PALAEOLITHIC RACES 509 



natives, that were it not for the different stone they are chipped 

 from, it would be hardly possible to distinguish them." 1 



Since then Prof. Tylor has been led to believe that an even 

 closer resemblance can be traced between the so-called plateau 

 implements and the Tasmanian. This is a view which has also 

 recommended itself to M. Rutot. 2 If this could be established it 

 would invest the Tasmanian implements with peculiar interest. 



The plateau " implements " are so called because they are 

 found in gravels capping the high plateaux of Kent and else- 

 where. They were first discovered by Mr. B. Harrison, of 

 Ightham, who brought them before the notice of Sir Joseph 

 Prestwich ; and this observer, famous for the caution and 

 sagacity of his judgment, expressed in unqualified terms his 

 conviction that they showed signs of the handiwork of man. 

 Sir John Evans, a fellow-worker with Prestwich, and equally 

 distinguished for his acumen and insight, was unable, however, 

 to share this opinion, and at present the question is involved 

 in the raging vortex of the " eolith " controversy. 



The plateau gravels are no doubt very ancient ; they lie at 

 a higher level than any of the existing river terraces, and cannot 

 be referred to any of the existing river systems. Prestwich 

 spoke of them as glacial or pre-glacial ; M. Rutot assigns them 

 to the Pliocene. 



The question as regards the " implements " is an extremely 

 difficult one. A great number of the Tasmanian forms are so 

 rude and uncouth that, taken alone, we should have little reason 

 to suspect that they had been chipped by man; some, on the 

 other hand, show signs of skilful working, and leave us in no 

 doubt. It is on these last that our judgment should be based 

 in a study of the Tasmanian art. As to the rest, " noscitur e 

 sodis." They are distinguished by two very definite characters. 

 In the first place their fundamental form is that of a flake 

 which has been split off from a larger fragment. They never 

 commence their existence as fragments already existing in 

 a natural state. And next, the finer dressing of the stone is 

 always confined to one face; if a boucher, there is one face 

 obtained by a single blow which detached it from the parent 

 mass, and an opposite face with secondary flaking ; if a scraper, 



1 Jonm. Afithr. Inst. 1895, vol. xxiv. p. 336. 



2 A. Rutot, " La Fin de la Question des Flolithes," Bull. Soc. Geo!. Belg. 1907, 

 xxi. p. 211. 



