203 
so would not produce bronze. But may not the ancient races 
have produced the bronze by smelting the ores of copper and 
tin? This has been held by some writers as the only answer 
to the question, How was the bronze produced? Dr. John 
Evans, when dealing with this question, says, “'Though some 
bronzes may have been produced directly by smelting a 
mixture of copper and tin ores, the usual mode of making 
them was by treating fused crude copper with tine stone,” 
p. 420; and then he adds the following important note :— 
“Dr. Percy, F.R.S., and other practical metallurgists, have 
shown that this view is untenable.’? (See Lubbock, Pre- 
historic Times, p.621.) There remains, therefore, the fact that 
the people who prepared the bronze— whoever they may have 
been—must have known both how to have reduced the ores 
of copper and tin to the metallic state, and have had some 
standard of weight by which to have mixed those metals in 
the proper proportion. Here, then, we have a clear evidence 
that at whatever period these people lived they possessed a 
very considerable amount of knowledge of metallurgy. 
But this was not the only art which the men of the Bronze 
Age possessed. Sir John Lubbock, in his charming work of 
Pre-listoric Times, pp. 49-51, gives an account of the opening 
of a tumulus near Ribe, in Jutland, in 1860, in which was 
found a stone coffin, 9 ft. 8in. long and 2 ft. 2in. broad. In 
the coffin were found various woollen garments, one of which 
was a shawl, 5 ft. long and 3 ft. 9 in. broad, and ornamented 
with a fringe. If this was a genuine find, then it proves that 
either the people of the Bronze Age in Jutland were consider- 
ably advanced in the knowledge of manufacture or were in 
communication with a people who were much more highly 
civilised than themselves and who did possess that knowledge. 
Again, the ancient tribes which inhabited the Scioto 
Valley, Mississippi, constructed earthworks which were not 
only accurate squares and perfect circles, but were, in most 
cases, of corresponding dimensions, each square being 
1,080 ft. a side, and the diameter of each of the larger and 
smaller circles a fraction over 1,700 ft. and 800 ft. respectively. . 
*« This,”’ observes the author of the Smithsonian Surveys, “is a 
coincidence which could not possibly be accidental, and which 
must possess some significance. It certainly establishes the 
existence of some standard of measurement among the 
ancient people, if not the possession of some means of 
determining angles.” 
When speaking of these mound cities, Dr. Wilson, in his Pre- 
historic Man, p. 271, says, “It is no less important to note that 
