346 



NATURE 



[February 9, 1905 



•densed form, is what Prof. Gowland says about 

 them : — 



More than a hundred flint implements were found, 

 and the greater number occurred in the stratum of 

 chalk rubble which either directly overlaid or was on 

 a level with the bed rock. They may all be arranged 

 generally in the following classes : — 



Class I. — Axes roughly chipped and of rude forms, 

 but having well-defined, more or less sharp cutting 

 edges. 



Class II. — Hammerstones, with more or less well- 

 chipped, sharp curved edges. Most may be correctly 

 termed hammer-axes. 



Class III. — Hammerstones, more or less rounded. 

 Some specimens appear to have once had distinct 

 working edges, but they are now much blunted and 

 battered by use. 



In addition to the above flint implements were 

 found about thirty hammerstones, consisting of large 

 pebbles or small boulders of the hard quartzite variety 

 of sarsen. Some have been roughly broken into con- 

 venient forms for holding in the hand, whilst a few 



ment. We evidently have to deal with builders doing 

 their work in the Stone and not in the Bronze age. 

 But was the age Paleolithic or Neolithic ? 



Prof. Gowland writes : — 



" Perhaps the most striking features of the flint 

 implements is their e.\treme rudeness, and that there 

 is not a single ground or polished specimen among 

 them. This, at first sight and without due consider- 

 ation, might be taken to indicate an extremely remote 

 age. But in this connection it must be borne in mind 

 that in the building of such a stupendous structure as 

 Stonehenge, the tools required must have been num- 

 bered by thousands. The work, too, was of the 

 roughest character, and for such only rude tools were 

 required. The highly finished and polished imple- 

 ments which we are accustomed to consider, and 

 rightly so, as characteristic of Neolithic man, would 

 find no place in such work. They required too much 

 labour and time for their manufacture, and, when 

 made, could not have been more effective than the 

 hammer-axes and hammerstones found in the excava- 

 tions, which could be so easilv fashioned bv merelv 



-Some of the flir 



nple 



have been rudely trimmed into more regular shapes. 

 They vary in weight from about a pound up to six 

 and a half pounds. To these we have to add mauls, 

 a more remarkable kind of hammerstone than those 

 just enumerated. Their weights range from about 

 40 lb. to 64 lb. 



How came these flints and stones where they were 

 found? Prof. Gowland gives an answer which every- 

 body will accept. The implements must be regarded 

 as the discarded tools of the builders of Stonehenge, 

 dumped down into the holes as they became unfit for 

 use, and, in fact, used to pack the monoliths as they 

 were erected. We read: — "Dealing with the cavity 

 occupied by No. 55 before its fall, the mauls were 

 found wedged in below the front of its base to act 

 together with the large blocks of sarsen as supports 

 (p. 54)." Nearly all bear evidence of extremely rough 

 usage, their edges being jagged and broken, just as 

 we should expect to find after such rough employ- 

 NO. I 84 I , VOL. 7 I ] 



rudely shaping the natural flints, with which the 

 district abounds, by a few well directed blows of a 

 sarsen pebble." 



On this ground Prof. Gowland is of opinion that, 

 notwithstanding their rudeness, they may be legiti- 

 mately ascribed to the Neolithic age, and, it may be, 

 near its termination, that is, before the Bronze age, 

 the commencement of which has been placed at 

 1400 B.C. by Sir John Evans for Britain, though he 

 is inclined to think that estimate too low, and 2000 B.C. 

 by Montelius for Italy. 



Prof. Gowland guardedly writes : — 



" In my opinion, the date when copper or bronze 

 w-as first known in Britain is a very remote one, as 

 no country in the world presented greater facilities 

 for their discovery. The beginning of their applica- 

 tion to practical uses should, I think, be placed at least 

 as far back as iSoo B.C., and that date I am inclined 

 to give, until further evidence is forthcoming, as the 

 approximate date of the erection of Stonehenge." 



