L 25 i 



recapitulate minutely the accounts given by the various archaeo- 

 logical authorities who had treated on the subject. The etymology 

 of the name had, too, been a wide field for speculation. Camden 

 in the 16th century, Cartwright, Turner, M. A. Lower in this, had 

 discussed the question at length, but the result of their several and 

 combined efforts was, he was afraid, eminently unsatisfactory. 

 They all attributed it to the " bury " (or fort) of a Saxon General, 

 of whose occupation of the camp, or presence within its walls, from 

 internally derived evidence, we had no proof whatever. He could 

 not accept the theory, in the absence of all traces possible of 

 Saxon tenancy; it might be supposed that had the hill been 

 occupied by a military chief (sufficiently powerful and well known 

 to give his name to the place) some relics would have been found 

 in the numerous excavations that had been carried on in and about 

 Cissbury, of so highly a civilized people as the Anglo-Saxons. 

 This was the case with the Romans, who, though they were by far 

 more advanced in the culture of arts and manufactures and 

 manners of living than our German forefathers, were but tempo- 

 rarily established in this country, of them we had sufficient 

 evidence in bones, pottery, coins, &c., to believe that, if indeed they 

 were not the actual engineers of the Camp, they selected it as an 

 important post, and held it for some time. With this brief intro- 

 duction he would proceed at once to the subject more properly 

 before them, hoping, though far from being sanguine, that future 

 excavations might reveal a Saxon burial ground, or that a deriva- 

 tion supported by more .patent external evidence might be found 

 by some one in an unlooked for source. He proposed to divide 

 his paper into three parts : — 



I. To give a description of the pit, the galleries connected 

 with it, and the material with which they were filled in. 



II. To state the reason for which it appeai-ed the pit and 

 galleries were made, and to describe the various manufactured 

 articles found, their occurrence and probable uses. 



III. To compare the workings with those of similar character 

 in other parts of the country, and to shortly consider the question 

 as to who the people were who onginated them. 



It was difficult, even if it were desirable, to prevent these three 



