The Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons, and Ornaments of Great Britain/Chapter 16


CHAPTER XVI.

JAVELIN AND ARROW HEADS.

I now come to a series of flint weapons, small but varying in size, which though presenting a general resemblance in character to each other, are still susceptible of being classified under several types. The similarity is probably due to their having been all intended for the same purpose—that of piercing the skin, whether of enemies in war, or of animals in the chase; the differences may result from some of the weapons having served for warlike and others for hunting purposes. The variation in size probably arises from some of them having tipped spears to be held in the hand for close encounters, while others may have been attached to lighter shafts, and formed javelins to be thrown at objects at some distance; and the majority of the smaller kind were, beyond doubt, the heads of arrows discharged from bows.

The possibly successive ideas of pointing a stake as a weapon of offence, of hardening the point by means of fire, and of substituting a still harder point made of horn, bone, or stone, must have occurred to mankind at the earliest period of its history, and weapons of one or all of these kinds are to be found among savage tribes in all parts of the world. The discovery of the bow, as a means of propelling javelins on a small scale to a distance, seems to belong to a rather higher grade of culture, and its use is not universal among modern savages. The use of the bow and arrow was totally unknown to the aborigines of Australia,[1] and even the Maories[2] of New Zealand—who were by no means in the lowest stage of civilization—had, when first discovered, no bows and arrows, nor even slings; in fact, no missile weapon except the lance, which was thrown by hand.

In Europe, however, the use of the bow seems to date back to a very remote period, as in some of the cave-deposits of the Reindeer Period of the South of France, what appear to be undoubtedly arrow-heads are found. In other caves, possibly, though not certainly, inhabited at a somewhat later period, such arrow-heads are absent, though what may be regarded as harpoon-heads of bone occur; and in the River Gravel deposits, nothing that can positively be said to be an arrow-head has as yet been found, though it is barely possible that some of the pointed flakes may have served to tip arrows.

The Greek myth[3] that bows and arrows were invented by Scythes, the son of Jove, or by Perses, the son of Perseus, though pointing to an extreme antiquity for the invention, not improbably embodies a tradition of the skill in archery of the ancient Scythians and Persians.[4]

The simplest form of stone-pointed spear or lance at present in use among savages, consists of a long sharp flake of obsidian, or some silicious stone, attached to a shaft, like that shown in Fig. 195; and arrows, tipped with smaller flakes, having but little secondary working at the sides, beyond what was necessary to complete the point, and to form a small tang for insertion into the shaft, may also be seen in Ethnological collections. Between these almost simple flakes and skilfully and symmetrically-chipped lance and arrow heads, all the intermediate stages may be traced among weapons still, or until quite recently, in use among savages; as well as among those which once served to point the weapons of the early occupants of this country.

It is indeed probable that besides these stone-tipped weapons, other seemingly less effective, but actually more deadly missiles, were in use among them in the form of poisoned arrows; but as these at the present day are usually tipped with hard wood or bone, as better adapted than stone for retaining the poison, the same was probably the case in ancient times; and while those of wood have perished, those of bone, if found, have not as yet been recognized. Such arrow-heads of bone were also in use without being poisoned, as, for instance, among the Finns, or Fenni, as Tacitus calls them, whose principal weapons were, for want of iron, bone-pointed arrows.[5] The use of poisoned arrows had, among the Greeks and Romans, long ceased in classical times,[6] and is always represented by authors, from the time of Homer downwards, as a characteristic of barbarous nations; and yet, in our own language, a word in common use survives as a memorial of this barbarous custom having been practised by the Greeks probably long before the days of Homer. For from τόξον a bow (or occasionally an arrow[7]), was derived τοξικὸνtoxicum—the poison for arrows ; a term which gradually included all poisons, even those of the milder form, such as alcohol, the too free use of which results in that form of poisoning still known among us as intoxication.

One of the first to mention the discovery of flint arrow-heads in Britain was Dr. Plot, who, in his "Natural History of Staffordshire"[8] (1686), speaking of the use of iron by "the Britains" in Cæsar's time, observes: "we have reason to believe that, for the most part at lest, they sharpen'd their warlike instruments rather with stones than metall, especiall in the more northerly and inland countries, where they sometimes meet with flints in shape of arrow-heads, whereof I had one sent me by the learned and ingenious Charles Cotton, Esq., found not far from his pleasant mansion at Beresford, exactly in the form of a bearded arrow, jagg'd at each side, with a larger stemm in the middle, whereby I suppose it was fixt to the wood." "These they find in Scotland in much greater plenty, especially in the prefectury of Aberdeen, which, as the learned Sr Robert Sibbald[9] informs us, they there call Elf-arrows—Lamiarum Sagittas—imagining they drop from the clouds, not being to be found upon a diligent search, but now and then by chance in the high beaten roads." "Nor did the Britans only head their arrows with flint, but also their mataræ or British darts, which were thrown by those that fought in essedis, whereof I guess this is one I had given me, found near Leek, by my worthy friend Mr. Thomas Gent, curiously jagg'd at the edges with such-like teeth as a sickle, and otherwise wrought upon the flat, by which we may conclude, not only that these arrow and spear-heads are all artificial, whatever is pretended, but also that they had anciently some way of working of flints by the toole, which may be seen by the marks, as well as they had of the Egyptian porphyry; which, as the aforesaid worthy Gent. Sir Robert Sibbald, thinks, they learned of the Romans, who, as Aldrovandus[10] assures us, anciently used such weapons made of stones. However, still, it not being hence deducible, but they may be British, they are not ill-placed here, whatever original they have had from either nation."

Plot gives engravings both of a stemmed and barbed arrow-head, and of a leaf-shaped lance-head or knife.

Sir Robert Sibbald, in his[11] "Scotia Illustrata," 1684, expresses his belief that the flint arrow-heads are artificial. He possessed two, one like the head of a lance and the other like the end of an anchor, or tanged and barbed. He also relates the account given him by the Laird of Straloch, in Aberdeenshire, which he had passed on to the historian of Staffordshire.

It will be observed that Plot alludes to different opinions regarding these instruments, it being a matter in dispute whether they were artificial, natural, or partly natural; in the same manner as at the time when the flint implements were first discovered in the River Gravels doubts were expressed by some as to their artificial origin, while others regarded them as fossils of natural formation; and others again carried their unconscious Manichæism so far as to ascribe all fossils, and we may presume these included, to diabolical agency. The old Danish collector, Olaf Worm, speaks of a flint of a dark colour[12] exhibiting the form of a spear-head with such accuracy that it may be doubted whether it is a work of art or of nature, and of others like daggers, which, as being found in ancient grave-hills, are regarded by some as the arms of an early people; while others doubt whether they are the work of art or nature; and others consider them to be thunderbolts. One reason in former times for doubting the artificial origin of the most highly finished instruments was ignorance of how such objects could have been chipped out. After describing one of the beautiful Danish daggers, with the delicately "ripple-marked" blade and the square ornamented handle, Worm remarks—"si silex ullo modo arte foret tractabilis, potius Arte quam Naturâ elaboratum esse hoc corpus jurares."[13]

Aldrovandus[14] engraves a flint arrow-head as a Glossopetra—a stone which, according to Pliny,[15] "resembleth a man's tongue, and groweth not upon the ground, but in the eclipse of the moone falleth from heaven," and which "is thought by the magicians to be verie necessarie for those that court faire women."

But perhaps one of the most curious of these early notices of flint arrow-heads is that given in the "Catalogue and Description of the Natural and Artificial Rarities belonging to the Royal Society and preserved at Gresham College," [16] made by Nehemiah Grew, M.D., F.R.S. In Part III., Chap. V., Of Regular Stones, Dr. Grew speaks of "The flat Bolthead—Anchorites. Of affinity with that well described by Wormius[17] with the title of Silex venabuli ferreum cuspidem exacte referens. By Moscardo[18] with that of Pietre Ceraunie; who also figures it with three or four varieties. This like those of a perfect Flint and semiperspicuous. 'Tis likewise, in the same manner, pointed, like a Speer, having at the other end, like those of Moscardo, a short handle. But, moreover, hath this peculiar, that 'tis pointed or spiked also backward on both sides of the Handle, with some resemblance to an Anchor or the head of a Bearded Dart, from whence I have named it. 'Tis likewise tooth'd on the edges, and the sides as it were wrought with a kind of undulated sculpture, as those before mentioned. Another different from the former, in that it is longer, hath a deeper indenture, but no handle. Both of them strike fire like other flints." There is a representation given of this Anchorites, which shows it to have been a common barbed arrow-head with a central stem.

Moscardo's[19] figures which are here cited represent for the most part tanged arrow-heads. He says that Bonardo relates that they fall from the clouds, and that those who carry them cannot be drowned or struck by lightning. They produce, moreover, pleasant dreams.

Mention has already been made of the superstition attaching to flint arrow-heads in Scotland, where they were popularly regarded as the missiles of Elves. In speaking of them Dr. Stuart[20] quotes Robert Gordon of Straloch, the well-known Scottish geographer, who wrote about 1661. After giving some details concerning elf-darts, this writer says that these wonderful stones are sometimes found in the fields and in public and beaten roads, but never by searching for them; to-day, perhaps one will be found where yesterday nothing could be seen, and in the afternoon in places where before noon there was none, and this most frequently under clear skies and on summer days. He then gives instances related to him by a man and a woman of credit, each of whom while riding found an arrow-head in their clothes in this unexpected way. Mr. F. C. Lukis, F.S.A.,[21] draws a distinction between the elf-shot or elf-arrow and the elf-dart, the latter being of larger dimensions and leaf-shaped. He gives an engraving of one which has been mounted in a silver frame and worn as a charm. The cut is here reproduced, as Fig. 271. The initials at the back are probably those of the owner, who mounted the amulet in silver, and of his wife. It was worn by an old Scottish lady for half a century. Others thus mounted were exhibited in the Museum of the Archæological Institute at Edinburgh in 1856.[22]


Fig. 271.—Elf-Shot.
Another arrow-head, also thus mounted, is engraved by Douglas,[23] but in this instance it was found in Ireland, where "the peasants call them elf-arrows, and frequently set them in silver, and wear them on their necks as amulets against the aithadh or elf-shot. Others are engraved in the Philosophical Transactions[24] and in Gough's "Camden's Britannia."[25] Sir W. Wilde[26] informs us that in the North of Ireland, when cattle are sick and the cattle doctor or fairy doctor is sent for, he often says that the beast has been elf-shot, or stricken by fairy or elfin darts, and by some legerdemain contrives to find in its skin one or more poisoned weapons, which, with some coins, are then placed in the water which is given the animal to drink, and a cure is said to be effected. The Rev. Dr. Buick,[27] in an article on Irish flint arrow-heads, has given some particulars as to their use in curing cattle that are bewitched, and the Folklore Society[28] has published some details as to the beliefs still existing with regard to fairy darts. The same view of disease being caused by weapons shot by fairies at cattle, and much the same method of cure, prevailed, and indeed in places even now prevails, in Scotland.[29]

The late Dr. J. Hill Burton informed me that it is still an article of faith that elf-bolts after finding should not be exposed to the sun, or they are liable to be recovered by the fairies, who then work mischief with them.

Mr. Llewellynn Jewitt has recorded a similar elf-arrow superstition[30] as obtaining in Derbyshire, where flint arrow and spear heads are by some regarded as fairy darts, and supposed to have been used by the fairies in injuring and wounding cattle. It was with reference to discoveries near Buxton, in that county, that Stukeley wrote—"Little flint arrow-heads of the ancient Britons, called elfs'-arrows, are frequently ploughed up here."[31]

The late Sir Daniel Wilson[32] gives many interesting particulars regarding the elf-bolt, elf-shot, or elfin-arrow, which bears the synonymous Gaelic name of Sciat-hee, and cites from Pitcairn's "Criminal Trials," the description of a cavern where the archfiend carries on the manufacture of elf-arrows with the help of his attendant imps, who rough-hewed them for him to finish. He also mentions the passage in a letter from Dr. Hickes[33] to Pepys, recording that my Lord Tarbut, or some other lord, did produce one of those elf-arrows which one of his tenants or neighbours took out of the heart of one of his cattle that died of an usual death (sic). Dr. Hickes had another strange story, but very well attested, of an elf-arrow that was shot at a venerable Irish bishop by an evil spirit, in a terrible noise louder than thunder, which shaked the house where the bishop was.

Similar superstitions prevailed among the Scandinavian[34] nations, by whom a peculiar virtue was supposed to be inherent in flint arrow-heads, which was not to be found in those of metal.

The fact, already mentioned, of arrow-heads of flint being appended to Etruscan[35] necklaces of gold, apparently as a sort of charm, seems to show that a belief in the supernatural origin of these weapons, and their consequent miraculous powers, was of very ancient date. It has still survived in Italy,[36] where the peasants keep flint arrow-heads to preserve their houses from lightning, believing that the lightning comes down to strike with a similar stone—a superstition which Professor Gastaldi also found prevalent in Piedmont. In some instances they are carried on the person as preservatives against lightning, and in parts of the Abruzzo[37] they are known as lingue di S. Paolo, and the countryman who finds one devoutly kneels down, picks it up with his own tongue, and jealously preserves it as a most potent amulet. In the Foresi Collection[38] at the Paris Exhibition were some arrow-heads mounted in silver as amulets, like those in Scotland, but brought from the Isle of Elba. Another has been engraved by Dr. C. Rosa.[39]

M. Cartailhac[40] has published an interesting pamphlet on such superstitions, and Professor Bellucci has also dilated upon them. They are abundant in the neighbourhood of Perugia.[41]

It is a curious circumstance, that necklaces formed of cornelian beads, much of the shape of stemmed arrow-heads, with the perforation through, the central tang, are worn by the Arabs of Northern Africa at the present day, being regarded, as I was informed by the Rev. J. Greville Chester, as good for the blood. Similar charms are also worn in Turkey. I have a necklace of fifteen such arrow-head-like beads, with a central amulet, which was purchased by my son in a shop at Kostainicza,[42] in Turkish Croatia. Among the Zuñis[43] of New Mexico, stone arrow-heads are frequently attached to figures of animals so as to form charms or fetishes.

Enough, however, has been said with regard to the superstitions attaching to these arrow-heads of stone; the existence of such a belief in their supernatural origin, dating, as it seems to do, to a comparatively remote period, goes to prove that even in the days when the belief originated, the use of stone arrow-heads was not known, nor was there any tradition extant of a people whose weapons they had been. And yet it is probable that of all the instruments made of stone, arrow-heads would be among the last to drop out of use, being both well adapted for the purpose they served, and at the same time formed of a material so abundant, that with weapons so liable to be lost as arrows, it would be preferred to metal, at a time when this was scarce and costly. In this country, at all events, the extreme scarcity of bronze arrow-heads is remarkable, while we know from interments that flint arrow-heads were in common use by those who employed bronze for other weapons or implements. There appears to be some doubt as to whether the arrow-heads, or rather the flakes of black flint or obsidian which have been found in considerable numbers associated with bronze arrow-heads on the field of Marathon, were made in Greece, or whether they were not rather in use among some of the barbarian allies of the Persian King. M. Lenormant[44] is clearly of the opinion that they are not of Greek origin,[45] but this is contested by others, and probably with reason. Whatever their origin, there is a strong argument against stone arrow-heads having been in use among the Greeks at so late a period as the battle of Marathon, B.C. 490, in the fact that Herodotus,[46] writing but shortly afterwards, records, as an exceptional case, that in the army of Xerxes, circa B.C. 480, the arrows of some of the Ethiopian contingent were tipped with stone, while those of some Indian nations were even pointed with iron. So early as the days of Homer the arrow-heads of the Greeks were of bronze, and had the three longitudinal ribs upon them, like those in that metal found at Marathon, for he speaks of the χαλκήρἐ ὀϊστόν[47] and applies to it the epithet τριγλώχιν[48]

Even among such rude tribes as the Massagetæ and Scythians, the arrow-heads, in the days of Herodotus, were of bronze; as he records an ingenious method adopted by one Ariantas,[49] a king of the Scythians, to take a census of his people by levying an arrow-head from each, all of which were afterwards cast into an enormous bronze vessel.

Besides the Æthiopians there was another nation which made use of stone-pointed arrows in Africa, as is proved by the arrows from Egyptian tombs, of which specimens are preserved in several of our museums. The head, which is of flint, differs however from all the ordinary forms, inasmuch as it is chisel-shaped rather than pointed, and in form much resembles a small gun-flint. The tip of one of these, secured to the shaft by bitumen, is shown in Fig. 272. The original is in the British Museum. In my own collection are some specimens of such arrows. Their total length is about 35 inches and the shafts for about two-thirds of their length are made of reed, the remainder towards the point being of wood. Near the notch for the string are distinct traces of there having been a feather on either side, in the same plane as the notch. It is probable that arrow-heads of similar character may have been in use in Britain, though they have hitherto almost escaped observation, owing to the extreme simplicity of their form. To these I shall subsequently recur.

The Ancient Stone Implements Fig. 272.—Egypt.png

Fig. 272.—Egypt. 1/1

Some of the Egyptian arrows[50] have supplemental flakes at the sides, so as practically to make the edge of the arrow-head wider.

In October, 1894, the Ghizeh Museum acquired from a Sixth Dynasty tomb at Assiut, two squadrons of soldiers, each of forty figures carved in wood. The figures of one set, presumed to be Egyptians, have a brown complexion and are armed with bronze-tipped spears and with shields. The figures are about 13 inches high. The other group is shorter, and the soldiers are black-skinned and armed with bow and arrows only; each has a bow in his left hand, and in his right four arrows with chisel-shaped heads of flint.[51]

The better-known forms of arrow-heads which occur in Britain may be classed as the leaf-shaped, the lozenge-shaped, the tanged or stemmed, and the triangular, each presenting several varieties. The arrow-heads of the third class are in this country usually barbed; those of the fourth but rarely.

Whether the forms were successively developed in this order is a question difficult of solution; but in an ingenious paper by Mr. W. C. Little, of Liberton, published early in this century, being "An Inquiry into the Expedients used by the Scotts before the Discovery of Metals,"[52] the lozenge-shaped are regarded as the earliest; next, those barbed with two witters,[53] but no middle tang; and last, the tanged. The same author argues from analogy that the ancients could extend this flint manufacture to other purposes, "as the same ingenuity which formed the head of an arrow could also produce a knife, a saw, and a piercer."

Colonel A. Lane-Fox, now General Pitt Rivers, in his second lecture on "Primitive Warfare,"[54] arranges the forms of arrow-heads in the same manner as I have here adopted, and shows that the transition from one form to the other is easy and natural. There are, indeed, some arrow-heads of which it would be impossible to say whether they were leaf-shaped or lozenge-shaped, or whether they were lozenge-shaped or tanged.

Sir William Wilde regards the triangular as the primary form, and the leaf-shaped and lozenge-shaped as the last.

Mr. W. J. Knowles[55] has suggested a somewhat different classification, but it seems unnecessary to alter the arrangement here adopted. He does not enter into the question of the development of the forms. An exhaustive paper on Irish flint arrow-heads, by the Rev. Dr. Buick,[56] may be usefully consulted.

Whatever may have been the order of the development of the forms, it would, in my opinion, be unwarrantable to attempt any chrono- logical arrangement founded upon mere form, as there is little doubt of the whole of these varieties having been in use in one and the same district at the same time, the shape being to some extent adapted to the flake of flint from which the arrow-heads were made, and to some extent to the purposes which the arrows were to serve. The arrow-heads in use among the North American Indians,[57] when intended for hunting, were so contrived that they could be drawn out of the wound, but those destined for war were formed and attached to the shaft in such a manner, that when it was attempted to pull out the arrow, its head became detached, and remained in the wound. The poisoned arrows of the Bushmen of South Africa[58] are in like manner made with triangular heads of iron, which become detached in the body if an attempt is made to withdraw the arrow from the wound that it has caused.

I have already remarked on the difficulty of distinguishing between javelin and arrow heads; but, from their size, I think that the late Dr. Thurnam was justified in regarding those engraved as Figs. 273, 274, 275, as heads of javelins; and they may therefore be taken first in order. Two of them have already been engraved.[59] Their beautifully worked surfaces had, however, hardly had justice done them, and, by the kindness of Dr. Thurnam, I was able to have them engraved afresh full size. They were found in 1864, in company with another almost identical in form with the middle figure, in an oval barrow on Winterbourn Stoke Down, about a mile and a half north-west of Stonehenge, close to the head of a contracted skeleton. They are most skilfully chipped on both faces, which are equally convex, and they are not more than a quarter of an inch in thickness. Three are leaf-shaped, and one lozenge-shaped, and this latter, though larger, is thinner and more delicate. They have acquired a milky, porcellanous surface while lying in the earth. They are all four now in the British Museum. As has been remarked by Dr. Thurnam, objects of this description have rarely been found in barrows.

Fig. 273. Fig. 274. Winterbourn Stoke. Fig. 275.

The two javelin-heads, if such they be, found by Mr. J. R. Mortimer in the Calais Wold barrow, near Pocklington, Yorkshire,[60] are lozenge-shaped and much more acutely pointed, and were accompanied by two lozenge-shaped arrow-heads. By the kindness of the late Mr. Llewellynn Jewitt they are all four here reproduced as Figs. 276 to 279. A similar javelin-head to Fig. 277, 23/4 inches long, now in the British Museum, was found by the late Lord Londesborough in a barrow on Seamer Moor, near Scarborough.[61] A fine lozenge-shaped javelin-head (5 inches) was found with arrow-heads, scrapers, and knives, near Longcliffe,[62] Derbyshire, and some delicate arrow-heads, broken, at Harborough Rocks,[63] in the same county. Javelin-heads of much the same form as those from Winterbourn Stoke and Calais Wold occur not unfrequently in Ireland, but are rarely quite so delicately chipped. Lozenge-shaped arrow-heads are recorded from a cairn at Unstan,[64] Orkney, and from the Culbin Sands.[65] The class having both faces polished, though still only chipped at the edges, like Wilde's[66] Fig. 27, has not, except in Portugal, as yet occurred out of Ireland. A few of these may have served as knives or daggers, as they are intentionally rounded by grinding at the more tapered end, which at first sight appears to have been intended for the point and not for the handle. The long lozenge-shaped form is found in the Government of Vladimir, Russia.[67]

Fig. 276. Fig. 277. Calais Wold Barrow. Fig. 278. Fig. 279.

Large lozenge-shaped lance-heads were occasionally in use among the North American Indians;[68] but the more usual form is a long blade, notched at the base to receive the ligature which binds it to the shaft.

Of leaf-shaped arrow-heads, which form the first class now to be described, there are several minor varieties, both in outline and section, some being longer in proportion to their breadth than others, rounder or more pointed at the base, thicker or thinner, or more carefully chipped on one face than the other. A few typical examples are given full size in the annexed woodcuts. The originals are all in my own collection, unless otherwise specified.


Fig. 280.—Icklingham.

Fig. 280 is from the neighbourhood of Icklingham, Suffolk, of flint become nearly white by weathering, and carefully chipped on both faces, one of which is, however, more convex than the other. I have a larger but imperfect specimen of the same form from Oundle. A nearly similar arrow-head, of yellow flint, from Hoxne, Suffolk, has been figured.[69] It was supposed to have occurred in the same deposit as that containing large palæolithic implements and elephant remains; but nothing certain is known on this point, and from the form there can be no hesitation in assigning it to the Neolithic Period. A rather smaller arrow-head, but of much the same character, was found at Bradford Abbas, Dorset.[70] Professor Buckman had several leaf-shaped arrows from the same neighbourhood. Some of them were long and slender, more like Fig. 286.

In Fig. 281 is shown an arrow-head of rather broader proportions, from Gunthorpe, Lincolnshire, which has been engraved in the Reliquary,[71] whence the block is borrowed. I have specimens of the same form, delicately chipped on both faces, and found near Icklingham and Lakenheath, Suffolk. Occasionally, one face of the arrow-heads of this form is left nearly flat.

Fig. 281.—Gunthorpe. Fig. 282.—Yorkshire Wolds.

Fig. 282 shows a smaller specimen in the extensive Greenwell Collection. In this instance, the flake from which the arrow-head was made has been but little retouched on the flat face. It is slightly curved longitudinally, but probably not to a sufficient extent to affect the flight of the arrow. This form is of common occurrence on the Yorkshire Wolds, though very variable in its proportions, and also in point of symmetry, both as regards outline and similarity of the two faces.

In Fig. 283 is shown another and broader form, from Butterwick, on the Yorkshire Wolds. It is in the same collection, and is worked on both faces. The sides are slightly ogival, so as to produce a sharper point.

Fig. 283.—Yorkshire Wolds. Fig. 284.—Little Solsbury Hill.

Occasionally, instead of being sharply pointed, arrow-heads are more oval in form. An instance of this kind is given in Fig. 284, the original of which was found by Mr. Francis Galton, F.R.S., on the occasion of a visit with me to the camp of Little Solsbury Hill, near Bath. It is of flint that has become white with exposure, equally convex on the two faces, and rather thick in proportion to its size. I have a somewhat similar but broader specimen from the camp of Maiden Bower, near Dunstable, and others even more rounded at the point, and larger and thinner, from Willerby Wold, Yorkshire, and from Icklingham. I have one Yorkshire specimen, which is almost circular in form, and bears traces of grinding on one of its faces. In the Greenwell Collection are specimens of almost all intermediate proportions between an oval like Fig. 284 and a perfect circle.

Fig. 285.—Yorkshire Wolds. Fig. 286.—Bridlington.

More lanceolate forms are shown in Figs. 285 and 286, both from Yorkshire. Fig. 285, though worked on both faces, still exhibits portions of the original surface of the flake from which it was made; but Fig. 286, from Grindale, near Bridlington, is of transparent chalcedonic flint, beautifully and symmetrically worked over both faces. This elongated form is not of common occurrence. I have a beautiful example, of the same general character, but pointed at either end, found near Icklingham, Suffolk. A large example of this form, from Derbyshire, in the Bateman Collection, may have been a javelin-head.


Figs. 287 and 288.—Yorkshire Wolds.

Other and shorter forms are shown in Figs. 287 and 288, the former of which has been made from a flat flake, the original surface of which remains intact on a large portion of each face. Fig. 288, on the contrary, is carefully chipped over the whole of both faces, which are equally convex. It has a slightly heart-shaped form.

It will have been observed that in all these specimens the base of the arrow-head is much more rounded that the point. This, however, is by no means universally the case with the leaf-shaped arrow-heads, the bases of which are in some instances almost, if not quite, as acute as the points. It is, in fact, sometimes difficult to say which of the ends was intended for the point.

Fig. 289.—Lakenheath. Figs. 290 and 291.—Yorkshire Wolds.

Fig. 289 shows a large arrow-head from Lakenheath, Suffolk, from the collection of the late Mr. J. W. Flower, F.G.S. It is equally convex on both faces, and almost equally sharp at both ends. In the Greenwell Collection are similar specimens from Burnt Fen, Cambs. Others, of the same character, but of smaller size, are engraved in Figs. 290 and 291. Both the originals are from the Yorkshire Wolds.

That shown in Fig. 290 is in the Greenwell Collection. It is thin, slightly curved longitudinally, and very neatly worked into shape at the edges. It is a form of not unfrequent occurrence in the Yorkshire Wolds, sometimes of larger dimensions, and more roughly chipped, but more commonly of smaller size. I have a beautifully-made arrow-head of nearly the same size and shape, found at Lakenheath, Suffolk. It is not more than one-eighth of an inch in thickness. One of wider proportions from Burnt Fen is in the Greenwell Collection. Fig. 291 is thicker in proportion to its width, more convex on one face than the other, and less acutely pointed at the base.


Figs. 292 and 293.—Yorkshire Wolds.

In Figs. 292 and 293 are shown some more or less unsymmetrical varieties of form. Fig. 292 is, towards the point, equally convex on each face; but at the base the flat inner face of the original flake has been left untouched, so that the edge is like that of a "scraper," or of a round-nosed chisel. Though the point is, in all respects, identical with that of undoubted arrow-heads, and though I have placed it here among them, it is possible that that end may, after all, have been intended for insertion in a handle, and that it was a small cutting tool, and not an arrow-head.

There can be no doubt of the purpose of Fig. 293, which is of white flint delicately chipped, and is equally convex on the two faces. On one side the outline is almost angular, instead of forming a regular sweep, so that it shows how easy is the passage from the leaf-shape to the lozenge form.


Fig. 294.—Yorkshire Wolds.

There are often instances like that afforded by the arrow-head engraved in Fig. 294, where it is hard to say under which form a specimen should be placed. The original of this figure forms part of the Greenwell Collection, and is neatly worked on both faces. I have a somewhat broader arrow-head of the same character, which I found in the camp of Maiden Bower, near Dunstable. General Pitt Rivers found one of the same form, and one like Fig. 311, within an earthwork at Callow Hill,[72] Oxfordshire. Another was found with a perforated hammer, a flint flake ground at the edge, some scrapers, and other objects, in a cairn in Caithness.[73] One like Fig. 294, but smaller, was found in the Horned Cairn[74] of Get, at Garrywhin, Caithness. A large specimen from Glenluce[75] has been figured. Another, very thin, found at Urquhart, Elgin, is in the Edinburgh Museum.

It is to arrow-heads of this leaf-shaped form, but approximating closely to the lozenge-shaped, that Dr. Thurnam[76] is inclined to assign a connection with the class of tumuli known as long barrows; and in support of this view he has cited several cases of their discovery in this form of barrow, in which no barbed arrow-heads have hitherto been found. Some leaf-shaped arrow-heads were found in a long barrow at Walker's Hill, Wilts.[77]


Fig. 295.—Fyfield.

The annexed cut, kindly furnished by the Society of Antiquaries, shows an arrow-head from a long barrow near Fyfield, Wilts. It is delicately chipped, and weighs only forty-three grains. Another, 11/2 inches in length, from a long barrow on Alton Down, is of surprising thinness, and weighs only thirty grains. Others, it would seem purposely injured at the point, were found in the long chambered barrow at Rodmarton, Gloucestershire.[78] Others, again, were found by Mr. Bateman in long barrows in Derbyshire and Staffordshire. One of these, from Ringham Low, is 21/4 inches long and 1 inch broad, yet weighs less than forty-eight grains. In Long Low, Wetton,[79] were three such arrow-heads, and many flakes of flint. Dr. Thurnam, in speaking of the leaf-shaped as the long-barrow type of arrow-head, does not restrict it to that form of tumulus, but merely indicates it as that which is alone found there. The form indeed occurred elsewhere, thus, one was found in a bowl-shaped barrow at Ogbourne,[80] Wilts.

The Calais Wold barrow,[81] already mentioned as having produced four lozenge-shaped javelin and arrow heads, is circular, while that on Pistle Down, Dorsetshire,[82] which contained four beautifully-chipped arrow-heads of this type, is oblong.

Leaf-shaped arrow-heads are mentioned as having been found with burnt bones in Grub Low, Staffordshire.[83] The same forms, more or less carefully chipped, and occasionally almost flat on the face, are frequently found on the surface in various parts of Scotland,[84] especially in the counties of Aberdeen, Banff, Elgin, and Moray. One not of flint, but apparently of quartzite, was found near Glenluce,[85] Wigtownshire. Numbers have been found on the Culbin Sands,[86] and at Urquhart.[87] They are comparatively abundant in Yorkshire, Derbyshire, and Suffolk, but rarer in the southern counties of England. They have been found at Grovehurst,[88] near Milton, Kent, and I have picked up a specimen near Kit's Coty House. I have seen specimens found at Redhill, near Reigate;[89] near Bournemouth; at Prince Town, Dartmoor; and near Oundle; besides the localities already mentioned.

Fig. 296.—Bridlington. Fig. 297.—Newton Ketton.

Typical lozenge-shaped arrow-heads are, in Britain, and, indeed, in other countries, rarer than the leaf-shaped. That shown in Fig. 296 has been made from a flat flake, and is nicely chipped on both faces, though not quite straight longitudinally. It was found at Northdale Farm, Grindale, Bridlington. A Scottish specimen, from Urquhart,[90] Elginshire, slightly smaller, has been figured. The original of Fig. 297 forms part of the Greenwell Collection, and has been made from a very thin, transparent flake. It is rather less worked on the face opposite to that here shown. It was found at Newton Ketton, Durham. One like Fig. 297 was found on Bull Hill,[91] Lancashire. A regularly-chipped arrow-head of lozenge shape is said to have been found at Cutterly Clump, Wilts;[92] and I have seen a few specimens from Derbyshire. Those from the Calais Wold Barrow have already been mentioned.


Figs. 298 and 299.—Yorkshire Wolds.

A diamond-shaped arrow-head was found at Cregneesh,[93] Isle of Man; and another, as well as one of leaf shape, within a stone circle near Port Erin.[94] Lozenge-shaped arrow-heads are frequently found in Scotland.

A more elongated form is shown in Figs. 298 and 299, taken from specimens found on the Yorkshire Wolds. Both of them are neatly chipped on either face, and have but little left of the original surface of the flakes from which they were formed. One of the shorter sides of Fig. 299 is somewhat hollowed, possibly to give a slight shoulder, and thus prevent its being driven into the shaft.

This is more evidently the case with the arrow-head represented in Fig. 300, which, like so many others, comes from the Wolds of Yorkshire. It is made from a slightly curved flake, and is more convex on one face than the other, especially at the stem or tang.

Fig. 300.—Yorkshire Wolds. Fig. 301.—Amotherby.

In the collection of Messrs. Mortimer, of Driffield, is another Yorkshire arrow-head, which is leaf-shaped, but provided with a slight tang.

Leaf-shaped arrow-heads, with a decided stem like that of the leaf, found in Arabia and Japan, will be mentioned at a subsequent page.

Another of these stemmed but barbless arrow-heads, from the same district, is shown in Fig. 301. It was found at Amotherby, near Malton, and was given to me by the late Mr. Charles Monkman, of that place. It has been made from a flat flake, and has been worked into shape by a slight amount of chipping along the edges, which does not extend over the face. There are numerous arrow-heads of the same class, though not of the same form, which have been made from flakes of the proper thickness, by a little secondary working to give them a point, and by slightly trimming the butt-end of the flake. They usually approximate to the leaf-shape in form, but, as might be expected, vary considerably in size, proportions, and the amount of symmetry displayed. It seems needless to engrave specimens.


Fig. 302.—Iwerne Minster.

The weapon point shown in Fig. 302 is so large that possibly it may be regarded as that of a javelin, and not of an arrow. In was in the collection of Mr. H. Durden, of Blandford, and is now in the British Museum. It was found on Iwerne Minster Down, Dorsetshire. It is boldly and symmetrically chipped, thick in proportion to its breadth, and equally convex on both faces; though distinctly stemmed, it can hardly be said to be barbed. It much resembles an Italian specimen in the Arsenal of Turin.[95]

A somewhat more distinctly-barbed arrow-head from the Yorkshire Wolds is represented in Fig. 303. Its thickness, 5/16 inch, is great in proportion to its size; the two faces are equally convex, and the stem widens out slightly at the base. The same is the case with a smaller and thinner arrow-head in my collection, of somewhat similar form, found near the camp of Maiden Bower, Dunstable. A third, from the Yorkshire Wolds, presents the same peculiarity, which is still more apparent in an arrow-head from a barrow on Seamer Moor, near Scarborough,[96] if indeed it has been correctly figured.


Fig. 303.—Yorkshire Wolds.

A magnificent specimen of much the same type as Fig. 303, but nearly twice as long, has been kindly lent me for engraving by Messrs. Mortimer, of Driffield, Yorkshire. It was found in the neighbourhood of Fimber, and is shown in Fig. 304. It is neatly chipped over both faces, which are equally convex, and the stem is carefully shaped and of considerable thickness. The edges, as is not unfrequently the case, are serrated.

The fine arrow-head engraved as Fig. 305 shows the barbs or "witters" still more strongly developed. One of them is, however, less pointed than the other. From its size, this and others may have formed the heads of javelins rather than of arrows, though arrow-heads as large are still in use among some savage tribes. It was found at Pick Rudge Farm,[97] Overton, Wilts, in company with the oblong implement engraved as Fig. 255. It is now in the Blackmore Museum, the Trustees of which kindly allowed me to figure it.

I have a very fine specimen with even longer barbs, from Ashwell, Herts, which is shown in Fig. 305a.

Fig. 304.—Yorkshire Wolds. Fig. 305.—Pick Rudge Farm.

Fig. 306 represents another unusually large specimen, found on Sherburn Wold, Yorkshire. It is nicely worked on both faces, and the end of the stem or tang has been carefully chipped to a sharp semicircular edge, well adapted for fixing into the split shaft. One similar to it was found on Bull Hill,[98] Lancashire. Mr. A. C. Savin, of Cromer, has a rather smaller arrow-head of this type, but with the sides more curved outwards, like Fig. 313, found near Aylsham. Barbed arrow-heads of various forms and sizes are of frequent occurrence in some parts of the Yorkshire Wolds and Moors, and in parts of Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire, Suffolk and Derbyshire.

Fig. 305a.—Ashwell. Fig. 306.—Sherburn Wold.


Fig. 307. Fig. 308. Fig. 309.


Fig. 310. Fig. 311. Yorkshire Wolds. Fig. 312.

It would be tedious to attempt to exhibit all the different varieties, but specimens of the more ordinary forms are given in Figs. 307 to 312, from originals principally in the Greenwell Collection. As a rule, there is but little difference in the convexity of the two faces, though very frequently one face is decidedly flatter than the other; and occasionally the flat face of the original flake has been left almost untouched. Fig. 311 affords an example of this kind, being nearly flat on the face not shown, while the other face still retains part of the crust of the flint nodule from which the flake was struck. The central stem or tang varies much in its proportions to the size of the arrow-head, and occasionally forms but an inconsiderable projection, as in Fig. 309, making the form approximate to the triangular. Sometimes, as in Fig. 312, the ends of the barbs are carefully chipped straight, as is the case with many arrow-heads from the more southern parts of England, some of which will shortly be noticed. An arrow-head like Fig. 312 was found near Ashwell,[99] Herts.

The Ancient Stone Implements Figs. 313 and 314.—Yorkshire Wolds.png

Figs. 313 and 314.—Yorkshire Wolds.


Fig. 314a.—Icklingham.

Before quitting the arrow-heads of the Yorkshire Wolds, I must insert figures of two other specimens illustrative of another form. Of these, that shown in Fig. 313 was found at Northdale Farm, Grindale, Bridlington. It is thick in proportion to its size, and skilfully chippt on both faces. The tang is thin and slight. The other arrow-head (Fig. 314) is not so thick in proportion. In both, if the sweep of the outline were continued past the barbs, it would about meet the extremity of the tang, and give a leaf-shaped form; so that it seems probable that this class was made by first chipping out the simple leaf-shaped form, and then working in a notch on either side to produce the tangs and barbs. The same type occurs in Suffolk. An exaggerated example, rather like Fig. 320 but broader, found near Icklingham, is shown in Fig. 314a.

The next specimen that I have selected for engraving. Fig. 315, is from another part of the country, having been found by myself in 1866 on the surface of a field, at the foot of the Chalk escarpment between Eddlesborough and Tring, Herts. It can hardly be regarded as unfinished, though one of the surfaces is very rough and the outline far from symmetrical. It rather shows how rude were some of the appliances of our savage predecessors in Britain. Curiously enough, some barbed flint arrow-heads of nearly similar form, and but little more symmetrical (to judge from the engravings), were found in 1763 at Tring Grove, Herts,[100] with an extended skeleton. They lay between the legs, and at the feet were some of the perforated plates of greenish stone of the character of Fig. 354. An arrow-head of much the same form was found in a barrow near Tenby,[101] with human bones and a part of a curious ring-shaped ornament, supposed to be of ivory. The long tapering arrow-head shown in Fig. 316 affords a contrast to this broad form. Its barbs are unfortunately not quite perfect, but the form being uncommon I have engraved it. It was found in Reach Fen, Cambridgeshire. A ruder example of the same form as Fig. 316, from Bourn Fen, has been figured in Miller and Skertchly's "Fen-land."[102] A longer specimen, almost as acutely pointed, and with square-ended barbs, found on Lanchester Common,[103] Durham, is in the Museum of the Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle. I have several others of the same type from Suffolk, some with the sides curved slightly inwards.

Fig. 315.—Eddlesborough. Fig. 316.—Reach Fen. Fig. 317.—Isleham.

The next Figure (317) is illustrative of the extraordinary amount of care and skill that was sometimes bestowed on the manufacture of objects so liable to be broken or lost in use as arrow-heads. This specimen was found at Isleham, Cambridgeshire, and has unfortunately lost its central stem, the outline of which I have restored from a nearly similar arrow-head found at Icklingham, Suffolk, which has lost both its barbs. It is very thin, so much so that its weight is only thirty-eight grains, but it is neatly chipped over the whole of both faces. Nothing, however, can exceed the beautiful regularity of the minute chipping by which the final outline was given to the edges, extremely small flakes having been removed at regular intervals so close to each other that there are twenty of them in an inch. The inner sides and ends of the barbs are worked perfectly straight, the ends forming right angles to the sides of the arrow-head, and the inner sides being nearly parallel with each other, so that the barbs are somewhat dovetailed in form.

The broader, but almost equally beautiful arrow-head shown in Fig. 318 was found in front of the face of an unburnt body, in a barrow at Rudstone, near Bridlington, by Canon Greenwell. I have a beautiful specimen of the same type from Dorchester Dykes, Oxon, given to me by the late Mr. Davey, of Wantage. It is shown in Fig 318a. A less highly finished example from Chatteris Fen[104] has been figured.

Fig. 318.—Rudstone. Fig. 318a.—Dorchester Dykes.

The ends of the barbs thus chipped straight sometimes, as in Fig. 312, form a straight line. Occasionally, as in the arrow-heads found by Sir R. Colt Hoare[105] in one of the Everley barrows, the base of the barbs forms an obtuse angle with the sides of the arrow-head, so that there is a sharp point at the inner side of the barbs. In others the end forms an acute angle with the sides of the arrow-head, so that the point of each barb is at the outer side. A beautiful specimen of this kind is shown in Fig. 319. It is one of six, varying in size and somewhat in

Fig. 319.—Lambourn Down. Fig. 320.—Fovant.

shape, but all beautifully worked, found in barrows on Lambourn Down, Berks, and now in the British Museum. In some few instances the sides of the arrow-head are rather ogival in form (like the Scotch specimen, Fig. 326), which adds to the acuteness of the point. In one of this character from a barrow on the Ridgeway Hill,[106] Dorsetshire, and others from one of the Woodyates barrows,[107] the barbs are also acutely pointed at the outer side. I have a rather smaller specimen than that figured, from Lakenheath, Suffolk, and others from Thetford and Reach Fen, with the sides even more ogival than in Fig. 326. Others of the same character, found in Derbyshire, are in the Bateman Collection. In some of the arrow-heads[108] from the Wiltshire barrows the barbs are inordinately prolonged beyond the central tang, which is very small. Fig. 320, copied from Hoare,[109] gives one of those from a barrow near Fovant, found with a contracted interment, in company with a bronze dagger and pin, and some jet ornaments. One of similar character was found in a barrow on Windmill Hill,[110] Avebury, but its barbs are not so long. An arrow-head with equally long barbs, but with the central tang of the same length as the barbs, was found in a dolmen in the Morbihan, and is in the Musée de St. Germain.


Fig. 321.—Yorkshire Moors.

Before proceeding to notice one or two Scottish specimens, I must devote a short space to an exceptional form of arrow-head shown in Fig. 321. Like so many others, it is from the Yorkshire Moors, and was probably either barbed on both sides or intended to have been so. But one of the barbs having been broken off, possibly in the course of manufacture, the design has been modified, and the stump, so to speak, of the barb, has been rounded off in a neat manner by surface-flaking on both faces. The one-barbed arrow-head thus resulting presents some analogies with several of the triangular form, such as Figs. 336 to 338, about to be described.


Figs. 322 and 323.—Yorkshire Wolds.

Arrow-heads either accidentally lost before they were finished, or thrown away as "wasters," in consequence of having been spoilt in the making, are occasionally found. Examples, apparently of both classes, are shown in Figs. 322 and 323. The originals form part of the Greenwell Collection. Fig. 322, from Sherburn Wold, appears to have been completely finished, with the exception of the notch on one side of the central tang. The face not shown in the figure exhibits on the left side a considerable portion of the surface of the original flake, the edge of which has been neatly trimmed along the right side of the face here shown. The base has been chipped on both faces to a sharp hollow edge, in which one notch has been neatly worked to form the barb and one side of the stem. There is no apparent reason why the other notch should not have been formed, so that the probability is that the arrow-head was lost just before completion. In the other case the arrow-head, after being skilfully chipped on both faces into a triangular form, has had one of the notches worked in its base; but in effecting this the tool has been brought so near the centre of the head as to leave insufficient material for the tang, and the barb has also been broken off. In this condition it appears to have been thrown away as a waster.

Whether these views be correct or not, one deduction seems allowable, viz., that the barbed flint arrow-heads were, as a rule, finished at their points, and approximately brought into shape at their base, before the notches were worked to form the central tang and develop the barbs.


Fig. 323a. Brompton. 1/1

A curious double-pointed arrow-head from Brompton,[111] Yorkshire, is, by the kindness of the Society of Antiquaries, shown in Fig. 323a. It had probably at first only a single point, and having been broken was trimmed into its present shape. Some of the "exceptional" forms from Brionio, in the Veronese, approximate to this, but with all respect to the Italian archæologists, I agree with Mr. Thomas Wilson,[112] and cannot accept these forms as genuine.

I must now give a few examples of the stemmed and barbed flint arrow-heads found in Scotland, which, however, do not essentially differ in character from those of the more southern part of Britain. First among them I would place a remarkably fine specimen found in the Isle of Skye,[113] which has already been published more than once. It is very acutely pointed, and expands at the base so as to give strength to the barbs, which are slightly curved inwards. From its size it may have served to point a javelin rather than an arrow.

The edges of some of the Scottish arrows are sometimes neatly serrated. An example of this kind is given in Fig. 325, from a specimen in the National Museum at Edinburgh. It is formed of chalcedonic flint, and was found with others of ordinary types at Urquhart,[114] Elgin.

The original of Fig. 326 is in the Museum of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and was found in Aberdeenshire. Its sides (like those of some in the National Museum at Edinburgh) are slightly ogival, so as to give sharpness to the point. Another from Urquhart,[115] Elgin, has been figured, as well as one from Ballachulish,[116] with straighter sides. One from Montblairy, Banff,[117] is of the same type, as is one from Kilmarnock.[118] The sides of Fig. 327 are curved outwards. This arrow-head was found in Glenlivet, Banff, a district where arrow-heads are common, and is in the Greenwell Collection, now the property of Dr. Allen Sturge, at Nice.


Fig. 325.—Urquhart.

Fig. 324.—Isle of Skye. Fig. 326.—Aberdeenshire.


Fig. 327.—Glenlivet.

I have already mentioned the counties of Scotland in which "elf-bolts" are most abundantly found. I may now enumerate a few of the spots, and the characters of the specimens of this form. One much like Fig. 327, but with the barbs more pointed, is figured by Wilson,[119] as well as another[120] like Fig. 305, found in a tumulus at Killearn, Stirlingshire. One from the Isle of Skye,[121] like Fig. 316, and another from Shapinsay, Orkney,[122] like Fig. 312, have been figured by the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. Others, found with burnt bones in an urn deposited in a cairn in Banff, have been engraved by Pennant,[123] and some from Lanarkshire are given in the Journal of the Archæological Association.[124]

Stemmed and barbed arrow-heads are recorded to have been found in Aberdeenshire at the following localities:—Slains,[125] Forgue,[126] Kintore,[127] Kildrummy,[128] Strathdon,[129] and Cruden;[130] one 3 inches long and 21/2 inches wide, at Tarland,[131] and a large number at Cloister-Seat Farm,[132] Udny.

In Banff, at Mains of Auchmedden,[133] Eden[134] and Bowiebank, King Edward; Cullen of Buchan,[135] Glen Avon,[136] Alvah,[137] and Longman,[138] Macduff.

In Elgin, at St. Andrew's, Lhanbryd;[139] Urquhart, and elsewhere.

In Forfarshire, at Carmyllie[140] and elsewhere. Some Ayrshire[141] specimens have been figured.


Fig.327a. Philiphaugh.

They have also been found near Gretna Green[142] and Linton,[143] Peebles, and in numbers on the Culbin Sandhills,[144] Morayshire, and Killearn,[145] Stirlingshire. In Fifeshire, in a cist at Dairsie;[146] near Fordoun,[147] Kincardineshire; Glenluce,[148] Wigtownshire; and stemmed but not barbed, at Philiphaugh,[149] Selkirkshire. This last is shown in Fig. 327a.

Other specimens, of which the form is not mentioned, were exhibited in a temporary Museum of the Archæological Institute at Edinburgh from the following localities:—Caithness,[150] Cruden, Cromar, Kinellar, Aberdeenshire; Robgill, Ruthwell, Dumfriesshire; Arbuthnot, Bervie and Garvoch, Kincardineshire; Braidwood and Carluke, Lanarkshire; and Burgh-head, Wigtownshire.

Other have been found at Elchies, Keith,[151] and Oldtown of Roseisle,[152] Morayshire; Abernethy,[153] Inverness; and at Mortlach[154] and Lesmurdie,[155] Banff.

In this place, also, it will be well to mention some of the discoveries of stemmed and barbed flint arrow-heads in England which have not already been cited. The following have been engraved:—One much like Fig. 303, found in the Kielder Burn,[156] North Tyne; one like Fig. 327, found with burnt bones in an urn on Baildon Common,[157] Yorkshire; another from Lake, Wilts;[158] others, like Figs. 312 and 319, from the Green Low Barrow,[159] Derbyshire; one like Fig. 308, from Hastings;[160] one like Fig. 307, found near urns, scrapers, &c., at Wavertree, near Liverpool;[161] some like Fig. 307, with ashes, at Carno,[162] Montgomeryshire; and several others from barrows in Wilts,[163] Dorsetshire, and Derbyshire. A considerable number of flint arrow-heads are engraved in a plate in the Transactions of the Historical Society of Lancashire and Cheshire.[164] They are, however, for the most part forgeries. Others from East Lancashire[165] and Rochdale[166] have been described. Besides the discoveries recorded by Hoare and Bateman, and those made in Yorkshire,[167] such arrow-heads are mentioned as having been found in the Thames;[168] in the cemetery at Standlake,[169] Oxon; in West Surrey,[170] from which a number of arrow-heads of various forms have been figured by Mr. F. Lasham; St. Leonard's Forest,[171] Horsham; Plymouth,[172] on Dartmoor,[173] Devonshire; at Horndean,[174] Hants; and in large numbers in Derbyshire, especially on Middleton Moor.[175] Both the leaf-shaped and the barbed forms have been found near Leicester.[176] A number have been found at Carn Brê,[177] Cornwall.

Arrow-heads, of which the form is not specified, have been found at Wangford,[178] Suffolk; Cliffe,[179] near Carlebury, on the Yorkshire side of the Tees; Priddy,[180] Somerset; Sutton Courtney,[181] Berks; Lingfield Mark Camp,[182] Surrey; near Ramsgate;[183] Bigberry Hill,[184] near Canterbury; Manton,[185] Lincolnshire; Anstie Camp[186] and Chart Park, Dorking.

Besides specimens already cited, and many from the Yorkshire Wolds and Moors, there are in my collection stemmed and barbed arrow-heads from the following localities:—One much like Fig. 307, from Staunton, near Ixworth, Suffolk; many others from West Stow, Lakenheath, and Icklingham, in the same county; from Hunsdon, near Ware, Brassington, Derbyshire, and Turkdean, Gloucestershire, much like Fig. 308; one from Abingdon, like Fig. 327; and one from St. Agnes, Truro, of the same form as Fig. 317, but not so delicately worked; and others from Wicken and Reach Fens, Cambs. I have also numerous examples of different forms from Stow-on-the-Wold, Gloucestershire, and from the neighbourhood of Wallingford. The Earl of Ducie has a series found near Sarsden House, Chipping Norton.

In the British Museum is a stemmed and barbed arrow-head, rather more curved at the sides than Fig. 307, found at Hoxne, Suffolk. Another of the same class, from Necton, Norfolk, is in the Norwich Museum, together with a smaller specimen like Fig. 308, from Attleborough. In the Cambridge Antiquarian Society's Museum is one like Fig. 306, but with one of the barbs square-ended. It is 25/8 inches long, and 11/2 inch wide, and very thin, and was found in Burwell Fen. Another, like it, but 21/4 inches long, was found near Aldreth, Cambs., and was in the collection of the Rev. S. Banks. Canon Greenwell obtained one of somewhat similar character, but narrow, from Barton Mills, Suffolk; and the Rev. C. R. Manning found one like Fig. 311 on a tumulus near Grime's Graves, Norfolk. One of the same class is in the Penzance Museum; and Mr. Spence Bate, F.R.S., has shown me a broken one like Fig. 308, found under six feet of peat at Prince Town, Dartmoor, where also a leaf-shaped arrow-head was found. Prof. Buckman had one much like Fig. 327, found at Barwick, Somersetshire. One like Fig. 309, from Milton, near Pewsey, Wilts, is in the collection of Mr. W. H. Penning, F.G.S. Mr. Durden had one rather smaller than Fig. 308 from the neighbourhood of Blandford. I have seen them both stemmed and barbed and leaf-shaped, found near Bournemouth. Sir John Lubbock has one with square-ended stem, and barbs separated from it by a very narrow notch, found at Shrub Hill, Feltwell, Norfolk; and numerous specimens exist in other collections.

Fig. 328.—Icklingham. Fig. 329.—Langdale End. Fig. 330.—Amotherby.

Before entering into the circumstances under which flint arrow-heads have been discovered, it will be well to describe the remaining class—the triangular. Some of these differ only from those last described in the absence of the central stem. Although this form is very common in Ireland and in Scandinavia, it occurs but rarely in Britain. The arrow-head shown in Fig. 328 was found near Icklingham, Suffolk, and was formerly in the collection of Mr. H. Trigg, of Bury St. Edmunds. Messrs. Mortimer possess a very similar specimen from the Yorkshire Wolds near Fimber. One has also been figured by Mr. C. Monkman[187] as from Yorkshire. An arrow-head from Forfarshire, and one or two others of this type, are in the National Museum at Edinburgh. One from Ellon,[188] Aberdeenshire, has been engraved, as well as one of much more elongated form, with, a semicircular notch at the base, from Glenluce,[189] Wigtownshire. A broader arrow-head of the same type was found by the Rev. James M. Joass at Golspie, Sutherland, and is now in the Dunrobin Museum. An example was also found by Canon Greenwell in the material of a barrow at Childrey,[190] Berks. Prof. Flinders Petrie has found the type in Egypt.[191]

A beautiful specimen of another double-barbed triangular form is shown in Fig. 329. It was found at Langdale End, on the Moors of the North Riding of Yorkshire, and is in the Greenwell Collection. It has been surface-chipped over part of one face, but on the other it still shows the central ridge of the flake from which it was made. The sides are neatly serrated.

Fig. 331.—Weaverthorpe. Fig. 332.—Lakenheath. Fig. 333.—Yorkshire Wolds.

Fig. 330 represents a broader and less distinctly barbed form. The original was found at Amotherby, near Malton, and is chipped over both faces. I have another longer specimen from Sherburn, the base of which is less indented. Allied to this longer form, but having the sides more curved, is that shown in Fig. 331. The original was found by Canon Greenwell in one of the barrows examined by him at Weaverthorpe, Yorkshire. Varieties of this form, with the sides more or less straight, are of not unfrequent occurrence in Yorkshire. The same type has been found near Mantua.[192]

The more perfectly triangular form shown in Fig. 332 is of rather rare occurrence. This arrow-head was found near Lakenheath, Suffolk, and is now in the Greenwell Collection. It is neatly chipped over both faces, which are equally convex. I possess other specimens from Suffolk. Some arrow-heads of the same shape from Gelderland are in the Christy Collection.

In many instances rude triangular arrow-heads have been formed from flakes and splinters of flint, which were evidently selected as being nearly of the desired form, and were brought into shape by the least possible amount of subsequent chipping. The secondary working on Fig. 333 nowhere extends back so much as an eighth of an inch from the edges, and the bulb of percussion of the splinter of flint from which it was made is at the right-hand angle of the base, but not on the face here figured.

Fig. 334.—Yorkshire Wolds. Fig. 335.—Yorkshire Wolds.

In Fig. 334 the bulb is at the back of the left-hand angle, but this specimen is much thicker, and shows a considerable amount of skilful chipping on both faces. The angle at the bulb is rounded, while on the opposite side of the base it is somewhat curved downwards, so as to form a kind of barb. This obliquity of the face is more apparent in Fig. 335, though the barb is less pronounced. The flat face of the original flake is in this instance left nearly untouched, but the ridge side has been neatly wrought by removing a series of minute parallel flakes. This form occurs in Ireland,[193] and has been regarded as rather a knife than an arrow-head. I have seen an arrow-head of much the same form found at Bournemouth.

Fig. 336.—Bridlington. Fig. 337.—Bridlington.

The character of surface-flaking, observable in Figs. 335, 336 and 337, is almost peculiar to Yorkshire; and one of the most beautiful examples that I have seen of it is on the arrow-head engraved as Fig. 336, which was found on Northdale Farm, Grindale, Bridlington. The ripple-like flaking extends over nearly two-thirds of one face, the remainder of which is a flat portion of the original surface of the flake from which the arrow-head was made. On the other face a rather larger portion of the original surface is left, but the surface-chipping, though neat, is not of this regular character. The base is chipped on both faces, so as to leave a sharp edge with a delicate projecting barb at one angle only. The other angle is perfect, and has never been continued so as to form a barb. I have fragments of other arrow-heads of the same kind, from the same neighbourhood, and on some the fluting along the base is as regular as that on the side, and the two series of narrow shallow grooves "mitre" together with great accuracy. I have arrow-heads of the same general form and character from the neighbourhood of Icklingham, Suffolk; and in the Greenwell Collection is a small and elegant example from Lakenheath; but these are devoid of the parallel flaking, as are also some of the Yorkshire specimens. The late Mr. J. F. Lucas, however, had an arrow-head of this form, with the fluted chipping, from Middleton Moor, Derbyshire. Such regular fluting can, I think, only have been produced by pressure, probably with a pointed instrument of stag's-horn, as before described. It comes nearer in character to the wonderful "ripple-mark flaking" on some of the Danish daggers or lance-heads, and of the Egyptian knives, than the workmanship of any other British specimens.

The same style of work is observable on another arrow-head, Fig. 337, found on the same farm, though it is not of equal delicacy. In this case, however, the flaking extends along both sides, and the two series meet in the middle of the face, where but a very small portion of the original surface of the flake is visible. The face not shown is chipped in the same manner, but less neatly. One of the angles at the base has unfortunately been broken off, but there is no appearance of there having been more than one barb.


Fig. 338.—Fimber.

In some Egyptian arrow-heads from Abydos the surface seems to have been made smooth by grinding before the final flaking, just as was the case with the large blades mentioned on p. 359.

Less finely executed arrow-heads, with a long projecting wing or barb at one of the angles of the base, are of common occurrence in Yorkshire and Suffolk. They usually retain a considerable portion of the surface of the flakes from which they have been manufactured. They are also found in Gloucestershire[194] and Worcestershire.[195]

An unusually well-finished specimen of this class is engraved as Fig. 338. It was found in the neighbourhood of Fimber, Yorkshire, and is in the collection of Messrs. Mortimer, who have kindly allowed me to figure it. It has been made from an external flake, as there is a portion of the crust of the flint visible on one of the faces, both of which are neatly chipped. It is barbed at both angles of the base, though the projection is far longer and more curved on the one side than on the other. In most instances, however, there can hardly be said to be any barb at all at one of the angles.

The form with the long single barb appears to be common on the Derbyshire Moors. In one instance a rectangular notch has been worked in the curved side, with what object it is hard to say. This specimen, shown in Fig. 339, was found in a barrow at Hungry Bentley, Derbyshire, by the late Mr. J. F. Lucas. It had been buried together with a jet ornament and beads, subsequently described, in an urn containing burnt bones.

The single-winged form is of rare occurrence in Scotland, but what appears to be an arrow-head of this kind, from Caithness,[196] has been engraved by the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, and the cut is here, by their kindness, reproduced. Another from Urquhart and several from the Culbin Sands, Elginshire, and Glenluce Sands, Wigtownshire, are in the Edinburgh Museum. By some[197] they are regarded as knives, with the tang for insertion in a handle. The same form is found in greater abundance in the North of Ireland. A somewhat analogous shape from Italy has been figured by Dr. C. Rosa.[198] The type also occurs in Egypt.

Fig. 339.—Hungry Bentley. Fig. 340.—Caithness.

The varieties here engraved of single-barbed triangular arrow-heads of flint are, I think, enough to establish them as a distinct class, though they have received but little attention among the antiquities of any other country than the United Kingdom, nor have they been observed in use among modern savages. Many of the early bone harpoons, as well as those of the Eskimos, are barbed along one side only; and some of the Persian iron arrow-heads, as well as those of the Mandingoes,[199] and of some South American tribes, are also single-barbed. The same is the case with some arrow-heads of iron belonging to the Merovingian period.[200]

Another form of triangular arrow-head is round instead of hollow at the base, and bears an affinity with the leaf-shaped rather than the barbed variety. One of these from the neighbourhood of Lakenheath, in the Greenwell Collection, is shown in Fig. 341. It is surface-chipped on both faces.

The chisel-ended type in use among the ancient Egyptians has already been mentioned, and a specimen engraved in Fig. 272.

Another and much longer[201] Egyptian form has now become known. It approaches a triangle in form, but the base is indented like the tail of many homocercal fishes. The specimens vary in length from 3 or 4 inches to as much as 7 or 8 inches, so that some appear to have been javelin-heads. The flaking is wonderfully delicate, and the edges, for the most part, minutely serrated. Mr. Spurrell has described and figured a triangular blade, 41/2 inches long, which much resembles the Egyptian form so far as general character is concerned. It was found in Cumberland,[202] and is now in the British Museum. I have specimens from Abydos of a small, narrow, pointed and tanged arrow-head beautifully serrated at the sides. Other forms are figured by De Morgan.

Fig. 341.—Lakenheath. Fig. 342.—Urquhart.

In Fig. 342 is shown what appears to be a large example of the chisel-ended type, which was found at Urquhart,[203] Elgin, and is in the National Museum at Edinburgh. The edge is formed by the sharp side of a flake, and the sharp angles at the two sides of the arrow-head have been removed by chipping, probably to prevent their cutting the ligaments that attached it to the shaft. Another was found at the same place. A small specimen from Suffolk is in the Christy Collection, and I have a few from the same county. Canon Greenwell has obtained others from Yorkshire. It is questionable whether the specimens like Fig. 231 ought not also to have been classed as arrow-heads.

A similar form to Fig. 342 occurs in France. In one of the dolmens on the plateau of Thorus, near Poitiers, I found a small chisel-ended wrought flint, closely resembling the Egyptian arrow-heads; and I have observed in the collection of the late Rev. W. C. Lukis, F.S.A., others of the same form from chambered tumuli in Brittany. They have been discovered with ancient interments in other parts of France,[204] and I have specimens found on the surface of the soil near Pontlevoy, and given to me by the Abbé Bourgeois.

Baron Joseph de Baye has found them in considerable numbers in sepulchres of the Stone Age in the department of La Marne.[205] One was found embedded in a human vertebra. They also occur in the Camp de Catenoy, Oise.

One from St. Clement's, Jersey, is in the British Museum.

Some are recorded from Namur and other parts of Belgium.[206]

Two arrow-heads of this class, found in Denmark, have been engraved by Madsen;[207] one of them, to which I shall again refer, was still attached to a portion of its shaft.

Nilsson[208] has also engraved some specimens of this form found in Scandinavia. A considerable number of them were found at Lindormabacken in Scania,[209] some of which, by the kindness of Dr. Hans Hildebrand, are in my collection. I have also specimens from Denmark. There are others from the same countries in the Christy Collection, where is also an example of the same kind from Southern Italy. Several are engraved by Bellucci.[210]

They occur also in Germany,[211] Spain,[212] and Portugal.[213] Some crescent-shaped flints with sharp edges and a central tang, found on an island in the Lake of Varese,[214] may possibly be arrow-heads. Forms of nearly the same kind have been found near Perugia.[215]

In General Pitt Rivers's collection are some Persian arrows with chisel-edged tips of iron. Crescent-like[216] arrow-heads or bolt-heads, with a broad hollowed edge, were used in hunting in the Middle Ages, and some are preserved in museums. The Emperor Commodus[217] is related to have shown his skill in archery by beheading the ostrich when at full speed with crescent-headed arrows.

There still remains to be noticed another form of triangular arrow-head, of which, however, I have never had the opportunity of seeing a British specimen. It has a notch on either side near the base, which is slightly hollowed, and in general form closely resembles a common type of North American arrow-heads. A specimen of this form, said to have been found at Hamden Hill,[218] near Ilchester, has been engraved. Another, described as of much the same shape, was found in a barrow in Rookdale, Yorkshire.[219] A broken specimen, with the base flat instead of hollowed, and found in Lanarkshire,[220] has also been figured.

I am not, however, satisfied that this triangular form, with notches in the sides, is a really British type, though lance-heads notched in this manner have been found in France.

Both in Yorkshire and on the Wiltshire Downs arrow-heads have from time to time been found with their surface much abraded. There seems little doubt that this wearing away has been effected during their sojourn in the gizzards of bustards.

Having now described the principal types of arrow-heads found in Britain, it will be well to notice some of the circumstances of their discovery in barrows and with interments, which throw light on the manners and the stage of civilization of those who used them.

I am not aware of any well-established discovery of flint arrow-heads in this country in association with iron weapons, and certainly such a mixture of materials would require careful sifting of evidence to establish it. And yet we can readily conceive conditions under which flint arrow-heads might be present in Saxon graves, either from their having been dug in barrows of an earlier period, in which case a flint arrow-head might already exist in the soil with which the grave was filled; or from the occupant of the tomb having carried an "elf-bolt" as a charm, or even as the flint for his briquet à feu. In the Frankish cemetery of Samson,[221] near Namur, a broken flint arrow-head, almost of a lozenge form, accompanied a human skeleton with an iron sword and a lance; and another stemmed arrow-head (now in the Namur Museum) was found in the soil. At Sablonnières[222] (Aisne) flint arrow-heads were associated with Merovingian remains, and numerous instances of such associations have been adduced by the Baron de Baye.[223] Even in modern times flint arrow-heads have served for this fire-producing purpose. The late Earl of Enniskillen informed me that with flint-guns and muskets in Ireland[224] the gun-flint was frequently neither more nor less than an "elf-bolt" often but slightly modified in form.

The occurrence in Northern Italy of a flint arrow-head, in company with ten of the degenerate imitations of the gold coin of Philip II. of Macedon, known by the Germans as Regenbogen-schüsseln, recorded by Promis,[225] may also have been accidental. I have in my own collection a stone celt which is said to have been found with a hoard of Anglo-Saxon coins of the tenth century in Ireland,[226] but which can hardly be regarded as contemporaneous with them. There are, however, as I have already observed, many well-attested instances in which flint arrow-heads have been discovered in this and other countries in true association with weapons of bronze. Sir R. Colt Hoare records several such in his examination of the barrows of South Wilts. In one near Woodyates[227] a skeleton in a contracted position was buried with a bronze dagger and pin or awl, a jet button and pulley-like ornament, four arrow-heads (one of them engraved as Fig. 320), and "some pieces of flint, chipped and prepared for similar weapons; in another bowl-sbaped barrow at Wilsford an interment of burnt bones was accompanied by a small bronze dagger, some whetstones, and instrmnents formed of stag's horn, an arrow-head of flint, and another in an unfinished condition."

It is stated in the Archæologia[228] that with the well-known interment in the hollowed oak-trunk found in the Gristhorpe tumulus, near Scarborough, were "a brass and a flint spear-head and flint arrow-heads," &c. The flints[229] were, however, in this instance, merely flakes and the "brass spear-head" a bronze dagger.

In Borther Low,[230] near Middleton, Derbyshire, Mr. Bateman found by the side of a skeleton a flint arrow-head, a pair of canine teeth of fox or dog, and a diminutive bronze celt; and in a barrow on Roundway Hill,[231] North Wilts, a barbed flint arrow-head, like Fig. 327, was found close to the skull of a skeleton in a contracted posture, with a tanged bronze dagger at its left hand. Another bronze fragment, and a small plate of chlorite slate engraved as Fig. 355, were found at the same time. Similar plates, as well as flint arrow-heads, accompanied the skeleton at Tring Grove,[232] Herts, and an interment at Cruden, Aberdeen.[233]

A stemmed and barbed arrow-head of calcined flint was found in one of the urns containing burnt bones in the cemetery at Standlake,[234] Oxfordshire. In another urn was a spiral finger-ring of bronze, the only fragment of metal brought to light during the excavations.

Flint arrow-heads have been so frequently found in barrows containing both burnt and unburnt interments, and in company with other implements of stone and with pottery, that it seems needless to adduce all the recorded instances of such discoveries. I give a few references below.[235]

The stemmed and barbed variety is of the most common occurrence in tumuli; but, as has already been shown, one leaf-shaped form appears to be, to some extent, peculiar to a class of long barrows, though the stemmed and barbed,[236] lozenge and leaf-shaped forms have been found in the soil of the same grave mound.

In several instances, stemmed and barbed arrow-heads have been discovered with skeletons, accompanied also by the finely-chipped leaf-shaped knife-daggers of flint. In Green Low,[237] Alsop Moor, Derbyshire, the dagger-blade lay behind the shoulders, and three arrow-heads behind the back; in one, as already mentioned, on Seamer Moor, near Scarborough,[238] "two beautifully formed knives and spear-heads of flint," and four flint celts, accompanied "beautifully formed arrow-heads of flint;" and the dagger (Fig. 264) appears to have been found in the same barrow as the arrow-heads, on Lambourn Down.

Occasionally arrow-heads are found in the "drinking-cups" accompanying the skeleton, as in Mouse Low,[239] Staffordshire.

It remains for me to say a few words as to the points of difference and resemblance between the arrow-heads of Britain and those of other countries; and also as to the method of shafting in use in ancient times.[240]

In comparing the arrow-heads of Great Britain with those of what is now the sister kingdom of Ireland, we cannot but be struck, in the first place, with the far greater abundance found in Ireland, especially in its northern parts. How far this is due to their use having come down into later times, and how far to the character of the country, it is difficult to say. It is, however, evident that over so large an area of morass and bog, the number of arrows lost in the chase during a long series of years must have been immense; that when once lost they would be preserved uninjured, and remain undiscovered until the operations of draining and obtaining peat for fuel again brought them to light; and further, that the former of these operations has only been carried on to a large extent within the last few years, while the latter has also in all probability increased. On hard and stony soil, on the contrary, even assuming an originally equal abundance of arrow-heads, agricultural operations, after being carried on for a few centuries, would infallibly destroy a large number of them, and what were left would not be so instantly apparent to the eye as those in a peaty soil, and would consequently be found in fewer numbers. In districts where flint is scarce many ancient arrow-heads must have been used as strike-a-lights and gun-flints. In Ireland,[241] as already stated, they were highly esteemed for the latter purpose. Even on land recently enclosed, and where arrow-heads and worked flints may exist in abundance, unless some unusual inducement is offered, they remain unnoticed by the farm-labourers; and it is only owing to the diligence of local collectors that such numbers have been found on the Yorkshire Wolds, the Derbyshire Moors, and in parts of Gloucestershire, Oxfordshire and Suffolk. There seems, however, either from the character of the game pursued, or from some different customs of the early occupants of the country, to have been a far greater production of arrow-heads in these districts than in some other parts of Britain, such, for instance, as the Sussex Downs,[242] where on land but recently enclosed, almost innumerable flakes, scrapers, and other instruments of flint may be found, but where I have hitherto never succeeded in finding a single arrow-point. It is possible that in some districts, bone may have been preferred to stone.

Apart from the greater general abundance in Ireland, there is a far greater relative abundance of some particular forms, especially of the barbed triangular arrow-heads without a central stem, and of the elongated form with the stem and barbs. Lozenge-shaped arrow-heads are also more frequent, and some of the varieties of this form do not appear to occur in Britain. As a rule, Irish arrow-heads are also of larger size than the British. Their forms have been described by Sir W. Wilde,[243] Mr. Wakeman[244] and others.

In France, flint arrow-heads are at least as rare as in England, if not indeed rarer. In some of the dolmens of Brittany explored by the Rev. W. C. Lukis, F.S.A.,[245] he has found them both leaf-shaped and stemmed and barbed. Among the latter there are some of extremely neat workmanship, and closely resembling in form Fig. 312. I have seen the same form from the Côtes du Nord. Some beautiful examples, more elongated than Fig. 319 and with very small tangs, were found in a tumulus at Cruguel,[246] Morbihan. The more common French form is like Fig. 311, but with both stem and barb rather longer and the sides straighter. Specimens have been engraved from the neighbourhood of Londinières;[247] from a dolmen at Villaigre, Poitou;[248] a lake-habitation at La Péruse[249] (Charente); the Valley of the Saône,[250] the department of the Aisne,[251] the Camp de Chassey,[252] and other places.

Various forms from the Landes,[253] Gironde,[254] Marne,[255] Gard,[256] and other Departments[257] have been figured. Dr. Leith Adams traced a manufactory of flint arrow-heads in Guernsey.[258]

I have several tanged, and stemmed and barbed arrow-heads from Poitou, as well as some of triangular form, both with a rounded segmental base and with barbs. I have also leaf-shaped, lozenge-shaped, and tanged and barbed examples from the neighbourhood of Clermont Ferrand. Twenty-two of the latter form were found together, in company with a bronze dagger, in a cist in Brittany.[259]

Another common variety is stemmed and but very slightly barbed. Some of these approximate in form to a lozenge, with two of its sides curved inwards. Specimens from the dolmen of Bernac[260] (Charente), the Grotte de St. Jean d'Alcas,[261] and Argenteuil (Seine et Oise),[262] and the dolmens of Taurine, Pilande, and des Costes (Aveyron), may be cited. In several of the latter both leaf-shaped and lozenge-shaped specimens were also found. Many are neatly serrated at the edges, sometimes so as to form a sort of regular pattern, with only two or three projections on each of the sides. A pointed leaf-shaped arrow-head in a human vertebra was found in the Grotte du Castellet[263](Gard).

The same varieties, as well as some triangular arrow-heads, occurred in the Camp de Chassey.[264] Some of them are barbed without having the central tang.

A large arrow-head from the dolmen of Bernac, with pointed barbs, has a strongly dovetailed central stem. I have seen other much more elongated javelin-heads, four and five inches long, and an inch or an inch and a quarter broad, with similar tangs, but without barbs, the tang being formed by notches on either side at the base, as is the case with so many North American specimens, which these resemble in form. They were found at Corente, in Auvergne, and were in the collection of M. Aymard at Le Puy, where was also a leaf-shaped arrow-head with side notches, from Clermont. Another of the same kind, 4 inches long, with a more dovetail-like tang and better-developed barbs, has been found near Laon.[265] Others of smaller size were found in the Grotte des Morts, Durfort (Gard).[266]

A somewhat similar form has occurred among the lake-dwellings of the Ueberlinger See.[267]

A type much like Fig. 314 also occurs in the lake-habitations of Switzerland,[268] where, as might have been expected, a large number of stone arrow-heads have been found. Some few of them are stemmed and barbed, much like Fig. 311, but with the tang and barbs rather longer and sharper. More of them are tanged only, or but slightly barbed, and in many, the tang has so slight a shoulder that the outline is almost, and in some quite, lozenge-shaped. The most common form, however, appears to be the triangular, with the sides slightly curved outwards and the base flat, or even slightly rounded outwards. Many are a little hollowed at the base, so much so, in some cases, as to be distinctly barbed. At Nussdorf one arrow-head was formed of serpentine, and another of translucent quartz. One or two specimens are of bone.

Leaf-shaped and stemmed arrows without barbs, from Hasledon and Yvoir, are in the Museum at Namur, in Belgium. Belgian arrow-heads have been described by Van Overloop.[269]

In the lake-dwellings of Northern Italy,[270] as, for instance, at Mercurago, near Arona, and Cumarola, near Modena, the tanged arrows prevail, though leaf- and lozenge-shaped also occur. The same is the case in the south, where numerous discoveries of arrow-heads have been recorded by Nicolucci.[271] At Cumarola[272] some skeletons were found interred with flint arrow-heads and weapons of stone, in company with others of copper and bronze.

In the valley of the Vibrata,[273] in the Abruzzo, Dr. C. Rosa has found numerous arrow-heads, principally stemmed and barbed, but some also triangular and leaf-shaped. One specimen appears to be barbed on one side only, and a lance-head has a notch on each side near the base like those from Auvergne.

In the Lake of Varese,[274] where the site of a manufactory of arrow-heads was discovered by Captain Angelucci, the principal forms were those with a pointed tang and barbs. The roughly-chipped-out blocks were of a leaf-shaped form. A fine specimen like Fig. 302, but rather longer, was found near Civitanova[275] (Piceno), and the form occurs in Central Italy. A long leaf-shaped arrow from Italy is engraved by Lindenschmit,[276] as well as a tanged form without barbs. The latter form occurs in the Isle of Elba.[277] I have a series, from near Bergamo, nearly all of which are tanged, though few of them are distinctly barbed. The various forms of lance and arrow heads in the province of Perugia[278] have been described by Prof. Bellucci. The stone arrow-heads frequently cited as having been found on the plains of Marathon[279] appear to be only flakes,[280] as are many of those from Tiryns.[281] At Mycenæ,[282] however, in the fourth sepulchre, Schliemann found thirty-five beautifully-wrought arrow-heads of obsidian. They are mainly of triangular form, hollowed at the base, though the long loaf shape is also present. In general facies they closely resemble the Danish forms.

In a dolmen in Andalusia[283] a broken arrow-head of flint, with pointed stem and barbs, was found; and inasmuch as the fragment is engraved by Don Manuel de Gongora y Martinez as the head of a three-pointed dart, it appears that the form is not common in Spain.

A number of arrow-heads, mostly tanged, have, however, been found in the south-east of Spain by MM. Siret.[284] In Portugal[285] the arrow-heads are usually triangular, but often with long-projecting wings or barbs.

Returning northwards, I may cite a small series of flint arrow-heads in my collection, found near Luxembourg, where they appear to be not uncommon. They present the following forms: leaf-shaped, tanged, tanged and barbed, triangular with a straight base, and the same with barbs.

Numerous arrow-heads of flint have also been found in Gelderland, and a collection of them is to be seen in the Leyden Museum. Some are also in the Christy Collection. The most common forms are triangular, with barbs, or with a somewhat rounded base, and stemmed and barbed. Leaf-shaped and tanged arrow-heads appear to be rarer. Some scarce triangular forms are equilateral, and others long and somewhat expanding at the base. I have a series from Heistert, Roermond, Limburg.

In Central and Southern Germany flint arrow-heads appear to be rather scarce. In Pomerania the prevailing type is triangular hollowed at the base. The same form occurs in Thuringia. In the Königsberg Museum there are arrow-heads leaf-shaped pointed at both ends, lozenge-shaped, slightly tanged, tanged and barbed, and triangular with and without the hollowing at the base. Lindenschmit[286] engraves specimens, like Figs. 311 and 327, from the Rhine and Oldenburg, and a tanged arrow-head of serpentine from Inzighofen, near Sigmaringen, on the Danube.[287] Lisch also engraves a few specimens from North Germany,[288] which resemble the Scandinavian in character. Near Egenburg,[289] in Lower Austria, a considerable number have been found. Some Austrian[290] arrow-heads are barbed, but without the central tang.

Considering the wonderful abundance of flint implements in Denmark and Southern Sweden, it is not a little singular that arrow-heads should be there comparatively so rare. The leaf-shaped form is extremely scarce, but a triangular form, resembling the leaf-shaped in all respects but in having a rounded notch at the base in lieu of a rounded end, is more common. Stemmed and barbed arrow-heads are also very scarce, and those merely tanged are usually flakes simply trimmed at the edges, with the exception of those of equilateral triangular section, which are peculiar to Scandinavia. The lozenge-shape appears to be unknown; and by far the greater number of arrow-heads are of the triangular form, sometimes but slightly, if at all, hollowed at the base, though usually furnished with long projecting wings or barbs. The same type occurs in Norway.[291] Occasionally the notch between the barbs is square, and the ends of the barbs worked at an angle of about 45°, like Fig. 319, without the central stem. In some rare instances the barbs curve outwards at the points, giving an ogee form to the sides. In others the barbs curve inwards. In many, the sides are delicately serrated, and in most the workmanship is admirable. What appear to be lance-heads are sometimes notched on either side near the base, like the common North American form, and like those already mentioned as occurring occasionally in France.[292]

In Norway,[293] and more rarely in Sweden,[294] stemmed and acutely barbed arrow- and lance-heads, made of hard slate ground on the surface, are occasionally found. Knives of the same material also occur. They much resemble some of those from Greenland, and are probably of comparatively late date. Some spear-head-like implements of slate, ornamented with incised lines, have been found in a circular fort on Dunbuie Hill,[295] near Dumbarton.

Triangular arrow-heads of flint, more or less excavated at the base like those from Scandinavia, are also sometimes found in Russia. Specimens from Ekaterinoslav in the South, and Olonetz in the North, were exhibited at Paris in 1867. Others from Archangel approach more nearly to the North American form. They are occasionally tanged.[296]

In Northern Africa flint arrow-heads have been discovered, and the leaf-shaped, triangular, and tanged and barbed forms have been found in the dolmens of Algeria.[297] Some have also been collected in Tunis,[298] and simple tanged arrow-heads have been found in the Sahara.[299]

But little is at present known of the stone antiquities of a great part of Asia; but an arrow-head from India[300] was in the possession of Prof. Buckman, who obligingly furnished me with a sketch of it. It is acutely pointed, about 25/8 inches long, and tanged and barbed, though the barbs are now broken off. Some small leaf-shaped arrow-heads have been found at Ranchi,[301] in the Chota-Nagpore district. Mr. Bauerman, F.G.S., found, at Ghenneh, in Wady Sireh, Sinai, a flint arrow-head, neatly chipped on both faces, of a very peculiar form, being leaf-shaped, with a tang attached. It is in all nearly 2 inches long, of which the leaf-shaped part occupies about 11/2 inches, and the slender tang or stalk the other 1/2 inch. It lay in a tomb[302] with a lance-head of flint, a bracelet of copper, and a necklace of spiral shells. A very similar arrow-head, 21/2 inches long, from Wady Maghara, was presented by Major Macdonald[303] to the British Museum. The form seems also to occur in North America.[304]

The Abbé Richard found some very finely worked arrow-heads on and around Mount Sinai.[305] Two[306] from that locality were presented to the Society of Antiquaries in 1872. Flint arrow-heads have been found on Mount Lebanon,[307] mostly tanged, but without pronounced barbs. A few are leaf-shaped and triangular.

Some obsidian arrow-heads from the Caucasus[308] are triangular, with a semicircular notch at the base. Some of flint and of leaf-shaped form have been found at Hissar,[309] near Damghan, Persia.

Arrow-heads from Japan[310] are curiously like those from Europe, being triangular with or without barbs, and stemmed and slightly barbed. For the most part, they are narrower in their proportions than the European. Some are formed of obsidian. Besides these, the lozenge-shaped, the leaf-shaped, and a peculiar form with broad-ended barbs and no central tang, occur. There is a fine series in the Museum at Leyden and in the British Museum.

In Greenland flat arrow-heads and harpoon-points of chalcedony and slate are found, most of which approximate to ordinary North American forms. I have one triangular arrow-head with the sides curved outwards and delicately serrated. In Newfoundland[311] a narrow, triangular form prevails, sometimes ground sharp at the base.

One of the ordinary types in North America,[312] viz., that with a notch at the base on either side, has already been mentioned more than once. This form shades off into that with a central dovetailed tang, sometimes with well-developed barbs. Others again have merely a central tang, with little or no attempt at barbs. The triangular form, usually but little excavated at the base, is also common. A rare form terminates in a semicircular edge. The leaf-shaped form is rare. For the most part the chipping is but rough, as the material, which is usually chert, horn-stone, or even quartz, does not readily lend itself to fine work. They were made of various sizes, the smaller for boys, and those for men varying in accordance with the purpose to which they were to be applied.[313] They have been so fully described by others that I need not dilate upon them. Some broken arrow-heads have been converted into scrapers.

As we proceed southwards in America, the forms appear more closely to resemble the European. Some of the obsidian and chalcedony arrow-heads from Mexico are stemmed and barbed, and almost identical in shape with English examples. Don Antonio de Salis[314] relates that in the Palace of Montezuma there was one place where they prepared the shafts for arrows and another where they worked the flint (obsidian) for the points. In Tierra del Fuego[315] the natives still fashion stemmed arrow-heads tanged and barbed, or of a triangular form, with a tang extending from the centre of the base. In Patagonia,[316] triangular, stemmed, and stemmed and barbed arrow-heads occur in deposits analogous to the Danish kjökken-möddings. One brought from Rio Grande, and presented to me by Lieut. Musters, R.N., has a broad stem somewhat hollowed at the base. Mr. Hudson,[317] in giving an account of arrow-heads from the valley of the Rio Negro, formed of agate, crystal, and flint of various colours, remarks that beauty must have been as much an aim to the worker as utility.

Some of the flint and chalcedony arrow-heads from Chili are beautifully made, and closely resemble those from Oregon, farther north. A tanged and barbed point, embedded in a human vertebra, was found in a burial mound near Copiapo.[318]

A tanged arrow-head from Araucania, with a well-marked shoulder at the base of the triangular head, so that it might almost be called barbed, is engraved by the Rev. Dr. Hume,[319] It is like an Italian form.

Stemmed arrow- or harpoon-heads of quartz are found In Chili and Peru of much the same form as Fig. 303. The barbs, if such they may be called, are usually at rather more than a right angle to the stem, and occasionally project considerably from the side of the blade, giving it a somewhat cruciform appearance. I have several which were dug out by the late Mr. David Forbes, F.R.S., from graves close to the shore, about two miles south of Arica.[320] In some instances they are still attached to their shafts, which are unlike those of ordinary arrows, being shorter and clumsier. I have them of two sizes, the larger 101/2 inches long, about 5/8 inch in diameter at the end, where the head has been inserted in a socket, increasing to 7/8 in diameter towards the other end. At a distance of 2 inches from this, however, there is an abrupt shoulder, so that the diameter is increased by at least 1/4 of an inch, and the shaft then rapidly tapers in the contrary direction. The shafts have thus a stopper-like termination, which Mr. Forbes suggests may have been inserted in the end of a longer shaft of bamboo, so that the whole weapon was a sort of spear or javelin, and not, strictly speaking, an arrow. The smaller kind of shaft is of the same character, but only 6 inches long, and proportionately smaller. This may possibly have served as part of an arrow. The wood of all has been coloured with a red pigment.

One arrow-head from the same spot is of remarkably elegant form, and of wonderfully good workmanship. In general outline it is not unlike Fig. 324, but the blade expands more rapidly to form the barbs, which stand out well from the stem, and are separated from it by a slight hollow. It is 15/8 inches long. Its greatest width at the barbs is but 1/2 an inch; and the extreme acuteness and delicacy of the point may be judged of from the fact, that a distance of an inch from the apex the width is less than 1/4 of an inch. The heads appear to have been secured in their sockets by binding with thread formed of vegetable fibre. In some instances the wooden shaft is furnished with barbs made of bronze, tied on a little distance behind the stone point.

Leaf-shaped arrow-heads, as well as tanged and barbed, and barbed without a central tang, are found in Peru.[321] Some leaf-shaped arrows with a stalk, from New Granada, are in the Albert Memorial Museum at Exeter.

It will, however, be thought that enough, and more than enough, has been said as to the forms of arrow-heads occurring in various parts of the world. Allowing for local differences, the general correspondence in form is so great that we cannot wonder at Dr. Woodward's[322] suggestion that the first model of flint arrow-heads was probably brought from Babel, and preserved after the dispersion of mankind. To most, however, it will appear that this general similarity affords another proof that in all places, and in all times, similar circumstances and similar wants, with similar materials only at command for gratifying them, result in similar contrivances.

I must, in conclusion, say a few words as to the method of mounting these stone points upon the arrows; and here we are not left absolutely to conjecture, though the discoveries of flint arrow-heads still attached to their shafts, in any part of the United Kingdom, are extremely rare. But in Ballykillen Bog, King's County, a stemmed and barbed flint arrow-head was found, still remaining in a part of its "briar-wood" shaft, and with a portion of the gut-tying by which it had been secured, still attached. It is in the museum of Mr. Murray, of Edenderry, and has been figured by Sir W. Wilde.[323] Another Irish example was found in Kanestown Bog,[324] co. Antrim, and has been published by Mr. W. J. Knowles. In this case the head was barbed though not stemmed, but the shaft was cleft to receive it, and was bound round with gut or sinew for a length of about 4 inches. The shaft is thought to have been of ash.

Fig. 342a.—Fyvie, Aberdeenshire. 1/1 Fig. 343.—Switzerland. 1/1

A third example was found in a moss at Fyvie,[325] Aberdeenshire, and has been described by Dr. Joseph Anderson. By the kindness of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland it is shown in Fig. 342a. The point is leaf-shaped, approaching to a lozenge. It is inserted in a cleft in the tapering shaft, which extends almost to the point. The nature of the tough wood, of which the shaft is made, has not been determined, and the manner in which the head was secured in the shaft seems uncertain; but there may have been a binding which has perished. Dr. Anderson was able to reproduce the shaft in soft wood, making use of flint tools only.

Specimens have also been found in Switzerland and Germany. One of the former has been figured by Dr. Keller,[326] whose engraving I here reproduce, as Fig. 343, in the full size of the original arrow, instead of on the scale of one-half. It was found, not in any of the Lake habitations, but in the moss of Geissboden.
Fig. 344.—Fünen, Denmark. 1/1

The arrow-heads found among the ancient Swiss lake-dwellings, often bear on their surface some portion of the bituminous cement which helped to attach them to the shafts. Dr. Clément[327] possessed one, apparently tanged but not barbed, the base of which is completely incrusted with bitumen, with traces of the wood of the shaft upon it, and of the cord by which the whole was bound together. Another, leaf-shaped, similarly incrusted, is in the Museum at Lausanne. The attachment of a conical bone arrow-head to its shaft is of the same character. Some single-barbed[328] arrows were made by tying a bone pin, pointed at each end, diagonally to the extremity of the shaft.


Fig. 345.—Modern Stone Arrow-head.
Another specimen has been engraved by Madsen,[329] who, however, does not appear to have recognised it as an arrow-head. He describes it as "a flint instrument, fastened by means of fine bast-fibre to a wooden shaft, of which only 11/2 inch remains." I have here reproduced his engraving, as Fig. 344, and there can I think be little doubt that it represents the point of an arrow of the same character as those in use among the ancient Egyptians.[330] It was found in a peat moss in the parish of Vissenberg, Odense, in the Isle of Fünen.

Among modern savages, we find the stone points sometimes attached to the shafts by vegetable fibre, not unfrequently aided by some resinous gum, and also by means of animal sinew. The annexed woodcut, Fig. 345, kindly supplied by the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland,[331] shows an arrow-head, stated to be from one of the South Sea Islands, but more probably from California, attached by means of tendon to a reed shaft. The Indians of California certainly affix their arrow-heads in a similar manner; but commonly there are notches on either side of the head at the base, to receive the sinew or split intestine, which is in the form of tape about 1/8 inch wide. The binding extends about an inch along the shaft, and is of the neatest description. North American[332] arrow-heads, fastened in this manner, have been engraved by Sir John Lubbock and the Rev. J. G. Wood. The end of the shaft has a shallow notch in it to receive the flint, which is cemented into the notch before being bound on.

Among the Kaffirs,[333] the iron heads of the assagais are usually bound to the shafts with strips of wet hide, which contract and tighten in drying.

The shafts of arrows are frequently of reed, in which case there is often a longer or shorter piece of solid wood joined on to the reed to which the head is attached. This is the case with the ancient Egyptian arrows, and with those of the Bushmen,[334] in which, how- ever, bone and ivory replace the wood; and the shaft generally consists of three pieces—reed, ostrich bone, and ivory, to which latter the head of iron is attached. In other cases the shafts consist of straight-growing shoots of trees. Among the Eskimos,[335] where wood is so scarce, a peculiar tool—formed of bone, with an oval or lozenge-shaped hole through it—is used for the purpose of straightening arrow-shafts. The tang of their arrow-heads is inserted in a socket, and bound fast with sinew.

For harpoons there is often a hole in the triangular armature. One of these points was found in the body of a seal killed in Iceland[336] in 1643, and Olaf Worm judiciously thought that the seal had been wounded by a Greenlander.

In most countries the shafts are feathered at the bow-string end, and such was the case in the earliest historical times. Hesiod[337] describes the arrows of Hercules as feathered from the wings of a black eagle, and Homer[338] speaks of the πτερόεντες ὀϊστοί—if indeed, as Mr. Yates suggests, this latter refers to the plumes.[339] Herodotus,[340] however, mentions, as a remarkable fact, that the arrows of the Lycians in the army of Xerxes, like those of the Bushmen and some other savages of the present day, had no feathers, so that this addition to the shaft was not indispensable. It is said that some North American arrow-heads are "bevelled[341] off on the reverse sides, apparently to give them a revolving motion," so as to answer the same purpose as plumes. But this result seems very doubtful.

From what kind of wood the bows in Britain were made at the time when flint-pointed arrows were in use is uncertain; the yew, however, which is probably the best European wood for the purpose, is indigenous to this country. It is not probable that the cross-bow was known in these early times, though it was in use during the Roman period, as may be seen on a monument in the museum at Le Puy.

I need, however, hardly enter into further details with regard to arrows, and I therefore proceed to the consideration of other forms of stone implements, including those by which it seems probable that some of the arrow-heads were fashioned.

  1. Trans. Ethn. Soc., N, S., vol. iii. p. 266.
  2. See Lubbock, "Preh. Times," 4th ed., p. 478.
  3. Pliny, "Nat. Hist.," lib. vii. cap. 56.
  4. Herodotus, lib. iv. cap. 132; v. 49; vii. 61.
  5. "Sola in sagittis spes, quas inopiâ ferri ossibus asperant."—"Germ.," cap. 46.
  6. Smith's "Dict. of Ant." s. v., Sagitta.
  7. Homer, "Il.," viii. 296.
  8. P. 396.
  9. "Prod. Nat. Hist. Scotiæ," pt. 2, lib. iv. c. vii.
  10. "Mus. Met.," lib. iv. c. xvii.
  11. P. 49.
  12. "Mus. Wormianum" (1655), p. 39.
  13. L. c. 85.
  14. "Mus. Met.," p. 604
  15. "Nat. Hist.," xxxvii. c. 10.
  16. London, 1681.
  17. "Mus.," lib. i,, sect. 3, c. xiii.
  18. "Mus. Mosc." lib. ii. c. 1.
  19. Mus. Mosc. (1672), p. 148. See Mat., vol. xi. p. 1.
  20. Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., vol. iv. p. 66. In the Theatrum Scotiæ of Blaeuw's "Atlas," is a plate of arrow-beads found in Aberdeenshire. This has been pointed out to me by the late Dr. J. Hill Burton. See his "Hist. of Scot.," vol. i. p. 136 n.
  21. Reliquary, vol. viii. p. 207.
  22. "Cat.," pp. 8 and 127.
  23. "Nænia," pl. xxxiii. 6, p. 154. See Vallancey, "Coll. de Reb. Hibern.," N. xiii. pl. xi.
  24. Pt. iv. pl. iv. fig. 11.
  25. Vol. iv. p. 232, pl. xviii.
  26. "Cat. Mus. R. I. A.," p. 19. See also Arch. Assoc. Journ., vol. xxi. p. 323, and xxii. p. 316.
  27. Journ. R. S. A. of Irel., 5th S., vol. v. p. 61.
  28. Folklore Record, vol. iv. p. 112. Journ., vol. ii. p. 260. See also "Folklore of the Northern Counties," p. 185.
  29. Pennant's "Tour," vol. i. p. 115. "Stat. Account of Scotland," vol. x. p. 15; xxi. 148. Collins' "Ode on Pop. Superst. of the Highlands." "Allan Ramsay's Poems," ed. 1721, p. 224. Brand's "Pop. Ant.," 1841, vol. ii. p. 285.
  30. Reliquary, vol. viii. p. 207.
  31. "Itin. Cur.," (ed. 1776), vol. ii. p. 28.
  32. "Preh. Ann. of Scot.," vol. i. p. 178, et seqq.
  33. Pepys' "Diary and Cor." (ed. 1849), vol. v. p. 366.
  34. See Nilsson's "Stone Age," p. 197. Wilson's "Preh. Ann. of Scot.," vol. i. p. 180.
  35. Mat., vol. xi. p. 540.
  36. Gastaldi, "Lake Habitations of Northern and Central Italy," Chambers's transl., p. 6.
  37. Nicolucci, "Di Alcune Armi ed Utensili in Pietra," 1863, p. 2.
  38. Mortillet, Mat., vol, iii. p. 319.
  39. Archivio per l'Antropologia, vol. i. pl. xv. 8.
  40. "L'âge de Pierre dans les Sonvenirs et superstitions populaires," Paris, 1877.
  41. Bull. di Paletn. It., 1876, pl. iv. 7.
  42. A. J. Evans, "Bosnia and Herzegovina," 1876, p. 289; 1877, p. 291.
  43. 2nd Ann. Rep. of Bur. of Ethn., 1880—1. Mat., 3rd S., ii., 1885, p. 532.
  44. Rev. Arch., vol. xv. p. 145. Leake, "Demi of Attica," p. 100. Dodwell's "Class. Tour," vol. ii. p. 159. Arch. Journ., vol. vii. p. 86.
  45. See Smith's "Geog. Dict.," vol. ii. p. 268.
  46. Lib. vii. cap. 69.
  47. "Il.," xiii. 650.
  48. "Il.," V. 393.
  49. IV. 81.
  50. See De Morgan, op. cit. p. 121.
  51. Academy, Oct. 27, 1894.
  52. Archæologia Scotica, vol. i. p. 389.
  53. This word, still in use in Scotland for the barbs of a fishing-spear or hook, is a good old English term derived from the Saxon ƿiðep. Withther-hooked = barbed:—

    "This dragoun hadde a long taile
    That was withther-hooked saun faile."
    "Arthour and Merlin," p. 210.

    Halliwell, "Dict. of Arch. and Prov. Words," s. v.

  54. Journ. R. U. Serv. Inst.
  55. Journ. Anth. Inst., vol. vi. p. 482
  56. Journ. R. S. A. of Irel., 5th S., vol. v. p. 41.
  57. Schoolcraft, "Ind. Tribes," vol. i. p. 212.
  58. Wood's "Nat. Hist, of Man," vol. i. p. 284.
  59. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. ii. p. 429.
  60. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. iii. p. 324. Reliquary, vol. vi. p. 185.
  61. Arch. Assoc. Journ., vol. iv. p. 103.
  62. Reliq., N. S., vol. iii. pl. iv. 8.
  63. Op. cit., p. 224.
  64. Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., vol. xix. p. 350.
  65. P. S. S. A., vol. xxv. p. 499.
  66. See Wakeman, "Arch. Hib.," p. 270.
  67. Cong. Préh. Moscou, 1892, vol. ii. p. 240.
  68. Schoolcraft, "Ind. Tribes," vol. i. pl. xxvi. 4.
  69. Arch. Journ., vol. xvii. p. 261.
  70. Arch. Journ., vol. xxv. p. 156.
  71. Vol. vi. pl. xvi. 5.
  72. Journ. Ethnol. Soc., vol. i. p. 5.
  73. P. S. A. S., vol. vii. p. 500.
  74. P. S. A. S., vol. ix. p. 246.
  75. P. S. A. S., vol. xi. p. 586.
  76. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. iii, p. 170.
  77. A. C. Smith, Ants. of N. Wilts," p. 182.
  78. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. ii. p. 278; iii. p. 168.
  79. Reliquary, vol. v. p. 28.
  80. Wilts Arch. Mag., vol. xix. p. 71. A. C. Smith's "Ants. of N. Wilts," p. 197.
  81. Reliquary, vol. vi. p. 185.
  82. Warne's "Celtic Tum. of Dorset," Errata, pp. 15 and 27.
  83. "Ten Years' Dig.," p. 148.
  84. See Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. i. p. 20. Arch. Journ., vol. x. p. 362. Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., vol. iii. p. 362; iv. 54, 377, 553; v. 13, 185; vi. 41, 208, 234; vii. 500; viii. 10.
  85. P. S. A. S., vol. xiv. pp. 111, 129.
  86. P. S. A. S., vol. xxv. p. 499.
  87. P. S. A. S., vol. xix. p. 251.
  88. Arch. Cant., vol. xiii. p. 124.
  89. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. i. p. 74. Arch. Journ., vol. xvii. p. 171.
  90. Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., vol. xix. p. 251.
  91. Tr. Lanc. and Chesh. Arch. Soc., vol. iv. p. 306.
  92. Arch. Journ., vol. xviii. p. 75.
  93. "Manx Note-book," vol. i. (1885) p. 72.
  94. Trans. Biol. Soc, L'pool., vol. viii., 1894, pl. xii.
  95. Mortillet, Mat., vol. ii. p. 89.
  96. Arch. Assoc. Journ., vol. iv. p. 103.
  97. Arch. Journ., vol. xii. p. 285. "Cat. Mus. Arch. Inst. at Ed.," p. 40.
  98. Trans. Lanc. and Chesh. Arch. Soc., vol. iv. p. 306.
  99. Trans. Herts Nat. Hist. Soc., vol. viii., 1896, pl. xii. 1.
  100. Arch., vol. viii. p. 429, pl. xxx.
  101. Arch. Camb., 2nd S., vol. ii. p. 292.
  102. P. 579.
  103. Arch. Journ., vol. xvii. p. 60.
  104. Miller and Skertchly, "Fenland," p. 579.
  105. "South Wilts," pl. xxii. p. 183. "Cat. Devizes Mus.," No. 105.
  106. "The Barrow Diggers," p. 75, pl. ii. 7.
  107. "South Wilts," pl. xxxiv.
  108. "The Barrow Diggers," pl. ii. p. 6.
  109. Ib., pl. xxxiv. "Cat. Devizes Mus.," No. 203.
  110. "Salisb. Vol. of Arch. Inst.," p. 94.
  111. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. vi. p. 398.
  112. Assoc. franç. pour l'avancem. des Sciences, Nancy, 1881, 16 aôut.
  113. Wilson's "Preh. Ann. of Scot.," p. 127 (2nd ed. p. 182, pl. ii. 15). "Cat. Mus. Arch. Inst. Ed.," p. 6, Fig. 9. For the loan of this block I am indebted to Messrs. Macmillan and Co.
  114. P. S. A. S., vol. ix. pp. 240, 262.
  115. P. S. A. S., vol. xix. p. 251.
  116. P. S. A. S., vol. xxiii. p. 93.
  117. P. S. A. S., vol. xxvii. p. 355.
  118. Smith, "Preh. Man in Ayrsh." (1895), p. 105.
  119. "Preh. Ann. of Scot.," vol. i. pl. ii. 14.
  120. "Preh. Ann. of Scot.," p. 182.
  121. "Acc. of Inst., &c., of S. A. Scot.," p. 389.
  122. P. S. A. S., vol. xii. p. 183.
  123. "Tour. in Scot.," vol. i. p. 156, pl. xxi.
  124. Vol. xvii. p. 19.
  125. Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., vol. xii. p. 62.
  126. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. ii. p. 294.
  127. P. S. A. S., vol. vi. p. 208.
  128. Ib., vol. vi. p. 234.
  129. Ib., vol. iv. p. 54; vii. 105.
  130. Ib., vol, viii. p. 10.
  131. Ib., vol. vi. p. 89.
  132. Ib., vol. iv. p. 54; v. 185.
  133. P. S. A., 2nd S., vol. iii. p. 19.
  134. Ib., 2nd S., vol. i. p. 20.
  135. P. S. A. S., vol. iv. p. 54; v. 13.
  136. Arch. Journ., vol. x. p. 362.
  137. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. i. p. 20.
  138. P. S. A. S., vol. vi. pp. 41, 234.
  139. Ib., vol. iii. p. 362.
  140. Ib., vol. v. p. 326; iii. 438; viii. 50; xiv. 267; xxiv. 13.
  141. P. S. A. S., vol. xxvii. p. 360. See also "Smith's Preh. Man in Ayrshire," (1895).
  142. Arch. Scot., vol. iii. App. 135. P. S. A. S., vol. xii. p. 270.
  143. P. S. A. S., vol. iv. p. 55.
  144. Ib., vol. iv. pp. 67, 377.
  145. Wilson's "Preh. Ann. of Scot.," vol. i. p. 182.
  146. P. S. A. S., vol. xxi. p. 133.
  147. P. S. A. S., vol. xiv. p. 267; vol. xxiv. p. 13. For a list of Kincardineshire arrow-heads see vol. ix. pp. 461, 499; xi. p. 26.
  148. P. S. A. S., vol. xi. p. 585.
  149. P. S. A. S., vol. xxviii. p. 341.
  150. "Cat. Arch. Inst. Mus. Ed.," pp. 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 20.
  151. P. S. A., 1st S., vol. iii. p. 224.
  152. P. S. A. S., vol. iii. p. 490.
  153. Geologist, vol. i. p. 162.
  154. P. S. A. S., vol. i. p. 42; vol. xix. p. 11; xxv. 500.
  155. Ib., vol. i. pp. 67, 190.
  156. Arch. Journ., vol. xvii. p. 60.
  157. Arch., vol. xxxi. p. 304. "York Vol. of Arch. Inst.," p. 1.
  158. Hoare's "South Wilts," pl. xxx.
  159. Reliquary, vol. iii. p. 177. "Cran. Brit.," vol. ii. pl. 41, p. 3.
  160. Suss. Arch. Coll., vol. xiii. p. 309.
  161. Tr. Hist. Soc. Lanc. and Chesh., N. S., vol. viii. p. 131.
  162. Arch. Camb., 3rd. S., vol. iii. p. 303.
  163. Hoare's "South. Wilts," the "Barrow Diggers," Bateman's "Vestiges," Arch., vol. xxx. p. 333; vol. xliii. pp. 418, 420; vol. lii. pp. 48, 53, 61. Wilts Arch. Mag., vol. vi. p. 319.
  164. Vol. xiv. pl. iii.
  165. Tr. Lanc. and Chesh. Arch. Soc., vol. ii. pl. i. Trans. Manch. Geol. Soc., vol. xiii. p. 141; xiv. p. 284.
  166. Op. cit., viii. p. 127. Trans. Manch. Geol. Soc., vol. xvi. p. 287.
  167. For Yorkshire arrow-heads see Yorhsh. Arch. and Top. Journ., vol. i. (1870), p. 4.
  168. Proc Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. i. p. 64.
  169. Arch., vol. xxxvii. 369.
  170. Suss. Arch. Coll., vol. xxvii. p. 177.
  171. Surr. Arch. Coll., vol. xi.
  172. Tr. Dev. Assoc., vol. xx. p. 44.
  173. Op. cit., xxvi. p. 53.
  174. Arch. Journ., vol. xx. p. 372.
  175. Bateman's "Cat.," 47, et seqq. See also the York, Norwich, and Lincoln Volumes of the Arch. Inst.
  176. Harrison's "Geol. of Leic. and Rutl.," p. 49.
  177. Rel. and Ill. Archæol., vol. ii. p. 45. Journ. Roy. Inst. of Cornw. vol. xiii. p. 92.
  178. Arch. Journ., vol. x. p. 354.
  179. Op. cit., vol. xiv. p. 79.
  180. Op. cit., vol. xvi. p. 151.
  181. Arch. Assoc. Journ., vol. i. p. 309.
  182. "Trans. Arch. Assoc. at Glouc.," p. 94.
  183. A. A. J., vol. iv. p. 152.
  184. Op. cit., vol. xviii. p. 272.
  185. Op. cit., vol. iv., p. 396.
  186. Arch., vol. ix. p. 100.
  187. Yorksh. Arch. and Top. Journ., 1868, fig. 5.
  188. P. S. A. S., vol. xiv. p. 267; xxiv. p. 13.
  189. P. S. A. S., vol, xi. p. 585.
  190. Arch., vol. lii. p. 63.
  191. "Kahun, &c." (1890), p. 21, pl. xvi.
  192. Bull. di Pal. Ital., 1877, pl. v. 25.
  193. Wilde, "Cat. Mus. R. I. A.," p. 15, fig. 7.
  194. Proc. Cotteswold Nat. Field Club, vol. x., 1889—90, p. 22, pl. i.
  195. Proc Soc. Ant., March 10, 1897.
  196. P. S. A. S., vol. vii. p. 500.
  197. P. S. A. S., vol. xxi. p. 201; xxii. p. 51. Journ. R. Hist. and Arch. Assoc. of Ireland, 4th S., vol. viii., 1887—88, p. 241.
  198. Archivio per l'Anthrop., &c., vol. i. pl. xii. 16.
  199. Wood, "Nat. Hist. of Man," vol. i. p. 679.
  200. Ann. de la Soc. Arch. de Namur, 1859, pl. ii. 9.
  201. Arch. Journ., vol. liii., 1896, p. 46, pl. iv. 3, 4. De Morgan, op. cit., p. 124.
  202. Op. cit., pl. vi. 11.
  203. P. S. A. S., vol. ix. pp. 240, 262; xi. p. 510.
  204. Rev. Arch., vol. xv. p. 367.
  205. "L'Arch. Préh.," p. 191, ed. 1888, p. 253. Rev. Arch., vol. xxvii., 1874, pl. xi. p. 401. Mat., vol. viii. pl. ii. Bull. Soc. Anthrop., 19 Dec, 1889.
  206. Bull. Soc. Ant. de Bruxelles, vol. vi. pl. i.
  207. "Afbild.," pl. xxii. 18, 19. See also Aarb. f. Oldk., 1890, p. 325, 329.
  208. "Stone Age," pl. ii. 36, 37.
  209. "Antiq. Tidskr. för Sverige," vol. iii. fig. 3.
  210. "Mat. paletnol. dell' Umbria," pl. ix.
  211. Zeitsch. f. Ethn., vol. xv. p. 361; xvi. p. (118).
  212. Siret, p. 10.
  213. Cartailhac, pp. 53, 173.
  214. Riv. Arch. della Prov. di Como, Dec. 1879.
  215. Arch. per l'Ant. e al Etn., vol. xiii. (1883), Tav. i.
  216. Arch. Journ., vol. ix. p. 118. Lee's "Isca Silurum," p. 112.
  217. Herodian, lib. i. c. 15.
  218. Arch. Journ., vol. x. p. 247.
  219. Arch. Journ., vol. x. p. 69.
  220. Arch. Assoc. Journ., vol. xvii. p. 19.
  221. Ann. de la Soc. Arch. de Namur, 1859, p. 361.
  222. Rev. Arch., vol. xxxiv. p. 183.
  223. Cong. Préh. Lisbonne, 1880, p. 372.
  224. See also Nature, vol. xxiii. p. 218.
  225. Berliner Blätter, vol. iii. p. 172.
  226. Num. Chron., N. S., vol. iii. p. 54.
  227. "South Wilts," p. 239.
  228. Vol. xxx. p. 460.
  229. See "Cran. Brit.," pl. 52, p. 9
  230. "Vest. of the Ant. of Derbysh.," p. 48.
  231. "Cran. Brit.," vol. ii. pl. xlii. p. 3, Wilts Arch. and N. H. Mag., vol. iii. p. 185.
  232. Arch., vol. viii. p. 429; supra, p. 383.
  233. "Cat. Arch. Inst. Mus. Ed.," p. 11. Wilson, "Preh. Ann.," vol. i. p. 224.
  234. Arch., vol. xxxvii. p. 369.
  235. Arch. Journ., vol. xvi. p. 151; xxii. p. 249. "Ten Years' Diggings," pp. 60, 95, 96, 116, 127, 167, 178, &c. Arch. Assoc. Journ., vol. iv. p. 103; vii. 215. Arch., vol. xxxi. p. 304. "Salisb. Vol. Arch. Inst.," pp. 25—105, Hoare's "South Wilts," pp. 182—211. Greenwell's "British Barrows," passim.
  236. "Ten Years' Dig.," p. 223. Arch. Assoc. Journ., vol. iv. p. 103.
  237. "Vest. Ant. Derb.," p. 59. "Cran. Brit.," vol. ii. pl. 41, p. 3.
  238. A. A. J., vol. iv. p. 105.
  239. "T. Y. D.," p. 116. A. A. J., vol. vii. p. 215.
  240. For a comparison of arrow-heads from different countries see also Westropp's "Prehistoric Phases," pl. i.
  241. Nature, vol. xxiii. p. 218.
  242. Dr. Mantell, however, found a flint arrow-head in a barrow near Lewes.—"York Vol. of Arch. Inst.," p. 1.
  243. "Cat. Mus. R. I. A.," p. 19 seqq.
  244. "Archæol. Hibern." (1891), p. 269 seqg.
  245. Arch. Assoc. Journ., vol. xxiv. p. 40.
  246. Rev. Arch., 3rd S., vol. xvi. pl. xvii. p. 304.
  247. Cochet, "Seine Inférieure," 2nd ed., p. 528.
  248. "Epoques Antédil. et Celt, du Poitou," p. 102, pl. iv. bis. 3, 4, 5.
  249. De Rochebrune, "Mém. sur les Restes d'Industrie, &c.," pl. x. 8, 9.
  250. Chantre, "Etudes Paléoéthn.," pl. xiii. 7.
  251. Watelet, "L'Age de Pierre, &c.," pl. iv. 2. Coll. Caranda, Moreau, 1877.
  252. Perrault, "Note sur un Foyer, &c.," Châlons, 1870, pl. ii.
  253. Rev. d'Anthrop., vol. iv. p. 258.
  254. Matériaux, vol. xi. p. 207.
  255. De Baye, "Arch. préh.," 1888, pp. 225, 255, 291, 292.
  256. Bull. de la Soc. d'Etude des sc. nat. de Nimes, 1894.
  257. Mortillet, "Mus. préh.," pl. xliii. et seqq.
  258. Journ. Anth. Inst., vol. ii. p. 68.
  259. Rev. Arch., vol. xx. p. 359.
  260. De Rochebrune, pl. xiii. 2.
  261. Cazalis de Fondouce, "La Pierre polie dans l'Aveyron," pl. i. 9 and 10; pl. iv. 2, 3, &c. Trans. Preh. Cong., 1867, p. 189; 1868, p. 351. Mortillet, Matériaux, vol. ii. p. 146; vol. iii. p. 231.
  262. Rev. Arch., vol. xv. p. 364.
  263. Cazalis de Fondouce, "All. couv. de la Provence," 2nd Mém. pl. ii. 18. Mat., vol. xii. p. 452, pl. xii. 18.
  264. Matériaux, vol. v. p. 395. Perrault, op. cit.
  265. Watelet, "Age de Pierre dans le Dépt. de l'Aisne," pl. iv. 4.
  266. Matériaux, vol. v. p. 249.
  267. In the Wessenbergische Sammlung, Constance.
  268. Keller's "Pfahlbauten," and "Lake-dwellings," passim. Desor's "Palafittes," p. 17. Troyon, "Hab. Lac.," pl. v. Ant. Lac. du Mus. de Lausanne, pl. ix.
  269. "Les âges de la pierre," pl. vi. and vii.
  270. Keller, op. cit., 4ter Ber. Taf. i. and ii. Strobel, "Avanzi Preromani," Parma, 1863, 1864.
  271. "Di Alcune armi ed utensile in pietra." Atti della R. Accad. delle Scienze, Napoli, 1863 and 1867.
  272. Gastaldi, "Lake Habs. in Italy," p. 7. "Nuovi Cenni, &c.," Torino, 1862, p. 10. Mem. Acc. R. di Sc. di Torino, vol. xxvi. (1869).
  273. Archivio per l'Antropol, &c., vol. i. p. 457.
  274. Mortillet, Matériaux, vol. ii. p. 87. "Promenades," p. 152. A. Angelucci, "Le Palafitte del Lago di Varese" (1871); and Ragazzoni, "Uomo preh. di Como" (1878).
  275. Mortillet, Matériaux, p. 89.
  276. "Alterth. uns. held. Vorz.," vol. i., Heft vi. pl. i. 9. "Hohenz. Samml.," Taf. xliii.
  277. Mortillet, Mat., vol. iii. p. 319.
  278. Archivio per l'Ant. e la Etn., vol. ix. p. 289. See also Marinoni, "Abit. lacust. in Lombardia," Milan (1868), p. 20.
  279. Dodwell, "Class. Tour in Greece," vol. ii. p. 159. Leake, "Demi of Attica," p. 100.
  280. F. Lenormant in Rev. Arch., vol. xv. p. 146.
  281. Schliemann, "Tiryns," (1886), pp. 78, 174.
  282. "Mycenae," (Murray, 1878), p. 272. See also pp. 76 and 158.
  283. "Antigüedades Prehistóricas de Andalusia," p. 104.
  284. "Les premiers Ages du Métal, &c.," Anvers, 1887.
  285. "Ant. de Algarve," 1886. Cartailhac, p. 86, 159, 170.
  286. "Alterth. u. h. Vorzeit," vol. i. Heft vi. pl. i. "Hohenz. Samml.," Taf. xliii. 17.
  287. "Hohenz. Samml.," Taf. xliii. 25.
  288. "Frederico-Francisceum," 1837, Tab. xxvii.
  289. Von Sacken, "Grabfeld von Hallstatt," p. 38.
  290. Kenner, "Arch. Funde. i. d. Oesterr. Mon.," 1867, p. 41.
  291. O. Rygh, "Norske Oldsager," (1881), No. 76.
  292. Conf. Madsen's "Afbildninger," pl. xxxvii. and xxxix. Worsaae, "Nord. Oldsager," fig. 68 et seqq. Nilsson's "Stone Age," pl. iii. and v. Antiq. Tidskrift för Sverige, 1864, pl. xxiii.
  293. Foreningen til Norske Fortidsmindesmerkers Bevaring, Aarsber., 1867, pl. i.; 1868, pl. iii. 8.
  294. Nilsson, "Stone Age," pl. iii. 59.
  295. P. S. A. S., vol. xxx., 1896, p. 291.
  296. L'Anthropologie, vol. vi. (1895), p. 14.
  297. Bonstetten, "Essai sur les dolmens," pl, iv. Zeitsch. f. Ethn., vol. xvii. p. (93).
  298. L'Anthropologie, vol. v. (1894), p. 538.
  299. Rev. Arch., vol. xlii. pl. x. p. 1.
  300. Arch. Soc. Journ., vol. xvii. p. 74.
  301. Journ. As. Soc. Bengal, vol. lvii. 1889, p. 392, pl. iv. 6, 7.
  302. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxv. p. 35.
  303. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. i. p. 322.
  304. Schoolcraft, "Ind. Tribes," vol. i. pl. xvii. 9.
  305. Rev. Arch., vol. xxii. p. 378. Brit. Assoc. Rep., 1871.
  306. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. v. p. 330.
  307. La Nature, 25 juillet, 1896. L'Anthrop., vol. vii., 1896, p. 571.
  308. Chantre, "Le Caucase," (1885), pl. i. Zeitsch. f. Ethn., 1885, Supp., pl. viii.
  309. Journ. R. As. S., 1876, p. 425. Miith. Anth. Ges. in Wien, 1884, N. S., vol. iv. p. (28).
  310. Trans. Preh. Congress, 1868, p. 266. See also Bull. de la Soc. Roy. des Ant. du Nord, 1843-45, p. 26. Journ. Anth. Inst., vol. x. p. 395, pl. xviii. Proc. Soc. Ant., 2nd S., vol. vi. p. 15. Zeitsch. f. Ethn., vol. xxiv., 1892, p. (432). Matériaux, vol. viii. p. 92; xiv., p. 32. T. Kanda, "Anc. St. Impts. of Japan," (Tokio, 1884).
  311. Journ. Anth. Inst., vol. v. p. 241, pl. xi.
  312. Douglas, "Nænia Brit.," pl. xxxiii. 8. See Squier and Davis, "Anc. Mon. of Miss. Valley," p. 212. Schoolcraft, "Ind. Tribes," vol. i. pl. xvii., xviii.; vol. ii. pl. xxxix.
  313. Schoolcraft, op. cit., vol. i. p. 77. Catlin, "N. A. Ind.," vol. i. pl. xii. See also Nature, vol. vi. pp. 392, 413, 515; xi. pp. 90, 215. Gerard Fowke, "Stone Art," 13th Ann. Rep. Bureau of Ethn. (1891-2), 1896. P. S. A. S., vol. xxiv. p. 396. Abbott's "Primitive Industry," (Salem, Mass., 1881).
  314. "Conquista de Mejico," bk. iii. chap. 14.
  315. Lubbock, "Preh. Times," 4th ed. p. 107. Douglas, Nænia Brit.," pl. xxxiii. 9, 10.
  316. Strobel, "Mat. di Paletnologia comparata," Parma, 1868. Journ. Anth. Inst., vol. iv. p. 311, pl. xxiii. Nadailhac, "l'Amér. préh." (1863), pp. 27, 57.
  317. "Idle Days in Patagonia," 1893, p. 39.
  318. Arch. Journ., vol. xxxviii. p. 429.
  319. "Ill. of Brit. Ant. from objects found in South America, 1869," p. 89.
  320. See also Mat., vol. xiv. p. 382.
  321. Camb. Ant. Comm., vol. iv. p. 13.
  322. "Method of Fossils" (1728), p. 43.
  323. "Cat. Mus. R. I. A.," p. 254, fig. 164.
  324. Journ. R. H. and A. A. of Ireland, 4th S. vol. vii., 1885, p. 126.
  325. P. S. A. S., vol. xi. p. 509.
  326. "Pfahlbauten," 2ter Ber. Taf. i. 5. "Lake-dwellings," pl. xxxix. 15. It is curiously like an arrow of the Zoreisch Indians, figured Mitth. d. Ant. Gesells. in wien, 1893, p. 119.
  327. Mortillet, Mat., vol. ii. p. 512. Mackie, "Nat. Hist. Rep.," vol. i. p. 137. "Mus. Préh.," fig. 406.
  328. Le Hon, "L'homme foss.," 2nd ed., p. 184.
  329. "Afbildninger," pl. xxii. 19.
  330. See p. 369.
  331. Proc., vol. iv. p. 298.
  332. "Preh. Times," 4th ed., p. 107. "Nat. Hist. of Man," vol. ii. p. 648.
  333. Wood, "Nat. Hist. of Man," vol. i. p. 103.
  334. Ib., vol. i. p. 284.
  335. One is figured in Trans. Lanc. and Chesh. Arch. Soc., vol. iv. p. 369.
  336. "Mus. Wormianum," 1655, p. 350.
  337. "Scut. Herculis," v. 134.
  338. "Iliad," v. 171.
  339. Smith's "Dict. of Ant.," p. 1002.
  340. Lib. vii. cap. 92.
  341. Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., vol. i. p. 85. Nature, vol. x. p. 245.