469 
times. A good deal of the same reasoning applies to the 
weapons of bronze, which, as you are well aware, are found 
not only in all European, but in many Asiatic countries. 
There is, as far as I can tell, no evidence whatever of bronze 
having been used on account of the absence of iron, and not 
much reason to doubt that the two metals were used contem- 
poraneously. At the same time, I would call your attention 
especially to the fact that there are varieties in the forms of 
those implements in different countries. Their principle is, 
indeed, the same; there is a great general resemblance both 
in the material of which they are made, and in the graceful- 
ness of the form; but, with all these resemblances, there are 
still characteristic differences : 
‘¢¢ Facies non omnibus una, 
Nec diversa tamen, qualis decet esse sororum.’ 
«¢ The swords of bronze that are found in these islands are 
characterized by the absence of a solid hilt of metal. Those 
of the Continent rarely want it. They are further charac- 
terized by a peculiar flatness of blade; those of the Continent 
are rimmed in a peculiar manner, which, with little observa- 
tion, enables us to throw them into seven or eight separate 
classes, all indicative, as I believe, of different dates of anti- 
quity. One peculiarity I am bound to mark, namely, the 
smallness of the hilt, leading us to the conviction that they 
must everywhere have been used by a race of diminutive pro- 
portions. Again, they are characterized by a total absence of 
guard, in which they appear to differ from the similar form, 
which we meet with in bas-reliefs on urns, and gems of 
Grecian origin. In these, according to the measurement made 
from many hundred specimens, the hilt is found to bear a very 
different proportion to the blade, and on the vast majority of 
Etruscan urns there is a well-defined guard, often of consi- 
derable size. Some, it is true, of the Etruscan swords of the 
earliest class want this; and this is a consideration which re- 
