RELICS OF THE STONE AGE IN NOVA SCOTIA PIERS, 41 



One incomplete specimen of the second type bears a longi- 

 tudinal groove on the flat side, extending to within nearly 2'50 

 inches of the cutting edge (Fig. 46). I have never before seen a 

 groove thus cut on a Nova Scotian implement of this kind. 

 It may have been intended to lodge the crooked portion of a 

 handle, thus gaining greater firmness, or possibly it once extended 

 so as to form a gouge at the missing end, as remarkably 

 instanced in two gouges, referred to hereafter. The latter 

 explanation, however, does not seem probable. It may be that 

 the tapered end or butt having been broken off, the groove was 

 formed in order to again haft the remaining part in the manner 

 just suggested ; otherwise the re-hafted fragment would doubtless 

 have slipped in its lashings. A short transverse groove, however, 

 would have answered the purpose, and probably could have been 

 more easily made. 



A well-formed specimen (Fig. 47) of the second type, propor- 

 tionately broader than other implements of the kind, has a boss 

 near the middle of the convex side, which would help to retain 

 the lashing in place. At the point of the butt there is a slight 

 prominence for the same purpose. This is additional evidence 

 of the adze method of hafting. An implement of the first or 

 broader type, exhibits a similar knob on the same side, near the 

 butt (Fig. 22). A gouge (Fig 63) in the collection also has two 

 well-defined bosses, one near the butt and the other near the 

 middle. One or two other gouges have slightly raised .trans verse 

 ridges for the same purpose. This indicates that some form of 

 gouges, at least, were hafted like adzes. 



A couple of implements resembling the second type, are 

 somewhat rectangular in transverse section (Figs. 49 and 50). 

 A thin celt, 6 inches long and '65 of an inch thick, shown in 

 Fig. 51, was possibly used as a chisel. Two other specimens 

 (Figs. 53 and 54), measuring respectively 11 '25 and 12 inches, 

 are very rough. One, palaeolithic in appearance, is merely chipped 

 into form. The other (Fig. 53) is doubtless a natural form, and 

 would have been rejected from the present account were it not 

 for indications that the larger end had been artificially brought 



