Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 October 2013
In 1931 I described two newly-discovered stone age industries of post-glacial age situated in north-east Ireland which had been made by myself and worked in conjunction with my friend C. Blake Whelan: the one from the Lower Estuarine Clay on Islandmagee, and the other from what is probably a fluviatile gravel intercalated between the Upper and Lower Estuarine Clays in the raised-beach formation at Cushendun.
The former of these cultures has its counterpart in the blade industry beneath alluvium in the Orwell Estuary at Ipswich, Suffolk; whilst the latter finds its parallel in the raised-beach at Campbeltown in Argyllshire, Scotland. Adopting the familiar culture-sequence of Central Europe I had previously designated these two groups as phases of the Magdalenian period, but, in order to avoid confusion between the time-periods and the nomenclature of continental cultures, I have decided to base my chronology of the north Irish industries upon the natural changes of climate revealed by a study of the deposits in which they were found. The industries to be described below were contemporary with the Mesolithic Forest Cultures distinguished by Childe and Clark over the plain of northern Europe.
page 366 note 1 Burchell, , Proc. Preh. Soc. East Anglia, 1931, vol., vi., pt. 4, pp. 270–281Google Scholar.
page 366 note 2 Ibid., pp. 282-7.
page 366 note 3 Moir, , Proc. Preh. Soc. East Anglia, 1930, vol., vi., pt. 3, pp. 212–216Google Scholar.
page 366 note 4 Breuil, , Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scot., 1921–1922, vol. viii, ser. 5, pp. 261–5Google Scholar.
page 366 note 5 Childe, , Journ. Roy. Anthr. Inst., 1931, vol. lxi, pp. 325–348Google Scholar.
page 366 note 6 Clark, , Journ. Roy. Anthr. Inst., 1934, vol. lxiv, pp. 119–124Google Scholar.
page 366 note 7 Burchell, , Nature, 1932, 14th May, p. 726CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
page 369 note 1 Erdtman, , Geol. For. Stockholm, 1928, p. 163Google Scholar.
page 369 note 2 Letter to Burchell.
page 369 note 3 Praeger, , Reported in Mem. Geol. Survey, Belfast, 1904, p. 81Google Scholar.
page 369 note 4 Ibid., p. 80.
page 369 note 5 Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 1896, vol., iv., ser. 3, p. 47Google Scholar.
page 369 note 6 Anderson, , Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scot., 1895, vol. v, ser. 3, pp. 211–230Google Scholar.
page 370 note 1 Erdtman, , Geol. For. Stockholm, 1928, p. 163Google Scholar.
page 370 note 2 Burchell, , Proc. Preh. Soc. East Anglia, 1931, vol. vi, pt. 4, pp. 282–7Google Scholar.
page 370 note 3 Breuil, , Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scot., 1921–1922, vol. viii, ser. 5, pp. 261–5Google Scholar.
page 370 note 4 Praeger, , Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 1896, vol. iv, ser. 3, p. 81Google Scholar.
page 370 note 5 Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 1904, vol. xxv, section C, pp. 190–2Google Scholar.
Burchell, , Proc. Preh. Soc. East Anglia, 1931, vol. vi, pt. 4, p. 290Google Scholar, fig. 45.
page 370 note 6 Burchell, , Proc. Preh. Soc. East Anglia, 1931, vol. vi, pt. 4, pp. 286–295Google Scholar.
page 370 note 7 Ibid. pp. 296-300, and Addendum to present paper.
page 370 note 8 Praeger, , Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 1896, vol. iv, ser. 3, p. 51Google Scholar.
page 370 note 9 Burchell, , Proc. Preh. Soc. East Anglia, 1931, vol. vi, pt. 4, pp. 295–8Google Scholar.
Traill, , Mem. Geol. Survey, 1886, Ballymena, Glenarm, etc., p. 21Google Scholar.
Burchell, loc. cit. p. 295 and Pl xxv.
page 371 note 1 Praeger, , Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 1904, vol. xxv, section C, pp. 190–1Google Scholar.
Knowles, , Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., vols. i, iii, and iv, ser. 3, pp. 173, 650 and 331Google Scholar respectively.
page 371 note 2 Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 1901–1902, vol. vi, ser. 3, pp. 336–7Google Scholar.
