STONE AGE IN NEW JERSEY. 2G3 



writer forwardetf to Sir J. Lubbock, that arcbteologist writes: "The 

 polished as about which you inquire is very similar, as you suppose, 

 to the one figured in Prehistoric Times, so much so, indeed, that I had 

 placed it in a drawer with similar axes from various other parts of the 

 world to show how much they are alike." 



While this form (figure 23) is usually of porphyry and highly polished, 

 it is sometimes met with of softer mineral, and the specimen in question 

 is peculiarly interesting on this account ; for, although of the tapering 

 form, and accurately outlined, it is of sandstone, and pecked into shape, 

 having a highly-i)olished edge only, instead of being so worked over 

 the whole surface. 



We have ventured to call figure 25 a "celt," rather than a " skin dressei," 

 because the cutting-edge varies decidedly in its character from the gen- 

 eral run of " skinning-knives." The edge, it will be seen, is narrow, and 

 slopes suddenly from the thickest portion of the implement, and is not 

 produced by a gradual slope from the back of the instrument, as in the 

 majority of so-called skin-dressers, or skinning-knives. There may, per- 

 Jiaps, be no sufiQcient reason for calling figure 25 a celt, since its size cer- 

 tainly precludes the idea of its utilization for chopping, unless for very 

 slender and tender marrow-bones 5 but we have a good example to follow 

 in so doing, as we shall see. 



Sir John Lubbock,* in some " Notes on Stone Implements from Africa 

 and Syria," gives natural-size figures of stone axes, which certainly are 

 identical in shape, and have been used, no doubt, in an identical manner. 

 The author says, with reference to them : " Some of the West African 

 axes, as will be seen by the figures, (plate ii, figures 1 and 2,) closely re- 

 semble some of the smaller axes so common in Western Europe;" and 

 adds, as we have already observed of the preceding jiattern, "Indeed, 

 this type may be said to be cosmopolitan, and needs no description." 



We find that Sir John Lubbock simply uses the term "ax" in speaking 

 of these African relics, and if it is applicable in the one case it is in the 

 other, but unless the term is properly applied to implements that cannot 

 be made to cut in any useful manner, which is not the case, the designa- 

 tion is certainly a misnomer. 



Figure 2G may properly be placed in the same " class" with the pre- 

 ceding. Although a much less finished specimen, it was unquestionably 

 put to the same uses. It is made of a fine-grained porphyritic stone, and 

 has been polished over its entire surface. This little " celt" measures two 

 and one-eighth inches in length by one and three-quarters in width. The 

 cutting (or skin-detaching^) edge was originally good. The back has a 

 ridge running obliquely across it, from which the surfaces slope at an 

 angle of forty-five de^^'ees. Had this specimen been used as a wedge 

 for splitting wood, certainly the back was not favorably fashioned for 

 receivinga hard blow; moreover, the ridge, which in that case would have 



*Joiiru. Authrop. lust., Loudon, vol. 1, paj^e xcii, plate 11, lij^ures 1 and 2, (Etii. 

 See. Proes.) 



