tag="{http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml}a">[49] But I need not further continue the subject,[50] and I think that it may be taken for granted, that sea-burial, or immarment, or immersion, or aquation, or whatever names the method may be known by, will never become general. The ancient Lacustrine dwellers did not practise water-burial, but disposed of their dead upon terra firma, evidently from motives that have already been explained.

A method of petrifaction has lately been broached, and has met with some adherents. Something is to be produced similar to a relic which I once saw for sale in Manchester, taken from a guano-bed about thirty years ago, and which had been interred in the phosphates about a hundred and fifty years previously. In a cave in the Bay of Nipea, a number of bodies were discovered which had been petrified by the waters of some springs. The latest mode of effecting this kind of sanitary preservation was practised upon the body of Mazzini; and the result was, I understand, very disappointing.

A system of inhumation analogous to that practised when stone-coffins were in use is now agitating in Germany.[51] It is proposed to encrust the subject over with a cement, and, after placing it in a sarcophagus of similar artificial material, to pour more of the same matter in a fluid state around it, so that the dead would be entombed in a solid matrix of long-enduring material. But those who are practically acquainted with the nature of cements, or rather with the impossibility of resting assured that proper cements would always be used, will know that it is more than likely that, out of the 32,000 who are said to die annually per million, one-half of the bodies would be enveloped in an impoverished material, which would speedily fall to pieces, with disastrous results. Dr. Sedgwick has expressed himself as certain that even plaster of Paris would prove ineffective in preventing the exhalations from coffins. Supposing, too, that each of the defunct required a space of one cubic yard only, where could cemeteries be obtained which could afford permanently to alienate 32,000 cubic yards of space per million annually? The scheme carries wildness upon its very face. Something analogous to this system of burial was the strange one carried out by the ancient Peruvians. A late traveller[52] has described some of the Huacas, as the places were called, and the well-preserved remains of which are still to be seen. It was a system of piling up coffins of plaster in pyramid fashion, to such an extent that one of these pyramidal mounds measures over 14½ millions of cubic feet. One carefully examined measured over 3½ millions of cubic feet, and was one mass of half-mummified bodies. As fast as a death took place, a chamber of sun-dried material was prepared upon the mound, and the body laid in it; and although the material of which the mound was composed was little else than mud-plaster, these cellular-built Huacas possessed a wonderful power of resistance to decay. One of them, in 1854, had occasion during the war to accommodate a battery of artillery on its summit.

Many of the ancient peoples buried in caves. The primeval races frequently used the caverns once inhabited by the extinct beasts for this purpose.[53] The ancient Persians hewed out holes in the mountains with the same view. The early Arabians also hid their dead in caves, in order to protect them from wild beasts. Burial-caves of some ancient Russian peoples are found along the Borysthenes.[54] To this class of burial might also be said to belong all those tombs which were built up in chambers with rude pieces of stone, and whether afterwards heaped over with earth or not. A tomb of this latter description was the huge barrow of the Emperor Yung-Lo, with its extensive megalithic avenue leading to its centre, by way of which the dead was visited or the tomb cleansed.[55] The stone lines on Dartmoor may have originally belonged to this category. Even at the present day the Inguishes of the Caucasus bury in vaults of masonry built above ground, with an aperture in the west side by which the corpse is introduced, and which is afterwards filled up with stones.[56]

We now approach burial in the earth, and the common practice of the present day. It is not needful, however, to say much here concerning it, as it will be treated of in a separate chapter, where its shortcomings will also be noted. The most persistent practisers of inhumation[57] are the Chinese. They seem rarely to have followed any other system of burial. Long before the Christian era they used coffins, and previous to committing them to the ground inserted in them gold and silver valuables. But at that time they did not form grave-mounds or fence them round with extensive palisades.[58] The secret of their attachment to burial in the earth lies in the fact that they believe that the body must rest comfortably in the grave, or misfortune will follow the family.[59] The Chinese are therefore particularly anxious about the suitableness of the burial site, and sometimes a priest is consulted and a fresh interment made. This superstition has considerable disadvantages, because the dead not being interred in enclosed spaces, as with us, but at the fancy of the relatives, it is sometimes impossible to make roadways from place to place. They oppose tramways and railways for this reason, and riots with the Franks have already taken place in consequence. The Chinese never desecrate the graves of even foreign sailors, and have been known to inter cast-ashore bodies with the greatest attention. To wherever they themselves wander, and whether they die and are buried in California or in Australia, they are eventually re-interred in the Flowery Land, in the mortuary erections of the villages dear to them. It is therefore not uncommon to see a China-bound vessel from San Francisco well freighted with the bones of disinterred Celestials. On the hills in China the graves are often allowed to remain undisturbed