THERE are four principal theories as to the Bronze age. According to some archaeologists, the discovery, or introduction, of bronze was unattended by any other great or sudden change in the condition of the people; but was the result, and is the evidence of a gradual and peaceable development. Some attribute the bronze arms and implements, found in Northern Europe, to the Roman armies, some to the Phoenician merchants; while others, again, consider that the men of the Stone age were replaced by a new and more civilized people of Indo-European race, coming from the East; who, bringing with them a knowledge of bronze, overran Europe, and dispossessed—in some places entirely destroying—the original, or rather the earlier inhabitants.

It is not, indeed, necessary to suppose that the introduction of bronze should have been effected everywhere in the same manner; so far, for instance, as Switzerland and Ireland are concerned, Dr. Keller and Sir W. R. Wilde may be quite right in considering that the so-called “primitive” population did not belong to a different race from that subsequently characterised by the use of bronze.

Still, though it is evident that the knowledge of bronze must necessarily have been preceded by the separate use of copper and of tin; yet no single implement of the latter metal has been hitherto found in Europe, while those of copper are extremely rare. Hungary and Ireland, indeed, have been supposed to form partial exceptions to this rule. The geographical position of the former country is probably a sufficient explanation; and as far as Ireland is concerned, it may perhaps be worth while to examine how far that country really forms an exception.