96 H. C. Lawlor on 



Souterrains in various parts of France. The brevity of Mons. 

 Dechelette's remarks on French Souterrains is accounted for by 

 his statements, first, that little, if anything, has been done in the 

 way of scientific investigation of these underground dwellings, 

 and second, that they are of comi)aratively recent date, subse- 

 quent to the Komaii Conquest, and therefore not in France, 

 strictly prehistoric remains, of which his great work almost 

 exclusively treats. It must be remembered that the period which 

 we call prehistoric in Ireland or in Glreat Britain extended to a 

 later date than the prehistoric period in France, but the 

 fact that Souterrains are found with some frequency in France, 

 Cornwall, Ireland and the Pictish o)- Eastern half of Scotland, 

 seems to indicate a common origin for some of the waves of 

 population which extended to tliese parts. I have no information 

 as to the existence or non existence of the Souterrain in the 

 Iberian Peninsula. It would be of great interest if any archaeo- 

 logical authority familiar with the antiquities of Spain and 

 Portugal could sup})ly information on this point, for of 

 course we all know the somewhat vague tradition of a Milesian 

 origin of the very early Irish population. Mons. Dechelette's 

 reference to French Souterrains does not convey with any 

 certainty that he is referring to caves even closely resembling 

 those found in Ireland and Scotland. 



Professor O'Curry's work on the "Manners and Customs of the 

 Ancient Irish " throws some light upon the Irish Souterrains and 

 their dwellers, chiefly, curious to say, because he never mentions 

 them at all. His lectures are based on the ancient Irish Tracts 

 collected into various books, chiefly written by monastic 

 writers of the 9th to the 16th centuries, in the main 

 copies of earlier, but now lost, MSS. or oral history care- 

 fully handed down by the hereditary bards and historians. 

 O'Curry's descriptions of the dwellings and relative customs 

 derived, as they are, from all the existing sources of ancient 

 manuscript authority, are probably exhaustive. They contain, 

 however, no account of the manners and customs of the 



