Viewing page 63 of 469

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

[[underlined]] Chapter III. [[/underlined]]
49.

would have met at a point something like 12 [[underlined]] cm. [[/underlined]] from the concave side of the tine.
These perforations had sharply defined edges which showed no signs of wear. The region between them was slightly constricted laterally. Here, owing apparently to long continued contact with a copper or bronze fitting of some sort, there was a pale bluish-green stain extending nearly around the tine but not into the perforations. This had the appearance of having been freshly exposed, as though the metal causing it had only very recently been removed. Quite possibly a workman had torn it off for its infinitesimal intrinsic value as scrap. At all events careful search failed to reveal it.
Although the object had clearly been embedded in the earth, there was nothing to indicate its original position, nor whether indeed it had formed part of the grave-furniture at all. It seemed nonetheless of interest in itself; for it was, I felt fairly certain, one of a pair of antler cheek-pieces of an early form of bit. The type, well known in Europe (27), has, so far as I know, never been reported hitherto

------------------
(27)
On the occurrence of this type of bit in Europe see, for example, V. Gordon Childe, [[underlined]] The Danube in Prehistory [[/underlined]], Oxford, 1929, p. 260; also fig. 160 (on p. 289).
In the [[underlined]] Méms. de la Soc. Royale des Antiquaires du Nord [[/underlined]] for 1902, Sophus Müller discusses antler cheek-pieces on pp. 54 and 57 [[underlined]] sq. [[/underlined]] of his paper, "Charrue, joug, et mors".
-------------------------

from China. It seemed curious to find it in proximity to well-made snaffle-bits of bronze. The European antler-bits thus far found seem to have had mouth-pieces of wood or bone, or possibly even of twisted rawhide; none, so far as I am aware, [[strikethrough]] have [[/strikethrough]] ^[[has]] had them of metal. In the present instance the metallic stain suggests that the mouth-piece was of copper or bronze. Our specimen need not have been older