By Lt.-Gen. Pitt-Rivers, D.C.L., F.R.S., F.8.A. 215 



trenching in the interior, was of all the six kinds found in the ditch 

 and rampart, with the addition of a few fragments of thin grey, not 

 found elsewhere in the camp, though well-known in the Roman 

 deposits of this neighbourhood. This quality is, therefore, not 

 included in the average section of the ditch and rampart. 



I may here refer to a recent paper on " Quelques Encientes 

 Anciennes des Departments de la Somme, &c.," by M. M. Vauville, 

 which has been kindly sent to me by the Societe des Antiquaires 

 de France. It relates to the examination of several camps on the 

 sides of the Somme Valley, viz., those of Tirancourt, L'Etoile, 

 Liercourt, and others. I am acquainted with these camps, having 

 examined them superficially twice. The passenger by railway to 

 Paris may see some of them, if he looks for them, near Abbeville 

 and Amiens. M. Vauville received a grant from the Prencb 

 Government for the purpose, and his conclusions are based almost 

 entirely on the quality of the pottery found in his excavations. I 

 think we may welcome this communication as a first recognition of 

 the value of the evidence afforded by fragments of pottery in camp 

 digging, and as a first commencement of the scientific study of the 

 French camps, from which, like ours, so much information relating 

 to prehistoric times is likely to be derived in future. His conclusions 

 are no doubt correct in the main. He attributes these camps to the 

 later part of the Neolithic Period, but shows that they were also 

 occupied in later times. I am bound, however, to say, that I think 

 the information given in the paper is a little unsatisfactory in point 

 of detail. Although assisted by a grant from Government, his 

 means have evidently been insufficient, and, as he himself admits 

 it will require further evidence to substantiate some of the con- 

 clusions. For instance, he speaks repeatedly of " une poterie 

 gauloise," "deux poteries gauloises,^' &c., but one would require 

 more precise information to satisfy one upon this point, as there were 

 several varieties of Gaulish pottery, as well as of British. Then again, 

 it is evident from the diagrams, and is also admitted by M. Vauville, 

 that, on account no doubt of the expense, the sections were not 

 carried on to the main ramparts, and without that, the origin of a 

 camp cannot possibly be determined. He speaks of Neolithic 



