Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1890-04-02

and made our way to a small field in the center
of forest by the peasants small house. On the
border Of the forest he had been digging for
stone for the road and he had unearthed about
foot below the surface, two skeletons. one
somevhat larger than the other. On being ex-
posed to the air they had broken to pieces and
only the skulls we're LETT The two skeletons
were found side by side, the head of one by
the foot Of the other and loosely walled in with
stones. Beside them we're found several small
weapons OF hardened copper and other imple-
ments including some long copper pins and q
chisel-shaped implement. There was also q
iavein and q sword blade not unlike in shape
to a bay leaf. Some Swiss archaologists had
endeavored to purchase them, but the peasant
had conceived the idea that they were inn
mensely valuable and would not let them go.
The syndic or mayor of the town, who was
with me, at once pronounced them to belong
to the stone age, but on reference to an Amert-
can encyclopedia found Roman weapons that
corresponded to the sword, although there was
no counterpart Of the chisel-shaped weapon"
THE QUESTION OF NATIONALITY.
DR.. Gregory then discussed the probable his
tory Of the weapons. He said that the ques-
ton at once arose as to whether the remains
we're prehistoric or whether they belonged to
the Lacustrian age, which has left SO many in
teresting relics. If that was the case it would
have to be proved that the Carthaginians used
bronze weapons. The manner of burial itself
Woo dppdrcuuy uOt hOiudu. luc TWO DOulcS
might have been those Of warrior and his
servant although the double set of weapons
would indicate that they were two warriors,
and yet they might have been man and wife.
In the museums of Zurich and Berne, where
there are relics Of the LacusIrian age, DR..
Gregory said he had found no weapons Of
bronze like these, though he did find Roman
short sword corresponding to the one found
near ST. Martin. He said it was
evident then that they were not
uons. FIRST, that they we're Roman and be-
longed to an earlier period and had been OBJ
tanned from Egypt and second, that the Car
thagenians may have had In their ranks men Of
the barbarian tribes with which they had come
In contact, He thought that the find was of too
early date to have belonged to Roman or Car
thagenian soldiers. Moreover. the form of
burial WAS barbarian, and he said that, in his
opinion, they must have belonged to an earlier
period, yet not to SO early period but that the
armor could have come from some OF the bar
barian races with whom the Romans and Car
thagenians were familiar.
In the discussion that followed Capt
Bourke stated that the fact that the weapons
were Of hardened copper and the form OF bur-
ial led him to think that the remains belonged
to some Of the Spanish or Portuguese followers
Of Hannibal, who found his most devoted allies
In the Spaniards. Others participated in the
discussion and agreed generally that the re-
mains, although perhaps Of the Roman period, |
were not themselves Roman.
THE HISTORY OF sALUrATIoNs.
Col Garriek Mallery read a valuable and
quite amusing paper ON the "Origin and his
tory Of salutations."
why do people do anything as q custom" |
said Col. Mallory. Because it is right? Then |
the question arises is there any absolute right |
and wrong. Yet some things are done at some |
times because they seem proper, and at another
time the same things are tabooed as wrong"
Few ceremOnfaia have originated IN
times. Almost all Of them, whether they are
important or trivial, are the heritage OF a by
gone time. Things of this sort are not ORR
ginated and done because they are right, but
they are right because they are done. The
history Of customs is too immense to handle.
and he said he would only discuss
the one question OF salutations First he
spoke Of the bow and its near relation to the
salaam- He spoke Of Herbert Spencer's ex-
PLANTATION in ascribing bow to a desire to
show regard and feeling Of the superiority
Of the one bowed to. This has a modcum OF
reason IN it, yet it probably has a more COM
Plicated origin. The expression Of apprecia-
ton and reverence, for instance, shown in
raising the hands. has example in the western
phrase, "hsnds up
HIGH AND Low.
Sign language undoubtedly goes far toward
explaining salutations. In some countries it is
wrong for the chief to see head higher than
his own, consequently the sitting posture is the
one OF respect. In Siam no man dares to raise
his head to the'level of his superior In the
principle Of the higher and lower may be
found the origin of the custom of bowling. A
nod shows some Difference. low bow denotes
reverence and perhaps fear. The head thrown
back marks pride and hauteur. Kneeling and
saiaaming to the ground does not necessarily
mark fear, but Is simply a recognition OF the
principle OF the higher and lower. The uncov-
ering Of the masculine head is explained by
Spencer as an exhibition of Difference and fear.
UScoyERINo THE HEAD.
The uncovering of part OF the body is more
likely tacit admission of the poverty and
lowly station Of the one making the salutation.
Yet in some countries il is etiquette to keep the
head covered and the feet bare. Cyrus be-
headed two satraps for neglecting to place
their hands within their flowing sleeves when
saluting him. Col. Mallery said that the ear
lest head covering was a helmet or other pro-
lection, and the removal of it denoted surren-
der or an admission that the one saluting is
willing TO place himself in the power of the
other. This is shown by the fact that women,
who have never worn helmets. have never been
expected to take of their hats. Removing the
hat il an evidence Of real Or perfunctory
respect and does not necessarily denote fear or
cowsrdice.
hand SHAKING.
The shaking of hands has been explained as
the survival of n contest, real or pretended,
where each tries to kiss the hand of the other:
yet this Gust ON has prevailed where the kiss is
not known. Some African races salute by rub
bling noses. The kiss OF the hand is uudoubt-
eddy ancient and does not grow out Of the Gus
tom of kissing the lips. Hand kissing is spoken
OF in Homer. Among the Algonquin and Iro-
quois Indians Of the seventeenth century it
Was customary for each to kiss his own hand
and then to place it in the hand of the other
Hand shaking probably originated in the tax
ing OF the hand and not in shaking it. The
shake IL not essential. Among many peoples
the joining of hands is the ceremonial denoting
union and peace. The union of hands to de-
note honesty Of purpose and desire for
fAir dealing still exists among prize fighters.
ORAL aREETINas.
The oral forms Of salutation as a rule refer
to health and well being. The Arabs reiterate
the phrase How are vou?' for several min
utes. The inhabitants Of Cairo ask How do
you perspireY" dry skin dsnoting the dreaded
fever. Humboldt says that along the Orono,o
the morning salutation il "How have the mos
quitoes used your" Our phrase, How do you
do2" has been explained, with the emphasis on
the word do" ss referring to the activity OF
the Anglo-Saxon race. II may refer. however
10 the devotion of the race to commercial pur-
suits, and would be the equivalent OF How