General Pitt Rivers suggests a question, whether the implements found at Cissbury belong to the Neolithic or Palæolithic age, and seems almost to regard the distinction between the implements of those two ages as founded merely on the minor point of whether they are chipped simply, or also polished. The associated fauna in this case is however purely Neolithic or, as Professor Boyd Dawkins would call it, Pre-historic; and whatever may be the case with a few of the specimens which resemble in form implements from the River Drift, the greater number are unmistakeably of forms such as are constantly found polished, and are undoubtedly Neolithic. Indeed, as already stated, a portion of at all events one polished specimen has been found in one of the |81| pits. I need not, however, dwell longer on the circumstances of this discovery, nor on the speculations to which it may give rise, but will proceed to give illustrations of a few of the forms of implements found at Cissbury, referring for others to the memoirs already cited. A fine series of the implements has been presented to the Christy Collection, now in the British Museum. * * * * * One of the most highly-finished forms, of which, in all, a considerable number were found, is a long, narrow instrument, as shown in Fig. 26. So narrow and pointed are they, that General Pitt Rivers thought that they may have been intended to be used with the pointed end as spear-heads. Such instruments, however, are occasionally found with the broad end ground to an edge. It is also to be observed that this circular edge is generally more carefully chipped into form than the pointed butt, and was therefore considered of more importance. [Illustration: Fig. 26.—Cissbury. 1∕2] [Illustration: Fig. 27.—Cissbury. 1∕2] Another specimen is figured in the _Archæologia_;[306] and a narrow flint celt of this character, 5 1∕4 inches long, found with a larger celt in a barrow in Hampshire,[307] is in the British Museum. Another rough-hewn celt is shown in Fig. 27. Like several others, both from Cissbury and Spiennes, the two ends are almost similar in form, so that it is difficult to say at which extremity the cutting edge was intended to be. Possibly it was found convenient to fashion some of the |82| implements, in the first instance, into this comparatively regular oval contour, and subsequently to chip an edge at whichever end seemed best adapted for the purpose. This instrument is not unlike that from the Forest of Bere, Fig. 25. Another from Cissbury, with more parallel sides, has been figured.[308] Others from the same place are like Figs. 16, 17, and 23, and like Fig. 35, though not ground at the edge. [Illustration: Fig. 28.—Cissbury. 1∕2] [Illustration: Fig. 29.—Cissbury. 1∕2]