in Britain, influenced by canons directly supplied from Scandinavian sources, has a tendency to authenticate some of the most favourite errors of older British antiquaries. Based, as nearly all antiquarian pursuits in this country have heretofore been, on classical learning, it has been accepted as an almost indisputable truth, that, with the exception of the mysteriously learned Druid priests, the Britons prior to the Roman Period were mere painted savages. Hence, while the artless relics of our primeval Stone Period were generally assigned to native workmanship, whatever evinced any remarkable traces of skill distinct from the well-defined Roman art, was assumed of necessity to have a foreign origin, and was usually ascribed to the Danes. The invariable adoption of the latter term in preference to that of Norwegians or Norsemen, shews how completely Scottish and Irish antiquaries have abandoned themselves to the influence of English literature, even where the appropriation of its dogmas was opposed to well-known historical facts. The name of Dane has in fact for centuries been one of those convenient words which so often take the place of ideas and save the trouble and inconvenience of reasoning. Yet this theory of a Danish origin for nearly all native arts, though adopted without investigation, and fostered in defiance of evidence, has long ceased to be a mere popular error. It pervades both the Scottish and English Archæologiæ, and the great majority of works on every department of British antiquities, and has till recently proved a perpetual stumblingblock to the Irish antiquary. It is, moreover, a cumulative error,--certain Scottish relics, for example, found in Argyleshire, as well as others in the Isle of Man, being assumed in the Archæologia Scotica to be Scandinavian,[2] an able writer in the Transactions of the Cambridge Camden Society, taking these assumptions as indisputable facts, employs them in proving that other equally undoubted native works of art are also Scandinavian.[3] So, too, a writer in the Archæologia Scotica, ascribing a similar origin to the monolithic structures of the Orkney and Shetland Islands,[4] is quoted by Danish antiquaries[5] as referring to an established truth, and as proving, accordingly, that similar structures in the Hebrides are also the work of the Northmen! Pennant, Chalmers, Barry, Macculloch, Scott, Hibbert, and a host of other writers might be quoted to shew how this theory, like a snow-ball, gathers as it rolls, taking up indiscriminately whatever chances to lie in its erratic course. Even the poets have lent their aid to propagate the same prevalent error. Cowper, for example,--no uneducated or superficial writer,--thus strangely postdates Britain's birth-time:--