In the County of Herts., gravel is worked for road metal in many places, and in 1915, when staying at Harpenden, I was able to give some attention to a spot not far from that place, already known to me from descriptions in Evans' “Stone Implements,” and Worthington Smith's “Primeval Man,” viz., No Man's Common.

This common extends over the face of a shallow valley, now dry, which as Sir J. Evans (“Ancient Stone Implements,” p. 602) remarks, was formerly the course of a stream, either the Lea itself or one of its branches. Two sections have been opened at this spot, one superficial, the other deep and extensive. It is from the latter—from which an immense amount of gravel has been removed—that I obtained the implements described in this paper. The common lies about a mile south of Wheathampstead.

In the autumn of 1913, Mr. T. C. Cantrill, F.G.S., of the Geological Survey, drew the writer's attention to the possibility of finding flint artefacts in the surface soils of Hinckley and neigh-bourhood wherever the chalky boulder clays and gravels were in evidence. During his survey of the drift in this district in that and the following year, he himself found a lozenge-shaped scraper (No. 163, Plate LXVIII) in a field at Sapcote, and also five spalls of unmistakable human origin in other neighbouring localities.

In the winter of that year, Mr. F. C. Grimes and I began a systematic search which by the following spring had resulted in sufficient material to encourage us to further efforts, and the following notes are the result of a by no means exhaustive survey during that and the two following winters.

The experiments on which these notes were made were undertaken to clear up a little of the mystery which has been thrown around the subject by well-meaning but not always chemically-minded people. Much has been said lately on the necessity for prehistorians being also geologists, but it is perhaps too much to ask that they shall, in addition, be chemists. But a very little knowledge of chemistry would have averted some of the blunders and misstatements met with on the patination problem. These notes contain no really original idea, but were made on experiments proving what to most chemists are well-known facts. The experiments were carried out in the brief intervals of routine work in a very busy laboratory, unfitted with any special re-agents or apparatus for the work.

Silica is, chemically speaking, the dioxide of the element silicon, a body which does not appear to exist in a free state in nature, and which can only be brought into a free or elementary state by some what tedious laboratory processes.

The present position of the science of prehistoric research in England cannot be said to be satisfactory. New and important discoveries are continually being made, and for some years past there has been a marked awakening of interest in this highly important subject. But this rejuvenescence has been accompanied by endless dissensions and disputations amongst archaeologists, and though by the fire of controversy truth is revealed, yet a dispassionate observer would marvel at the utter divergence of the views expressed, and conclude that the foundations upon which prehistorians wish to build are in a very shaky and unsound condition. And in the opinion of the author the dispassionate observer would be right. It would be regarded by any ordinary person as unthinkable that an engineer, for instance, should be unfamiliar with the exact nature of the materials with which he works, and the manner in which these materials fracture. One can imagine the great divergence of opinion which would be shown at meetings of engineering societies were such ignorance of fundamental facts present. And what is true of engineering is true equally of all real science. Now what is the position regarding flint, which is the raw material of most prehistorical research ?

Mr. H. St. Geo. Gray's excavations at Avebury under the auspices of a Committee of the British Association, have shown that the famous vallum, fosse, and circle had their origin at the end of the Neolithic or beginning of the Bronze Age.

One mile N.W. of Avebury stands Windmill Hill. It may well have been to Avebury what the civil town of Old Sarum and its fortifications were to the clergy and the cathedral. The summit is surrounded by the remains of a rampart, which, however, may not truly deserve that title. For along most of its length it has the appearance of a bank only, supporting the flat platform of the hill top. A trench, recently made in connection with a water supply, failed to disclose any trace of a ditch below the bank at that spot. This, it is true, was overlooking the steeper side of the hill. There were probably other defensive banks on the lower slopes of the hill. Many round barrows stand upon the hill, some within, but most without the camp. Not far from the hill, at Winterbourne Monkton, stood a long barrow, destroyed, alas, some years ago, by a farmer.

In the Proceedings for 1915–16, Vol. II., p. 230, evidence was given which seems to show that the chipped flints of Windmill Hill, Avebury, belong to the Neolithic and Bronze Ages. Thirtynine implements were illustrated, bearing very close resemblance to specimens from Grime's Graves, illustrated in the Report; and showing that the same types were made, and that the same style of workmanship prevailed at both sites. The conclusion was drawn that Grime's Graves is not earlier than the Neolithic Age.

In the Proceedings for 1916–17, Vol. II., p. 339, in an important paper, Mr. W. G. Clarke gave other evidence supporting the view of a Neolithic date for Grime's Graves.

In the present paper, further evidence is brought forward pointing to Neolithic (and Bronze Age) dates for the Windmill Hill flints, and, therefore, also, for Grime's Graves; by reason, as aforesaid, of the close resemblance between the chipped flints from the two sites.

The longest, best preserved, and best known of the early trackways of Norfolk, Peddar's Way can still be traced, with one or two doubtful sections, from Holme-next-the-Sea, near Hunstanton, in a south-easterly direction to Blackwater, the ford of the Little Ouse between Rushford and Riddlesworth, and thence for a few miles into Suffolk. Notwithstanding that most of this course is marked on the Ordnance Survey maps, that it was correctly given by Samuel Woodward in 1830, and that a pedestrian who essays (as I have done) to walk the fifty miles of this most interesting primitive route can have little doubt that it is correctly indicated, yet in 1872 it was referred to as the “Roman road which leads from Brancaster to Swaffham,” in 1904 as going from Brancaster to Castleacre, Swaffham, Ickburgh and Brandon, and thence to Exning, Bishop's Stortford and Stratford-le-Bow, while in 1908 § it was stated that it connected “the two Branodunums, that to the south, now Brandon, with that to the north, now Brancaster.” Of the various places mentioned Castleacre is the only one on its course.

Primitive man is now being studied from so many standpoints that a comprehensive grasp of the whole subject is fast becoming an impossibility; but in view of the increase of conflicting evidence, every opportunity should be taken of adjusting rival claims, and testing our results by comparison with the more elaborate classifications of the Continent. In the present paper no verdict is given, but evidence is collected so fully in agreement with certain results obtained across the Channel, that there is a prima facie case for the revision of certain general principles that are in danger of lapsing into dogma.

The well-known brick-earth deposits of Crayford, in Kent (forming part of the so-called 50-ft., or middle terrace of the Thames), have for many years yielded flint implements of Mousterian type, and more recently (1910-12) I have succeeded in finding the cores from which such implements were struck.

In the closing decades of the last century long, slender knives of fine quality flint were abundant, but since the writer first came to have the pits under observation (in 1903) implements of all kinds have been rare, and many winters go by with only the discovery of a few simple flakes.

References up till 1889 are given in the “Geology of London,” and, in 1905, Messrs. Hinton and Kennard brought them up to date in their paper on “The Relative Ages of the Stone Implements of the Lower Thames Valley,” This valuable paper was the first to attribute the characteristic Crayford implement to the Mousterian period, on account of the similarity in workmanship to those from Le Moustier.

This question has been discussed at length by Mr. F. N. Haward in two papers published in the “Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia,” and if I have understood his views correctly, he holds the opinion that there is not at present any evidence in existence in favour of the pre-Palæolithic antiquity of man. Such a conclusion, in view of the large number of thoughtful archæologists and others who think otherwise, is somewhat startling, and, if well founded, of undoubted importance. It seems to be necessary, therefore, to examine the scientific data upon which Mr. Haward bases his conclusions.

My first paper on flint implements in Cornwall dealt with those of Booby Bay and Dinas Head, adjoining Trevose Head, near the famous cemetery at Harlyn Bay. Mention was made of the fact that prisms and cones of regular shape, and long thin flakes, occur there, and also at the inland site on the shore of Dozmare Pool. In both cases, pygmy flints are found with the flakes and cores. On the coast sites, however, scrapers are rare (at Booby Bay they are absent); whilst at Dozmare Pool they are numerous. They are both short and long at this site. The latter are sometimes formed on quite narrow blades. The facets are almost always grey. On the coast the chipped flints are sometimes grey, but are more often white, owing to exposure by the weathering away of the superincumbent soil.

Both on the coast sites and at Dozmare Pool the flint tools are made from shore pebbles. Local ideas sometimes attribute the presence of these pebbles on the shore to the casting out of ballast from coasting ships. It is evident that they are in reality remains from the Tertiary beds of West Cornwall, which have now almost vanished, though a section may still be seen near S. Erth.

I must apologise for again addressing you on the subject of Grime's Graves. My work, however, has kept me in a practically flintless country, and I have been unable to accumulate any fresh material except of Roman date. Although the villa we have been excavating in our spare time is very interesting it is not an appropriate subject for the Prehistoric Society.

Owing to the kindness of the Trustees of the Weeting Estate, Mrs. T. S. Hall and Mr. C. Cockburn, we were able to do some fresh work at Grime's Graves in 1916, and on behalf of those who took part in it I wish to express our cordial appreciation for the permission.

I was associated in the work of last year, 1916, with Mr. A. Leslie Armstrong, F.S.A. (Scot.), and Mr. and Mrs. E. T. Lingwood, and the pieces exhibited are some of the best and most interesting things which came to light during this work.

In the last number of our Proceedings (Vol. II., Part 3) our President, Mr. Reginald Smith, F.S.A., communicated a paper on “Plateau Deposits and Implements,” in which he produced facts to show that the Plateau Gravels are not sterile, as has hitherto been supposed. He cites in this paper two spots within a few miles of my centre at Rotherfield Peppard, viz., Blagrave's Farm, 1½ miles N.W. of Caversham Bridge, 149-ft. above the Thames, and Highlands Farm, 1 mile S.E. of Rotherfield Greys Church, 170-ft. above the river.

During the last few years I have searched the pits and surface within a wide radius of Peppard, and have been fortunate in finding some implements, forming the subject of this paper, which are certainly of Palæolithic date. The whole of the ground in this neighbourhood is mapped as either Plateau gravel or clay with flints—the former forming a wide spread over this part of the high Chiltern country, as may be seen on the model in the Museum of Practical Geology, Jermyn Street, London. I have not yet succeeded in finding any palæoliths in situ, but have found series of edge-trimmed flakes and chipped forms of rostro-carinate type, which will be included in another paper.

It has always appeared to me that if any real advance in our knowledge of early man is to be made, it is essential that the sequence of events during the Pleistocene period must be known, but judging from recent literature the prevalent ideas as to this succession are decidedly nebulous. Some years ago Prof. Penck drew up a scheme of Pleistocene chronology based on stratigraphical Alpine evidence which may or may not have been correctly interpreted. Instead of checking this Teutonic theory by English evidence the theory was generally accepted, and various authors have since tried to squeeze the English facts into the German theory with the result that there is no agreement between them, and it is self-evident that either the facts are, or the theory is, wrong. The custom has been far too prevalent in this country of accepting German scientific work at the author's valuation, and it cannot be too strongly insisted upon that German science has all the inherent defects of modern German thought. Classical archæology has thrown off the yoke of German theories based on preconceived ideas. Is it too much to hope that Prehistoric archæology may soon attain freedom? After all even a Geheimrath can err, and there is no room in science for ex cathedra opinions.

When strolling beside the Wharfe near Burley, Yorkshire, in 1897, a small stone axe, 3¼ in. by 1⅝ in., was found in the river amidst a heap of sandy clay, partly submerged, at a point where recent floods had undermined the bank. The importance of this find was not then fully appreciated; indeed, the unusual shape of the axe caused it to be looked upon with a degree of suspicion, even suggesting thoughts of “Flint Jack,” though without any adequate grounds. After cleaning it and recording the circumstances of discovery, for a time it occupied a place in a drawer of implements, but was ultimately relegated to one of more general specimens, there to remain forgotten until accidentally turned over a year or two ago, when its true quality was at last recognised.

The site which is described in the following paper was discovered by Mr. E. Payton, B.A., of Hambleden, Bucks., in May, 1913, and I had hoped to have his co-operation in describing it and the fine series of implements which he and Mrs. Payton (members of this Society) and I have accumulated from it. The war, however, has prevented Mr. Payton from carrying out his portion of the task, and I shall, therefore, include a description of some, only of my own pieces, hoping that the fine series now deposited by Mr. and Mrs. Payton in the Hambleden Museum will be described and illustrated later on, and amplify the large list of pieces now recorded.

I have chosen for the subject of my address a description of the excavations carried out at Grime's Graves by Mr. A. Leslie Armstrong and myself in the autumn of 1915. The work consisted in the digging over of four new floors, a description of which will form the main part of my paper. We also re-examined the mass of material left on three of the older floors excavated in 1914, viz., 3, 4, and 13, and devoted some time to searching the field which lies to the west of the plantation, which, in spite of many years' examination, still yields quantities of new implements. I have included, too, a description of some of the implements from a zone near Botany Bay, from which, in 1914, I obtained a number of pieces. This station lies about a mile on the Brandon side of the plantation, and is probably the ploughed-over site of some pits of similar date.

Owing to the kindness of some members of the Society, viz., Messrs. W. G. Clarke, H. H. Halls, R. H. Chandler, and the Rev. H. G. O. Kendall, I have been able to figure and describe a number of fine implements which clearly belong to the same culture—found either on the field or on the surface of the Graves, and these, together with various specimens found on these spots by Mr. Armstrong and myself, are dealt with separately.

For many years it was postulated that an ice sheet had covered the north and west of Great Britain during the period when Palæolithic man lived and made his flint implements in the south and east of England. It was taught that the southern margin of this ice sheet corresponded in the main with an imaginary line stretching from about the mouth of the Severn to the Wash, or, as others claimed, from the mouth of the Severn to the mouth of the Thames. These views were held to be supported by the fact that very few palæoliths had been found north of the above-mentioned line. As years passed, however, new facts testifying to the lengthy duration of the Palæolithic period slowly accumulated, and knowledge respecting the great Ice Age gradually increased. True, many and divergent views have been advanced respecting the several phases of the Ice Age as these concern Lancashire and the north of England generally. Some glacialists hold that the Ice Age there, as also in the Alps, was broken up into several complete cycles consisting of a number of glaciations with a corresponding number of interglacial periods. Others believe that there was only one interglacial period in the north of England.