Public attention had been called to these forgeries a year and a half ago, by a cause célèbre, when the fossil human jaw of Moulin-Quignon was placed on trial before a mixed jury of its own countrymen and of Englishmen, and a verdict returned in which Mr. Evans had been unable to concur. He was not, however, going to re-open that question, and would only observe that while formerly, when the gravel pit of Moulin-Quignon was worked, fossil bones were of excessively rare occurrence in it; now that little or no gravel is dug, human bones have cropped out like mushrooms on its banks, and even a whole human skull has made its appearance.

The forged flint implements from Amiens are usually of the long spear-head type; those from Abbeville are generally flatter, with a cutting edge all round, and ovato-lanceolate in form; those from Icklingham are usually sharply pointed, flat on one face and convex on the other. Of course there are varieties of form, but at all these places they are usually produced for sale enveloped in some clayey matrix, so as to conceal the character of their surface, unless some portion of an ancient surface of flint has been left in chipping them out, in which case the old surface is sometimes wiped clean and the new left covered with mud. It is only after a thorough washing that they appear in their true colours.

The characteristics of age and of novelty were next discussed, but it was observed that though flint implements, which present one or more of the characteristics of antiquity, cannot be of modern manufacture, yet it is by no means so certain that some which retain the characteristics of novelty may not be really ancient. It is known that a fractured flint may preserve its surface unaltered for ages if embedded in chalk, while, if exposed on the surface or embedded in certain soils, a few centuries may serve to change the colour and texture of its surface. In some of the French caves explored by Messrs. Lartet and Christy, certain flint implements come out as fresh-looking as if made yesterday; while others, possibly of a different quality of flint, have their surfaces much altered. Both the character of the flint and the circumstances under which it had lain were to be taken into account in judging of the antiquity of a flint implement; but though certain characteristics may prove that it is not of recent manufacture, it is in the highest degree unsafe to estimate its antiquity merely by the condition of its surface.

There is generally something in the form of the recent forgeries which strikes the practised eye; the method of chipping is different, the angles between the different facets sharper, and the edge also sharper, than is usual with genuine specimens. The surface is commonly dull and lustreless, and if a portion be chipped off, there is no perceptible difference between the recent fracture and the rest of the surface. These remarks were intended to apply more particularly to the common forgeries practised by ordinary workmen.

The principal characteristics of antiquity, more especially of the

flint implements from the river gravel deposits, may be summed up under the following heads :

1. Calcareous incrustations on the surface, caused by the passage of water charged with carbonate of lime over the flints.

2. Dendritic markings, or the small moss-like marks on the surface caused by the peculiar crystallization of a combination of

manganese.

3. Marks of wear, caused by the implements having been transported with the other stones forming the gravel along the bed of the ancient river. None of these three characteristics have been imitated by any ordinary forger, though portions of old surfaces with these marks upon them occur on forged implements.

4. Glossiness of surface, sometimes caused by friction, and sometimes probably arising from a partial dissolution of the surface of the flint. There have been attempts made to give this gloss by friction to recent counterfeits; but the lustre is generally such as can be removed by washing.

5. Discoloration of surface. This is one of the best tests of antiquity, as the character of the surface of the flint is completely altered, sometimes to a considerable depth, and instead of retaining its original colour, becomes white, grey, brown, or ochreous, according to different circumstances, often acquiring at the same time considerable lustre. It is only at Abbeville that attempts have been made to colour the surface of counterfeit implements, which was done by smearing them with ochreous clay, or with the beautiful dark pigment of the renowned "black band," according to the position in which they were destined to be found. After washing, however, the Moulin-Quignon specimens show a recently fractured surface, and on some are particles of iron, derived from the hammer with which they had been chipped out, and in a still unoxydized condition, notwithstanding the ages during which they were supposed to have been inhumed.

"But," continued Mr. Evans, "enough has been said of these miserable attempts at fraud. We have taken a glance at nearly every department of antiquity, and in each and all we find that wherever there has been a demand for any particular class of objects, it has more or less been met by a supply of forgeries. I am afraid that what I have said will hardly be regarded as encouraging to collectors, and that it may be thought calculated to throw distrust on all arguments based solely on archæological evidence.

"The case, however, is not so bad as it appears. Great as may be the forger's skill, I do not believe there is one forgery in a thousand that eventually escapes detection. With those long versed in any particular branch of archæology, there is a sort of intuitive perception which enables them almost at a glance to distinguish between the true and the false. And even with those less versed, a little exercise of common sense and careful observation and comparison will suffice to prevent any grievous error. It is surprising, also, how the once having

been taken in tends to sharpen the observation; and in this respect it is possible that the existence of forgeries may not be altogether an unmixed evil. Habits of caution and of careful investigation are cheaply purchased, if acquired for a small sum of money invested in worthless forgeries.

"There is, indeed, no reason for the collector or antiquary to despair; far less reason is there to doubt the value of well-sifted archæological evidence.

"We do not doubt the existence of genuine coins of Julius Cæsar or of Alexander the Great, because there are numerous counterfeits of them; much less do we doubt of the former existence of these monarchs. And yet I believe there are some who, because the flint implements from the ancient fluviatile beds have been counterfeited, persuade themselves into believing them all to be forgeries; in the same manner as some others persuade themselves that because there are natural forms of flint which in a measure resemble the implements from the drift, therefore they all are natural, and not artificial.

"The existence of these forgeries, however, affords a moderately complete answer to the latter class of doubters, for the counterfeits of the genuine implements which have imposed upon so many are all artificially chipped out, and have been of necessity thus made in order to resemble the originals, which must therefore be regarded as artificial also.

"The other class of doubters will do well to bear in mind that the existence of a counterfeit generally implies the existence of a genuine original, and that the frauds which have been attempted would never have been discovered, had not those who detected them had sufficient experience of genuine specimens on which to found their judgment. They must also remember, that the exposers of these frauds are precisely those who, having most fully investigated the circumstances, are most fully convinced of the value of those discoveries of relics of primæval man in beds of immense antiquity, of which such interesting accounts have, on former occasions, been given in this room by Mr. Prestwich and Mr. Lubbock.

"It is hard to say which is more mischievous to the advance of science to believe too little, or to believe too much. For myself, I think that the forgeries we have been examining point the true moral --that enunciated by Epicharmus 2000 years ago That the very nerves and sinews of knowledge consist in BELIEVING NOTHING RASHLY.""

[J. E.]

WEEKLY EVENING MEETING,

Friday, March 3, 1865.

SIR HENRY HOLLAND, Bart. M.D. D.C.L. F.R.S. Vice-President, in the Chair.

JAMES FERGUSSON, Esq. F.R.S.

On the Holy Sepulchre and the Temple of Jerusalem.

THE object of this discourse was to show that the building in the sacre 1 enclosure at Jerusalem called by Europeans the " mosque of Omar" (but by Mussulmans the "Dome of the Rock"), and supposed by some to have been built by Omar over the site of the altar of the Jewish temple, is really the "church of the Anastasis, or Resurrection," built by Constantine over the rock which he believed to contain the sepulchre of Christ.

The speaker commenced by briefly recapitulating the arguments in his former discourse, on February 21, 1862, on the same subject. On that occasion he had argued the Christian and Constantinian origin of the "Dome of the Rock," mainly from the architecture of that building. No refutation of his arguments having been put forward, and his own recent visit to the spot having destroyed the force of the taunt frequently levelled at him, that he had not been to Jerusalem, while it had confirmed him in his former views, he took this opportunity of reenforcing them. This he did by the reverse process of argument to that formerly employed-viz. by describing the dimensions of the successive temples of the Jews. "If," said the speaker, "I can convince you that the rock which is situated in the centre of the building popularly known as the 'mosque of Omar' is, and always was, known to be outside the temple area, you will be forced to admit that it was not built by the Moslems-the only reason ever advanced for assigning the building of it to them being, that on that rock stood the Holy of Holies, or the altar of the Jews. If it was not built by the Moslems, it was by the Christians; and if by them, it can be no other than the church which Constantine erected over what he believed to be the cave in which the body of our Lord was laid. The architecture is of his age, and neither he nor any other Christian ever built a church in Jerusalem, the whole floor of which was occupied by a great rock with a cave in it, but that which Eusebius describes as the one erected by that emperor."

The heads of the argument in the former discourse were recounted as follows:

1. The situation of the present so-called church of the Holy Sepulchre in the middle of the town, a locality so much at variance

with the recorded incidents of the passion, that many pious and learned men had denied that it could possibly contain the tomb of the Saviour, notwithstanding the traditions clinging to it, and though unable to suggest any alternative.

2. The fact that the mosque of Omar, so called, was not a mosque, because it had no kibleh; but, on the contrary, its principal entrance was towards Mecca, where the kibleh ought to be; and that though architecturally a tomb in all essential elements, there was no tradition of anyone having been buried in it; and it was so splendid a monument, and of so recent a date, that it was difficult to believe that the tradition had been so completely lost.

3. The solution of the mystery by the discovery that its architecture was of the age of Constantine, which, combined with the form of the building, the rock and the cave, and all the circumstances of the case, led irresistibly to the conclusion that it could be nothing else than the church which Constantine erected over what he believed to be the Holy Sepulchre.

4. The architectural evidence-less appreciable though not less certain than if the building had been Gothic instead of Byzantine of the fourth century.

5. The certainty that the "golden gateway" was a festal portal of the same age as the Dome of the Rock, exactly answering to the gateway leading to the Altar of Constantine's Basilica, as described by Eusebius, while the Mosque El-Aksah was a Saracenic building of the end of the seventh century, more modern in style, that they must be several centuries earlier.

6. The confirmation afforded by the historical argument to the conclusions arrived at from the architectural evidence.

7. The accordance of the locality (if the Dome of the Rock were the Holy Sepulchre) with the Scripture narrative, instead of being irreconcilable therewith as the localities pointed to in Jerusalem

were.

The speaker then spoke briefly of his personal experience at Jerusalem. He had noticed no material points of which he had not been previously aware from the plans and drawings of Catherwood, Arundale, the numerous photographs, and the fine engravings of De Vogue. The extreme beauty of the interior of the building had, however, much surprised him. He was familiar with the Taj Mahal and the other great imperial tombs of Agra and Delhi, and most of the tombs and tomb-like buildings in other countries. But they were all surpassed by the Dome of the Rock, which perfectly realized the instructions of its imperial builder; the elegance of its proportions and the appropriateness of its detail, which does not exist to the same extent in any other building, combined with the mystery of the Great Rock, which occupies the whole floor of the sanctuary, make up a whole, unrivalled in the world. "If the Mohammedans ever did anything as beautiful in any age or any country, the memory of it has passed away. If ever they built anything resembling it, the record of it is gone."