^{page 443 note 1} In the fragment of trench first excavated (supra, p. 440) the sterile layer would seem to have been caused by a similar slide from the wall.

^{page 446 note 1} Similar to that from the ditch of Wor Barrow. Pitt-Rivers, Excavations in Cranborne Chase, ii, p. 260, fig. 2.

^{page 449 note 1} A similar treatment of bone by sawing longitudinal furrows occurs on piecas of articular extremities of limb-bones of elk and the like from the moss-finds of Denmark. Part of the metacarpal of a red deer and of a tibia of elk from Maglemose (Aarbøgar, 1903, Pp. 237–8, figs. 25–6) and twelve examples from Sværdborg (Mém. Soc. Ant. Nord, 1926–7, p. 114, fig. 63) are regarded as debris from the manufacture of bone points, but neither the material nor the condition admits of such an explanation for the worked antlers from Abingdon.

Two imperfect combs like those from Abingdon were, however, found by Mortimer in barrows at Garton Slack (Forty Γiars, fig. 717) and at Huggate (ibid., fig. 929). The first of these was submitted to Sir John Evans, who pronounced it to have been a comb. As from the decoration of the pottery we know that these early inhabitants were able to make cord-like material—and were even perhaps able to weave—these combs were probably used like the Late-Celtic combs for teasing out wool or other fibrous material.

^{page 450 note 1} As in pottery from Wiltshire and Gloucestershire, Arch., xlii, 19$, and Wilts. Arch. Mag., xxxvi, 305–6.

^{page 451 note 1} This same process has been observed in the Saxon pottery found at Sutton Courteney (Archacologia, lxxiii, 178). That pottery too was of a primitive type and ordinarily very indifferently fired. Its slight superiority to the neolithic ware is shown by the greater whiteness and toughness produced by this secondary firing.

^{page 452 note 1} These sections should be compared and contrasted with those from Fengate (Antiq. Journ., ii, 232, fig. 12).

^{page 452 note 2} Cp. Norton Bavant (Archaeologia, xlii, 195, fig. 4); Isle of Arran (P.S.A. Scot., xxxvi, figs. 6, 10, 17, 34); Sandhill, Dún Droma (R. A. S. Macalister, Ireland in pre-Celtic Times, fig. 74).

^{page 453 note 1} It may be compared with the vase from Largie, Argyll (Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., xxxvi, 135, fig. 51).

^{page 455 note 1} This vase serves to corroborate Mr. Cunnington's dating of the remarkable specimen from Crendon, Bucks. (Stourhead Collection, Devizes Museum,’ Wilts. Arch. Mag., xxvi, 3 17). Except for some slight variations it might well be the upper half of the Crendon vase, which is obviously modelled on two vases, the one half inserted in the mouth of the other. Nor does the resemblance stop at this point. In reply to a request for details, Mrs. Cunnington has kindly sent me the following particulars: ‘Height, 11 in. ; rim diameter, 6½ in. The paste in fracture is a blackish grey and fairly fine. It is mixed with sand (I think); at least it has specks of an angular whitish material (quartz ?) and grains of mica. I doubt very much if the ornament is actually cord-impression, the individual depressions are too angular.’

^{page 455 note 2} Cp. Bicker's Houses, Isle of Bute (Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., xxxvii (1903), 26, fig. 4).

^{page 455 note 3} Cp. Glecknabae, Isle of Bute (ibid., 48, figs. 20–21), and the Largie vase (supra, p. 453, n. 1).

^{page 456 note 1} Cp. Glecknabae. Isle of Bute (Proc. Soc. Ant. Soc., xxxvi (1902), 108, fig. 35).

^{page 456 note 2} Hoernes-Menghin, Urgeschichte der bildenden Kunst, 3^e Aufl., p. 717–18.

^{page 456 note 3} Forty Γears, 102, figs. 248–9.

^{page 456 note 4} Examples are:— Dorset: Handley Hill, Pitt-Rivers, op. cit., pi. 294, 14; pl. 298, 4. Wilts.: Norton Bavant, supra, p. 452, n. 2 ; Kingston Deverill, Abercromby, B.A.P., ii, fig. 465 ; Knap Hill, Wilts. Arch. Mag., xxxvii, 61, pl. nos. 13–15 ; Lanhill Barrow, ibid., xxxvi, 305 ; Wexcombe Down, Proc. Soc. Ant., 2 s., xxxi, 90, fig. 5 ; and many other sites represented by fragments in Devizes and other museums. Gloucs.: Eyford, Crawford, The Long Barrows of the Cotswolds, 96 ; and many other barrows (see Index under Pottery, passim). Bucks.: Crendon, supra, p. 455, n. I. Somerset: near Cheddar, Excavations at Chelm's Combe, Cheddar (Somerset Arch, and N. H. Soc), 18, figs, viii and ix; Yorks., East Riding: Mortimer, op. cit., figs. 14, 15, 65. Ireland: Dún Droma, co. Louth, supra, p. 452, n. 2. Lame, Ashmolean Museum (Antrim Coll.) 1886, 5710; Scotland: Arran, Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., xxxvi, 66 seq., figs. 6, 10, 12 ?, 17, 30–31?; Bute: ibid., xxxviii, 17 seq., figs. 4–7, 20–21 ; Argyll: Auchnacree, Abercromby, B.A.P., i, pl. XLII, 214a; Largie, Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., xxxvi, 137, fig. 51. Wales: Port Darfach, Abercromby, B.A.P., ii, fig. 268 (a derived type with Bronze Age ornament). The Scotch and Irish group present some peculiar, evidently local, features.

^{page 457 note 1} Archaeologia, lxii, 352 seq., and Antiq. Journ., ii, 220 seq.

^{page 457 note 2} Surrey: Wisley, Journal, iv, 41. R. Thames: Mortlake, Archaeologia, lxii, pl. xxxvii, fig. 3, and British Museum; Putney, Antiq. Journ., iv, 15, pl. xxxviii, 2 ; Hedsor, Antiq. Journ., i, 316; Mongewell, Archaeologia, lxii, pl. xxxviii, 2–3 ; Wandsworth, ibid., Ixix, 11, fig. 9; Hammersmith, British and London Museums. Dorset: Wor Barrow and Handley Hill, Pitt-Rivers, loc. cit., pl. 261, 10, 11, 15–17; pl. 294, 2, 3, 5, 11 and 13 ; and pl. 298, 8. Wilts.: West Kennet, Archaeologia, xxxviii, 418, figs. 14–17. Oxon.: Asthall, Antiq. Journ., ii, 236, fig. 15. Northants. : Astrop, Report Oxfordshire Arch. Soc., 1912, pp. 114–18 (with two plates). Gloucs.: Pole's Wood, South Barrow, Swell, Crawford, op. cit., 128. Yorks., East Riding: Mortimer, op. cit., figs. 141–2, 219 and 335 ? Northumberland : Ford Castle (two bowls), Red Scar Bridge, Ford, and Alnwick (British Museum). Sherds from Grime's Graves, Norfolk, and-Grovehurst, Kent (British Museum), belonging to plain rough pots with plain rim and a row of largish perforations below the rim, the latter found with flint implements (one a sickle-knife) and flint debris it is not easy to associate with either of the above classes (Arch. Cantiana, xiii, 122). The same holds good of sherds from Icklingham, Suffolk, found on an occupation-floor with flints (Sturge Coll., British Museum). The pottery of the two first finds can. Mr. Kendrick tells me, be exactly paralleled from Hanover.

^{page 457 note 3} J. Bateman, Vestiges, 64.–6 ; Abercromby, B.A.P., ii, pl. XLII, p. 214.

^{page 457 note 4} See V. G. Childe, The Dawn of Civilization, 292, n. 2, on a similar phenomenon in Bute.

^{page 458 note 1} Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot. loc. cit.

^{page 458 note 2} Macalister, op. cit., fig. 75.

^{page 458 note 3} Déchelette, Manuel, i, fig. 202, nos. 16 and 19.

^{page 458 note 4} Archaeologia, lxx, 219, fig. 11.

^{page 458 note 5} Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., xxxvi, 178, pl. iii, fig. 2.

^{page 458 note 6} P. du Chatellier, La poterie préhistorique, pl. 1, 3, and 8 ; viii, 7 ; and iv, passim. The hollowed necked bowl with decorated carination also appears there.

^{page 458 note 7} This occurs in a large class of decorated pottery in Brittany which is intimately connected with the Champ de Chassey group. Apart from that already noted in du Chatellier's work it has been found in large quantities by Messrs. Peycquart and le Rouzic at Er Lannic, gulf of Morbihan, and amongst it examples of the so-called ‘vases-supports’, known already by examples from Charente and from the Dolmen des Grandes Pierres, Plouhinec (du Chatellier Coll., Musée Saint-Germain), and, as is clear from the fragments figured by Déchelette (op. cit., i, fig. 208, nos. 6 and 10), even from the Camp de Chassey itself. Clearly there was, as Childe has remarked, a movement from central Europe, and that down the Loire. It was this movement rather than the so-called ‘prospectors’ which was responsible for the development of the Grand Pressigny flint, as shown by its occurrence at Er Lannic. Its effects were probably more lasting on British ceramic than even the Abingdon pottery would suggest. For it is more than likely that the highly burnished brown, black, and grey vases decorated with zigzag zones of punctuations, so different from British Bronze Age pottery, e. g. Aldbourne, Beckhampton, Camerton, etc. (Abertromby, B.A.P., ii, figs. 213–17 bis), are the counterpart in fabric and decorative style of the Er Lannic pottery and of the little highly burnished brown cup from the dolmen of Mané Hui, Carnac (du Chatellier, op. cit., pl. vii, 6), and also that in the large triangular or lozenge-shaped perforations in the Manè Hui cup or the ‘vases-supports’ lies the origin of the almost inexplicable openwork fabric of many of the incensecups of southern England. To the same movement must also be assigned six arrows, almost unquestionably of Pressigny flint and French in form, from a barrow on the boundary of Fordington and Winterbourne Came parishes, Dorset (Dorchester Museum).

^{page 458 note 1} See V. G. Childe, op. cit., 289.

^{page 458 note 2} As yet no report of Mr. Keiller's excavations has appeared, but apart from the priority of his discoveries the more southerly situation of this important site makes the title I suggest more appropriate.

^{page 459 note 1} Antiq. Journ., ii, 2,29, fig. 8.

^{page 458 note 2} The Axe Age, 13–14.

^{page 462 note 1} Cf. Windmill Hill, Wilts. Arch. Mag., xxvii, 628.