ROTH] FIRE, STONE, TIMBER, TOOLS 75 
9. Itis clear that celts were manufactured by at least two meth- 
ods—grinding down various fragments broken from rocks, and grind- 
ing down water-worn pebbles already possessing more or less the con- 
tour and size required. To make their celts the Indians told Gumilla 
that they used to break the desired fragments by the use of other 
stones, and then grind them on very smooth rocks with the help 
of water to give them the necessary shape and edge, but he never 
witnessed their manufacture (G, 11, 229). Evidence of this grinding 
process in the smooth artificial furrows or grooves met with on the 
rocks at the waterside, either along the seaport or at river rapids, is 
very abundant throughout the Guianas from Cayenne (Cr, 7, 16, 143, 
152, 172) to the Orinoco.’ I know of only one celt specimen in the 
rough, that is, in the stage after breaking and chipping and before 
grinding; it seems extraordinary that more such fragments should not 
have been found. The celt in question came from the Potaro River, 
was forwarded to the Smithsonian Institution, and reported upon 
by Mr. William H. Holmes as follows: ‘‘ The implement-like specimen 
forwarded by Dr. Roth is of impure gray limestone, roughly shaped 
by chipping, the shape being that of a thick ovoid blade, having the 
broad and narrow ends characteristic of the celt fairly well developed. 
In type, it resembles somewhat certain of the well-known ‘paleolithic’ 
implements of Europe. A portion of the original surface appears 
on the flatter side, but traces of wear by use, if there were such, have 
been obliterated by weathering. The chip or fracture facets are, 
however, clearly discernible, the latter margins having been some- 
what rounded by frequent blows. Specimens very similar are 
common in workshop sites in the United States where celts are 
roughed out preparatory to completion by pecking and grinding.”’ 
10. On the Amazon, when first visited by ahe Spaniards, were 
tribes who made axes of stones, which they ground to an edge with 
main strength. These axes were much stronger than those of tor- 
toise shell and would cut down any great tree which the natives de- 
sired to fell, with less fear of breaking them and with much more 
speed (AC, 91). The art of manufacture of such tortoise-shell axes 
and hatchets has come down to us. The Indians cut the hardest 
part of the tortoise shell, which is that under the belly, into “‘leaves”’ 
of about a hand’s breadth, and not quite so thick as one’s hand. 
After having dried a ‘‘leaf’’ in smoke they whet it upon a stone; 
then, fastening it into a wooden helve, they make use of this tool to 
cut everything they fancy as well as if it were the best ax that can be 
fashioned but with a little more pains. They make their hatchets of 
the same material and the handles they put on them is a pegebuey’s 
(manati’s) jaw bone, which nature seems to have purposely fitted 
1 For a proper appreciation of the subject the reader is advised to consult my work on the present-day 
manufacture of stone implements in Northeastern Australia, in North Queensland Ethnography, Bulletin 
No. 5 (Domestic Implements, ete.) Brisbane, 1904. 
