that modern objects of modern design will one day become antiquities; and it should be our desire to assist in the making of the period of our lifetime an age to which future generations will look back for guidance and teaching.  Every man can, in this manner, be of use to a nation, if only by learning to reject poor work wherever he comes upon it—­work which he feels would not stand against the criticism of Time; and thus it may be said that archaeology, which directs him to the best works of the ancients, and sets him a standard and criterion, should be an essential part of his education.

[Illustration:  Pl.  II Wood and enamel jewel-case discovered in the tomb
                       of Yuaa and Tuau.  An example of the furniture of
                       one of the best periods of ancient Egyptian art. 
                       —­Cairo museum.]

[Photo by E. Brugsch Pasha.

The third argument which I wish to employ here to demonstrate the value of the study of archaeology and history to the layman is based upon the assumption that patriotism is a desirable ingredient in a man’s character.  This is a premise which assuredly will be admitted.  True patriotism is essential to the maintenance of a nation.  It has taken the place, among certain people, of loyalty to the sovereign; for the armies which used to go to war out of a blind loyalty to their king, now do so from a sense of patriotism which is shared by the monarch (if they happen to have the good fortune to possess one).

Patriotism is often believed to consist of a love of one’s country, in an affection for the familiar villages or cities, fields or streets, of one’s own dwelling-place.  This is a grievous error.  Patriotism should be an unqualified desire for the welfare of the race as a whole.  It is not really patriotic for the Englishman to say, “I love England”:  it is only natural.  It is not patriotic for him to say, “I don’t think much of foreigners”:  it is only a form of narrowness of mind which, in the case of England and certain other countries, happens sometimes to be rather a useful attitude, but in the case of several nations, of which a good example is Egypt, would be detrimental to their own interests.  It was not unqualified patriotism that induced the Greeks to throw off the Ottoman yoke:  it was largely dislike of the Turks.  It is not patriotism, that is to say undiluted concern for the nation as a whole, which leads some of the modern Egyptians to prefer an entirely native government to the Anglo-Egyptian administration now obtaining in that country:  it is restlessness; and I am fortunately able to define it thus without the necessity of entering the arena of polemics by an opinion as to whether that restlessness is justified or not justified.

If patriotism were but the love of one’s tribe and one’s dwelling-place, then such undeveloped or fallen races as, for example, the American Indians, could lay their downfall at the door of that sentiment; since the exclusive love of the tribe prevented the small bodies from amalgamating into one great nation for the opposing of the invader.  If patriotism were but the desire for government without interference, then the breaking up of the world’s empires would be urged, and such federations as the United States of America would be intolerable.