# The Primeval Antiquities of Denmark/Preface to the English Edition, written by the Author

PREFACE
TO
THE ENGLISH EDITION,
WRITTEN BY THE AUTHOR.
Whilst the antiquities of Rome, Greece, and Egypt have been carefully examined and systematically described by English writers, the primeval national antiquities of the British islands have never hitherto been brought into a scientific arrangement. The consequence has been that they have neither furnished those results to history, nor excited that interest with the public in general, which they otherwise would have done. This want of systematic arrangement has probably arisen from the circumstance that on the British islands there exist remains of many different people, as the Celts, the Romans, the Saxons, the North-men and the Normans. It is often difficult to distinguish with certainty the antiquities of those different people, and hence the same remains have, by some authors, been called Celtic or Druidical, by others Roman, by others again Danish, &c.
In order to determine with any degree of certainty the differences between the antiquities of different people, and particularly in order to determine what remains are not Roman, it will evidently be serviceable to British antiquaries to look to the national antiquities of countries that were never conquered by the Romans, and whose national remains are ​therefore unmixed. In that respect the primeval antiquities of Denmark are peculiarly important. Denmark was peopled at a very early age; it lay beyond the pale of Roman conquest; and there the ante-Roman civilization was kept up to a much later period than in the south and west of Europe. The Royal Museum of Northern Antiquities of Copenhagen contains a greater number of primeval antiquities, than most other collections, and by the efforts of C. J. Thomsen, (the real founder of the Museum,) it has been systematically arranged. The close connection which in the old time existed between Denmark and the British islands, renders it natural that British antiquaries should turn with interest to the antiquities of Denmark, and compare them with those of their own countries.
The present little work, which gives a short review of the Danish antiquities compared with the other antiquities of Scandinavia, was originally written in Danish for a Copenhagen society for the diffusion of useful knowledge. It was not my plan to write a book merely for the archæologist, but more particularly for the general reader. I endeavoured to prove the use and importance of archæological researches, by shewing how the early history of our country can be read through the monuments, and I wanted in that way to excite a more general interest for the preservation of our national remains.
In the supposition that this little book would be acceptable to English readers, my friend Mr. Thoms had already, without my knowledge, translated it into English before my arrival in ​England, and Mr. Parker had undertaken the publication. But since its publication I have had an opportunity of picking up a good deal of new information by examining the national antiquities of several foreign countries, and last year I published some of the results at which I had recently arrived in another book. Both Mr. Thoms and Mr. Parker agreed with me, that it would be desirable that the English edition should be corrected and enlarged with some of my new observations. I have therefore made a good many alterations, and additions, particularly in the general historical review. I have brought in more information about the connection between the antiquities of our country with those of Germany, Switzerland, France, &c., which, as I hope, will be found to possess some interest. It is only through a comparison of the national antiquities of the different European countries that we shall be enabled to trace the large historical results.
British Archæology has suffered very much from the want of a fixed nomenclature. This has caused a great deal of confusion. The same names and terms have been used for the most different remains. Mr. Thoms and myself have been anxious to give more fixed names. For instance, in the following work the term cromlech has only been applied to the monuments of the stone-period; and the name celt has not, as before, been given alike to stone hatchets, stone hammers, and to two different sorts of bronze hatchets, but only to one sort of bronze hatchet which is commonly called so on the continent, &c. I think that antiquaries can scarcely pay too much attention to the introduction of a fixed terminology.
​From the many valuable and interesting notes about similar remains in England, which have been added by Mr. Thoms from the writings of other antiquaries, it will appear, that there exists a great similarity between the Danish and the British antiquities. The same division of the antiquities into three classes,—those belonging to the periods of Stone, and Bronze, and Iron,—which has been adopted in the arrangement of the Danish primeval monuments, will apply to the British remains; and very nearly the same results, in regard to the state of civilization in the stone and bronze periods, as have been gained for Denmark, will also be gained for Britain through a careful examination of its primeval antiquities. At the same time it is perfectly clear, that the British antiquities, when once sufficiently collected, examined and compared, will on the whole give more interesting and important results, than have been derived from those of Denmark, or of most other countries, because they belong to so many and such different people. I myself in my travels in Holland, Ireland, and England, have seen how many most interesting antiquities and monuments still exist in those countries; and I am fully convinced, that a systematical description and comparison of those remains will throw quite a new light upon the early state of the British islands, and particularly that it will present inestimable illustrations on the civilization and connections of the people from the time of the Anglo-Saxons until the invasion of the Normans. It is only through the monuments that we are enabled to trace the influence of the Roman civilization upon the Celts, until it was superseded by those new invaders, who laid the foundation of the subsequent progress of England on the ruins of the Roman civilization. I hope the day is not far distant ​when the British people will have formed a national museum of antiquities commensurate with the importance of their remains. It is only in that way that they can be enabled to read the history of their country through its national monuments. If my book should have a little of the same effect in England, as that which it was intended to produce in Denmark, viz., to excite a more lively interest in the national remains, I think it will do some good. And even in any case,—if it only shews how important it is that the British and Danish antiquaries should unite their efforts more than has hitherto been the case,—I hope the translation will not be regarded as entirely without use. I feel quite sure that such union could not exist without producing most valuable results for the history of both countries.
J. J. A. WORSAAE, Copenhagen.
* ↑ The Danish title is: "Danmarks Oldtid oplyst ved Oldsager og Gravhöie. Udgivet af Selskabet for Trjkkefrihedens rette Brug. Kjöbenhavn. 1843. 8vo. It has also been published in a German translation. "Dänemarks Vorzeit, durch Alterthümer beleuchtet." Kopenhagen, 1844. 8vo.
* ↑ Blekingske Mindesmærker fra Hedenold. Kjöbenham, 1846. 4to. It has lately appeared in a German translation in "Zur Alterthumskunde des Nordens von J. J. A. Worsaae. Leipzig 1847." 4to.