394 PROCEEDIXGS AT MEETINGS OF

fi-agment of iron. On the other liand, the nse of stone is still retained, even among ourselves, when that substance is well adapted for the pur- pose to be accomplished; thus our modern corn-mill does not greatly differ in material vv principle from the ancient stone quern. " Nevertheless, the entire question is l)y no means so simple as some writers would have us believe that archieologists imagine it to be. I doubt whetlier anyone but the writer of ' Non-Historic Times' thinks that we ' flatter ourselves with the idea that because we have succeeded in arranging some thousands of bits of stone or bronze in glass cases, that therefore we uudei-stand the history and the manners and customs of long vani^heil races of men.' '■' "At the very outset of the inquiry we find tiiat there is no absoluto uniformity in the sequence, or duration of the Stone, the Bronze, and the Iron Pexnods. In some regions the Stone Period h!s lingered on much longer than in others, whilst in certain countries there appears to be no evidence of the exi.stence of a Bronze Period. But, in every country there seems to have been a Stone Period, although it docs not follow that the ancestors of the present occupants of the soil were the stone-using people. " In some instances even, two stone-using races may have succeeded each other, as in New Zealand.' " It must not be supposed that these Periods indicate with precision the state of culture arrived at by any given race or tribe. The degree of civilisjition to be attained by a i)eople would depend upon many other circumstances than their acquaintance with, or ignorance of, the use of metals. Foremost among these would be the possession of domesticated animals, the jjractice of agriculture, and such sub-division of labour as would lead to traffic and connnerce. Any attempt, therefore, to form a general scale of civilisation founded upon the Stone, the Bronze, and the Iron Periods can scarcely be satisfactory. "The system proposed by Mr. Tylor, which connects the Stone Period with savagery, the Bronze with barbarism or low civilisation, and the Iron with that of tiie middle level of civilisation and onwards, is j)erhaj)8 the least open to objection. It will be generally conceded that men in their Stone Period live in a state of savagery, but, as Mr. Tylor himself ha-s pointed out, the ])re-historic ])e(jple who lived in their Swiss jtthlillxniliii, althoiigli in tiieir Stone Period, ])ossessed domesticateil Hniniids, cidtivated cereals, niisetl ilax, and practised the arts of spinning und weaving. " (Jn the other hand, the iron-using Katlir and Hottentot aie in general culture actually below, instead of above, the standard uttaiued by the Itronze-using Mexican and Peruvian.* " .Mr. Ilodder Westropp has propo.sod to connect the earlier, or chipped Stone Periofl (I'aheolithic), with the liunting phase; the later, or rul>l)ed Stone Period (Neolithic), wiih the hi-rilsman phase; and the Bronze Period with the agricultural plia.se of I tie." ' Noll Hintoric Tiiiien in " QimiU'rly * K. H. Tylor, " Traii8acti(inii Iiitcr- Itfvifw," A|inl, 1870, J) 4:!5. iintioiml Coiii^'i-. J'ro liitt. Aiclueolugy,"

• For more ainjilo iiarticnlnrn of IIh'mi Im'.H pp. 13, II.

ciiltiiro iK;rio«U. »>f« livnim" "Anci<Mit * llo.Mor M. Wi-Htropp, " Pre lliatorio 8tonn liiipltujcntA of (Mtiit IJiilain," pp riinjti-ji. H<li & DiMy, 1872. 1-12.