^93 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1896. 



There appears to liave been a gap or hiatus between the Paleolithic 

 neoples aiuUhe Neolithic peoples in their occupation of western Europe. 

 There certainly were vast diflfereuces between their respective cultures, 

 •xud it has been believed there was a solution of the continuity of occu- 

 pation in western Europe between these two epochs.' 



Since the discoveries of Judge Piette^ in sundry caverns of southern 

 and western France; of MM. Boule and Oartailhac Mn the Grotto of 

 Reilhac (Lot), and the observations of M. Solomon Remaeh^ on the 

 ^^Femme nue:^ discovered in the caverns of Mentone by M. Julien, the 

 hiatus between the Paleolithic and Neolithic periods has been contro- 

 verted and is not now regarded nearly so certain as formerly. 



The contrary appears between the Neolithic and Bronze ages, at least 

 for western Europe, where the introduction of bronze and its subse- 

 quent use for weapons and implements seems to have occurred among 

 the same peoples. The advent of bronze for these purposes was by 

 immioration or introduction from some other country, and the peoples 

 (stilHn western Europe) who used it this year i)robably were the same 

 as used the stone implements last year. Therefore the introduction 

 of bronze, while it made changes in their implements and so wrought 

 changes in their mechanical ability, yet had comparatively small 

 influence upon their ai't. 



We have already shown the differences between the art of the Paleo- 

 lithic period and that of the Neolithic period; we have also shown how, 

 in the Neolithic period, the art was confined to the merest decorations 

 of objects, and that it consisted principally of geometric designs. 

 Plates 19 and 20 are again referred to as giving an extended represen- 

 tation of the kinds and styles of ornamentation employed. 



The decorative art of the Bronze age was but a continuation of that of 

 the Neolithic period, and it is not impossible that an investigation into 

 the origin of son)e of the specimens in plates 19 and 20 would show 

 them to have belonged to the Bronze age; that is to say, the styles of 

 ornamentation of the two periods or ages were practically the same, 

 and the latter was but a continuation of the former, wnth such possible 

 changes or additions as would naturally grow. The marked difference 

 between the two ages was the substitution of bronze for stone in the 

 material for cutting and piercing implements. 



The question continually arises whence and how was bronze intro- 

 duced into western Europe. Of course the answer is lost in anti(iuity, 

 for there are no records. There is not, and from the nature of the 

 case there can not be, any direct or positive testimony. We can de- 

 pend only upon the evidence furnished by prehistoric archaeology. 

 Many theories have been propounded, none of which have proved 



'S<'«' pp. 374, 401, 415, 423. 

 -L'Aiithropolojrio, 1895, p. 129; 1897, p. 168. 



•'Etudes Ethnogniphique et Geologiriue par E. Cartailhac etM. Boule: Lyou, 18,S9. 

 'L'AntlnopoloKic, 1898, pp. 26-31; and Description Raisonnie Musco de Saint. 

 (leiinain-uu-l^aye, ]>. 267, 



