42 THE MAMKACTUKK oK IIIK TKKoWATTA, 



2. EVIDENCE OF THE HAMMER-STONES. 



It seems easy enough to discern a hammer-stone- Rutot 

 has so well described the marks produced by blows that 

 it seems almost ridiculous to be in doubt whether a stone 

 is a hammer-atone or not. Yeb, if we collect a large num- 

 ber of specimens considered to be hammer-stones, we per- 

 ceive at once that the matter is by no means so easy. The 

 definition of the hammer-stone requires that it should be 

 actively used, but we. find specimens which show, from the 

 position of the marks of blows, that they could not possibly 

 have been used actively, but that they were subjected to 

 blows, in other words, used passively, and that they, there- 

 fore, cannot represent hammer-stones. Marks of blows 

 alone do not characterise a stone as a hammer-stone, a fact 

 that has been conclusively proved by the study of a large 

 number of specimens. 



A stone showing marks of blows may be — 



(1) A true hammer-stone. 



(2) A tested pseudo-nucleus. 



(3) A sacred stone. 



(4) An anvil-stone. 



The great difference between these four groups is obvious, 

 yet it is not always possible to say to which group a cer- 

 tain specimen belongs, so imperceptibly are they merging 

 into each other. It may, perhaps, be possible to discern 

 in future between the marks of active and passive blows, 

 that is, to know whether a specimen showing marks of 

 blows was activelv used as a hammer stone, or passively 

 subjected to blows as an object stone, but for the present 

 there is no criterion to discern these marks. 



There are, however, other features which will assist 

 us to discern tmc hammer-stones. It is almost pretty 

 certain that in order to break a larger boulder of siliceous 

 rock, no other than diabase pebbles were employed. This 

 seems a priori very probable- Diabase is a tough rock, 

 chert, hornstone. or the other siilceous rocks' used in the 

 manufacture of tero-watt? .ire brittle, and break easilv. 

 If, therefore, a siliceous rock were used as hammer, in order 

 to break another siliceous rock, it might happen t)ir\t tli? 

 hammer, but not the object-stone broke. 



It is. therefore, more than probable that all those 



