yo PROCEEDINGS OF THE COTTESWOLD CLUB 



CONTENTS OF TUMULI 



The dates to which the long and round barrows may be 

 assigned have been the subject of much controversy. 

 That the long tumuli are the earlier has generally been 

 recognised. When first studied they were also referred 

 to a pre-historic age. Against this theory Sir James 

 Fergusson has protested with great vigour. All the 

 chamber-tumuli in Gloucestershire, he contends, belong to 

 the post-Roman period. "There are," he says, "hardly 

 " half-a-dozen tumuli in the whole county. . . . All, too, 

 " it may be remarked, are close to Roman stations, and 

 " surrounded by evidences of Roman occupation."* Hut 

 in the quarter of a century that has elapsed since he 

 wrote, the number of long barrows known to exist in the 

 county has increased to about forty, and enough has been 

 learned al)Out them to place their pre-Roman date lieyond 

 question. First, we have the f.ict that flint and stone 

 implements are frequently found in them, while in an 

 undisturbed barrow there has never been found the 

 slightest scrap of metal. Secondly, although long barrows 

 are distributed over the greater part of Britain, all have 

 the same peculiar conformation, indicating that they arc 

 the work of one race of men ; and, as Professor Rollcston 

 says, we have no record of Great Britain ever having been 

 occupied by one single race in historic times. Thirdly, we 

 have the authority of Professor Rolleston,t that a fairly 

 selected set of bones from any long barrow would be 

 distinguishable from any fairly selected set of bones from 

 any other variety of interment in Great Britain, of what- 

 ever age. Any one of these facts is strong proof of a 

 pre-historic occupation, but the cumulative character of all 

 is conclusive. 



" Rmle Stone Monuments," p. i66. 

 T " Britisli Barrows, " p. 627. 



