272 
NATURE 
| Fan. 18, 1883 
The newest palzolithic implements are as a rule not 
highly lustrous as in the last, but sub-lustrous, and often 
even dull; not abraded or sub-abraded, but as sharp as 
on the day they were made. As a rule they are very 
much smaller and lighter than anything belonging to the 
two previous periods. An example is illustrated half real 
size at Fig. 8, No. 403, in my collection. Other charac- 
teristic specimens are illustrated at Figs. 9 and 10. Fig.9 
Fig. 1 
is a thin and exquisitely manipulated trimmed-flake, 
No. 47 in my collection, weighing only 1,5, ounces. Fig. 
Io is an implement worked on both sides, the natural 
crust of the flint being left untouched on the butt, weight 
only 14 ounces, No. 627 in my collection. Oval imple- 
ments with a cutting edge all round now appear ; a few 
examples, as in the last period, occur where the broad 
end (as in neolithic celts) appears to have been designed 
for cutting or chiselling ; scrapers are common, not large 
Fic. 2. 
and rough, but as a rule small and extremely neat. One 
is illustrated at Fig. 11, half actual size, scraper No. 22 
in my collection; small knives, ze. flakes, with the edge 
or edges showing very neat secondary trimming, are 
common, and hardly to be distinguished from neolithic 
eae As a rule every object is now neat, small and 
ne. 
That these later implements are of a different age from 
the last is proved by the curious fact that the newer 
implements are sometimes re-made from older ones, ze. 
re-trimmed after the lapse of a vast period of time. I 
have several such examples, one a scraper belonging to 
the “ Paleolithic Floor”: it is made from an old lustrous 
flake of medium age, all the more recent work being dull 
and sharp. At Fig. 12 is illustrated, half real size (No. 
452 in my collection), an implement of later palzolithic 
age from Bedford. It is an old implement that was 
“found” after a lapse of time by a newer palzeolithic man 
and re-pointed. The finder had probably sense enough 
to know that the thing he found was really a human- 
made implement, only wanting a little fresh work to make 
it “as good as new.’”’ This man. stands in contrast with 
the very few individuals (still extant) who say they can 
see no evidence of design in drift tools. The original 
form of the implement is indicated by the dotted lines, 
C,C,C; the natural crust of the flint is present at the 
base on both sides, shown by dots in the illustration. 
The original mid-age flaking is shown at B,B, B, B, and 
Fic. 3. 
the work of the newer palzolithic man is exhibited at 
D,D,D. The old finder of the implement gave two new 
edges and a new point to the tool, and improved the 
shape of the butt; the newer work is creamy white and 
lustrous, and in distinct contrast with the older work. 
When this implement was thrown out of the pit by the 
workman, the newer point got accidentally injured, at E, F. 
This injury, by exposing the interior of the flint, shows 
that the tool was originally a greyish-black one, and that 
since it was last pointed, it has acquired a thick, white 
bark by the decomposition of the flint. Now, neolithic 
flints at Bedford (where the example under examination 
was found) remain blackish-grey to the present day; the 
thousands of years (say from two to ten) since they were 
chipped have been insufficient to cause even the thinnest 
conceivable while film of decomposition to appear, but 
this paleolithic example has acquired a white bark of a 
sixteenth of an inch in thickness. How much older then 
must this ew oznt be than the neolithic flints from the 
same place. The new point being inconceivably old, how 
much older must the old butt be! The implement, how- 
