264 



too clever individual, commonly known as Flint Jack, and I may 

 add that I " paid the piper " for my acquaintance with him, — and pretty 

 smartly too. (Laughter.) I did not suffer much in pocket myself, but he 

 certainly did astonish my rather weak nerves, by showing me a number of 

 fish-hooks, combs, and knives, which he said he had picked up on the York- 

 shire wolds. (Laughter.) I communicated with a gentleman whose name I 

 have no doubt is well known to many here, — Mr. Mayer, of Liverpool, — 

 telling him what had been discovered in Yorkshire, at a place not far from 

 Whitby, and that a large collection was to be had for £50 . Mr. Mayer was 

 so excited by the intelligence that he started off at once for Yorkshire, paid 

 the £50, and brought away a batch of " Flint Jack's " work, in which I do 

 not say there was nothing genuine, although probably about four-fifths were 

 forgeries. This is one reason why I have felt a little distaste for the 

 collection and study of these implements. Perhaps Mr. Mello will tell us 

 whether he is able, under all the circumstances, to say whether what is put 

 before him is a genuine article or a forgery. (Applause.) 



Kev. F. S. Cook, D.D.— Perhaps Mr. Mello will be kind enough to state 

 the depth of the shafts at Spiennes, and whether they are sinkings of a well- 

 like character, or are merely large, wide pits ; because, if they are of well- 

 like formation, one would naturally inquire with what implements the wells 

 were sunk. 



Mr. W. P. James. — I merely wish to say, on behalf of those of the 

 outside public who desire to know something about these mysterious 

 questions on the borderland between geology and archaeology, that there are 

 certain points on which we should like to have a little more light thrown 

 than has been the case up to the present time. I may allude for 

 instance to the use of the word " prehistoric." Prehistoric, as far as the 

 ordinary interpretation of the word goes, means previous to history ; but 

 then we find that the historic records themselves vary in date, and thus we 

 become confused in our chronology. I would remark, by way of illustra- 

 tion, that " prehistoric," in regard to Egypt, would mean a very different 

 thing from " prehistoric " in regard to Gaul or Britain. Before the 

 beginning of history in Egypt would mean about 3,000 or 2,500 

 years before Christ ; whereas, in reference to Britain, it would mean 

 only 300 years before Christ. I do not think that those who use the 

 word " prehistoric " fully realise its extreme vagueness. We are, of course, 

 most intimately connected with our own island. Let us take it as an 

 example. The first time it is mentioned for certain is in the Travels of 

 Pytheas, a Greek, whose book was long deemed fictitious, but is now known 

 to be genuine. That traveller landed in Britain 300 years before Christ, and 

 described what he saw. It appears that there were Celts here at that 

 date ; and we cannot go further back by means of our records, or by an 

 appeal to material monuments, such as those of Egypt. The glory of 

 Egypt had all passed away before the historic period had begun in Britain ; 

 in other words, all the Celtic flints may be of later date than the papyrus 

 rolls of the early dynasties. I do not pretend to understand this subject in its 



