontes, four English miles south of the ‘broad.’ The city
disappears from history after the thirteenth century B.C., but local
legend has preserved its memory.

[546] Prof. Ebers, who is familiar with the many portraits of
Ramses-Sesostris, declares that he was a handsome man with fine
aquiline features, like Napoleon Buonaparte.

[547] This original and instinctive way to revive the drowned endures
to the present day, despite the wrath of the Faculty.

[548] Brugsch (ii. 68) gives the terms of the treaty as translated by
Mr. Goodwin (_Records of the Past_, iv. 25); and adds instances to
prove that it was acted upon. Thus he explains the hitherto mysterious
countermarch, the turning back of the Hebrew exodus, at the time when
the emigrants were advancing straight upon their objective. His strong
point is the identification of ‘Baal-Zephon,’ about which all the
commentators have made such hopeless guesses. He explains it by ‘Baal
of the North’ (Typhon, Sutekh or Khepsh), the ‘Mount Kasion’ of Jupiter
Kasios, a name derived from the Egyptian Hazian or Hazina.

[549] So called from an old Coptic town, long ruined.

[550] Rawlinson’s _Herodotus_, vol. i., Essay VII., and reference to
Black Obelisk in British Museum. _Synchronous History of Assyria and
Judæa_, pp. 1–82, vol. iii. pt. i.; _Soc. Bibl. Archæology_, 1874.

[551] A Keltic word, _bot_ = foot.

[552] In popular Hebrew use, ‘Canaanite’ meant a trader.

[553] Possibly the ‘pure’ (Hebr. _Tohar_), in which case the word is
‘Semitic.’

[554] Brugsch, ii. chap. xiv. As a rule, slingers were the least
esteemed of fighting men.

[555] The Rev. William Wright, missionary at Damascus, first suggested
that the Hamath inscriptions were Hittite. The study was begun in
1872 by the late Dr. A. D. Mordtmann at Constantinople, where is the
original of the silver Hittite dish represented in the British Museum.

[556] _Trans. Soc. Biblical Archæol._ vol. iv. pt. 2, 1876.

[557] Described by M. Clermont-Ganneau in the _Revue Archéologique_,
Dec. 1879; and figured in the _Palestine Exploration Fund_, July 1881.

[558] In Egypt the king rests his feet upon war-captives; and making a
foot-stool of the enemy is a Biblical phrase (Psalm cx. 1) which had a
literal signification.

[559] For the two-headed eagle in Moslem heraldry (A.D. 1190 and 1217),
see p. 108 of Rogers Bey’s valuable paper before quoted (chap. vii.).

[560] His chief argument for their Northern origin seems to be founded
upon their boots; he forgets, however, that the Arabs of Mahommed’s
day wore ‘Khuff;’ and that legal ablutions were modified to suit them.
It is the _cothurnus calceatus_ of Pliny (vii. 19) which, as we see
on statues and vases, covered the foot and ankle to the calf. The
Assyriologist Prof. P. Schrader, followed by Prof. G. Ebers, considers
the Khita to be Aramæans.

[561] And Carchemish. ‘On the Hamathite Inscriptions,’ Trans. _Soc.
Bibl. Archæol._ vol. i. pt. 1, 1876, and vii. 298–443, on Tarrik-timmun.

[562] Mr. Heath kindly explained to me the key of his system published
in the _Journ. Anthrop. Instit._ May 1880. The figures at Ibríz having
suggested ‘Semitism,’ he separated root-letters from formatives and
found three Aramæan suffixes, _t-na_, _t-kun_, and _t-hun_. These gave
an immense probability that he had hit upon the _t_, _n_, _k_, and _h_.
Meanwhile Mr. Boscawen (Pal. Expl. Fund, July 1881) contends that our
‘knowledge of Hittite is confined to four syllabic characters and the
ideographs.’ The Rev. Mr. Sayce was good enough to explain to me how he
had determined eleven values. A comparison of inscriptions, with the
silver boss of Tarkodemos as a _point de départ_, suggested to him that
the stirrup-shape ([Hittite]) marks the nom. sing. of proper names, and
this in the Egyptian and Assyrian monuments ends in _s_. He assumes
that adjectives agree with their substantives, which they follow by
taking the same suffixes. He was at first disposed to make the broken
_k_ ([Hittite] or [Hittite]), which curiously resembles an old Egyptian
sign, signify ‘and’ (cop. conjunct.); but the incised inscription
found by Mr. Ramsey at Bór (old Tyana) proved it the determinative of
an individual. The goat’s head seems from the bilingual boss to have
the phonetic value ‘tarku,’ and is interchanged with [Hittite] (_ku_),
[Hittite] (_s_), [Hittite], and [Hittite]. The two spear-heads with the
stirrup ([Hittite]) appear to represent a patronymic—_Kus_. The second
sign (= _ku_), which seems to be the first pers. sing. of the Aor.,
can be followed in the same group of characters by [Hittite]; whence
Mr. Sayce inferred the latter to be an adjectival participial affix =
_u_. Similarly [Hittite] = _e_, the acc. plur.; thus [Hittite] = _ue_.
The bilingual boss also shows [Hittite] or [Hittite] = _mi_, the third
pers. sing. present tense, and we find indifferently [Hittite] and
[Hittite]. The gen. plur. is [Hittite], but the pronunciation is not
determined. The same is the case with the sock or low boot ([Hittite]),
suggested to be the third pers. plur. of the Aorist. Lastly, the
ideograph of plurality attached to nouns and verbs is [Hittite].

[563] Dr. Guyther, visiting the Merash citadel, has found several new
characters in a long inscription on a lion, and fragments of stone with
other hieroglyphs have been forwarded from Carchemish to the British
Museum.

[564] Under Shishonk (Shishak), the contemporary of Solomon, the
conquered tribes of Edom and Judah are termed the ‘Fenekh and the Aamu
(Syro-Aramæans) of a far land.’ Brugsch (ii. 210) ‘has a presentiment’
that these Fenekh are intimately related to the Jews; and he notes the
similarity of Aamu with ‘Am,’ the well-known Hebrew term.

[565] Some have suspected Punt to be the far later Pándya, or Madura
kingdom, in Southern India. Mariette’s Punt extended from Bab el-Mandeb
to Cape Guardafui (‘I was a Guard’).

[566] Prof. Rugge of Christiania, however, connects Baldur with
Achilles. We can hardly accept his scheme until the details shall have
been better worked out.

[567] ‘Bak,’ from Beki in Coptic = city, town.

[568] ‘In Judæâ rivus Sabbatis omnibus siccatur’ (Pliny, xxxi. 18). The
idea doubtless arose from the intermittent springs (Siloam, &c.) about
Jerusalem. Josephus (_B. J._ viii. 5, § 1) makes his Sabbatic R. break
the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday) by flowing only on that day and resting
during the other six. Hence the fabled Sabbation, whose flood of huge
rocks and sand-waves, sixty to two hundred cubits high, issued from
the ‘Garden of Eden.’ It still hems in the ten ‘Lost Tribes,’ and is
believed by the Druzes.

[569] I quote from _Phœnician Inscriptions_, by the Rev. Dunbar I.
Heath, not from the far more poetical version of the Duc de Luynes.

[570] My friend Prof. Socin holds that St. Meklar of Tyre conserves the
cultus of Melkarth.

[571] Perhaps from the Egyptian _Ur_, old, ancient, original.

[572] The modern Persians, and, indeed, Persian history and legend,
know nothing of this wild legend.

[573] A terra-cotta relief in the British Museum shows Chrysaor
(Χρυσάωρ) springing from Medusa’s neck.

[574] Joppa, according to tradition (Pliny, v. 14), was built by
Kepheus, king of the Æthiopians, and was his capital before ‘the
Deluge.’ The same author tells us that Andromeda’s chains were there
shown, and that the monster’s skeleton (some fish cast ashore upon the
harbour reef?) was brought to Rome by the Curule Ædile M. Æmil. Scaurus
the younger, who held office in Syria (ix. 4). The bones were upwards
of forty feet long, the backbone one foot and a half thick, and the
ribs higher than those of the Indian elephant (a cachelot?). Ajasson
declared that the remains should have been sent to those who show in
their collections the weapon with which Cain slew Abel. Pausanias
(second century) saw the Lydda streamlet red with blood, where Perseus
had bathed after killing the ‘Ketos.’ At Joppa St. Jerome was shown the
traditional rock in which holes had been worn by Andromeda’s fetters.
The spot is now clean forgotten—at least, all my inquiries failed to
find it. The testimony is of the highest character; unfortunately it
testifies to impossibilities—all monsters are ‘contradictory beings.’
The Ketos, whale or shark (_Canis Carcharias_), is evidently the same
that swallowed Hercules and Jonah.

[575] Mgr. Bianchini very improperly translates _Harpé_ by ‘glaive,’
and other writers absurdly use ‘scymitar.’ They could hardly better
describe what it was _not_.

[576] The bronze Perseus of Benvenuto Cellini in the Loggie dell’
Orgagna of Florence holds a falx-Sword or falchion.

[577] Hence possibly the town Arsúf; and (the Isle of) Seripho, where
Perseus was worshipped.

[578] There seem to be three of the name: Palladius, the first
missionary to Ireland; Sen Patrick, who studied under St. Germanus and
died A.D. 458–61; and Patrick M‘Calphurn, also a pupil of St. Germanus,
who missionarised about A.D. 440–42.

[579] _Horus et Saint-Georges_, &c. See also a kind of sentimental
study æsthetically baptised ‘Saint Mark’s Rest: the Place of Dragons,’
by J. R. Anderson.

[580] From דג (_dag_), a fish, a Ketos, the Phœnician דגון (_Dajun_,
_Dagon_); Dagan is the male, Dalas the female. Simply a fish-god.
Sardanapalus was ‘he who knows Anu (the god) and Dagon.’

[581] Others found at Cannæ resemble the copper Swords of Ireland,
according to the _Encyclopædia Metropolitana_.

[582] The ‘tariff of masses,’ from the temple of Baal at Marseille,
speaks of Chaltzibah the Sufet. Other inscriptions inform us that
the Carthaginians had a triad, Baal Hammon (Ammon); the Lady Tanith
Pen Baal (Tanis or Neith, the πρόσωπον, or face, of Baal), and
Iolaus.—_Phœnician Inscriptions_, by the Rev. D. I. Heath.

[583] Ezekiel (xxxii. 27). ‘And they shall not lie with the mighty that
are fallen of the uncircumcised, which are gone down to hell [Sheol =
Shuala, the ghost-land of Babylon] with their weapons of war: _and they
have laid their Swords under their heads_, but their iniquities shall
be upon their bones, though they were the terror of the mighty in the
land of the living.’

[584] The Hebrews were probably included under the ‘miserable
foreigners,’ who, at that time, numbered about one-third of the
Egyptian people. It was the fashion to find ‘Hebrew’ in the ’Aper,
’Apura, ’Aperiu, and ’Apiurui of the monuments; but Brugsch has shown
that these were the original ‘Erythræans,’ equestrian Arabs of the
barrens extending from Heliopolis onward to modern Suez.

[585] _Trattato di Scherma_, &c. di Alberto Marchionni (Firenze:
Bencini, 1547).

[586] This word will be noticed in chapter xi. I cannot wholly agree
with Colonel Lane-Fox (_Anthrop. Coll._ p. 99) when he speaks of a
‘leaf-shaped Sword-blade attached to the end of the spear, like the
Thracian _romphea_ and the European _partisan_ of mediæval times.’

[587] May not this older form of Jupiter have derived from the
‘Semitic’ root יה, Jah (_Yah_), carried westward by the Phœnicians?
But this is ‘stirring the fire with a Sword,’ against which Pythagoras
warns us.

[588] ‘Les Figures de l’Histoire d’après la Bible,’ &c. (the
_Athenæum_, Feb. 31, 1880). ‘Lahat’ (the Germ. _lohe_, our ‘low’
or ‘lowe’) is in the singular a ‘flame’; in the plural ‘spells,
enchantments by drugs,’ &c.

[589] Mr. Gerald Massey would identify the Jewish Chereb, like the
Phœnician Hereba and the Greek Harpé, with the Egyptian Kherp,
[Hieroglyphs], the sign of majesty typified by an oar or rather
paddle—[Hieroglyphs]. Thus the Kherp first cut the water like a
propeller, then the grain as a sickle, and at last it became a
Sword—the reaper of men. This is ingenious, but nothing more: the white
arm in Egypt shows no sign of derivation from the oar.

[590] So Jeanne d’Arc’s Sword was taken from a church, as will appear
in Part II.

[591] Tacitus (_Hist._ v. 13) calls them a ‘band of murderers.’ The
ominous word ‘Sicarius’ first occurs in Jewish history during Josephus’
time (_Bell. Jud._ iv. 7; vii. 11). St. Paul was charged by Lysias
with heading four thousand Sicarii, who at great feasts murdered their
victims with concealed daggers. Also forty Sicarii bound themselves by
the Cherem-oath (the original ‘Boycotting’) to slay Paul. The Sica or
Sicca will be noticed in another chapter.

[592] The Machabæan epoch is interesting, because during it the idea of
a ‘resurrection’ was established. The word should be written ‘Makabi’
if derived from Mi Kamo Ka Baalim Yahveh (Ex. xv. 11).

[593] The number is given in Chronicles (1, xxi. 5) at one million
five hundred and seventy thousand without including Levi and Benjamin.
Many attempts have been made to reconcile the little difference of two
hundred and seventy thousand souls.

[594] I shall notice Assyrian Arms in chap. x.

[595] By a curious feat of etymology, this word, or rather the
German ‘Philister’ (confounded with _Balestarius_ or _Balestæus_, a
crossbow-man, the militia of small artisans?) has come to signify in
modern parlance one indifferent to ‘intellectual interest’ and the
‘higher culture.’ As applied to the enemy it is simply Prig writ large.

[596] _The Old Testament in the Jewish Church_, p. 126, by the Rev. W.
Robertson Smith (Blacks, Edinburgh, 1881).

[597] Napoleon Buonaparte was right in attributing the instability of
the great empires (Egypt, Babylon, Assyria) bordered by the Bedawin,
to the destructive action of the Arab race: ‘That most mischievous
nation whom it is never desirable to have either for friends or
enemies’ (Ammian. Marcell. xiv. 4). I have enlarged upon this subject
in _Unexplored Syria_ (i. 210). The first noted outswarming was of
the Hyksos or Shepherd-Kings (B.C. 1480 to 1530?). Another, under the
influence of Mohammed the Apostle of Allah, changed the condition of
the Old World; and in the present day, Turkish dominion in the regions
frontiered by Arabia is being seriously threatened. Hence Ibn Khaldún
of Tunis, who in A.D. 1332 began to write philosophical history,
assigns to empire in the East three generations (= 120 years) and
three several steps. The first, youth, is of growth (campaigning and
annexing); the religion being fanaticism and the form of government a
limited monarchy of a semi-republican type. The second, manhood, is a
period of ‘rest and be thankful,’ of not ‘stirring up things quiet’;
of enjoyment, of easy scepticism, of luxury, of despotism, The third,
age, is decline and fall, the triumph of financiers and capitalists;
of aversion from war and from ‘territorial aggrandisement’; it is
distinguished by employing mercenaries, by religious disbelief, by
tyrannic rule. (_Ibn Chaldun und seine Culturgeschichte_, Baron A. von
Kremer. Wien.)

[598] This has apparently been done by the Rev. Mr. Porter, the author
of that unpraiseworthy _Murray’s Handbook_. His Strabo had told him
that Gaza lay seven stadia or furlongs from the sea; and St. Jerome
that a new town had been built. Yet we are led three miles from the
shore to modern Ghazzah, and are gravely told of Moslem absurdities
concerning the Makám or tomb of Samson. The old port of which the
Ancients speak has evidently been buried by the sands which are
attacking Bayrút, and the only survivor of the past may be the site
of Shaykh Ijlin on the coast, south of the Mínat or present roads.
In noticing Askelon, Mr. Porter tells us all about the old story of
Ascalonia, Scallion, Shalot: nothing about the Egyptian Ac-qa-li-na.
For a third edition the learned author should take the trouble to
consult Brugsch Pasha’s Egypto-Syrian studies.

[599] See chap. iv.

[600] _Cyprus_, before quoted.

[601] Aphrodite or Venus (Urania and Pandemos, Porné and Hetæra), at
once the feminine principle in nature, the original mother and the
idea of womanly beauty, was a universal personage. In Egypt she was
Athor the Goddess of Pleasure, and Ashtar in Nilotic Mendes. Amongst
the Arabs she became Beltis, Baaltis the feminine of Bel or Ba’al, and
Alitta (Al-ilat the goddess); among the Sidonians Ashtoreth (1 Kings
xi. 33); in Phœnicia, Ishtar and Astarte, which Gesenius takes to be a
Semitisation of the Persian Sitáreh, a star (_i.e._ Venus); in Byblos,
Dionæa and Dione; in other parts of Syria, Derceto, Atergatis (Ta-ur-t,
Thoueris), and Nani, the latter still surviving in the Bibi Nani
(Lady Venus) of Afghanistan. In Cyprus she was Anat, Tanat, or Tanith
(Ta-neith = Athene?); in Persia and Armenia Mítra (Herod. i. 131),
Tanata, and Anaitis = Anahid, the planet Venus; and in Carthage, Tarnt
Pen Baal.

[602] In Heb. Kinnúr, a lyre of six to nine strings resembling the
Nubian article. Hence, probably, κιθάρα, Cithara, Chitarra, Guitar,
Zither; but there is a modification by the Persian Sih-tárah or ‘the
three-stringed.’

[603] Thus in Jeremiah (xxiii. 29), ‘Is not my word like as a fire?
saith the Lord; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?’

[604] I see with pleasure that Mr. W. P. Palmer proposes to continue
his exploration of Phrygia; his lecture before the Hellenic Society
(Dec. 14, 1882) promises much. The western half of the great western
plateau of Asia Minor, this land of monotonous grandeur, is directly
connected with the Ægean Sea by a single line of cleavage which extends
from Miletus to Celænæ. Egyptian art and influence found its way to
Greece _viâ_ Phrygia as well as through Phœnicia, especially in the
early days of the Argonauts and the _Iliads_, when Greece began to be
connected with nearer Asia. Hence the wide diffusion of the Midas-myth
(B.C. 670): the long-eared king’s tomb was discovered in 1800. I
have elsewhere noticed how far Phrygia extended to the West, leaving
indelible marks in Spain and Portugal.

[605] The Lycian tongue, as far as we know, resembles Zend; and
the coin with a triquetra (Rawlinson’s _Herod._ i. 212) has three
characters apparently Hittite. The Lycian confederacy of twenty-three
towns (six cities being chief) was strong enough to resist
Crœsus (Herodotus). Their relationship was by the ‘distaff-side’
(_Mutterrecht_), as opposed to the ‘Sword-side’; and we find traces
of the same antique and logical practice among the Greeks: ἀδελφὸς is
evidently derived from δελφύς.

[606] Major di Cesnola _On Phœnician Art in Cyprus_: the proofs are
‘gold and silver ornaments of remarkable beauty and grace,’ which are
said to resemble the produce of Hissarlik.

[607] The Cyprian Venus was worshipped in the form of an Umbilicus or
Meta, according to Servius (ad _Æn._ i. 724). Others compare it with a
pyramid.

[608] _Numismatique et Inscriptions Cypriotes_, Paris, 1832. The Dali
inscription is compared with the Lycian at the end of vol. i. pt. 1,
_Soc. of Bibl. Archæol._ 1872. Discussing the eighty characters, the
Duc de Luynes found twenty-seven Egyptian, twelve Lycian, and seven
Phœnician. This would suggest that the syllabary is a branch of the
picture-writing which grew to be an alphabet proper in the Nile Valley,
and which, modified by the Phœnicians, passed into Greece. Others
hold it to be an imperfect modification of the Assyrian cuneiforms,
introduced about B.C. 700 and lasting till Alexander’s day. I have
already noticed that the cuneiforms were originally pictures of natural
objects; and that the same is evidently the case with the Chinese
syllabary. Some of the Cypriot signs show a faint resemblance to the
Devanagari alphabet, which we know to be a modern offshoot from South
Arabian or Himyaritic. A gold incision from the Curium treasury (Plate
xxxiv. No. 7) consists of two crescents adossed, which may be either
Hittite or a simple ornament. Mr. Sayce, indeed, derives the syllabary
from Khita-land. Of the crescent and the star I have already spoken; no
date can be assigned to it in decorative art.

[609] I have figured a similar but broader blade as the Novacula in
_Etruscan Bologna_, p. 66. The Prague Museum has about a dozen of these
sickles found near Tepl: one (_b_) with a rivet-hole and a kind of
beading. In the collection of Carinthian Klagenfurth I found a sickle
(_c_, No. 1711) fifteen and a half cent. long by four broad, with an
Etruscan inscription [Etruscan]. See Chap. X.

[610] The winged Sphinxes upon this patera with hawks’ heads are
peculiarly Egyptian. _The_ Sphinx, which may be older than the
Pyramids, is a man-headed lion—the ‘union of force and intellect.’
Later types change the human head to that of an asp, a ram, and a hawk;
and supply the latter with wings. The same is the case with the Sphinx
of Troy and Assyria: it is mostly alate. The Grecian Sphinx changed
the bearded human head to that of a woman; the Gyno-Sphinx in Egypt
being later than the Andro-Sphinx. We find the female in the doorway of
the Xanthus frieze and over the sarcophagus at Amathus (_Cyprus_, pp.
264–267). Those who would understand the peculiar beauty, not only of
line but of expression, which the Egyptians threw into the face of the
Sphinx have only to study the statue standing to the proper left of the
main entrance to Shepheard’s Hotel, Cairo. It came, I believe, from the
great Dromos of the Serapeum, the Apis-tombs of the marvellous Memphis
cemetery.

[611] Meaning Holy Lady or Great Goddess, the Syria Dea. Preceded by
the digamma, the word became Famagosta, and was corrupted to Fama
Augusti and to Ammochosti, a sand-heap.

[612] See his diagram, p. 10, _Troy and its Remains_.

[613] See chapter viii. These assertions are fair specimens of the
harm done to philology, in uncritical England, by the one-sided and
_ad captandum_ views of the ‘Sanskritists.’ Mr. Gerald Massey hardly
exaggerates when he says (i. 135), ‘It looks as if the discovery of
Sanskrit were doomed to be a fatal find for the philologists of our
generation.’ The peculiar mixture of philology, in its specialist
form, with the science of religion and the tenebræ of metaphysics has,
it appears to me, done much harm to all three; but it delighted the
half-educated public. It met with scant appreciation in acute France
and in critical Germany, where the editing, or rather mutilation, of
texts, has been severely chastised. But the Sanskritist, much to the
discredit of Oriental studies and of philology in England, has given us
an indigestion of Sanskritism; during the last great Oriental Congress
in London he almost monopolised time and attention, to the prejudice of
Orientalism in general. Apparently a protest is on the point of being
raised; but, unhappily, Teutonism is still a scourge in Great Britain,
and the typical Solar myth, ‘like Hermann’s a German.’

[614] Except, of course, in the bronze.

[615] Charles Rau (?), an American, by means of a bow, and without
using metal, bored a hole through an axe of diorite: it occupied him
ten hours a day for four months (Jähns, p. 6).

[616] In mediæval Romance ‘Ilios,’ ‘Ilion,’ and ‘Ilium’ were applied to
the Palace of Priam.

[617] _Juventus Mundi_, by the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, p. 529.

[618] May it not be the black hæmatite used in Cyprus? Compare the
goose’s head, the sacred basket, and the frog, Egyptian symbol of
embryonic man and of Hor-Apollo (Harpocrates), in General Palma
(Appendix, p. 364). But is this able writer sure about his ‘hæmatite’?

[619] I.e. to one looking north and therefore west. The old Egyptians
faced to the south (Hín or Khount), which they called ‘upwards’ or
‘forwards,’ in opposition to the North, which was the lower (Khir)
or hinder part (Pehu). Thus their right was west (Unim) and their
left east (Semah): the right leg of Osiris was the western side of
the Delta. So Pliny (ii. 6) makes his observer front southwards. The
Assyrian and Semites faced east (Kadam or front, opposed to Akhir or
Shalam, the sun’s _resting_-place): hence their right (Yemen) was the
south, and their left (Sham) was north. They introduced this fashion
into Ancient India, where, consequently, Dakshina (_dextra_, the right
hand) became the south, and survives in our ‘Deccan.’ The practice even
extended to Ireland where Eiꞃin or Eꞃin (Erin, Ierne) has been derived
from the Keltic iaꞃ, behind, the west; and in, an island, the isle
lying west of France and Britain.

[620] Travellers who have inspected the excavations deride these
pompous terms: the ruins look well in book-illustrations, but the
reality is mean in the extreme.

[621] Dr. Schliemann shows the human umbilicus adorned with a cross.
The significance of such phrases as ‘omphalos of the earth’ applied
to Delphi and Paphos, is generally misunderstood. Any traveller in
India who has seen a Lingait temple would at once explain it, as well
as the illustration in Wilkinson (vol. i. ch. iv. p. 270) showing the
Lingam-Yoni, whose worshippers are ‘cherubim’ (i.e. winged Thmei).
Similarly the symbol of Chemosh of Moab and of sundry classical gods
was a cone. The Dea Multimamma, Cybele, miscalled ‘Artemis’ (Diana) of
the Ephesians, was a statue, not a cone, but it stood upon an inverted
pyramid. The uninitiated as little understand the Crux Ansata or
Egyptian Cross, the emblem of life and fecundity, which was adopted by
the Coptic Christians. The sacred Tau (Tau of Ezekiel ix. 6) gave rise
to the Maltese Cross in Phœnicia, and in Assyria became the emblem of
Shamas the sun.

[622] I need hardly remind ‘Grecians’ that Tychius is supposed to have
been a personal friend of the arch-Homerid.

[623] Upon this point Dr. Schliemann’s _Mycenæ_ is more explicit.

[624] It is, I need hardly say, still a disputed point whether the
Homeric Greeks could or could not write. See chapter xi.

[625] M. F. Lenormant, the _Academy_, March 21 and 28, 1874.

[626] I must again protest against the use, while compelled by want of
another to use the term ‘Indo-European,’ which, applied to language,
contains an unproved theory. India did not supply Europe either with
speech or with population. The popular belief appears erroneous as
is its appreciation of Darwinism, which did _not_ derive man from
monkey. The original Egyptian roots developed themselves into a host
of dialects which flourished and perished before Pali and Sanskrit,
a professor’s tongue, like mediæval Latin, never understanded of the
people, assumed their present shapes.

[627] _North American Review._

[628] Professor Jebb quotes M. Dumont, _Céramique de la Grèce Propre_.

[629] The _Academy_, Dec. 9, 1882.

[630] I have treated the question popularly in _Etruscan Bologna_
(London: Smith, Elder, & Co., 1876). The study owed its existence
to the Rev. Isaac Taylor, who, using the Family Pen once too often,
supported the Turanian origin of the Etruscans in a marvellously
uncritical and unscholar-like book, _Etruscan Researches_ (London:
Macmillan & Co., 1874).

[631] The stater of Crœsus was the first gold coin known to the Greeks.
Most of the classical authors declare that silver was first coined at
Ægina by order of Pheidon (circa B.C. 869).

[632] Hamilton (_Asia Minor_, vol. i. pp. 145–6) has carefully
described this most interesting monument.

[633] See the ‘colossal male head’ in General Palma di Cesnola,
_Cyprus_, p. 123.

[634] Preface to _History of Egypt_, p. xvi; and vol. ii. 124, where
a list of racial names is given. Brugsch, it should be noted, is here
entirely opposed to his predecessors, De Rougé, Chabas, &c.

[635] As opposed to the Aqaiuasha or Achæans of the Caucasus (ii. 124).

[636] ‘I have seen it affirmed that in those times (early Roman) the
youth was instructed in the Etruscan learning, as they are now in the
Greek’ (Livy ix. 35).

[637] Described in _Etruscan Bologna_, p. 144. The blade is in Count
Aria’s collection. The Sword of Misanello, _une longue epée de fer_,
also in that museum, is noticed in p. 359, _Transactions of the
Congress of Bologna_ in 1871.

[638] One vol. folio large quarto, with 17 Tables. It was preceded by
‘Di una necropoli a Marzabotto nel Bolognese,’ 1865, large quarto, with
20 Tables. Count Gozzadini is one of the earliest students who followed
in the steps of M. Boucher de Perthes.

[639] A fine specimen of a dagger from Thebes with the rapier-blade,
and a broad flat hilt of ivory, is in the Berlin Museum.

[640] _Di un antico Sepolcro a Ceretolo nel Bolognese_ (Modena:
Vincenzi, 1879), p. 9.

[641] This weapon resembled the bronze forms found at Broilo in Tuscany
and in the great collection discovered in 1875 and called the ‘Fonderia
di Bologna.’ An account of the latter is found in _Note Archeologiche_,
&c. (Bologna: Fava e Garagnani, 1881).

[642] The learned French anthropologist compared these weapons with
those found in the Marne graves. (_Les Gaulois de Marzabotto, Revue
Archéol._ 1870–71, &c.)

[643] Count Gozzadini replied in M. G. de Mortillet’s _Matériaux pour
l’Histoire primitive de l’Homme_; and the paper was entitled by the
Editor (not by the author), ‘L’Élément Étrusque de Marzabotto est sans
mélange avec l’élément gaulois’ (Jan. 1873).

[644] _L’Étrurie et les Etrusques_, vol. i. p. 93. Atlas, p. 2, Pl. II.

[645] Genthe, _Program_, &c. p. 15.

[646] The bronze is in the British Museum; the iron in the possession
of Mr. H. S. Cuming (Meyrick).

[647] XXVIII. cap. 45.

[648] Vol. iv, Pl. XXX.; it is copied by Meyrick.

[649] The writer of this sentence is, curious to say, the learned
Dr. Birch (p. 5, vol. i., _Soc. Bib. Archæology_, 1872). Even Justin
(lib. i.) knew better; he makes Sesostris (ii. 3) 1,500 years older
than Ninus, ‘the most ancient king of Assyria,’ whom he places in B.C.
2196–2144 (Wetzel).

[650] In the LXX Orech; the Cuneiform Uru-ki (City of the Land); in
Talmud, Urikut, City of the Dead for Babylon (_hod._ Warka); and in
Greek Orchóe, whence perhaps ‘Orcus.’ Urukh became among the Classics
of Europe ‘pater Orchamus.’

[651] _Assyrian Discoveries_ (London: Sampson Low & Co., 1876), p. 447.
He gives, as a scheme of Abydenus and Berosus, the Chaldæan:—

                                                    Years.
  Alorus and 9 kings before the Babylonian Flood    432,000
  86 kings after B. Flood to Median conquest
     (1st dynasty)                                   34,080 (33,091)
   8 Median kings (2nd dynasty)                         224 (160?)
  11 other (3rd dynasty )                               unknown
  49 Chaldæan (4th dynasty)                             458
   9 Arabian (5th dynasty)                              245
  Semiramis
  45 kings (7th dynasty)                                526

Nabonidus, the antiquary king (B.C. 555), according to a Cylinder found
at Sipar (Sepharvaim, Sun-city) and studied by Mr. Pinches, assigns a
date to the deified Sargina of about B.C. 3,800 years. He unburied,
18 cubits below the surface, the Cylinder of Naramsin, son of Sargina
(B.C. 3750?), ‘which no king had seen for 3,200 years.’ Sir Henry C.
Rawlinson (the _Athenæum_, Dec. 9, 1882) is disposed to accept the date
‘within certain limits.’

[652] The word is Har-Minni, or Mountains of the Minni. The oldest
Armenian inscriptions date from the eighth century B.C.

[653] It was in attacking these Khita that Ramses II. (Sesostris) left
his three ‘columns’ or tablets on the rocks near the Nahr el-Kalb of
Bayrut (chap. ix.). Six Assyrian inscriptions were also known there,
bearing the names of Assur-ris-ilîm, Tiglath-pileser, Assurnazirpal,
Shalmanesar, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon. No epigraphs were found on
the north side of the river, where an ancient aqueduct, overgrown
with luxuriant verdure, turns a mill. About three years ago, however,
the proprietor, when making a new channel, broke away part of the
rock, and a fragment bearing cuneiforms attracted the attention of
Dr. Hartmann, Chancellor of the German Consulate. No other steps were
taken till October 10, 1881, when M. Julius Loytved, Danish Vice-Consul
for Bayrut, bared the face of the cliff and discovered five cuneiform
inscriptions, one containing 45 lines. They seem to have been hastily
cut, as they follow the shape of the rock whose surface has not been
dressed. According to Professor Sayce, they are Babylonian, not
Assyrian.

[654] Or Asshur, ‘the Arbiter of the Gods,’ represented by the winged
disc of Egypt.

[655] Nineveh, destroyed by the Medes (Manda or Madu) and Persians in
B.C. 583, had thus a life of 1,617 years, assuming its origin at the
middle term, B.C. 2200.

[656] Brugsch, vol. i. chap. xvi., shows that Seshonk (Shishak) and
other Pharaohs of the Twenty-first Dynasty were Assyrians who ruled
‘Mat Muz-ur,’ the people of Egypt.

[657] The great scholar derives from Egypt the Cuneiform Syllabarium,
which was originally pictorial:—drawing everywhere preceded writing.
The astronomy of Mesopotamia is Egyptian (the unit of measure being
the ell of 0·525 mètre); and the architecture, that prime creation of
the human mind, shows by temples, temple-towers, tombs, and especially
pyramids (e.g. that at Birs Namrud), an imperfect imitation of the Nile
Valley. Herodotus attributes to Babylon the discovery of the Pole, the
Sun-dial, and the twelve hours of day, all well known to ancient Egypt.
The ‘Sabbaths’ are Assyrian.

[658] The _Athenæum_, July 24, 1880.

[659] That the Assyrians had books appears plainly from the
inscriptions: ‘In the night-time bind round the sick man’s head a
sentence taken from a good book’ (a soporific!). Parchment was most
probably the first material (_Trans. of Soc. Bib. Archæology_, vols.
ii. 55, and iii. 432); and the language proves that the papyrus-scroll
(Duppu-ga-zu) was known.

[660] We find in Assyria the wild goat standing upon a capital, now the
arms of Istria. The same appears at Palmyra (Prof. Socin’s Collection).
The winged bulls probably suggested, like the Egyptian Cherubs, our
angels’ wings. These motors should now be forbidden in statuary by
Act of Parliament; or the artist should be compelled to supply the
pinions with the muscles necessary for working them. I need hardly say
that the required development would convert the human dorsum to the
appearance of the two-humped camel. The late Gustave Doré’s admirable
illustrations of Dante (_Purgat._ xix. 51) sin greatly in this way.

[661] A goddess in alabaster has in each hand a lotus flower, which she
holds against her breasts. This is characteristic of old Egypt, which
derived the plant from the Equatorial African Lake-region. The same
figure again wears a large Egyptian wig, the hair falling in ringlets
upon the shoulders.

[662] The Soma, a weed in India (_Asclepias gigantea_), is a derivation
from Homa. The Persea, or Egyptian Tree of Life, was probably the
_Balanitis Ægyptiaca_.

[663] The careless confusion of Svastika, the worshipper-sect, with
Svasti, the symbol, was made by me in my Commentary on Camoens (chap.
iv. ‘Geographical’). Burnouf (Emile), in _La Science des Religions_,
made the Svasti the feminine principle; and the Pramantha, or
perpendicular fire-stick, the male. If used on sacrificial altars to
produce the holy fire (_Agni_), the practice was peculiar, and not
derived from every-day-life: as Pliny knew (xvi. 77), the savage uses
two, never three, fire-sticks. The Svasti is apparently the simplest
form of the guilloche. According to Wilkinson (II. chap. ix.), the most
complicated form of the guilloche covered an Egyptian ceiling upwards
of a thousand years older than the objects found at Nineveh. The Svasti
spread far and wide, everywhere assuming some fresh mythological and
mysterious significance. In the north of Europe it became the Fylfot or
crutched cross.

[664] Assyria, like Egypt, cultivated geometry and algebra, which
have been supposed to originate from revenue surveys and altar
measurements. She used the Astrolabe and popularised square roots and
fractions, with a denominator of 60, the sole representative of the
decimal and duodecimal systems. With her fall (B.C. 555) coincides
the birth of literature in Greece, where writing became general about
B.C. 500. The Assyrians were great in magic and in divination, such as
birth-portents, dog-omens, &c. &c.

[665] Again Egyptian. Wilkinson, II. chap. vii.

[666] The nearest site would be the Caucasus, which in early ages
yielded a small supply. Layard (p. 191) supposes the tin to have been
obtained from Phœnicia; and, ‘consequently, that used in the (Assyrian)
bronzes of the British Museum may actually have been exported, nearly
three thousand years ago, from the British Isles.’

[667] A ‘copper instrument from Koyunjik’ (Layard, p. 596) is shaped
exactly like the so-called Etruscan razors. See chap. ix.

[668] Layard, _Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 163.

[669] See chap. vi. He figures one of the latter (_Discoveries in the
Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon_, p. 195): it measured 3 feet 8 inches
long by 4⅝ inches in breadth.

[670] ‘Assyrians placing a human-headed bull on a car,’ with levers and
ropes (Layard, p. 112), reminds us of the statue of Ramses II., and
shows that the people could move enormous weights. Both societies had
‘unbounded command of naked human strength.’

[671] Demmin, pp. 293–94.

[672] We have still to explain ‘Kakku’ (weapon?) and ‘Gizzin’
(scymitar?).

[673] In the Tablets we read of the ‘Star of the double Sword’ (Kakab
gir-tab) [Cuneiform]. ‘Hammasti,’ also, is the ‘blade of the double
Sword.’

[674] ‘Ashur create a Son,’ B.C. 673. _Assyrian Discoveries_, by G.
Smith (London: Sampson Low, 1876).

[675] For instance, that in the bas-reliefs of Burs Nimrúd, B.C. 1000,
now in the Louvre. The hippopotamus is now never found out of Africa.

[676] With cavalry as well as infantry (Layard, p. 55). Upon this, a
very complicated subject, I shall have much to say.

[677] Whence the French _cravache_.

[678] This abomination popularly derives from Semiramis
(Sa-am-mu-ra-mat) of Assyria, and extended far and wide. Even in the
earlier part of the present century eunuchs were manufactured for
Christian and Catholic Rome. The practice is still kept up in Egypt,
Turkey, and Persia, although strictly forbidden by the Apostle of Allah.

[679] Col. Hanbury exhibited it at the British Museum. Notes by Mr. W.
St. Chad Boscawen, read April 6: _Trans. Soc. Bib. Archæology_, vol.
iv. Part II. 1876.

[680] Nebo, in the inscriptions, holds a golden reed or rod, as the
Homeric Hermes is Χρυσόρραπις; he also leads the ghosts to Hades. The
Chaldæan gods were, like the Egyptian, deceased ancestors, and they
were followed by natural objects, _Anu_ (sky), _Bel_ (earth), _Hea_
(sea), personified into a vast and various mythology. Sun, moon, and
æther, were the first Triad of Babylon. Thus the Chthonic gods of
Greece, Uranus (the Egyptian _Urnas_), Gaia and Thalassa (Assyrian),
preceded the Olympic anthropomorphism. Of course they were represented
with human shapes. Presently the priest introduced as godheads
cosmo-poetic causes and effects, which presently peopled the Pantheon
with glorified men. For, I repeat, man worships only one thing—himself.

[681] George Smith, _Chaldæan Genesis_, pp. 62, 95.

[682] _Sibri_ or _Sibirru_. I have noted the probable derivation of
this word from the Egyptian Sf, Sayf, or Seft; and its resemblance to
our ‘sabre.’

[683] Budil (says Mr. Boscawen) succeeded his father in B.C. 1350. He
defended the north-eastern peoples, the Nari and the Guti, Gutium or
Goim; he also built largely, and his son, Vul-nirari (Vul is my hope),
from whose palace the Sword came, was one of the greatest of the early
Assyrian kings. The British Museum has a long inscription recording his
restoration of the causeway leading to the Temple of Ashur.

[684] Layard advocates the theory that the Persians and Hindús
separated from a common centre about B.C. 1500. But of what Hindús does
he speak? Certainly not of the ‘Turanian’ tribes, which peopled the
peninsula before the Brahmin immigration.

[685] The Greeks having no _sh_ sound, turned Kurush into Kyros.

[686] Media was North-Western Persia, from Armenia to Azerbáiján,
south of the Caspian. ‘Great Armenia’ afterwards included Georgia and
Abkhasia. From their racial name Manda or Mada came the Greek Mantiene
and Matiene. (See _Bib. Archæology_, Nov. 9, 1882.)

[687] Herod. i. 136, 138, &c. All writers assure us that the ancient
Egyptians and Persians, the Chinese and Hindús (Marco Polo), were
truth-telling races who abhorred a lie. ‘How sweet a thing is truth!’
exclaimed a Nile-dweller. In the Carpentras Inscription the Lady Ta-Bai
‘spoke no falsehoods against any one.’ In the trilingual Behistun
Inscription (B.C. 516) Darius the king says, ‘Thou who mayest be king
hereafter, the man who may be a liar, and who may be an evil-doer,
destroy them with the destruction of the Sword’ (col. iv. par. 14).
They are now emphatically the reverse. The wild tribes, such as the
Bedawin, the Iliyát, and the outcasts of India, still preserve the
old characteristic. ‘The word of a Korager’ is proverbial on the West
Coast of the Hindu Peninsula. I cannot but attribute the deterioration
to extensive commerce, contact with strangers, and change of faith.
The subject, however, is too vast and important even to glance at in
these pages; but I may note that the Hindú has deteriorated even in my
day. In 1845 the trade-books of a Sahukár (merchant) were received as
evidence in our law courts. In 1883 the idea would be scouted.

[688] The conquests of Alexander the Great had given the civilised
world a unity of language. The Ptolemies, having asserted Greek mastery
in Egypt, established that perfect toleration which is proved by the
Septuagint, Manetho and Berosus.

[689] Famous in the Book of Esther (Amestris), which contains scant
traces of the faith of Israel. This terrible virago (B.C. 474) caused
the massacre of 800 men at Shushan, and 7,500 in the provinces. From
the Pehlevi name of Xerxes (Khshhershe), possibly we may derive the
modern titles, ‘Shah’ and ‘Shahanshah.’

[690] Hence, perhaps, Pukhtu or Pushtu, the Afghan language, an old and
rugged dialect of Persian type.

[691] The South American lasso has been pitted, of course on horseback,
against the Sword. Many a murder has been committed with it in the
Argentine Republic, the victim being ‘thugged’ unawares and dragged
to death. Needless to say, the lasso was well known in Egypt (Wilk.
i. 4), where it was used to catch the gazelle and even the wild ox.
The Pasha or Indian lasso was ten cubits long, with a noose one hand
in circumference. It was composed of very small scales, ornamented
with leaden balls; and was not regarded as a ‘noble weapon.’ The Roman
gladiators, called ‘Laqueatores,’ derived their name from the lasso:
they must not be confounded with the ‘Retiarii.’

[692] _A. J_. xx. 7, sec. 10.

[693] To be noticed in a future chapter (xii.).

[694] Chap. ix.

[695] _Travels in Georgia, Persia, &c._ (1817–20), by Sir Robert Ker
Porter. Other illustrators are Le Bruyn, Chardin, Niebuhr, and Leake
(_Athens_, ii. pp. 22–26).

[696] It may, however, have been treated as a dagger, while the Sword
was worn on the left.

[697] Wilkinson (_Egyptians_, II. chap. v.) remarks, ‘If there is any
connection between the religions of Egypt and India, this must be
ascribed to the period before the two races left Central Asia’; and
Layard, it has been said, would place that period about 1500 B.C. I
again protest against the idea that the Egyptian ever came from, or had
ever anything to do with, ‘Central Asia,’ beyond civilising it.

[698] Chandragupta (Sandracottus?) B.C. 316; his son Bindusara, B.C.
291; and his grandson (Dharm) Asoka or Priyadasi, B.C. 250–241, whose
children divided the empire. The Topes are probably Phallic buildings.

[699] I would explain the fact that India is confounded with East
Africa by the classics and by mediæval geographers as a survival of the
connection of the continents in the Miocene and, perhaps, in even later
ages.

[700] Utilised by Horace Hayman Wilson in his article ‘On the Art of
War as known to the Hindús.’ Dhanu (Sanskr. the bow) came to signify
any missile or weapon; and hence, Dhanúrvidya comprised the knowledge
of all other arms. The bow was also named; for instance, that of Vishnu
was called Shárnga (Oppert, p. 77).

[701] The Commander-in-Chief drew four thousand Varvas (gold coins) per
mensem. Prof. Oppert, with true German _naïveté_, says (p. 8), ‘If this
scale of salaries is correct, and if the salaries were really paid, one
would be inclined to think that an extensive gold currency existed in
ancient India.’ That the country worked its gold mines is proved by the
Wynaad and other diggings, lately reopened, but we may fairly doubt the
coinage;—at least, till a coin be found.

[702] I now borrow from Professor Gustav Oppert, _On the Weapons &c. of
the Ancient Hindus_ (London: Trübner, 1880). Unfortunately the work is
unillustrated. Its capital fault is not adducing proofs, or offering
highly unsatisfactory proofs, of the antiquity to be attributed to its
authorities, the Shukraniti (p. 43); the Naishedha (p. 69), and the
various pagodas showing firearms (p. 76). The Mánavad-harmashástra,
or Institutes of Menu (Halhed, p. 53), speaks of ‘darts blazing with
fire,’ a well-known missile, but not to be confounded with firearms
proper. And the Institutes in their actual form are comparatively
modern.

[703] Prof. Oppert gives the names of all these subdivisions; and, at
the same time, a lesson in Hindú absurdity (p. 11).

[704] Here we have the true Indian imaginativeness. The idea of a
Western anthropomorphising a bow after this fashion!

[705] Prof. Oppert says that Book III. of the Nitípra-kashika is
entirely devoted to the Khadga. In the Shukraniti, as will be seen, the
word denotes a two-handed Sword six feet long. The Professor translates
it ‘broadsword.’

[706] He lived between the tenth and thirteenth centuries and wrote
a notable Ovidian work. A translation is now being printed (not
published) by the Hindoo Káma-Shastra Society of London and Benares.

[707] The Italian word is evidently a diminutive of the Latin _stilus_,
or rather _stylus_ (στῦλος). Dagger (Germ. Dolch) is from the Keltic
_dag_, point. Degen, a larger weapon, originally means a warrior; hence
the Anglo-Sax. Thaegn and our Thane.

[708] Strabo (xv. 1, § 66) makes the Indian Sword three cubits (= four
feet and a half) in length; and the Greeks of the Alexandrine day
notice two-handed Swords and bow-drawing with the feet.

[709] Roteiro, p. 115.

[710] This is evidently inverted. The huge falchion, an exaggeration of
the Kukkri, may be seen in the British Museum, one blade inscribed with
Pali characters. Most of these huge weapons were used in sacrificing;
and the low-caste Mhars still behead with falchions the buffalos
offered to Kali.

[711] He constantly appears in the Mahabhárata, especially in Book I.

[712] Some writers are determined to find chess amongst the Romans, and
quote the Panegyric of Piso, and the game of Latrunculi. But if so,
where are their chessmen? The earliest allusion in any known author is
in Anna Comnena’s Alexias, when the First Crusade had done some good by
mixing the Eastern and the Western worlds.

[713] _Loc. cit._ p. 61.

[714] _Sport in British Burmah_ (London: Chapman and Hall, 1879).

[715] Lib. ii. cap. 53.

[716] The earliest date of the famous siege is B.C. 1370 (Justin,
like the Arundelian marbles, gives B.C. 1184), and the latest is B.C.
724–636. In _Troy and its Remains_, we find (p. 123) that the age
proposed for the founding of the city is B.C. 1400; that the war took
place after the reigns of six kings (p. 27), say two centuries, or in
B.C. 1200; and that Homer lived 200 years after the destruction of the
city (p. 91), or in B.C. 1000. Thus Herodotus and Dr. Schliemann do not
agree; but what possible agreement can there be upon such a subject?

[717] Would it not be more prudent to say ‘not hitherto found’?

[718] Dr. Schliemann, _Ilias_.

[719] The Arab, or rather the Moslem, practice of Koran-reading may
explain that of ancient Greece. There are two distinct ways: the
vulgar, as though it were a profane book; and the learned with peculiar
intonation (_Kirá’at_), of which there are some seventy systems. The
Hindús recite with a similar artful modification. So the Hellenes
would either pronounce their scriptures, Homer and Hesiod, according
to popular accent, or intone by quantity. That men ever wrote accents
without pronouncing them is one of those wild theories which can
commend itself only to a savant. Besides, we know that as late as the
eleventh century there were Greek authors who wrote indifferently
according to accent or quantity.

[720] The tools known to the _Iliad_ were those of Central Africa,
anvil, hammer, and tongs (_Il._ xviii. 477, and _Od._ iii. 434–5).

[721] viii. 14; ix. 41.

[722] xxxv. 12, 43.

[723] E.g. δέσμοι, bands or ties; ἥλοι, studs; περόναι, pins, fibulæ;
and κέντρα, points (_Il._ xviii. 379; xi. 634; Pausanias xi. 16).

[724] iii. 2.

[725] _Il._ viii. 20. The Assyrian Hadi or Bet Edi, ‘House of
Eternity,’ probably Grecised, by an afterthought, to ἀϊδής—invisible.
See the earliest ‘Miracle-play,’ the descent of Ishtar into Hadi; _Soc.
Bib. Archæol._ vol. ii. part i. p. 188.

[726] Eur. _Ion._ 1.

[727] From the copper trumpet comes χαλκεόφωνος, ringing-voiced (_Il._
v. 785). The _Iliad_ applies the epithet to Stentor (_Il._ v. 785), and
Hesiod (_Theog._ 311) to Cerberus.

[728] _Od._ iii. 425.

[729] For instance, Stasinus or Hegesias, author of the _Kypria_ or
Cyprian _Iliad_ (Herod. _Lib._ ii. 117), assigned to the end of the
eighth century B.C., when Kypros may have had her ‘Homeric School.’ It
was in nine books, of which the argument has been preserved by Proclus
in Photius; and it forms a kind of introduction to the _Iliad_. See
Palma’s _Cyprus_, p. 13. ‘Homer’ is said to mention iron thirty times.

[730] Dr. Evans (_Bronze_, p. 15) quotes Dr. Beck’s suggestion that the
-eros of Sideros is a ‘form of the Aryan _ais_ (conf. _æs_, _æris_). In
another place (_Stone_, p. 5), he alludes to the possible connection of
Sideros with ἀστὴρ (a meteor), the Latin Sidera, and the English Star.

[731] _Od._ ix. 391.

[732] This is a fair instance of ‘elegant translation.’ What Homer says
is:

    E’en as a blacksmith-wight some weighty hatchet or war-axe
    Dippeth in water cold with a mighty hissing and sputt’ring,
    Quenching to temper, for such is the strength and steeling of iron.

The reply will be that Homer does not say it in this way; and to this
reply I have no rejoinder.

[733] Hes. _Opera_, 174, sq.

[734] _Ibid._ ix. 366.

[735] xi. 34, 35, &c.

[736] Dr. Schliemann is assuredly singular when translating the Homeric
Cyanus by ‘bronze’ (Preface to _Mycenæ_, p. x.). Millin (_Minéralogie
Homérique_) holds it to be tin. The ‘Cyanus’ of Pliny (xxxvii. 38) is
lapis lazuli.

[737] _Opera_, 149; _Theog._ 161, and _Scut._ 231.

[738] _Erga_, 742–43.

[739] _Il._ xv. 677.

[740] xi. 629.

[741] _Scut._ Ll. 125–132.

[742] _Scut._ 216–224.

[743] _Ibid._ So early was that detestable invention, the metal
scabbard, introduced. Thus we must understand the φάσγανα καλὰ,
μελάνδετα (_Il._ xv. 713). Compare Eurip. _Phœn._ 1091. There is much
more to be said concerning ‘Phasganon.’

[744] _Il._ vii. 220.

[745] _Il._ iii. 292.

[746] _Il._ v. 330.

[747] _Il._ xviii. 474 sq.

[748] _Il._ vi. 236.

[749] x. 1.

[750] _Il._ iv. 242, xiv. 479.

[751] _Il._ xi. 385.

[752] The Romaic _gh_ is, as far as I know, the only modern European
representative of the ‘Semitic’ _ghayn_, which French writers must
transliterate by R: e.g. Razzia for Ghazweh.

[753] Even in the army of Perseus we are told by Livy (xliv. 40), the
Thracians marched first brandishing, from time to time, Swords of
enormous weight.

[754] xiii. 576.

[755] xxiii. 307.

[756] i. 210, 220.

[757] _Il._ i. 190, it is called a Phásganon.

[758] ii. 45.

[759] _Il._ xi. 30.

[760] Studs, flat-headed, like rivets, are still let into the iron
blade by modern Africans.

[761] iii. 334.

[762] _Il._ xvi. 130.

[763] xx. 475.

[764] _Il._ xvi. 335.

[765] xviii. end.

[766] So Aristophanes (_Clouds_, 1065) alludes to the Sword forged
by Hephaistos and presented to Peleus by the gods, as a prize for
resisting the temptations of Atalanta.

[767] _Il._ x. 256.

[768] xv. 712–12.

[769] _Iliad._ xxiii. 824.

[770] Sanskritists hold it to have been originally ἄσορ, and to derive
from असि (asi), a Sword; whence आसिक (ásik), a swordsman (Fick,
_Wörterbuch der indogermanischen Grundsprache_). It is probably
connected with ἀείρω, because ‘carried’ on the shoulder by the bauldric.

[771] _Od._ xi. 24.

[772] _Il._ xvi. 115.

[773] xvi. 473.

[774] _Il._ xiv. 385.

[775] In his illustrations of the _Iliad_, Flaxman rarely arms his
warriors with the Sword, even at the Fight for the Body of Patroclus.
It is to be hoped that artists in future will kindly take warning.

[776] _Il._ xv. 256; also _Hymn to Apollo_, 396.

[777] _El._ 837.

[778] _Odys._ viii. 401–5.

[779] _Odys._ iv. 695.

[780] Line 125.

[781] _Odys._ i. 180.

[782] iv. 83–4.

[783] xi. 520. In Buckley’s translation (Bell, 1878), χαλκός is mostly
translated ‘steel’ (pp. 62, 72, 198). Translators are almost as
misleading as dictionaries.

[784] xxi. 3.

[785] xxi. 10.

[786] v. 230.

[787] xxi. 127.

[788] xvi. 295.

[789] xix. 13.

[790] x. 535, xxi. 34 and 119, xxii. 329 &c.

[791] Line 40.

[792] _Il._ vii. 187.

[793] _Il._ vi. 169.

[794] xiii. 28.

[795] He also mentions writing on leaden plates and on linen cloths as
in ancient India; such, probably, were the books of Numa.

[796] v. 29.

[797] vii. 186.

[798] From _Kshatram_ (crown, reign) and _-pá_ (defender). These
viceroys of Asia Minor, who sometimes held more than one province,
received and despatched embassies, levied armies of mercenaries, and
even engaged in foreign wars without orders of the Great King (Herod,
iv. 165–7; Thucyd. i. 115 &c.).

[799] ix. 62.

[800] vii. 64.

[801] Grote, _History of Greece_, iii. 323.

[802] This word is erroneously translated ‘Scymitar,’ a weapon which,
in its present shape, dates from about the rise of El-Islam.

[803] Rawlinson’s _Herodotus_, 60. The learned commentator quotes
Müller, _Hist. Græc._ (iv. 429), Amm. Marcellinus (xxxi. 2), Jornandes
(_De Reb. Geticis_, cap. xxxv.), Niebuhr’s _Scythia_ (p. 46, E.
Tr.), &c. In vol. iii. 60, he gives a ground-plan of the tomb, whose
chief place also yielded a gold shield, a whip, a bow, a bow-case,
five statuettes, and an iron Sword. The space by the side contained
a woman’s bones, with a diadem and ornaments in gold and electrum.
Other barrows in Russia and Tartary showed bodies resting upon sheets
of pure gold weighing forty pounds, with bronze weapons and ornaments
set with rubies and emeralds. Herodotus’ description of the scalping
(ἀποσκυθίζειν, iv. 64) would apply to the North American ‘Indians’ of
our day; and the sending a messenger to Zalmoxis, god of the Getæ (iv.
94), is the practice of modern Dahome and Benin.

[804] Rawlinson, iii. 54.

[805] ‘Mongol’ denotes an especial race; the word is much abused by
non-Orientalists.

[806] iv. 70.

[807] This process of ‘mixing bloods,’ as a token of brotherhood, is
familiar to all travellers in pagan Africa.

[808] ii. 2.

[809] _Mycenæ, &c._ (London: Murray, 1878). It is regretable that this
handsome and expensive volume should be printed upon blotting paper.

[810] _Il._ i. 320.

[811] These illustrations are from photographs bought at Athens.

[812] ix. 29–31.

[813] P. 307.

[814] _Troy_, 330–31.

[815] P. 279.

[816] Jähns (pp. 91, 92) cannot but suspect that many of the weapons
which show a marked Oriental cast are not Atreidan but Carian. This
tribe about the thirteenth century B.C. spread itself, under the
mythical king Minos, over the Ægean Archipelago, and colonised even
the seaboard of Greece. Such words as Hymettos, Lykabettos, &c. are
supposed to be Carian. The symbol of their gods was the double-axe, so
common in Mycenæ; and, as Thucydides said, their practice was to bury
weapons with the dead, which was not customary in Greece.

[817] Yet soldering iron was known to Egypt in the Eighteenth Dynasty.

[818] The position may be seen in life all over India, where the
jugglers teach goats to stand and be hoisted in that position.

[819] The Etruscans, however, like the Jews, disposed the feet of the
corpse eastward, as told in _Etruscan Bologna_ (p. 22). Although the
author should not say so, the public has not done wisely to neglect
this book; its most valuable part, the osteological details of the
Etruscan, deserved a better fate and, perhaps, secured a failure.
Yet it had the prime advantage of angry abuse by a certain critical
journal, whose predilection for the commonplace (_quâ_ commonplace) is
expressed by vituperation of all that is not commonplace. In my case
I may say of it with Diderot: ‘Perhaps they do me more credit than I
deserve; I should feel humiliated if those who speak ill of so many
clever and worthy people took it into their heads to speak well of me.’

[820] See ‘Analysis of Mycenæan Metals’ (pp. 367–376, _Mycenæ_.) But
the book is almost as self-contradictory as _Troy_.

[821] For instance, by Mr. W. J. Stillman, a traveller and a scholar.
In the New York _Nation_ (August 18) he writes on ‘The True Age of the
Mykenæ Finds’; and, after a fresh examination, he declares the objects
post-classical, ‘probably representing the burial-place of a colony
of Celts between the fifth and the second century B.C.’ What chiefly
militates against this theory is the cremation of the human remains.

[822] Dictionaries derive this word from σπάω (to draw). I find it in
the Egyptian ‘Sft.’ It is evidently a congener of Σπάθη (dim. σπάθιον),
also Romaic, and verb σπαθάω = I wield (the weapon). Spáthe means
primarily a broad blade of wood or metal; secondarily a weaver’s spatel
or spaddle, a spatula (Latin _tela_); an oar-blade, a scraper (for
horse-currying), and a broadsword. Scotchmen still apply ‘spathe’ to
the weaver’s lath (_The Past in the Present_, p. 11), which preceded
the ‘pecten.’ It is also used for Carnifex in Tertullian (_De Cult.
Fem._ cap. xiii.), and in botany for a shoot of fructification. In
Anglo-Saxon it became _Spad_; Icelandic _Spadi_, our spade. The Latins
(Tacit. _Ann._ xii. 35; Veget. _De Re Mil._ ii. 15) converted it to
_spatha_; and hence the neo-Latin _espée_ and _épée_, _espada_ and
_spada_, from which we derive our (suit of) ‘spades.’ See the play of
words upon ‘Metal de Espadas’ in Camoens’ ‘Rejected Stanzas’ (canto
iv. vol. ii. p. 437 of my translation). It has been subjected to
other corruptions; and in Chaucer (_Knightes T._ 1662) ‘Sparth’ is a
battle-axe:—

    ‘He hath a sparth of twenti pound of wighte.’

Even the learned Major Jähns derives ‘Spatha’ from ‘Spatel.’

[823] Quoted by Colonel A. Lane-Fox, _Anthrop. Coll._ p. 174.

[824] I have described it in _Scoperte Antropologiche in Ossero_
(Trieste, 1877). The point is evidently broken off.

[825] See chap. viii.

[826] See chap. iii. The Danísko is the hatchet-yataghan of Demmin, p.
397.

[827] Gen. iii. 24; Zech. xiii. 7; Apocalyp. i.

[828] Here we find St. Michael a heavenly archetype of St. George. In
the vault of the Superga, Turin, Monseigneur carries a rapier instead
of a flamberge.

[829] Xenophon, _De Re Eq._ xii. 11.

[830] A world-wide juggling trick, which seems to have originated in
Egypt. In Apuleius (_Golden Ass_, lib. i.) a _circulator_ or itinerant
juggler swallows a very sharp two-edged cavalry broadsword and buries
in his entrails a horseman’s spear. This ‘Thracian Magic’ is still
practised by the well-known Raf’ai Dervishes.

[831] He figures the blade in his Tour (i. p. 443).

[832] Galatians, Keltic Gauls, who established themselves in Western
Asia Minor after the destruction of their leader Brennus at Delphi
(B.C. 279). Florus (ii. 10) calls the Gallo-Græcians ‘adulterated
relics of Gauls’: Strabo also alludes to the Phrygians and the three
Galatian peoples (iv. 1). As Ammian. Marcell. tells us (xv. cap.
ix.), ‘Galatæ is the Greek translation of the Roman term Galli.’ They
consisted of three tribes, each with its capital: the Tolistobogii (=
Tolosa + Boii) at Pessinus; the Tectosages (of Aquitaine) at Ancyra,
now Angora, famous for wool and cats; and the Trocmi, with Tavium for
principal city, lay to the east bordering on Pontus. This people, like
the Gauls, their kinsmen, was ‘admodum dedita religionibus’ (Cæs. _B.
G._ vi. 16).

[833] x. 32.

[834] Livy, xxxviii. c. 17.

[835] _Il._ i. 190.

[836] _Il._ xvi. 437.

[837] _Il._ xxii. 310–60.

[838] _Il._ xiv. 405.

[839] In the _Iliad_ (iv. 185) we find the ζωστὴρ and the ζῶμα
different. Menelaus wears the former outside, the Sword below it, and
a μίτρα or metal plate on the breast. The ζωστὴρ was probably a broad
girdle strengthened with metal, and considered part of the ὅπλα: thus
ζώννυσθαι, to ‘gird one’s loins,’ is to prepare for battle.

[840] Doubtless Pythagoras and Socrates were monotheists after the
fashion of the Egyptian priests; but the Olympus of the many-headed was
peopled by a charming bevy of _coquins_ and _coquines_.

[841] From the treatise of M. Rodios, ΕΠΙ ΠΟΛΕΜΙΚΗΣ ΤΕΧΝΗΣ (Athens,
1868); the soldier wears an Etruscan helmet, and the pelta shield
resembles an ivy leaf.

[842] _Philip._ i.

[843] To name merely the _sommités_: Alexander the Great, Eumenes, and
Ptolemy; Hannibal; Sulla, Fabius, Marius, Sertorius, Cato, Brutus,
Julius Cæsar, Mark Antony, Pompey, Metellus, Marcellus, Trajan, and
Hadrian. All these commanders were famous swordsmen, concerning whose
personal feats with the weapon we have ample notices.

[844] The Albanians still preserve the four castes which do not
intermarry. These are: Soldiers (or Landowners), Tradesmen, Shepherds,
and Artisans.

[845] Some of the Greek statues were larger than any Egyptian. Olympian
Jove stood 60 feet, Apollo 45 (Pausanias), and the Image of the Sun
(commonly called the Colossus of Rhodes) 105 feet, exceeding everything
in the Nile Valley. I need not refer to Mount Athos and the Charonion
of Antioch. The oldest known Greek statue is a portrait produced at
Miletus in B.C. 550, and inscribed: ‘I am Chares, son of Kleisis,
rider of Teichiousa, an offering to Apollo.’ The style of this and
other archaic works (vases, &c.), which are rare, connects it with
Assyrianism, about the age of Assurnazirpal (B.C. 880).

[846] _Iliad_, ii. 362 and iv. 297 sq.

[847] _De Ages._

[848] But who is to do this under a Republic? And here we foresee
troubles for our neighbours in the next Prusso-Gallic War.

[849] For instance, the ‘Holy City’ of Miletus, with its 300 dependent
towns. When we speak of ancient Greece we must remember that it
extended from Asia Minor to Sicily, Italy, and even Southern France;
and from Egypt to Albania. Modern Greece is a mere mutilated trunk.

[850] Demmin (p. 106, &c.) tells us that ‘the Greeks had not even a
term to denote the action of riding on horseback’; and that ‘even in
French a proper verb does not exist, as the expression _chevaucher_
means rather to stroll (_flâner_) on horseback.’ As his English
translator remarks, the assertion is hardly admissible in the face
of such words as ἱππεύειν (_equitare_), _cavalcare_, to ride the
horse; ἱππεία (riding), ἱππεὺς and ἱππότης (a rider, a knight), and
ἐπιβεβηκώς, mounted (_scil._ on horseback). His interpretation of
_chevaucher_ is equally erroneous. _Chevaucher_, a fine old word, now
only too rare, exactly expresses our ‘to ride’: _Il chevaucha aux
parties d’occident_, is quoted from a French MS. (early fourteenth
century) by Colonel Yule in his preface to Marco Polo; and the word
occurs twice in the same sentence with the same sense.

[851] Lord Denman’s translation.

[852] D. K. Sandford.

[853] ‘Armour’ is from the Lat. _armatura_, through O. French _armeure_
and _armure_; _armoire_ is _armarium_, originally a place for keeping
Arms, and _armamentarium_ is our arsenal. It is not a little curious
that ‘finds’ of Roman weapons are so rare, bearing no proportion to the
wide extension of the rule. We must also beware of the monuments which
are apt to idealise and archaicise: this is notable in the shape of the
helmet, the pilium, and the Sword. Jähns specifies as the best place
for study the Romano-German Central Museum at ‘Mainz,’ under Professor
Dr. Lindenschmit (p. 192).

[854] In our day the only ‘Fecialists’ are the Moslem States.

[855] _Polybii Historiarum quæ supersunt._ The voluminous and luminous
writer, a contemporary of Scipio Africanus, and a captain who witnessed
the destruction of Carthage, was born A.U.C. 552 (B.C. 204), nearly
three centuries after the Latin conquest of Etruria. He was called
‘Auctor bonus in primis,’ and Scipio said of him, ‘Nemo fuit in
requirendis temporibus diligentior’ (Cicero, _De Off._ iii. 12, and _De
Rep._ ii. 14).

[856] _De Linguâ Lat._ iv. 6.

[857] Livy, viii. 8.

[858] Also called Adscriptii, Supernumerarii, and Velati, because
wearing only the _sagum_ or soldier’s cloak, opposed to the officer’s
_paludamentum_. Properly speaking, they were rear-troops, ranged in
battle order behind the Triarii. During certain epochs the Rorarii
stood next to the Triarii, and the Accensi, less trustworthy than
either, formed the extreme rear.

[859] The weapon is well shown in a monumental tablet on the Court wall
of the Aquileja Museum.

[860] The Clypeus, or Clipeus, of favourite Greek use, was also round,
but larger than the Parma. Our ‘buckler’ (_buccularius clypeus_) takes
its name from having on it an open mouth (_bucca_, _buccula_), in
Chinese fashion, instead of the _umbo_.

[861] In Livy’s Phalanx (A.U.C. 415) the Velites were light-armed men,
carrying only a spear and short iron pila (viii. 7).

[862] A congener of the Keltic _Ast_ = branch; whence the Fr. _arme
d’hast_. It was the Greek κοντός, _contus_, or lance, an unbarbed
spear, a royal sceptre: under the Republic it collected the hundreds
(_hastam centumviralem agere_); it noted auctions (_jus hastæ_), it
was the weapon of the light infantry-man (_hasta velitaris_), and it
served to part the bride’s hair (Ovid, _Fast._ ii. 560). _Hastarius_
and _hastatus_, _hasta_ and _quiris_ are synonyms; the _gæsum_ was a
heavier weapon and barbed, and the _jaculum_, with its diminutives,
_spiculum_, _vericulum_, or _verutum_, was a lighter javelin. Virgil
uses _hastile_ poetically.

[863] _Loc. cit._

[864] The number of men greatly varied; the extremes of the Legion are
6,800 including cavalry under Scipio, and 1,500 under Constantine.
In Livy’s Legion there were 5,000 infantry and 300 horse (viii.
8). Perhaps we may assume an average of 4,000 foot—a full Austrian
regiment. Each line of the three numbered 10 cohorts, and each cohort
three maniples. The latter were named from manipulus, a handful (of
grass, &c., _Georg._ i. 400), because this rustic article at the end of
a pole was the standard of Romulus.

[865] The Signa, ensigns, or standards, were different in the legions.
The Vexillum, or colours of cavalry, was a square of cloth, also called
Pannus (πῆνος). The word is a congener of the Gothic _Fana_ and _Fan_;
the Ang. Sax. _Pan_; the Germ. _Fahne_; the French _bannière_ and our
_banner_. Hence, too, _Gonfanon_ = _Gundfano_. When the Eagle became
imperial, and the Vexillum a Labarum with a cross, this standard was
splendidly decorated, and led to the French oriflamme. The latter was
made of the fine red (silk?) stuff called _cendalum_, cendal, or sendel.

[866] These ‘light bobs’ were re-organised and regularly established in
A.U.C. 541, after the battle of Cannæ.

[867] In fact, it formed phalanx, a word originally meaning a block or
a cylinder.

[868] The officer’s was adorned by way of honourable decoration with
three (ostrich?) feathers black and scarlet.

[869] The original kilt was the waistcloth, man’s primitive dress in
the Tropics and the lower Temperates. It became an article of defence
under the Greeks and Romans; and thence it spread over most of Europe.
The Maltese long preserved it, and the _Fustanella_ is still worn in
Greece and Albania. In Ireland it was ancient, as it is modern in
Scotland.

[870] Livy, ix. 35.

[871] Livy, viii. 8.

[872] _Pilum_, like our ‘pile,’ a congener of the Teutonic _Pfeil_,
is not a Roman invention, and was probably borrowed from the Samnites
(Sallust. _Cat._ 51, 38). The _pilum murale_, used for piercing walls
(Cæsar, _B. G._ v. 40), was a round or quadrangular shaft of three
cubits, with an iron of the same length (Polybius, vi. 23, 9). The
_pilum_ was perpetually changing size and proportions; moreover, there
were two kinds, the heavy and the light. The figures in the text are
those of the Mayence _pilum_ (Jähns, p. 201).

[873] Livy, xxi. 8.

[874] Under Trajan and Septimius Severus the cavalry adopted the iron
or bronze _Hamata_, hooked metal chains, forming a kind of mail-coat,
and the _Squamata_, scales sewn on to linen or leather, Demmin (p. 121)
erroneously makes the latter ‘chain-armour,’ and yet his illustration
shows the scales.

[875] _De Re Mil._ i. 16.

[876] _Essais de Montaigne_, l. ii., chap. 24 (Paris: Garnier Frères,
1874).

[877] Or _maître d’armes_, a word borrowed by Rome from Etruria. The
legionary teachers were termed _armidoctores_ and _campidoctores_.

[878] Athenæus (iv. 41) relates from Hermippus and Ephorus that the
Mantineans were the inventors of Gladiatorism proper (μονομαχοῦντες),
suggested by one of their citizens, Demus or Demonax, and that the
Cyreneans followed suit.

[879] Livy, xxviii. 21.

[880] In early Roman days the Gladiator was infamous; even Petronius
Arbiter (_Satyr._ cap. i) uses ‘you obscene gladiator’ as an insult.

[881] _Philip._ ii. 25.

[882] Marius and Pompey the Great both ‘kept up’ their swordsmanship
in these schools and in the Champ de Mars, the latter till the age of
fifty-eight.

[883] Hence his simple medication when _hors de combat_, ‘refreshing
himself with a drink of lye of ashes.’ Can they mean the antiseptic
charcoal, whose use has been revived of late years?

[884] _Nat. Hist._ xxxvi. 24.

[885] _Sub v._ Epicurus.

[886] _Deipn._ vi. 105. Eunus was the slave-leader in the Servile War,
which began B.C. 130.

[887] The first Roman artist who painted gladiators was Terentius
Lucanus (Pliny, _N. H._ xxxv. 34).

[888] The Mirmillo, _alias_ Gallus, is supposed to be derived from a
Keltic word, meaning a fish.

[889] If Nero was the monster represented by the commentaries and the
contemporary Christians, we must wonder how this anti-Christ was loved
in life by Acte, the ‘sweet and pure-minded Christian’; and why the
citizens of Rome sorrowed for his death. And there is much suggestion
in the fact that the greatest persecutors of the earliest Christians
were the best of the Cæsars, for instance, Vespasian, Titus, Diocletian
and Julian.

[890] See the character given to him by Eutropius, viii. 4.

[891] _De Morib. Germ._ xxxiii.

[892] Mariette, _Recueil_, No. 92.

[893] The learned Mr. Tylor is notably in error when he informs Mr.
Herbert Spencer (_Ceremonial Institutions_, pp. 174–75) that the
Japanese two-sworded man (Samurai) wore sword and dagger. The blades
used to be of equal length. Of the Japanese sword I shall treat in Part
II.

[894] Copied by Smith (_Dict. of Ant._ p. 456) from Winckelmann
(_Monumenta Inedita_, Pl. 197): the latter, by the by, was murdered at
Trieste.

[895] The word seems to be a congener of _Sahs_, _Sax_, or _Seax_,
the weapon supposed to have named the Saxons. It was either straight
or curved, the main object being to fit it closely to the body or
under the armpits. Hence it was a favourite with the Sicarius (Ital.
_sicario_), the Assassin. Gregory of Tours has (ix. 19) ‘Caput sicharii
siccâ dividit.’ A fanciful derivation of Sicily is from _sica_, because
Cronos threw one away at Drepanum. From the diminutive form _Sicula_
and _Silicicula_ comes the English ‘sickle.’

[896] This hide-shield, which supplanted the _clypeus_ or _clipeus_,
the large round article of osier-work, was also Sabine.

[897] Petronius Arbiter, chap. i. 7.

[898] _Falx_ is properly a large pruning knife, plain or toothed,
with a coulter or bill projecting from the back of the curved head.
Besides this, there are many forms; one is a simple curve; another is a
leaf-shaped blade with an inner hook, while a third bears, besides the
spike, a crescent on the back. ‘Falx’ is the origin of our ‘falchion,’
an Italian augmentative form, or perhaps the Spanish _facon_. Cæsar
(_Comm._ iii. 14) speaks of _falces præacutæ_.

[899] _Loc. cit._, copied by Smith.

[900] Mentor is mentioned by Pliny (viii. 21). The tale of Androclus is
well known; he was pardoned, and presented with his friend the lion,
whom he used to lead about Rome, doubtless collecting many coppers.

[901] He is called by Captain Godfrey ‘the Atlas of the sword,’ and
Hogarth immortalised this valiant ‘rough’ in the _Rake’s Progress_ and
_Southwark Fair_.

[902] It is regretable to see this unmanly and ignoble ‘sport’
spreading abroad: there was pigeon-shooting at Venice during the
Geographical Carnival, _alias_ Congress, of September 1881. All honour
to the English Princes who are discountenancing the butchery at home.
Fox-hunting is another thing; the chief good done by it seems to be the
circulation of about a million of money per annum.

[903] I have described cock-fighting in the Canary Islands (_To
the Gold Coast for Gold_, i., chap. 9). The celebrated story of
Themistocles and the game-cocks made the pastime classical. Alexander
the Great is said to have crucified a tax-gatherer at Alexandria who
killed and ate a famous fighting-cock. Verdict, S. H. R.

[904] So Μελίη and the O. Germ. _Ask_ (an ash-tree) signify a bow:
there are many instances of such nomenclature.

[905] Quinctilian, _Inst. Orat._ xii. 11. Marchionni (p. 123) makes the
Gladius short and broad for infantry, and the Ensis long and broad for
cavalry, in fact, synonymous with Spatha. This view is not unusual.

[906] In _Claud._ cap. 15.

[907] Florus, ii. 17.

[908] This blade greatly resembles one found in Ostirbotten, Finland,
except that the latter preserves the tang. _Trans. Congress of Bologna
of 1871_, p. 428.

[909] The point was called _cuspis_, which never applies to the
_mucro_, _acies_, or edge. ‘Differt a mucrone quæ est acies gladii,’
says Facciolati.

[910] See chap. vii. In Hugues de Bançoi’s _Battle of Benevento_ we
read: ‘Le Roy Charles’ (brother of St. Louis, and then fighting to take
Sicily from Manfred) ... ‘crioit de sa bouche Royale à ses Chevaliers
de serrer les ennemis, leur disant, _Frappez de la pointe, Frappez de
la pointe, soldats de Jésus Christ_. Et il ne faut pas s’en étonner,
car ce Prince habile avait lu dans le Livre de l’Art Militaire que les
nobles Romains n’avoient pas imaginé de meilleure manière de combattre
que de percer les ennemis avec la pointe de l’épée.’

[911] Livy, xxxv. 12. According to Spanish tradition, Toletum (probably
a Carthaginian-Punic word) was founded B.C. 540 by Hebrews, who called
it Toledoth, in Arab. Tawallud, the ‘mother of cities.’

[912] Properly the South-Danube country from the Wienerwald to the Inn.
The great seat of the iron works was at Lauriacum (Lorch, near Enns).
After B.C. 16 the province was ruled by a Procurator.

[913] See chap. vi.

[914] In Tonini’s _Rimini avanti l’ era volgare_ (p. 31) we read
that the Spatha-blade ‘Come ognuno sa, presso i Greci quanto presso
i Latini, _est genus gladii latioris_; onde Isidoro nelle _Origini_
(xviii. cap. 6) ha che alcuni _spatham latine autumant, eo quod
spatiosa sit, id est lata et ampla_.’ But this is a dictionary
derivation. In chap. viii. I have traced it back to the Egyptian
_Sfet_, and in chap. xiii. I shall show that it is the straight
broadsword as used by the Kelts.

[915] Parazonium = παρά + ζώνη. _Pugio_, our ‘poniard,’ is from
_pugnus_ (πύξ), the fist; others take it from _pungere_ to prick.

[916] Smith (_Dict. of Ant._ p. 809) borrows figs. _a_ and _b_ from
Beger (_Thes. Brand_, v., iii. p. 398, 419).

[917] See end of chap. viii.

[918] Smith (_loc. cit._ p. 195) renders _capulus_ by ‘hilt.’ Pommel,
however, best explains Ovid’s legend of Theseus (_Met._ vii. 423), who,
appearing for the first time before his father Ægeus, was known by
the carving on his ivory _capulus_, and thus escaped Medea’s aconite.
Moreover, a ‘golden hilt set with beryls’ would have been very awkward
to handle.

[919] Virg. _Æn._ xii. 942.

[920] Section Beaumont. The grip has four hollows to fit the fingers.
This indentation-system has been revived of late years, as shown by
the swords of Victor Emmanuel and General Lamarmora in the Municipal
Museum, Turin.

[921] Guard plates, accompanying cross-bars, have been found in Gaul.

[922] These rings appear on the scabbard of Tiberius.

[923] Here I rely upon Ammian. Marcell. (xxiv. 4; xxv. 3, 4, and
_passim_). So great a reformer could not escape detraction in its most
venomous form. His last words (attributed) _Vicisti, Nazarene_, must, I
think, have been pronounced in Syriac-Arabic, _Nasart’ yá Nasráni_.

[924] Jähns, p. 198. He gives an illustration (Pl. xvii. 14) of the
‘Annæus’ monument at Bingen; there is a double balteus worn round the
waist for the Spatha, or long Sword, to the right, and the Pugio to the
left, both being carried perpendicularly. The Roman Parazonium is also
rare in collections.

[925] In this matter we must be careful how we trust to engravings,
especially from vases, &c. The careless artist often reverses the
figure.

[926] _Military Antiq._, vol. ii.; Pl. xli.

[927] Quoting Lyson’s _Woodchester Antiquities_ (Pl. xxxv.).

[928] Pl. i. fig. 10. Quoted in _The British Army_, &c., by Sir Sibbald
David Scott, a well-studied work containing a considerable amount of
information.

[929] _Soc. of Antiq._, June 29, 1876.

[930] During the critical action at Thapsus, Cæsar, according to
Plutarch, was _hors de combat_ with a fit of epilepsy, the _comitialis
morbus_ (Afric. War, chap. 14). I have noticed in my Commentaries on
Camoens (i. 40) the strange fact that some of the greatest men of
antiquity were subject to this ‘falling sickness.’ The Egyptians held
it to be a manifestation of the power of Typhon; hence the ‘divine
disease’ of Apuleius (Defence), and the strange fancies of dæmoniac
possession which prevailed in the earliest ages, and which have not
yet died out. The learned Canon Farrar (_Life, &c. of Saint Paul_,
Appendix, vol. i.) holds that this perhaps was the ‘thorn in the
flesh’ (2 Cor. xii. 7) alluded to by the great Apostle. He quotes from
Hausrath the ‘trances’ of Sokrates, the fits of Mohammed, and the
faintings and ecstasies of Saints Bernard, Francis, and Catherine of
Sienna; and to these he adds George Fox, Jacob Böhme, and Swedenborg.

[931] This is an illustration of genius taking pains and a lesson to
the leader of troops; but how many of the moderns have practised it, or
have been capable of practising it? Suvóroff (Suwarroff), it is true,
taught his men bayonet-exercise, with his coat off and his sleeves
tucked up: Mediocrity shudders at the idea. The Russian had, by the
way, curious ideas concerning the use of the weapon. ‘Brothers! never
gaze into the enemy’s eyes; fix your sight on his breast, and prod your
bayonet there.’ The first rule for the General is to be ever looking
after his men, to live, as it were, in the saddle, and to lead the
attack when requisite. What were the habits of poor Lord Raglan and
of his successor General (Jimmy) Simpson? No wonder that we had the
mortification of the Redan affair.

[932] _Strategemata_, viii. 28. The ‘Macedonian’ flourished about the
middle of the second century (Christian era).

[933] ix. 40.

[934] This word has a universal history of its own, and contains a
lecture on anthropology.

Its form is onomatopoetic, the earliest form of expression, as the
Egyptian _miao_, for a cat; and it admirably conveys the idea of
muttering or stuttering. Again, it is a reduplication of sounds;
another absolutely primitive construction, and the effect is emphasis.

‘Berber-ta’ (Berber-land) was applied by the ancient Egyptians
(Catalogue of Thut-mes III.), whence our modern term Barbary.

The word in Hebr. ‘wild beast feeding in waste’ migrated to India,
and was there corrupted to वर्वर (Varvara), a barbarous land, one who
speaks unintelligibly.

‘Berber’ passed over to Greece from Egypt, and became βάρβαρος, meaning
a foreigner whose language was not Hellenic, and who, therefore,
was little better than a beast. (N.B. Shakespeare would have been a
barbarian in Persia and Hafiz in England.)

‘Barbaros’ broadened its meaning in Rome, where it was applied to all
peoples who could not speak or who mispronounced Greek and Latin. See
Strabo, xiv. 2, on ‘Barbaros’ and to ‘barbarise’; thus unhappy Ovid
could wail:

‘Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor illis.’

Lastly, the ‘proto-Aryan’ term ‘Barbarian’ has now grown to full size,
and is applied generally to the rude, the fierce, the uncivilised, and
those who contumaciously ignore the ‘higher culture.’

[935] This is materialism pure and simple; but all the teaching of
modern science points to the material. The mysterious ‘life’ is no
longer ‘vital power’; it simply represents the sum total of the
energies and protoplasm. ‘Life is a property of protoplasm or bioplasm,
and is the latest product of thought and research.’ And I may add that
Consciousness, like Will, is a property of life in certain of its
forms; a state and condition of cerebral and other atoms; the mere
consequence of hitherto unappreciated antecedents.

[936] Florus, ii. 3.

[937] _Bronze_, &c. p. 297. From _Aarbög. f. Nord. Oldk._ 1879, pl. i.

[938] _Bronze_, &c., p. 298. From Bastian and A. Voss, _Die
Bronze-Schwerter des K. Mus. zu Berlin_, 1878, p. 56.

[939] _Bronze_, &c., p. 299, from Von Sacken and Lindeschmit’s
_Alterthümer_. The first finds by Herr Namsauer in 1846–64 were 6,000
articles from 993 graves.

[940] I have already noticed the copper Ensis and coppered shield
attributed by Virgil (_Æn._ viii. 74) to the people of Abella, an
Italian district under Turnus.

[941] _Bronze_, &c., p. 277. The author also notices the small handles
of bronze Swords, ‘a fact which seems to prove that the men who used
these swords were but of moderate stature’ (_Prehistoric Times_, p.
22). He denies their being very small, and he justly believes that the
expanding part of the hilt was intended to be within the grasp of the
hand. I have already explained that the hand was purposely confined in
order to give more momentum to the cut.

[942] _Bronze_, &c., p. 297; taken from Gastaldi, Pellegrini and
Gozzadini. The author remarks (p. 287) that some of the bronze daggers
from Italy seem also to have had their hilts cast upon the blades
in which the rivets were already fixed. This is not unfrequent with
the Sword, and the object seems mere imitation; like the Hauranic
stone-doors, panelled as if to pass for wood.

[943] _Bronze_, &c., p. 283, we find that the British Museum contains a
specimen. _Catalog. Italy_, p. 28.

[944] _Bronze_, &c., ibid., quoting from _Numm. Vet. Ital. Descript._,
pl. xii.

[945] See chap. vi.

[946] _De Garrul._

[947] _De Ferro_, i. 195.

[948] Lib. xliv. 3. Martial also alludes (i. 49; iii. 12, &c.) to the
metallic wealth of his native province.

[949] Pliny (xxxi. 4, 41) also notices the Salo or River Bilbilis
(Xalon); and the Celtiberian town of the same name, now Bombola, the
birthplace of the poet Martial, is near Calatayud (Kala’at el-Yahúd =
Jew’s Fort), or Job’s Castle. Of the Chalybes I have already spoken.

[950] _Roman Archæology_, by Angelo Maio.

[951] The words Κέλται, Γαλάται, Γάλλο (meaning Armati, pugnaces,
Kämpfer, fighters), evidently derive not from Coille, a word, but from
the old word Gal (battle), Gala (arms). The name suited their natures;
they were never at peace, and their bravery was proverbial: the Greeks
called it Κελτικὸν θράσος = Keltic daring.

[952] Cladibas or Cladias = _gladius_. I have noticed the shape when
speaking of the Hallstadt finds.

[953] Polyænus, _Strategemata_; Dion. Halicar. xiv. chap. 13.

[954] Plutarch (_De Cam._ cap. xxvii.) also arms the Gauls, when
attacking the Capitol, with the Kopis. ‘The first to oppose them was
Manlius.... Meeting two enemies together, he parried the cut of one
who raised a Kopis (κοπίδα) by hacking off his right hand with a
Gladius’ (ξίφος). I presume that ‘Kopis’ is here used for the _pugio_,
dirk, or shorter sword. Borghesi _Œuvres Complètes_, vol. ii. pp.
337–387, says: ‘In use and form, in grip and in breadth of blade,
the Kopis much resembles our _Sciabla_, (Sabre).’ But its comparison
with the falx and pruning hook and a medal of Pub. Carisius suggest a
substantial difference: while the broadsword is edged on the convex
side, the Kopis had a sharpened concave. Count Gozzadini, like General
A. Pitt-Rivers, compares the Kopis with the Khanjar or Yataghan, and
quotes Xenophon (_Cyrop._ ii. 1, 9; vi. 2, 10) to prove that it was
peculiar to Orientals. I have traced the word to the Egyptian Khopsh or
Khepsh, and repeat my belief that it is the old Nilotic sickle-blade
with a flattened curve. But, as might be expected in the case of so old
a word, the weapon to which it was applied may have greatly varied in
size and shape.

[955] Brennus is evidently a congener of the Welsh _brenhin_ (the
king). The Senones have left their name in Illyrian Segna, once a nest
of pirates and corsairs, south of Fiume the Beautiful. I shall notice
them in a future page.

[956] Livy, xxii. 46.

[957] _Bell. Gall._ iii. 13; vii. 22.

[958] Lib. x. cap. 32.

[959] Lib. v. cap. 30.

[960] See chapters viii. and xii. Here the word is evidently applied
generically to a straight two-edged broadsword, about 1 mètre long. In
the Middle Ages the weapon gave rise to many curious varieties, as the
_Spatha pennata_ and the _Spatha in fuste_.

[961] According to Vegetius (ii. 15) the Saunion was the light javelin
of the Samnites, with a shaft 3½ feet long, and an iron head measuring
5 inches. Thus it would resemble the Roman _pilum_. But Diodorus
evidently means another and a heavier weapon which could hardly be
thrown. Meyrick and Jähns (p. 390) do not solve the difficulty.

[962] Lib. iv. 4, § 3.

[963] _De Bell. Pers._

[964] The Northumberland Stone in Montfaucon (vol. iv. part 1, p. 37)
shows a Gaul wearing sword and dagger on either side.

[965] In Athenæus, lib. xiv., the celebrated philosopher called the
Apamæan or the Rhodian, a contemporary of Pompey and Cicero, left,
amongst other works, one called Τέχνη τακτικὴ (_de Acie instruenda_).

[966] Lib. vii. cap. 10. It is evident that the Duello did not, as many
authors suppose, arise with the Kelts. All we can say is that they
may have originated in Europe the sentiment called _pundonor_ and the
practice of defending it with the armed hand. The idea was unknown to
the classics; and, with the exception, perhaps, of the Arabs, it is
still ignored by the civilised Orientals of our day, especially by the
Moslems.

[967] Lib. ii. caps. 28, 30, and 33.

[968] Simply meaning Spearmen. Gaisate = _hastatus_ from Gaisa
(_gæsum_), the Irish _gai_, any spear. Isidore (_Gloss._) translates
‘Gessum’ by ‘hasta vel jaculum Gallicè, βολίς.’ The word survives in
the French _guisarme_, _gisarme_, &c. The Gæsum probably had a kind of
handle and a defence for the hand.

[969] Lib. xxii. cap. 46.

[970] Lib. xxxviii. 21.

[971] The naked bodies and narrow shields are well shown in the
battle-scene on the Triumphal Arch of Orange (Jähns, Plate 29).

[972] Borghesi (Tonini’s _Rimini_, &c., p. 28 and Tables A 3 and B 6)
makes one of these gladii a ‘Kopis.’

[973] Lib. v. cap. 30.

[974] The cavalry was organised in the Trimarkisia (three marka, or
horses) composed of the ‘honestior’ (afterwards the knight), and the
clients (squires). The host that attacked Hellas, under Brennus, had
20,400 horsemen to 752,000 foot.

[975] The pattern is almost universal. Moorcroft found it in the
Himalayas, and I bought ‘shepherd’s plaid’ in Unyamwezi, Central Africa.

[976] The first use of tattooing was to harden the skin, a defence
against weather. The second (and this we still find throughout Africa)
was to distinguish nations, tribes, and families.

[977] ‘Galli bracchas deposuerunt et latum clavum sumpserunt.’ Diodorus
Sic. (v. 30) has βράκας; in Romaic βράχι; in Italian _braghe_, Germ.
_Brüche_. Our word ‘breech-es’ or ‘Breek-s’ is a double plural; ‘breek’
being the plur. of the A. S. _broc_, a brogue. Aldus and other old
writers mistranslate the _bracchæ_ by plaid, or upper garment. Jähns
more justly renders _sagum_ by plaid (p. 431).

[978] Livy, xxxviii. 24.

[979] Italy has declared herself _Una_. But without considering a
multitude of origins, one for almost every province, she is peopled in
our modern day by two races, contrasting greatly with each other. The
Po is the frontier, dividing the Græco-Latin Italians to the south from
the Gallic and Frankish Italians (Milanese, Piedmontese, &c.) to the
north. The latter, originally Barbari, are the backbone of the modern
kingdom: the Southerners are the weak point.

[980] _Bell. Gall._ vi. 24.

[981] Jähns (in his Plates 27–30) unites ‘Kelten und Germanien,
Germanien und Kelten.’

[982] _De Mor. Germ._, cap. 6.

[983] So we find the god Tyr or Tuisco (regent of Tuesday), the
Monthu or Mars of the North, figured in the Runes as a barbed spear ᛏ
(resembling the planetary emblem of Mars). He afterwards became the
Sword-god. From the Tyr-rune is derived ᛠ Er (= hêru, the sword), or
Aer, which resembles the Greek ἄορ, and which Jacob Grimm connects with
Ἄρης, _æs_ and _Eisen_ (Jähns, p. 14).

[984] The older derivation is from _ferrea_. Jähns (p. 407) gives a
host of others—_Bram_ (thorn, bramble); _Pfriem_ (punch, awl); _Brame_
(a border, edging); _ramen_ (to aim, strike), &c., &c.

[985] _Arms_, &c., p. 419.

[986] _Annals_, ii. cap. 14.

[987] _De Mor. G._ cap. 6.

[988] The _steendysser_ of Denmark, dolmens of France, and cromlechs of
England.

[989] P. 416, Pl. xxviii. 4. In p. 417 he gives a list of many
bronze-finds.

[990] Tacit. _Annals_, ii. 14.

[991] Cap. 42 and 6.

[992] So the Longobards may be Long-halberts, and the Franks
Francisca-men.

[993] Vegetius (ii. 15) makes them use ‘gladii majores quas Spathas
vocant,’ and Isidore (68, 6) says that the _gladii_ were ‘utraque parte
acuti.’

[994] In Scandinavian, the noblest of the Germanic tongues, _hjalt_; in
O. Germ, _helza_; Ang. S. _helt_, _hielt_, and in Mid. Germ. _helze_,
_gehilze_ (Jähns, p. 419).

[995] Jähns (p. 419) has three kinds of hilts. The oldest is the
crescent, noticed above (fig. 293); it is adorned with spirals and
various figures. The second, which seems to be more general in the
Sahs, or short weapon, has in the place of pommel a crutch or crescent,
with the horns more or less curved, and either disunited or joined
by a cross-bar. Here again spirals were disposed upon the planes: we
shall see them highly developed in the Scandinavian weapons of a later
date. The third hilt was a kind of tang, continuing the blade, and
fitted with rounded edges for making fast wood, horn, or bone: it had
generally a bulge in mid-handle. The pommel proper is little developed
in these Swords.

[996] ‘Sahs’ seems to have an alliance with the Latin ‘saxum’ (Jähns,
p. 8, quoting Grimm). ‘Hamar’ (hammer) had the same meaning. From
‘sax’ we may probably derive the Zacco-sword of the Emperor Leo
(_Chronicle_): ‘Item fratrem nostrum Ligonem cum zaccone vulneravit.’
The Laws of the Visigoths mention both weapons, long and short:
‘plerosque verò scutis, spatis, scramis’ (battle-axes?) ‘....
instructos habuerit.’ ‘Nimith euere saxes’ (take to your knife-swords),
said Hengist, and the oaths ‘Meiner Six!’ (by my dirk), and
‘Dunner-Saxen’ (thunder sword) in Lower Saxony, are not forgotten.

[997] I have spoken of the Scramasax in chap. v. Demmin (p. 152) and
others deduce ‘scrama’ (broadsword) from ‘scamata,’ the line traced on
the ground between two Greek combatants(!). Hence, too, he would derive
‘scherma’ and ‘escrime’—fencing. Others prefer ‘scaran’ (to shear),
which gave rise to the German ‘schere’ (scissors), and our ‘shears’ and
‘shear-steel.’ The word, however, is evidently a congener of the Germ.
‘schirmen,’ to protect, defend.

Jähns (p. 418) observes that the Sahs varied greatly in size.
Some authorities make it a Mihhili Mezzir (muchel knife), a large
_cultellus_. But the Frisian Asega-buch shows it to be a murderous
weapon, forbidden to be worn in peace. The finds yield at times a dirk,
and at times a broadsword; such, for instance, are the Copenhagen
Scramsahs, 90 centimètres long, and that of Fronstetten, which, though
imperfect, weighed 4·5 lbs. The British Museum contains a fine specimen
of the Scramasax with engraved Runes.

[998] P. 421. Pl. xxviii. 15.

[999] The word is the Ang. Sax. _dolc_, a wound, which thus gave a name
to the weapon that wounded.

[1000] _Bronze_, pp. 261–63. Figs. 329 and 330.

[1001] _Germ._ 6.

[1002] Jähns (p. 439) quotes Asclepiodotus (vii. 3) and Ælian (xviii.
4), who describe the _cuneus_ as Scythian and Thracian, _i.e._
barbarous. Unfortunately Jähns also cites the ‘Boar’s head’ of the Laws
of Menu (Houghton’s _Manava-Dharma Shastra_, vii. 187), _in the eighth
century_ B.C.; Menu being centuries after Tacitus. I have noticed
that the disposal of our chessmen shows the Hindú form of attack, the
infantry in front, the horse and elephants (castles) on either wing,
and the Rajah or Commander-in-chief in the centre and not in front.

[1003] In its purest form the Standard-bearer stood alone at the apex,
as Ingo in King Odo’s battle at Mons Panchei (Montpenssier), A.D. 892.

[1004] ‘Quodque præcipuum fortitudinis incitamentum est, non casus,
nec fortuita conglobatio turmam aut cuneum facit, sed familiæ et
propinquitates’ (Tacit. _Germ._ 7).

[1005] _Nat. Hist._, iv. 14.

[1006] _In Mario_, 23.

[1007] In later times they were carefully cleaned for another object,
to show their Runic inscriptions.

[1008] Malet’s _Introduction to the History of Denmark_.

[1009] Pliny, iv. 14. Procop. _Bell. Vand._ i. 1.

[1010] In O. Germ. Sper = hasta, lancea; Sperilîn = lanceola, sagitta;
Ang. Sax. Sper, Engl. spear; Germ. Speer. The word seems to be a
congener of Sparre, spar. Less commonly used is Spiess = hasta, cuspis;
Scand. Spjot; O. Germ. Speoz, Spioz; Ang. Sax. spietu; Fr. espié,
espiel, espiet, espieu; Ital. spiedo; Engl. spit. It seems to ally with
the Lat. spina, and the Germ. Spitze (Jähns, p. 413).

[1011] The peculiar celts, chisels, spear-points, &c., extended over
all the peninsula of Jutland, and as far south as Mark Brandenburg
(Jähns, p. 6).

[1012] Neither Cæsar nor Tacitus mentions the use of the bow amongst
the ancient Gauls and Germans, although the graves yield arrow-heads of
stone, bone, and iron.

[1013] Dr. Evans, _Bronze_ &c., p. 299.

[1014] I reserve Scandinavian weapons for Part II.

[1015] _Origins of English History_ (London: Quaritch, 1852).

[1016] The Sword amongst the Anglo-Saxons and the Franks will be
described at full length in Part II.

[1017] These are:

  No. 1. That Bronze-casting spread from a common centre by conquest
  or migration.

  No. 2. That each region discovered the art independently, and made
  its own implements.

  No. 3. That the art was discovered and implements were made in one
  spot, whence commerce disseminated them.

  No. 4. That the art was diffused from a common centre, but that the
  implements were constructed in the countries where they were found.

[1018] _Bronze_, &c., p. 475.

[1019] _Bronze_, p. 473. I would notice that upon the subject of
‘Celts’ the learned author joins issue with the peculiar views of M. de
Mortillet, before noticed. _Bronze_, &c., p. 456.

[1020] The three divisions are:

  No. 1. Characterised by flat or slight flanged celts and
  knife-daggers, found in barrows with stone implements.

  No. 2. Age of heavy dagger-blades, flanged celts and tanged
  spear-heads, such as those from Arreton Down. In these two the
  Sword is unknown.

  No. 3. Palstaves, socketed celts (introduced from abroad); true
  socketed spear-heads, Swords, and the variety of tools and weapons
  found in the hoards of the old bronze-founders.

And a great peculiarity in Britain is the absence of nearly all traces
of the Later Bronze Period in graves and barrows.

[1021] Dr. Evans, _Bronze_, &c., p. 300, quoting M. Alexandre Bertrand.
For the condition of the Ancient Britons during the Bronze Period, see
_ibid._ p. 487.

[1022] In the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres of Paris.
(Dr. Evans, _Bronze_, &c., p. 20).

[1023] ‘On the True Assignation of the Bronze Weapons,’ _Trans. Ethn.
Soc._ N. Ser. iv. p. 7).

[1024] _Bronze_, &c., p. 274. See also Introductory Chapter, p. 20.

[1025] See chap. v.

[1026] _Bronze_, &c., p. 417.

[1027] _Bronze_, &c., p. 421. The list of analyses shows lead chiefly
in the Irish finds.

[1028] _Geog._ vii. 2.

[1029] _Bell. Gall._ v. 12.

[1030] Evans’s _Coins of the Ancient Britons_. I have not yet read the
work.

[1031] Cæsar (iv. 33): ‘Genus hoc est eis essedis pugnæ;’ and he speaks
again (v. 15) of _essedarii_. The scythe-car was known to Assyria,
Jewry (the _Faldat_ of Nahum ii. 3), and Persia, where Xenophon and
Plutarch attribute to it the highest importance; even the pole ended
in a lance. It became a favourite with all Keltic peoples. At Sentinum
(B.C. 296) the Gauls almost defeated the Romans by suddenly throwing
on a force of one thousand ‘esseda currusque.’ The Tectosages, when
engaged with Antiochus Soter in Phrygia (B.C.), ranged in front of
their attack 240 scythe-cars, some with two and others with four
horses. Antiochus the Great armed his chariots not only with two
scythe blades, but also with lances ten cubits long (?), laterally
projecting (Livy, xxxvii. 41). The historian also notices the Arab
dromedary-riders, ‘archers who carried their swords four cubits (= 6
feet) long, that they might be able to reach the enemy from so great
a height.’ When the Gæsatæ crossed the Alps (B.C. 228) they were
accompanied by a vast number of war-cars (Polybius, ii. 4, 5 says
20,000 ἁρμαμάξας καὶ συνωρίδας) which did good service at the battle of
Telamon. Ossian’s _Fingal_ offers a long description of the war-car and
its uses. Many remains of these two-wheeled vehicles have been found in
Keltic Europe (Jähns, pp. 394–96).

[1032] _Geog._ iii. 6.

[1033] I cannot but attribute to Italian blood the high and aquiline
features which distinguish the Briton from the Northern German; the
latter has been intimately mixed with the Slav race, as a glance at the
Berlinese suffices to show. Portraits of the Cavalier period explain
my meaning. In the Hanoverian times the ‘Roundhead’ again came to the
fore, and hence the popular ‘John Bull’ portrayed in the pages of Mr.
_Punch_. He is a good working type, but he has not the face to command
or to impose.

[1034] _Bronze_, &c., pp. 286–87. It was found in the river Cherwell
and it is now in the Museum at Oxford. The first notice was in the
_Journ. Anthrop. Inst._, vol. iii. 204.

[1035] _Ibid._ p. 287. The author suggests that it may be foreign.

[1036] _Ibid._ p. 288.

[1037] I have already referred to the bronze dagger from Thebes, now in
the British Museum, with its narrow rapier-like blade and broad flat
hilt of ivory.

[1038] Dr. Thurnam considered the tanged dagger more modern than
that which was attached by rivets in the base of the blade, and his
classification is followed by Dr. Evans, _Bronze_, &c., p. 222.

[1039] The most perfect form of the bronze rapier is found in Ireland;
of this and of the moulds I shall treat in Part II.

[1040] In _Agric._ cap. 36.

[1041] Montfaucon, _Suppl._ iv., p. 16; Smith, _s. v._ ‘Gladius.’

[1042] ‘Pliny’s Ape.’

[1043] Prof. Rhys, of Oxford.

[1044]

    ‘These men from horrid woods, a hairy band,
    Sends far from earth divided Irish-land.’

[1045] The word ‘Pict,’ says Prof. Rhys, is first applied by a writer
of the third century to the people beyond the Northern Wall and on
the Solway. It evidently arose from their tattooing. He opines that
‘Scotti’ is of Brythonic origin having the same signification. This
is better than the old Scjot (Scjot), the dart which named the Scythæ
and the Scoti. The Picts, both of Alban and Ireland, called themselves
Cruithing—‘which an Irish Shanachie has rightly explained to mean a
people who painted the forms (Crotha, Ir. kꞃoꞇ) of beasts, birds, and
fishes on their faces, and not on their faces only, but on the whole of
the body.’ Again we find ourselves in

    —‘infinita, arcana Africa orrenda.’


                          LONDON: PRINTED BY
                SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
                         AND PARLIAMENT STREET



Transcriber’s Notes:
 - Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
 - Text enclosed by equals is in bold (=bold=).
 - Blank pages have been removed.
 - Silently corrected typographical errors.
 - Hyphenation variations are unchanged.
 - Sidenotes refer to right page headings, and are relocated to
   approximately relevant positions in text.
 - Where possible Unicode fractions have been used.
 - Fig. 82 measurement corrected, blade width was > length.






End of Project Gutenberg's The Book of the Sword, by Richard Francis Burton