360 
and it is only about 20 years since that the subject first began to 
receive the attention which its great importance deserved. The results 
which pre-historic archaeology has succeeded during the last few 
years in establishing, are familiar to every one. It has been proved 
that whereas the inhabitants of Britain were acquainted, at the 
time of the Roman invasion, with the manufacture of iron, at a 
previous period they constructed their tools and weapons of bronze, 
and at a period earlier still were altogether unacquainted with the 
use of metals. The premetallic age in Europe has further been 
divided into the neolithic and palaeolithic periods, the first character- 
ized by the use of polished stone implements, and the latter by 
that of implements which were merely roughly chipped into shape. 
The ages of iron, of bronze, and of polished stone, have been 
shown to be all of them more or less connected with the present 
state of things, for the animals which co-existed with neolithic 
man were all of them of existing species, and the physical features of 
the country did not then widely differ from those of our own times. 
On the other hand, in considering the age of palaeolithic man, 
archaeologists suddenly found themselves landed at a point not 
only far removed from that of our own epoch, but also from that of 
the neolithic period. The era of polished stone, distant although 
it undoubtedly was, belonged to pre-historical, that of the ruder 
weapons, to geological times. The one was separated, Ion go intervallo, 
from the other, and there was nothing to show how the transition 
between them was effected. Still the influence of preconceived 
ideas was so strong, that it was until quite recently believed that 
palaeolithic man belonged to the later part of the post-glacial period. 
The feeling has been lately growing up in several directions at once, 
that the evidence for this was by no means satisfactory. Although 
the great majority of archaeologists still continued to hold to the 
late post-glacial age of all the earliest remains of man in England, 
there were some, amongst whom I may mention Dr. Jas. Ceikic, 
Mr. Tiddeman, Mr. Belt, and Mr. Skertcldy, who believed that 
some at least of the implement-bearing beds belonged to inter- 
glacial times. 
The systematic survey of the Brandon district brought to the 
