Journal of Proceedings. xvii 
find.* And finally lie wished to know whether Mr. Smith had noticed 
any relationship showing a sequence in time of the river-gravels when 
compared with the glacial gravels in their district. 
Mr. Robarts said he felt sure he spoke the feelings of every member in 
saying how much they were obliged to Mr. Smith for his admirable paper, 
which had given them a great deal of information about what had 
occurred in then’ own neighbourhood. He should like to ask one or two 
questions with regard to the hammer-stones. He wished to know whether 
Mr. Smith had found these to be made of many kinds of stones, or 
whether they were chiefly of quartzite—whether he had been able to trace 
that one particular stone was better adapted for making implements than 
another. Also, with regard to the three ages to which Mr. Smith had 
referred, and the smaller and more finished implements which were made 
in the latter period, whether the size of the implements was any indication 
of the date—whether the very largest im plements were all of the very 
oldest date, or whether any of the very large implements were found in 
the latest age ; in fact, whether the gravel contained such large stones at 
the latest dates as it did at the earlier dates. Mr. Robarts also alluded 
to the perfection of form shown in some of the Neolithic celts, and expressed 
an opinion that they were really finer than some of the best axes we had 
now; that was to say, the curves were more beautiful, though the imple¬ 
ments were not perhaps so well adapted for cutting. 
Mr. Smith, in replying, placed implements of the three ages side by 
side, and held that they furnished conclusive evidence of a marked 
improvement in the manufacture, and therefore in the status of the men 
who made them. He was not able to give an immediate and short answer 
to Mr. Meldola’s question as to the rate of denudation of river valleys ; 
the subject was a large and intricate one, and a whole evening would 
hardly suffice for its discussion. He next referred to the question raised 
by reference to Mr. Skertchley’s discovery, and said he had unfortunately 
seen none of Mr. Skertchley’s sections, and so could give no opinion from 
his own observation. Opinions were very much divided as to the age of 
the material in which Mr. Skertchley had found the so-termed glacial 
implements. Mr. Smith had found implements in gravel said to be 
middle-glacial at Amwell, Ware, and Hertford, but some geologists 
questioned the age of these deposits. The “ hammer-stones ” were nearly 
always of quartzite; he had only two examples made of another stone: 
both were of flint; one a rudely cylindrical nodule, the other a fossil cast 
from the Upper Chalk—an Echinite (Ananclujtes ovatus) ;—this had been 
“found” by a paleolithic man and used as a hammer-stone, and a 
flake detached by repeated hammering. As to the sizes, he was sorry 
to say that size was not an invariable test of the age of an implement, 
* See Prof. Bamsay’s ‘ Physical Geology and Geography of Great Britain,’ pp. 481 and 
544; Prof. Boyd Dawkins’ ‘Early Man in Britain,’ p. 169, note (1880); ‘The Fenland, 
past and present,’ by S. H. Miller and Sydney B. J. Skertchley, p. 546 (1878); and 
Proc. Essex Field Club, vol. ii., p. xxiv.—E d. 
b 
