15 
Mr Bonney (St John’s) mentioned some tumuli in Brittany, 
Scandinavia, and Constantine (Algeria) which illustrated the use 
of stele, and the method of building the mound. He discussed 
the probable antiquity of some in the first country, and shewed 
that they belonged in all probability either to the Neolithic or 
to the Bronze age, exhibited a progress in Art, and were certainly 
pre-Roman. He also described the various forms of their tomb 
chambers, and made some remarks upon the geographical dis- 
tribution of these remains. 
The Pusiic Orator (Mr W. G. Ciark, Trinity) gave some 
interesting particulars from his personal recollections concerning 
the barrows in the Troad, and mentioned that all which had 
been explored lately had been found to have been previously 
opened. He also commented upon the difficulty of deciding 
upon the age of tumuli from the remains contained, owing to the 
fact that one material did not necessarily wholly replace another 
in the manufacture of weapons, &c.; instancing the heaps of 
flint chips at Mavathon, which are comparatively modern, being 
the remains of threshing instruments still used in agriculture 
in that part of the country. He also doubted whether the 
various ‘ages’ could always be maintained. 
In reply to a question by Mr Candy (Sidney) as to the re- 
lation of Mr Paley’s paper to Stonehenge, Professor CARDALE 
Basineton briefly indicated the commonly received opinions 
concerning the date and purpose of Stonehenge; and brought 
forward instances from Denmark and the north of Europe to 
shew that the distinction of the ‘ages’ could not be entirely set 
aside. 
