BY FRITZ NOKTLINU, M.A., PH.D. -5 



thickness, and was, therefore, unhandy- In most cases the 

 external flakes will have been submitted to this process, 

 fvhile the internal flakes, which were mostly ot smaller 

 thickness, did not require further reduction. 



The trimming of the Indical face was invariably car- 

 ried out in such a wav that the blows were directed from 

 the Pollical towards the Indical face, but never m the r^ 

 verse way. This is another essential feature m the manu- 

 facture of the tero-watta, and R. M. Johnston (1) was the 

 first who drew attention to this fact. There is no doubt 

 that a good deal of unnecessary controversy in discussing 

 the nature of the European archpeolithes would ha.ve been 

 avoided had Johnston's observation not been entirely over- 

 looked. The fact he established as far back as 1888 had to 

 be' rediscovered, so to say, by Verworn (2) in 1908- 



When the Indical face was trimmed it apparently hap- 

 pened cot unfrequently that the blows did not have the 

 desired effect. If it became impossible to reduce the thick- 

 ness, the flake was rejected, no matter how much work had 

 already been spent on it. One of the finest instances of 

 this type that has come to my notice is the magnificent 

 specimen found at Mona Vale. Its large thickness, 78 

 mm., and its weight of 3Mb., make it a most unwieldly tool, 

 and it would require a giant's hand to grip and handle 

 it (3). 



Now, I observed that every time, when a tero-watta 

 showed great thickness, the sides of the Indical face formed 

 an angle of SOdeg. to 90deg. with the Pollical face, while in 

 those whose Indical face was well wrought the sides formed 

 an angle of 45des'. to 60deg. with the Pollical face. This 

 observation further confirms the view expounded in a previ 

 ous paper that the effective angle under which the blow 

 must strike the rock must be about 45deg. If it was impos- 

 ■sible to direct the blows at this anffle. it was also impossible 

 to detach further flakes, thus reducing the thickness of the 

 tero-watta, and the specimen was rejected as useless- G-ener- 

 ally speaking, these( unused rejects can be recognised by a 

 saw-like edge, showing noi marks of use. 



(1) Geology of Tasmania, 334. 



(2) Ein objectives Kriterium fuer die Beurtellung der Manufactnatur 

 geschlagener Feuersteine, Zeitscli, f. Ethnol, Heft. 4, 1908, pags 548 (page 

 555). 



'3) The weiglit of this specimen appears more striking still if we 

 hear in mind that 74.6 per cent, of tero-watta weigh under 8 ounces, 

 while only 1.3 per cent, weigh more than 31b. 



