BOLjiEsi RUDE FLAKED IMPLEMENTS 91 



tool thau auy other known form, as hardly more than half a dozen 

 blows were ever expended in elaborating its shape. It is found on 

 fishing village-sites and elsewhere all over the bowlder-yielding dis- 

 tricts. At Eock point on the Potomac, SO miles below Washington, the 

 shell banks and village-sites are literally strewn with these objects, and 

 they are found by hundreds in the great shell bank at the mouth of 

 Popes creek. The bowlders used were obtained in the vicinity in each 

 case. These tools were apparently intended to be held in the hand, as 

 there is usually insufficient space for hafting, and the unmodified end 

 is round and well suited for grasping. Their great number and very 

 wide utilization sufficiently indicate that they served some important 

 function in the arts and industries of the fisher people. To cnt up fish, 

 to break bones, to open oysters, and to cut wood may be regarded as 

 possible uses. I have selected several specimens, shown in face and 

 profile in jilates xlix and l, to illustrate the various forms. Typical 

 examples appear in a and b, iilate xlix. Specimen a, plate L, is of 

 medinm size and usual shape, and h and c are more elaborately flaked 

 and have a greater appearance of battering or of use iu rough work 

 than is usual; the latter are rather exceptional forms. Many have 

 broader edges and longer bodies. A specimen sharjjened at both ends 

 and probably intended for hafting is shown iu c, plate xlix. It is not 

 unusual to find implements of other varieties, such as polished axes, 

 which have become much worn or have ceased to be valued, sharpened 

 by a few heavy strokes as are these bowlders. This form grades almost 

 imperceptibly into the notched axes, picks, and hoe-like forms, as will 

 be seen by reference to succeeding illustrations. These tools are iden- 

 tical in shape with thousands of the rejects found in our qiuirries where 

 a few flakes were removed to test the material of the bowlders. Thej^ 

 are identical also with specimens published by some authors as paleo- 

 lithic implements. The sharpened bowlder tool is distinguished from 

 the bowlder reject by the aid of the following observations: 1, it is 

 found on the sites where implements were used, i. e., on village-sites 

 and in shell heaps; 2, thus found it has evidently been obtained and 

 removed from the deposits of bowlders, generally near at hand; 3, as 

 found on village-sites and in shell heaps it often shows signs of use; 

 4, the same form in the bowlder-flaking shop is evidently one of the 

 necessary forms of bowlder-flaking rejectage and never shows traces of 

 use. The quarry reject is associated with its complement of refuse and 

 related forms, whereas the implement on the site of use stands alone. 

 The implement also presents suggestions of specialization when studied 

 ill numbers, but the quarry reject conforms to no one well-defined type of 

 form. A similar form is found also in the soapstone quarries, where it 

 was employed as a quarrying and cutting tool. It thus appears that 

 objects of this general type, this essentially i)aleolithic type, may, in the 

 Potomac valley, beeither(l) quarry rejects,(2)acommon variety of village- 

 site tool, or (3) a quarry tool; but ft)und iu the vicinity of Washington, 



