102 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [bull. 52 



of different sizes, destined to receive the inferior pole of the pebbles 

 to be chipped, in order to keep them in position. Holding the pebble 

 in place and upright with one band, he grasped the hammer with the 

 other and directed a sharp blow on the superior pole. As a result of 

 this first blow there were detached from the superior pole or end two 

 flakes, smaller or larger, according to the force ot the blow, one on 

 each of the opposite large faces of the pebble. Almost invariably- 

 one of these flakes was much larger than the other. The two facets 

 or planes produced by the separation of the two flakes converged 

 upward, terminating in a small cutting edge. Repeating the blows, 

 there was finally obtained at the superior pole of the pebble a trans- 

 verse cutting edge." 



As to the occurrence of similar types in other parts of the world, 

 the author says (p. 195) : 



''It is true that there have been found elsewhere some more or less 

 similar objects, but they are very rare, isolated, their manufacture 

 not constituting a veritable industry. The form is accidental, and 

 the pieces were not obtained by the procedure that I have described, 

 wlijch consists in cleaving the stone on an anvil with the aid of a 

 percussor. This procedure is not, to my knowledge, as yet known 

 from any other region, and it is for this reason that I designated the 

 industry as the split-stone industry (Vindustrie de la pierre /endue.) " 



The newly discovered stone industry involves, in tlie opinion of 

 Ameghmo (p. 195), "tlu-ee characteristic pieces: The chisel or hatchet- 

 cliisel with a transverse cutting edge, which is the instrument desired; 

 and the two agents employed for its fabrication, namely, the anvil- 

 stone and the hammer." 



Further details as to the characteristics of these three varieties of 

 stones are given as follows (p. 196) : 



"The hatchet- wedge or chisel is the simplest instrument that one 

 can imagine; very often a single blow on the superior pole of the 

 pebble sufficed to make it. Notwithstanding tliis simplicity, how- 

 ever, the instrument presents a very large variety of forms, due 

 probably to the differences in shape, size, length, or thickness of the 

 pebbles employed, as well as to their dissimilarity of nature and 

 texture, from which it often resulted that they fractured in a different 

 manner or direction from that which the operator desired. Often the 

 blow of the hammer not only detached one or two flakes from the 

 superior pole intended for the cutting edge, but the coimter-shock of 

 the anvil also detached flakes from the inferior pole, destined for the 

 handle of the piece, and in consequence the implement occasionally 

 remained unutilized. At other times the blow of the hammer split 

 the pebble from one end to the other, or crushed it, reducing it to use- 

 less fragments. 



