Chapter I.


The aboriginal inhabitants of New Jersey appear to have had an eye for the picturesque in landscape-scenery, although facility in procuring food and safety from attack were the objects mainly in view in settling at any point; still, we find that wherever the scenery is commanding, as in the northern mountainous portion of the country at such grand localities as the Delaware Water Gap, we discover there remains in abundance, but as we go inland they are less numerous, as the hills decrease and the rivers dwindle into brooks. Yet so abundant were the Indian villages and numerous these people that almost every brook that harbors a fish has now lying among the pebbles on its bed, or in the turf upon its banks, flinty arrow-points or delicate fish-spears.

The abundance of the weapons and domestic implements of the aborigines suggests that each village had at least one implement-maker; that the various stone articles were the product of the skill of some one of every community, who was exclusively devoted to the business of making them. Although, when on hunting-expeditions or in battle, the single specimens lost would have the effect to mingle all the “styles” throughout the State; yet if we compare a suite of arrow-heads, spears, lances, or even axes, from a single locality, with a similar series from a distant section of the State, there will be found with each a peculiarity of its own, an individuality, so to speak, that characterizes the two collections. The similarity of stone implements the world over is one that extends to those forms that are simplest, and is not an indication that because the same results have been wrought out by widely-separated tribes there was necessarily a kinship.

Studying the localities in the State where relics are most numerous, we have been surprised with the frequent exhibition of the implement- maker’s peculiar tastes, and are convinced that widely-differing shapes of wrought stones in some cases have had an identical purpose; and certainly it would be difficult to suggest names for each type, they being more numerous than the occupations of a primitive people.

While weapons in the majority of localities greatly predominate over the domestic or agricultural implements, still, in some sections of the State, the opposite is the case, at least approximately, as evinced by the number of the latter class of relics equaling the former in an average day’s search.

When we consider, in another chapter, the relics designated as “rude implements,” we shall find that these are not especially characteristic of any one locality, but seem scattered uniformly over the State, while they are deeper in the soil than the majority of so-called surface specimens.

Starting at Trenton, N. J., the head of tide-water, and following the river’s course in a southerly direction, we find the rocky, mountainous shores of the upper river succeeded by a gravelly, bluffy bank on the Nfcw Jersey side, which varies in height from twenty to one hundred feet, and finally disappears near the town of Burlington, being replaced there and thence by almost continuous level, sandy shores, terminating at Cape May, the southern extremity of the State. Along the first five miles of the brow of this bluffy bank, and extending inland some half mile, is the tract from which has been gathered the great bulk of our collection and the most interesting specimens. This bluff does not always imme­diately face the river, but, receding half a mile or more between Tren­ton and Bordentown, forms, between these two points, a semicircular tract of meadow, of varying elevation above the river’s level, and on the higher portions, or knolls, are found numerous relics j but the greater number are from the hill-top fields, although it may be that the rare occurrence of plowing in the meadows, as compared with the uplands, may in some measure account for the difference.

A glance at this limited tract of country, even in the highly artificial condition that it now presents, will plainly show why it was a favorite spot with the red men. Placing their wigwams on the brow of the hill, they had at their command an unbroken stretch of forest of white-oak, pine, and chestnut, harboring the elk, deer, and bears, while in the deep creeks traversing the meadows below them, and the broad river beyond, were fishing-facilities that in that ancient day were not to be excelled by any within a thousand miles.


Chapter II.



So attractive to the amateur, or the more scientific student, are the finished specimens of wrought jasper and polished porphyry, that the “rude implements,” sparingly scattered among them, and buried still more deeply in the soil, are either overlooked, or the passing glance given them suggests that they are unfinished specimens, or the crude results of a beginner in the art of flint-chipping. This we believe to be an error. These  “rude implements” are usually formed of the mineral that characterizes the locality where they are found; those met with at Trenton, N. J., are all of the sandstone that forms the bed of the river at the rapids, and crops out here and there. This rock varies somewhat in texture, and the implements also are found to be made both of the denser and the softer strata of the stone, as though frag­ments were broken off and chipped into shape from any convenient point.

This class of antiquities is not abundant, considering the whole num­ber of specimens we have gathered, about ten thousand, and embrac­ing nearly every class of relics. The proportion is less than 2 per cent, of the whole number. Careful examination of a series shows that they cannot be merely roughly-outlined pieces intended for future more finished work, inasmuch as the present general character and dimensions of the great bulk of them renders additional chipping impracticable. The larger rude implements would, if further chipped away, form axes and lance-heads of much smaller dimensions than the great majority of those that we now find.

Figure 1 represents an average specimen of the flat-bottomed, peak-backed stones, known in some localities as “turtle-backs,” a name that admirably describes their general appearance. Made of the ordinary Delaware River sandstone, this specimen measures four inches in length and two and one-half inches in width. The bottom is nearly a perfect plane, and shows, by the slight indentations and scratch-like markings, that it has been chipped into its present shape, and not accidentally broken. Its greatest thickness is one and one-eighth inches; the “peak”, or highest point of the back, being in the middle of the specimen, measured lengthwise, but rather nearer one side than the other, or off the center; but the broader side of the back does not appear better adapted for cutting than the narrower or more abruptly descending side.

Although this stone, from long exposure, has become porous upon the surface, the edges still remain sharp, regular, and exhibit an amount of skill in flint-chipping about equal to that of the ordinary slate lance-heads, spear and arrow points. Close examination shows that the back has been worked into its present shape by a series of powerful blows, or by pressure, leaving large surfaces usually, several of the planes being those of a single detachment of a fragment of the rock, in some instances extending from the peak to the edge of the implement.

Had these fractures occurred in an ordinary water-worn pebble, throughout its rough-and-tumble existence, they would assuredly have happened at various periods, and, besides leaving different degrees of weathering on the fractured surfaces, would also exhibit traces of the causes that produced the breakage, as in scratches where a flinty rock had graved and cut the underlying pebble, in ground-off angles where some huge mass had been rolled upon and crushed off the weaker projecting portions left by a previous altering agency. It is needless to state no traces of occurrences like these are discoverable, but, on the contrary, every portion of the surface plainly indicates that, by a “tool” in the hand of a workman, was the turtle-back” shaped.

It is not easy to conjecture the special use of such a stone implement. There is nothing about it to show that it was intended to be attached to a handle. It seems impossible, in fact, to use it otherwise than by holding it in the hand, and yet, if for cutting uses only, why the peculiar and carefully-wrought peak? There is nothing to show it was ever used in connection with another implement, for such joint uses would be indicated by battered surfaces at different points; yet we have found no “turtle-back” that showed other contact than that of the “hammer stone” that pecked the level side of the implement.

Figure 2 is a smaller specimen of turtle-back, varying principally from the preceding by the back being rudely ridged rather than pointed. It is two and seven-eighths inches in length by one and seven-eighths inches in width. The greatest thickness is nearly three-fourths of an inch. The bottom-, or under surface, is even more uniform than that of the preceding specimen, and indicates that the more prominent points of the under surface were rubbed away, although not sufficiently to give a perfectly smooth or polished surface. Viewed from above, it bears considerable resemblance to an implement for skin-dressing, to which use it was probably applied.

Figure 3 is a small ax or hatchet, that makes a step, as it were, in advance of the turtle-backs. Two and one-quarter inches in length and two and one-eighth inches wide, it is brought to a good edge of two inches in length, from a base one inch and one-eighth long by one half inch in width. As will be seen in the illustration, this specimen still retains one characteristic of “turtle-backs,” in that it is flat upon one side and is chipped upon its upper and lower edges or side, as well as sloped to the front or cutting-edge proper. The cutting-edge has been dulled by exposure, but is still sufficiently keen to be used as a skinning- knife, an incision having previously been made. Although calling it an ax or hatchet, we believe its use was that above mentioned.

If the climate of our country during the stone age was even as temperate as it is now, warm clothing was an imperative requirement; and it is safe to infer that a prominent use of all these rude implements was in rendering fit for clothing the skins of the large mammals once numerous in this region.

Figure 4 is an interesting specimen, previously designated as a hatchet, but which is now classed and considered as a “rude implement.” Three and one-quarter inches in length by two and one-half inches in breadth, it presents nothing in common with the types—if we may call them so— of these ruder forms of implements. From the base, which is the un­chipped natural surface of the stone that has been selected, this implement is chipped equally on both sides, and brought to an edge along each margin, and at the same time tapered to an obtuse point, suffic­iently marked, however, to indicate that it was intended to pierce as well as cut. The broad base, which is sufficiently wide to allow the specimen to stand upon it without support, upon a level surface, pre­cludes the i<Jea that there ever has been a long shaft attached, and so converting the specimen into a spear-head.

Held in the hand, it would seem to be an awkward instrument for most purposes, bat best adapted probably for incising the skin of an animal with the point, and then, by the long cutting margins, detaching the skin from the carcass. The point has probably been much more acute than now, and, when in its original condition, it certainly could hav$ been so used; or, held in the hand by the base, it would, by a well-directed blow, split the long, hollow bones of a bison for obtaining the marrow, being, for such a purpose, an admirable combination of wedge, hammer, and hatchet; and such split bison-bones have been found in New Jersey.

Figure 5 represents a specimen most like a weapon of any of the rude implements we have as yet been able to find. Its shape at once suggests its use, and, considering the rough workmanship that has been expended upon it, it seems admirably adapted to the supposed use to which it was put. It foreshadows the tomahawk of more modern times. There appear to have been no fractures since the implement was made. The whole surface presents the same degree of weather-worn appearance, and it is doubtful if even the rude edges were more regular in design or sharper than at present. Very nearly eight inches in length, the specimen may, for purposes of description, be divided into two sections—the front or blade of the weapon, and the hammer-head or back. The blade or front portion is four inches in length, forming nearly a continuous line with the top of the back; the elevation of the outline or margin being less than half an inch at the angle of the back and edge. Below, the line of the back and that of the blade form an obtuse angle; the blade being beneath an inch and three-eighths wider than the narrower portion or hammer-head. The entire margin of this specimen has been chipped into its present shape and condition, giving it a rudely-rounded appearance at the top, edge, bottom, and extremity of the back. This chipping has not been done by an ordinary hammer stone, pecking off the small fragments and producing the peculiar dotted appearance common to the ordinary grooved cobble-stone axes; but the stone has been flaked off in larger pieces, although the appearance varies from the shelly fracture of jasper, having nothing in common with those minerals that have this peculiar fracture, well named conchoidal. As a large portion of the side of this specimen is smooth, it is probable that the mass, as originally detached from the rock, bore some resemblance to the weapon or implement as it now appears. The interest, as it seems to us, that attaches itself to this rude hatchet, is that it is the most primitive specimen we have met with that clearly indicates that a handle has been fastened to it. A split or forked sapling could have been as readily attached to an ax of this shape as to any of the grooved forms. The shallow notch beneath, at the junction of the back and blade, was evidently so chipped to make the attached handle more secure. Armed with such a weapon, a powerful man could do great exe­cution in close combat.

It must be borne in mind that the specimens here figured are not iso­lated instances of rude stone implements bearing peculiar markings; although in a large series there will of course be some even possibly more rude, and again others that seem a partial transition from the “turtle-backs” to the ax, or the latter to the spear-head shaped speci­mens. Other than the specimen last figured, (figure 5,) we have now lying on our table two specimens with about the same amount of work upon them, but varying somewhat in details. The larger of these is of the same length as figure 5; but the blade narrows gradually toward the back, which is about two-thirds of the width of the front or cutting edge. There is no defined spot to show where or how a handle has been fastened, but such must have been attached in some manner to render the stone at all available as a war-weapon or an implement of the chase. The other, smaller specimen of a rude ax is five and one-half inches in length, with a front or cutting edge of three and one-half inches in extent; and from this edge the specimen tapers to an acute point, giving it the form of an acute, nearly equilateral, triangle, with a slightly-curved base. It shows clearly that it has had a handle attached, as in case of figure 5, and, with the pointed back and curved edge in front, well represents the tomahawk of the Indians in use after the introduc­tion of iron, and still in use among the wilder tribes of the West.

Figure 6 represents a small ax, showing that occasionally considerable labor was expended in even this class of rude implements. The general outline is good, much resembling that of the preceding figure. Unlike that specimen, however, it clearly retains the marks of the hammer-stone, showing that it was slowly pecked into shape, and not formed by hard blows and large fragments broken off. One side is flatter than the other, indicating that it approaches the specimens we have figured as the types or starting-points of this series of stone relics. The cut­ting-edge is still well preserved, but shows no indication of having been polished or sharpened otherwise than by pecking fresh fragments off as the old edge grew dull by use. This specimen measures three and three-fourths inches in length, by two and one half inches in width at the front or edge, and tapers then to a back about one inch in width, which has also been chipped to a moderately sharp edge.

Figure 7 represents a common form of “rude implement,” that returns to the “turtle-back” variety in the characteristic of a perfectly flat bottom or under surface, which in this case appears to have been the face of a smooth fracture effected by a single blow upon the rock from which the specimen was detached. The object of the specimen is wholly different from the axes we have been describing; this being a spear­head apparently, as the well-defined point is unquestionably the important feature of the weapon or implement of the chase. It is not easy to comprehend why spear-heads should have been thus fashioned, that is, flat upon one side, and so ridged upon the other as to make the greatest thickness equal to half the length, as in this and many other instances. We will find, however, that this character re appears in other specimens of a later period, of the highest degree of polish and workmanship. The specimen in question measures three inches in total length by two and one-fourth inches in greatest breadth, and is a fair representative of the “flat” spears found in localities where these rude implements are met with, as in the gravelly bank of the Delaware south of Trenton, N. J., and occasionally on the surface of the ground in the same neighbor­hood.

Associated with this flat-sided variety, but in far smaller numbers, is a larger implement, that may be considered as a rude spear-head. Certainly, the shape of the specimen, (figure 8,) as in the preceding case, shows the point to have been the principal object in view. This specimen was found upon the surface, but is identical with those associated with the gravel of the river-bank. Indeed, specimens of every type of “ rude implements” are found upon the surface, and are plowed up every spring and autumn; but this in no way militates against the opinion that these ruder forms are far older than the well-chipped jasper and beautifully-polished porphyry stone-work.

The hatchet and the spear represent the two types from which the more modern stone weapons have proceeded, and if we look upon these as having been suggested by the use of the “turtle-backs” previously for the uses to which the hatchet and spear were afterward put, so far as that was practicable, then we have an unbroken line of development in the manufacture of tools.

Rude implements of a “domestic” type are exceedingly rare. We have met with but two such specimens, (figures 9 and 10.) Figure 9 represents a nondescript form, innumerable uses for which can be imagined, but not easily demonstrated. Sir John Lubbock, in his “Prehistoric Times,” (2d ed., p. 340, figures 199-200,) figures a very similar specimen from Madras. The similarity in size and shape suggests the probability that both these specimens were put to the same use; and, curiously enough, the India specimen, like figure 9, was found at a considerable depth below the surface of the ground. Everything con­nected with the history of this specimen shows that it should be classed with the “turtle-backs” and the other forms that we have figured. It is just six inches in length and two and three-fourths inches in greatest breadth. Nearly four inches of its length is of this width, where it tapers to a stem-like handle a little over an inch in width. The whole surface still retains traces of the blows of the hammer, and the edges, those of the handle included, are all rudely chipped.

With one other illustration of “rude implements” we shall close oar consideration of this portion of the subject. Figure 10 represents a form of this class of relics wholly unique. That it is a product of human workmanship no one can doubt; but, as in many of the preceding cases, it is difficult to say for what it was especially designed. It was found on the surface of a Sandy field, where many of the ordinary shapes of Indian relics occur. If intended for an ax with a handle, “ all in one,” then the purpose is well carried out; but why so carefully rounded a blade! No detailed description other than some of the principal meas­urements are necessary. The illustration gives an accurate idea of the weapon itself. The handle and “back” straight portion of the blade measure together exactly five and one-half inches. The diameter of the circular blade is about four and one-half inches. The straight back of the implement is the only portion of the natural surface of the stone from which it was made. An examination shows that some large bowl­der has been broken into laminae, and one of these, originally about oue inch in thickness, has been afterward chipped until the handled disk has been produced as we now find it. The edge apparently has never been sharper, about one-fourth of an inch in width, and the whole gen­eral appearance tends to show that it is an agricultural implement. While this impression militates against the idea of a great antiquity for these rude specimens, an antiquity that antedates agriculture even in its most primitive condition, yet there seems no other method of utilizing this unique specimen.


Chapter III.


Theste, although having a general similarity, are not exactly alike, and we have had in our possession at various times several hundred. The universal exception that co-exists with every rule here obtains in the pattern of ax that is grooved upon each side, near the head and across one margin, but whether the top or bottom is uncertain. Such speci­mens are alike sometimes, even with regard to size. So far as the con­tinuation of the groove across one margin is concerned, we find that a forked sapling can be best attached to such axes by placing the flat margin in the fork of the handle and drawing the ends together over the groove, thus making it the top or upper margin of the implement. We shall, therefore, in describing this pattern of ax, which is the most nearly uniform of all the styles, consider the groove as being across the upper margin. Careful examination also of the edges of such specimens as we have had seems to us to show also that this manner of securing the handle was that pursued by the people who made and used these axes.

Figure 11 is a very good example of the most common type of grooved stone axes; that is, such as we have described in the preceding para­graph. This ax measures eleven and one-half inches in total length, and is but four inches wide at the broadest portion, the ridge immediately in front of the groove. The groove itself is but seven-eighths of an inch in width, and the head, or that portion posterior to the groove, varies from one and one-half inches to one inch in length. The cutting-edge is but two and one fourth inches in extent, and is still moderately sharp and well preserved. Although the specimen still shows the marks of the hammer, yet it might almost be placed under the head of polished axes, as the weapon has been so carefully smoothed down that the slight inequalities and shallow indentations can scarcely be felt by the hand. Its weight is seven and one-half pounds. With the handle placed where the groove is, it must have produced a great strain upon the wrist. The small extent of the edge suggests that it was intended to inflict one effect­ive blow, and not that its main use was chipping or girdling of trees.

This specimen was found on a small gravelly island in the Delaware River, and was presented to the author by his friend Mr. W. Dean, of Lambertville, N. J.

Figure 12 represents the average style of ax of this particular pat­tern, which we believe is found throughout the United States. They vary from two to five and seven inches in length, and occasionally, as we have seen, reach eleven and one-half inches. The smallest specimen we had met with for a long time was scaht three inches 5 but, as the ex­treme edge was wholly broken away, it probably measured, when per­fect, fully three inches. (See figure 13.) We have since collected a still smaller and more perfect specimen, (figure 14,) which measures only two and one-half inches in length; the perfect back being in the natural condition of the pebble from which the little ax was made.

This variety of ax is most usually found to be of sandstone, and the ordinary cobble-stones, or water-worn pebbles of the adjacent river-beds. At and above Trenton, N. J., the bed of the Delaware River is wholly composed of loose stones of various sizes, with here and there an out-cropping of stationary rock. These loose pebbles or cobble-stones are found on examination to frequently bear considerable general resem­blance to the finished axes, and to need little work upon them other than making the groove and rubbing one end down until a cutting-edge is produced. So abundant, as it seems to us, are the well-adapted stones, in shape and size, that we wonder why so frequently we meet with stone-axes that have been carefully pecked over the whole surface to bring them down to the proper shape. This may be explained, perhaps, by the suggestion that many axes were made where stones at all suitable were difficult to obtain, and that the frequent wars or wanderings of a community and bartering may have resulted in the commingling of the*axes of a multitude of localities, many of them miles distant from each other. We know, too, that tribes came from long distances to make autumnal visits to our sea-coast, and, of course, on such journeys would always be provided with, and frequently lose, as they passed through the State, many specimens of every variety of both weapons and domestic implements.

Occasionally, this pattern is produced in porphyry, and in that case is invariably polished. We have knowledge of some specimens of this pattern, and of this material, of immense size and weight, but could not, unfortunately, learn the exact numbers of inches and pounds 5 but we do not suppose they really measured more than figure 11, although the weight was probably more, inasmuch as figure 11, if of porphyry, would certainly be considerably heavier.

When made of porphyry, these axes were valued much more than those of ordinary sandstone, inasmuch as they were continually ground down to new edge, as the old one wore away or was accidentally broken off; and the original owners were so choice of them that they continued the resharpening until there was scarcely any blade left, and that little unavailable in consequence of the thickness of the ax across the back and at the groove.

Figure 15 is an admirable example of an ax made of a porphyry pebble of this pattern, worn down by continual resharpening. The specimen now measures four inches in length by three and three-eighths in width, and is two and one-half inches across the head or back. It has a well-defined groove running along its under margin, a feature common to this pattern of stone axes.

Occasionally, an ordinary sandstone or cobble-stone axe of this pat­tern is to be found very carefully smoothed over its whole surface. We can scarcely call it a polish, and yet it is very near it. In such speci­mens especially, the uniformity in the width and depth of the groove is truly remarkable. This groove varies much in depth, and a noticeable feature is that the depth of the groove is in no wise in accordance with the size and weight of the ax, as would be the natural inference. Thus, in figure 11, the groove is very shallow and narrow, being about one-quarter of an inch only in depth, while in some of the smaller speci­mens it is fully one-half an inch deep, and we have met with instances fully five-eighths of an inch in depth. The depth of groove may per­haps be a good index to the degree of patience in the various indi­viduals of a community. We have before us a very fine sample of ax from Indiana, the remarkable features of which are the depth and width of the groove as compared with the general measurements of the imple­ment itseilf. The ax measures six inches in length by four and one- half in width, and the groove measures one and three-quarters in width by seven-sixteenths of an inch in depth. Such a groove compared with the example in figure 11 seems the more strange when we remember that the latter, in size and weight, is about double that of the deeply- grooved Indiana specimen.

Figure 16 represents as fine a specimen of a polished ax as we have ever seen. This ax was found in Elsinborough Township, Salem County, New Jersey, by Dr. John W. Ward, of Trenton, by whom it was kindly presented to the writer. It is now preserved in the cabinet of the Peabody Academy of Science, at Salem, Mass. The illustration gives a better idea of the specimen itself than any description can. Suffice it to say that the whole surface has been beautifully polished, the edge rendered as sharp as practicable, and it is still perfect, equidistant from each side, and describing a very nearly accurate circle. It will be noticed that this specimen has two grooves, one of them shal­lower and much less well defined than the posterior and deeper one.

The object of this double grooving does not appear. It is a feature we have not met with in any other specimen. The preservation of the edge and the general freshness of the whole surface makes it highly probable that it is among the very latest of the stone axes made in New Jersey, or, indeed, anywhere within a reasonable distance of this State; there- j fore it has probably seen little if any service, perhaps being used as an ornament or badge of office.

When we consider the class of relics known as a skinning-knives,” we shall find that some of them are similar in many respects to this specimen, and that possibly we have erred in calling figure 16 an a*. It has, however, some features so common to the true axes that the likelihood in the case is much in favor of classing it as we have done.

Figure 17 represents a fair average specimen of a cobble-stone ax, in which the groove extends entirely around the weapon. One feature is particularly noticeable in these axes, viz, that the groove is always nearly in the middle of the specimen. We have examined a large series of axes, and find that the following characteristic is common to all the examples that have come under our notice, viz: that when the groove extends entirely around the ax, it is in advance of the grooves that do not meet above, or on the upper margin, as in figures 11,12,13,14, and 15. There was something in the method of using these rude implements that is yet to be learned before an explanation can be given of this curious feature of the varying position of the groove. Certainly, the original shape of the selected pebble had nothing, or very little, to do with determining the location. This specimen (figure 17) is about the average size of any ordinary collection of these stone axes as gathered from any one neighborhood. They range from four to eight inches in length, seldom exceeding this limit, as compared with the whole number found; and the number of instances of axes of less length than four inches is comparatively few. As a class, the completely-grooved axes do not appear to be as well finished as the preceding style ; and being usually of “crooked” or irregularly-shaped stones, when a number are together, there appears to be but little in common except the features that pronounce them all “ axes” or malls.

A very fine specimen of a large ax is in the cabinet of Rutgers Col­lege Museum, at New Brunswick, 3ST. J. It was found within the limits of that town, on the banks of the Raritan River, which was probably a favorite locality with the aborigines, who perhaps were further attracted to the place on account of the native copper that was.formerly found there, and which they highly prized for a variety of purposes, especially ornamental. The ax above referred to is of identical pattern with that figured by Squier and Davis in Smithsonian Contributions, vol. 1, page 216, figure 108, (Anc. Mon. Miss. Valley,) but is somewhat larger and heavier. The former measures nine inches in length by six inches in width, and weighs an ounce or two over nine pounds. The western spec­imen is made of very compact greenstone, and measures eight inches in length by five inches and a half in its greatest breadth, and weighs eight pounds.” S. & D. farther state that this “is regarded as a genuine relic of the mound-builders. Its form is almost identical with that of the forest-ax of the present day.”

Figure 18 represents the finest specimen of a large stone ax that we have ever met with. Very many that we have seen have been as large; a number have been of more finished workmanship, but no one has as many features of interest as this. The specimen measures eleven inches in length. The conical head is three inches long, the groove and ridges together two and one-quarter inches, and the blade within a small frac­tion of five and three-quarter inches. The conical head does not appear to have met with any very hard usage, and was probably intended for ornament. It would seem as though the ridges, at each margin of the groove, would be of great advantage in securing the handle to the ax, inasmuch as it secures greater depth to the groove without cutting too deeply into the body of the implement itself; but such plausible rea­soning somewhat vanishes when we come to compare weights and find that this specimen (figure 18) weighs but six pounds, whereas figure 11, with one pound and a half greater weight, has a groove only one- half the depth and width, and as near as practicable to one end also, while in figure 18 it approaches to the middle.

A pertinent question may here be asked, By what means were these cobble-stones shaped into axes! We have frequently already spoken of “hammer-stones,” but we have as yet found nothing that seems adapted to such work when it comes to a deep, narrow groove 5 for while some of the axes have the grooves finely polished, others present in the groove the same pitted appearance that characterizes the general surface of the specimen.

This ax (figure 18) was found on the shore of the Delaware Biver, close to the water’s edge, and was presented to the writer by Dr. J. W. Ward, of Trenton, N. J. Squier and Davis, in the Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge, vol. 1, page 217, speaking of stone axes, state that “it is clear, from the weight of many of these axes, that they were designed to be wielded with both hands. Some weigh not less than fourteen pounds, but most range from six to ten. The average weight of the ordinary iron-ax of the present day is about six pounds.” Between the weight of our heaviest ax and their maximum there is a difference of five pounds, which we have not yet been able to make up 5* but, whether so or not, it is very safe, we think, with the New Jersey axes, to consider figures 11 and 18 about as heavy as they were ordinarily made ; and, in treating of this subject in the manner that we do, the most that we hope is to convey a good general idea of what stone weapons, ornaments, and domestic im­plements were in use among the aborigines during their primitive stage of culture.

Figure 19 represents a specimen of ax of somewhat similar outline to the preceding, having the ridges that are on the margin of the groove very well defined, but the tapering, conical head is by no means as artistically finished as in the other instance, (figure 18.) As the illus­tration shows, this specimen has been chipped, or, more properly, pecked, over its whole surface, and is a good instance of the perseverance and patience of the primitive folk who accounted such weapons among the chiefest of their worldly goods. Axes of this shape and pattern occur iu every part of the State, associated with the pattern described in figures 11-15. So different are they in the one matter of the groove and its position, that it seems exceedingly probable that the two patterns had different uses, and yet we cannot see in what the one shape is superior to the others. On examining the hammer-heads, or “backs,” of a large number of the pattern of figures 11-15, we find there indh cations of the hammer-head portions having been struck frequent and hard blows with another stone, as though this style of ax was largely used in splitting wood; while, in the present type (figures 16-19) there is much less indication of such battering of the head. But we have not sufficient evidence as yet to make any separation of these styles into “war” and “domestic” axes, or some such distinctive designations.

Figure 20 represents an exceedingly crude ax, that, when figured, was the very “plainest” specimen we had ever met with. Since then, however, we have had one other that is even more primitive, and yet unquestionably a “grooved stone ax.” The specimen here figured (figure 20) has the groove on each side and above and below of a uniform depth, and is well defined throughout, as the illustration indicates; but, in the still plainer specimen, the groove consists of a faint roughening, that seems of little use, being scarcely uneven enough to prevent the fastening from slipping; but, like figure 20, the groove at the top and bottom is practically deepened by a projecting knob of the stone, at which points all the strain of the fastening of the handle must have come. In the specimen figured, (figure 20,) the sides of the blade of the ax have been dressed down with a hammer-stone to a pretty well defined edge; but in the still plainer ax before us we find that upon one side a few chips only have been struck off, and on the other two great portions have been artistically knocked away, and the then roughly-prepared blade has been rubbed with a polishing-stone until a small but highly- polished edge has been produced. We cannot imagine any more difficult task than really cutting wood or splitting bone with such a weapon as this, and would restrict its use to bruising the bark of trees; but the trees once dead, they would require something better than these rude axes to fell them. Judging from their present appearances, the edges only of these axes have been used; the back, which is very uneven in each case, does not show any trace of having ever been struck with a hammer; and we find in many of the axes, especially in the pattern of figure 11, that they were so struck, thus converting the ax for a time into a wedge. Loskiel says: Their hatchets were wedges, made of hard stones, six or eight inches long, sharpened at the end and fastened to a wooden handle.”

Occasionally we meet with a crooked or bent ax, which has, however, more method in its irregularities than has figure 20. Such an ax we now have, which was originally an ordinary cobble-stone that was decidedly bent or bow-shaped. Such shaped stones were frequently chosen, as we have seen a number of specimens from widely distant localities. The best illustration of such bent axes is one measuring nine inches in length by three and one-half inches in width. The head alone is the natural sur­face of the stone, except a narrow strip immediately in front of the groove) all the rest has been dressed down, and tapers gradually to the edge, which has been moderately sharp but never polished. These so-called bent axes are attractive in appearance as seen in the cabinet, but do not seem to possess any especial advantage over any other form.

With one more illustration, that of a fantastically-shaped cobble-stone ax, we will conclude this portion of our subject. Figure 21 represents a small ax with three uncommon features: the near approach of the groove to the middle of the specimen; the almost flat surface of one side of the implement; and the intended double edge. We say intended, but it may be that the shorter end has had a cutting-edge thereon, although there is no trace of it left now; or the broken condition of this end may be the preparatory chipping, to have it ready for grinding to a cutting-edge at any time it might be desirable to do so. This specimen measures six inches in length by two and one-half inches in breadth, except at the pro­jection immediately in front of the groove on the upper margin, which pro­jection is about one-half an inch in length. What might be the object in having one side flat, or nearly so, does not appear; but it will be seen that this peculiarity is not confined to this ax, or to a few axes as a class by themselves, but occurs in weapons and implements of a far different nature.

It would be easy to go on for an indefinite time, and point out pecul­iar features in the multitudes of stone axes that are to be found in every museum, and scattered throughout the country, but it is unnec­essary to give additional examples. We probably have particularized more than was necessary, and certainly have gone over the ground sufficiently to give a general idea of the common characters and average appearance of this class of relics.

Whatever may be thought of the scientific value of single specimens of these axes, or of other relics found lying upon the surface of the ground, that value is enhanced perhaps, or at least interest is attached to the specimens, when we occasionally have the good fortune to un­earth a so-called “deposit” of these specimens, sometimes numbering several hundred.

In one case, in digging a cellar in Trenton, N. J., one hundred and twenty were found, u all closely huddled up together,” as my informant described them. They were about three feet below the surface, and a “ foot deep” in the gravel underlying the soil. They were surrounded by, and entirely covered with, a bright brick-red powder. Again, in digging the receiving-vault of the Biverview Cemetery, near Trenton, N. J., “a bushel-basketful of these axes was found, packed closely to­gether, six feet deep in the ground.” On the face of the bluff fronting the Delaware Eiver, immediately below Treuton, N. J., several such instances have come to the notice of the writer. In the first two instances, the specimens were all grooved cobble-stone axes. In another instance, the “axes (!),” fifty in number, were of the ungrooved pattern, all of porphyry, well polished, and appeared to have been carefully deposited, and not thrown pell-mell into the hole dug to contain them.

Dr. Daniel Wilson, in “ Prehistoric Man,” page 412, gives an illustra­tion and comments on an “ inscribed ax ” that was found in New Jersey, and so claims a notice here. We will quote the doctor in full con­cerning it. He says: “ In 1859, Dr. John C. Evans, of Pemberton, N. J., communicated to the American Ethnological Society an account of a stone ax inscribed in similar [that is, to the Yarmouth Bay Stone,’] unknown characters, which had been recently plowed up on a neighboring farm. The ax, which measures about six inches long by three and a half broad, is engraved from a drawing furnished to me by Dr. Evans. Dr. E. H. Davis, after carefully examining the original, informs me that, though the graven characters have been partially retouched in the process of cleaning it, their edges present an appearance of age consistent with the idea of their genuineness, and the circumstances attending its production furnish no grounds for doubting its authen­ticity. Two of the characters are placed on one side in the groove for the handle; the others apparently form a continuous line, running round both sides of the ax-blade, as extended here, (figure 50.)”

We probably spoke too hastily in attributing to plow scratches, such a case as this, of an inscribed ax; * but, nevertheless, we have no faith in an ancient foreign origin of these figures. If not intended as a hoax by some witless idler, then it is the meaningless fancy of some eccentric aboriginal. But one single fact has come under our own notice that in any way bears upon the subject of the age of these relics.

The instance referred to was as follows: On the 3d of July, 1869, a large white-oak, measuring twenty-seven feet in circumference at three feet from the ground, during a high gale of wind was blown down. A short time afterward the immense stump was uprooted, preparatory to leveling the ground. The hole that the extracted roots left measured seven feet in depth and thirty-three in circumference. Four feet below the bottom of this hole, or eleven feet from the surface of the ground, we found a very rude stone ax, that was entangled in a mass of fibrous roots that had been cut off from the main mass of roots of the tree. In this case an ax must have been buried in the earth before this old tree was an acorn. Now, as to the age of the tree. There were not less than five hundred rings clearly to be traced on a section of the tree afterward made; and a large portion of the center and another portion about the circumference could not be determined accurately, but which, on comparison with so much of the tree as retained the rings sufficiently distinctly to be counted, might safely be estimated at as many more circles.

Without allowing for any time to have elapsed from the occurrence of the ax falling on the ground, or of its intentional burial, we have here with considerable certainty the long stretch of one thousand years that this ax has been quietly resting in the ground.


Chapter IV.


We propose to consider, under the name of celts, the class of relics that approach most nearly to the ordinary stone axes, but which ate without any groove or other indication that a handle has been attached. These celts vary more in size among themselves than in any other feature; and we have separated the specimens obtained into two classes, viz, celts and “skinning-knives,” the latter being, in our judgment, too small to be used as weapons, under which heading we think the ordi­nary celts, or ungrooved axes, must be placed.

Considered with reference solely to size, we can be moderately sure of correct nomenclature in saying that a stone dressed down until its thickness is less than half the width, with one end sharpened to a cut­ting-edge, and the length not less than five inches, may be taken as a celt, or ungrooved ax. Still, it must be borne in mind that smaller grooved axes occur.

The use or uses to which some of the larger of these celts were put is very difficult to conjecture, inasmuch as no trace of a handle having been attached can be detected. Mr. John Evans, however, describes several methods employed by savages in hafting just such stone imple­ments. A fact to be taken into consideration, however, with reference to our New Jersey specimens, is, that the great prevalence of grooved axes renders it probable that the ungrooved were used without handles, since grooved or ordinary axes occur, made of the same hard materials as the hand-axes, viz, porphyry and hornstone. Concerning the use of these hand-axes, or “ polished celts,” Mr. Evans remarks: “Among modern savages we have instances of similar tools being used in the hand without the intervention of any haft, though among the Austra­lians the butt-end is sometimes enveloped in a mass of resinous matter, so as to form a knob which fits the hand.” And again: “They were also employed in times of war, as weapons of offense and defense, as a supplementary kind of tomahawk.”

The term “wedge” has been applied to this pattern of “ax,” and may very possibly be a correct designation for the flattened specimens, but scarcely applicable to those that are nearly or quite cylindrical or conical in shape. The term “wedge,” however, suggests the use of a hammer, and we do not usually find the back of the so-called wedge exhib­iting traces of having been struck with such stone hammers as were in use when these “wedges” were made.

Figure 22 imperfectly represents a specimen of the larger ungrooved axes, that show but little trace of human workmanship, other than the finely*wrought edge, and a limited polished surface on the upper and lower margins. It measures seven and three-quarters inches in length, by three and one half inches in width, at a point a little in advance of the middle. It is of ordinary sandstone, and originally was very nearly of its present shape. One side is much flatter than the other, and ap­pears to have been first pecked away and then somewhat polished. The margins have been polished for a short distance from the edge, and, on the lower margin, there is a very smooth surface, little over an inch in extent either way, that appears to be such peculiar polished space, which has been produced by the friction of the wood,” as described by Lubbock as exhibited in some specimens found in Europe. There does not appear to have been any hard hammering upon the head of this stone celt; but, if the handle had been attached after the manner of the grooved ax, as the polished space seems to indicate, we cannot see how a hard blow could fail to displace the implement.

While such celts are usually cobble stones from the river-bed, mate­rially altered only at one end in the production of the edge, many are porphyry pebbles, handsomely polished over their whole surface, and not only admirably edged, but the opposite end frequently ground to a very beautiful, tapering point. Such point headed polished porphyry axes are among the very handsomest of all the relics found wifchin the limits of the State. This pattern (figures 23 and 24) is found in every part of the globe where polished stone implements occur, showing it best met those common wants of all mankind, wherever they may have happened to be; and possibly, if we could determine one use to which such axes were adapted, of a strictly universal nature, it would be safe to apply a name suggested by such use to this form, now known by the objectionable term of celt.

Sir John Lubbockt figures a celt, similar to figure 23, from Ireland; Nilsson figures them from Scandinavia; and the pattern is nearly approached in axes from Accra, West Africa, figured by Sir J. Lubbock. Of a porphyry polished celt, similar in shape to figure 23, that the writer forwarded to Sir J. Lubbock, tbat archaeologist writes: “The polished ax about which you inquire is very similar, as you suppose, to the one figured in Prehistoric Times, so much so, indeed, that I had placed it in a drawer with similar axes from various other parts of the world to show how much they are alike.”

While this form (figure 23) is usually of porphyry and highly polished, it is sometimes met with of softer mineral, and the specimen in question is peculiarly interesting on this account 5 for, although of the tapering form, and accurately outlined, it is of sandstone, and pecked into shape, having a highly-polished edge only, instead of being so worked over the whole surface.

We have ventured to call figure 25 “celt,” rather thana “skin dressei,” because the cutting-edge varies decidedly in its character from the gen­eral run of “ skinning-knives.” The edge, it will be seen, is narrow, and slopes suddenly from the thickest portion of the implement, and is not produced by a gradual slope from the back of the instrument, as in the majority of so-called skin-dressers, or skinning-knives. There may, per­haps, be no sufficient reason for calling figure 25 a celt, since its size cer­tainly precludes the idea of its utilization for chopping, unless for very slender and tender marrow-bones; but we have a good example to follow in so doing, as we shall see.

Sir John Lubbock,* in some “ Notes on Stone Implements from Africa and Syria,” gives natural size figures of stone axes, which certainly are identical in shape, and have been used, no doubt, in an identical manner. The author says, with reference to them: “ Some of the West African axes, as will be seen by the figures, (plate ii, figures 1 and 2,) closely re­semble some of the smaller axes so common in Western Europe;” and adds, as we have already observed of the preceding pattern, “Indeed, this type may be said to be cosmopolitan, and needs no description.”

We find that Sir John Lubbock simply uses the term “ax” in speaking of these African relics, and if it is applicable in the one case it is in the other, but unless the term is properly applied to implements that cannot be made to cut in any useful manner, which is not the case, the designa­tion is certainly a misnomer.

Figure 26 may properly be placed in the same “class” with the preceding. Although a much less finished specimen, it was unquestionably put to the same uses. It is made of a fine-grained porphyritic stone, and has been polished over its entire surface. This little “celt” measures two and one-eighth inches in length by one and three-quarters in width. The cutting (or skin-detaching) edge was originally good. The back has a ridge running obliquely across it, from which the surfaces slope at an angle of forty-five degrees. Had this specimen been used as a wedge for splitting wood, certainly the back was not favorably fashioned for receiving a hard blow; moreover, the ridge, which in that case would have been much battered, is still moderately well preserved. This double-faced condition of the backs of small axes is not unfrequent among the grooved cobble stone specimens.

Localities known to have been the former sites of Indian villages are where these celts are now found in greatest abundance; a fact which does not hold good with reference to the grooved stone axes; although these, too, have been found in “deposits” occasionally, as described in Chapter III. In the instance referred to in the preceding chapter, of a deposit of fifty polished porphyry celts, we have possibly an indication that the use of these implements was of a domestic and not warlike character, supposing that the specimens were buried for the purpose of concealing them from an enemy, should a sudden raid be made upon the village. If such celts were weapons, they would always be in demand, but as domestic implements, there might be times of consider­able duration when they would not be required. If so, what method more natural than to bury them I The fact that undoubted weapons are also found buried in considerable numbers does not, we think, mili­tate against this supposition, since, in the burial of weapons, the deposits were made by the makers of such specimens, and were usually in sub­terranean arsenals; the specimens being generally in an unfinished state.

Chapter V.


We have seen that all the specimens as yet described under the head of axes and celts have been, without exception, pebbles or “cobble-stones,” worn into shape by polishing-stones or pecked by a stone hammer into the required form. We have nowhere made any allusion to a chipped ax. The term “ chipped ” was purposely reserved, as it were, for flint like Stone-cutting implements, which we further propose to designate as hatchets, to distinguish them from “axes” proper; that is, pecked or polished pebble implements. The distinction between the two is, that an ax has a polished edge, and a hatchet a chipped edge. 

Flint hatchets (which in New Jersey are never true flint) are found associated with other implements, as arrow-points and spear-heads, in very scanty numbers, if we consider the very hatchet-like specimens only as really the implement in question, and consider those as “implements” having no particular use in view, or as rude spear-heads that do not present the ideal outline of the hatchet in every detail. If we chance, however, upon the site of an Indian village, or if, along the river or creek bank, we come upon a mussel-shell heap or fresh-water Kjokken- modding, these rough flint hatchets will be found much more abundant, and sometimes even sufficiently numerous to be quite characteristic of the particular locality.

The flint hatchets vary considerably in size and somewhat in shape, and are always of jasper or white quartz. The latter, however, are rare; at least, we have only met with some eight or ten during four years’ systematic collecting. The jasper forms are of all the colors that appear in that mineral—red, yellow, brown, blue, green, chocolate, and varie­gated. They never exhibit the fine finish of some of the arrow-points, and appear to have been made, in a great measure, of portions of the jasper masses that could not be fashioned into those remarkably delicate shapes which, as will be seen in another chapter, are exhibited in some of the arrow-points that we have gathered. Jasper is not found in New Jersey in situ; fragments and an occasional pebble in the river-gravels being all that occur, except in the shape of finished  “relics.” The fragments, however, are abundant about sites of aboriginal villages. Sandy fields, with no stone of any kind near, are occasionally thickly dotted with the little flakes and failures of some ancient arrow-maker.

Figure 27 is a beautiful mass of many-colored jasper, red and yellow predominating, that has been laboriously chipped until brought to its present shape, which, we think, warrants its being designated a hatchet; but, indeed, were there not other specimens to be found that more clearly show the work of man, it might be considered merely a chance-shaped fragment of a jasper bowlder. We give it the first place in our list of hatchets because of its size, it being the largest specimen that we have met with, and as serving as a good link between this form of weapon and the axes proper; and certainly, from its size, it was fitted to perform the duties of any ax we have figured. The hatchet (figure 27) measures six inches in length by three and one quarter inches in width. It is chipped to an edge at one end and along the upper and lower margins. The amount of work expended upon it is very great, and we should judge to very little purpose, if wood-cutting was the intended use of the implement; but for mussel-shell crushing, or, better yet, bone- splitting—its most likely use—it is moderately well adapted. The illustration is very imperfect in its details, although correct in outline. It shows far too few of the innumerable surfaces caused by the forcing-off of small flakes, from every portion of the surface, to give a good idea of the specimen itself. The edge, which was apparently much sharper, has been dulled by use and long weathering. It bears no traces of a handle having ever been attached; and yet it would seem to be comparatively useless unless wielded by such an appendage.

Figure 28 represents a not uncommon form of flint hatchet, that we considered, when we found the specimen figured here, as rare. Since then we have met with a large number, all agreeing with it in size, shape, and material. It may be questioned, perhaps, if such an implement should be called a hatchet; many would look upon it as a scraper.” We shall see, however, that those specimens, so abundant in New Jersey, and which we have called scrapers,” are much smaller chipped flints as a class, and have a handle of the mineral itself; the complete implement being chipped out of one piece. We, therefore, incline to the belief that this specimen is a double-edged hatchet, if the ends were used in catting, or a single-edged one, if a bone handle was ever attached to the lower, straighter margin. With a handle so attached, it certainly could then be used advantageously as a hatchet or chopping- knife, and, when sharper, as an instrument for detaching the tough hide of the bison or deer, both of which, from the crumbling bones that we have occasionally exhumed, we now know were formerly found in New Jersey. Again, such a hatchet would be useful in breaking apart the tough vertebrae of the sturgeon, once so numerous in the Delaware River. These immense fish frequent the shallow portions of the stream during the summer, and are, even now, captured by the spear when found in such localities. If the stone-age people valued the sturgeon as an article of food, which is probable, they would require the very largest and sharpest of their stone weapons to capture it and to divide the carcass. An occasional glance at the fauna of the locality from which we gather relics will give us many valuable hints as to the probable use of the various implements. Again, may not such a chipped flint as figure 28 have been a sort of handy comeby, and not specially set apart for any particular use or uses. Some such shaped flint, boue- handled, as we have described, would be admirable for splitting marrow­bones, crushing large mussels, girdling trees, or cutting saplings for lance-handles; and, if put to any or all these uses, must we not call it a hatchet.

Figure 29 represents a form of flint hatchet that approaches the  “lancetead” in shape, but is, of course, too short and broad to be used for such purpose. Having a well-defined edge upon each side, as well as in front, where it becomes obtusely-pointed, it appears evident that it was used to split rather than to pierce, if a handle was attached, we suppose it to have been placed at the flattened or straight base, and to have been of bone, as in figure 214 of Lubbock’s Prehistoric Times, second edition, although this illustration referred to is that of a knife, and not a hatchet. We think it not improbable that just such “flints” as these were inserted in long wooden clubs as teeth, and that dobs thus formed were used in war. The war-club was, and is, a favorite weapon, and the vast majority of such specimens as figure 29 were very possibly used in this manner.

Figure 29 bears much resemblance, except in being more pointed at one end, to modem Esquimaux scrapers, as figured by Sir John Lubbock,* but is just double the size. There is this difference, however, between either the modem or the prehistoric scrapers and such an implement as we here designate a hatchet, viz, that the former have one flat, smooth surface, the plane of a single cleavage, while the hatchets have an edge, beveled from each side, which are both equally well chipped. These more elaborate hatchets may have been used as scrapers.

We would also call attention to the similarity of our specimens, as represented by figure 29, to a flint implement from Le Moustier, also figured by Lubbock. Although figure 20 is somewhat larger, and has not “one side left unchipped,” the variation in general characteristics is very slight, and an identity of the uses of the two specimens is highly probable. We, too, have met with some specimens of this pattern of “flint hatchet,” with such an unchipped surface as is particularly pointed out in the Le Moustier implement by Lubbock. Such identity of Eu­ropean and American specimens of flint-work, even to the details, is certainly remarkable.

Figures 30, 31, 32, and 33 represent the smaller flint hatchets, which are much more abundant than the larger examples which we have just described. They do not vary very greatly in their general outline, being usually triangular, or nearly so, in shape, and varying but little from three inches in length by two inches in greatest breadth. We have gathered several dozens of these small hachets, usually associated with arrow-points and spear heads and the other ordinary shapes of surface- relics.

On the sites of the long-past labors of “Indian arrow-makers,” and we have visited several such localities, these small hatchets are found in an unfinished state, mingled with the mass of chippings that accumulated during their manufacture, and that of arrow points, spear-heads, &c. The unfinished specimens are almost always such as have been discarded, in consequence of some defect in the mineral which was not discovered until the specimen was well toward completion. This fact combats, we think, the assertion, often made, that the Indian arrow-maker was a good practical mineralogist. These specimens were always commenced from, masses of the rock not a great deal larger than the intended implement, and small enough to develop to the experienced the weak points of the mineral.

As already stated, the more usual sizes of hatchets are such as we have figured, (figures 30-33.) Their size should be no objection to the proposition that they were used as cutting-tools. We have already seen that axes are equally small. Sir John Lubbock figures one from Ire­land, which is as small; and, on page 182, speaking of Swiss axes, says, “With few exceptions, they were small, especially when compared with the magnificent specimens from Denmark. In length, they varied from six inches to one while the cutting-edge had generally a width of from fifteen to twenty lines ;” and, again, on page 03, speaking of so called “ axes,” or hatchets of the Ejokkenmoddings, says, “ They are * * * rudely triangular or quadrangular in shape, with a cutting-edge at the broader end, and two and a half to five and a half inches in length, with a breadth of one and a half to two and a half inches.” Now, the New Jersey specimens differ only in this, that both sides are chipped 5 other­wise they are identical. As we have abundant reasons for knowing that mussels (TJnio and Anodonta) were a favorite food, these little flint hatchets may have been used principally to crush their shells, inasmuch as very many of these implements have been found with heaps of the burned shells.

We would here call especial attention to the rude, green jasper hatchet, (figure 30,) which has its edge derived by striking off a large chip, struck at one blow, giving it, on one side, a smooth surface, which edge meets with the opposite more gradually wrought surface. This specimen is of peculiar interest in agreeing so nearly with an illustration of a Euro­pean Kjokkenmodding ax, given by Sir John Lubbock, in “ Prehistoric Times,” plate 1, figure 8.

In conclusion, we would direct attention particularly to the hatchet, (figure 33,) which very nearly approaches the lance or arrow head and indeed it may properly be one of these two implements rather than a hatchet. We place it here, however, as showing how readily some of these smaller weapons run into other forms. While figure 33 would make a small spear head, and be well adapted for that purpose, yet, as it appears to us, it is quite as well shaped for a hatchet as any of the preceding figures.

The few chipped jasper implements, which we have designated as “ flint hatchets,” resemble very closely the smaller specimens of rough- hewn celts figured by Mr. Evans in the fourth chapter of his work. There are some points of difference, however, which are well worth indicating, and the principal variation is, that our jasper specimens are, as a rule, thinner, and show a much more elongated oval section; indeed, in section, the New Jersey specimens are quite irregular, the mineral not being as easy to work as the true flint. This difference, however, does not arise because the jasper will not yield to chipping and pressure; since for symmetry and accuracy of the beveled edges, some of our jas­per arrow-points are not excelled in specimens of a similar character in any, other part of the world.

There appears to be fully as much variation in outline in the English celts of this class as in the flint hatchets, such as we have described. In all, a well-defined cutting-edge obtains, and this feature decides the use of the implement, call it by whatever name one may. The celts of England and flint hatchets of New Jersey are so nearly similar that we doubt not that their uses were identical j which uses, however, it would be difficult to determine accurately, as our only means of learning their history is the scarcely safe plan of judging of them, as allied to similar implements of iron now in use.

Some of the flint implements figured by Lartet and Christy, in Reliquiae Aquitanicae bear considerable resemblance to the specimens we have figured in this chapter; but, just as in the preceding comparison with English rough-hewn celts, we find the French specimens are much thicker, and shaped by the detachment of much larger flakes, than, as a rule, fly off from jasper when it is worked. Indeed, it would appear as though the jasper, agate, hornstone, and chert, of which our “ Hint implements ” are made, is really better adapted to the purpose than true flint for the cutting-edges of the implements found here in New Jersey are much sharper and more regular than the same are in the allied implements made of true flint and this fact may explain why the true flint celts had their edges ground, to make them sharp, which grinding is wholly wanting to the u flint hatchets,” such as we have described. The edges here are so finely chipped and sharp that grinding or polishing is unnecessary. We doubt if a ground-edged celt could be put to any use to which the chipped jasper hatchet would not be equally well adapted.


Chapter VI.


Wherever we find arrow-heads, and other larger specimens, more properly designated spear-points, there also occur in varying numbers, but nowhere rare, certain leaf-shaped and irregularly triangular-worked flints, which we will call lance-heads. A distinction is made be­tween the lance and the spear, inasmuch as the former is without a notched or stemmed base, or both, which features singularly or together characterize the spear-head proper, which, also, are smaller as a class than lance-heads, but too large to be of use if placed at the end of an arrow. The size, however, is not of much importance in distinguishing the various types, since all classes of weapons invariably merge into each other.

There is considerable variation in the minerals used in the production of these lance-heads, and, in localities where they are abundant, are usually of the native rocks most easily worked. About the Delaware Eiver, and, indeed, throughout the State, the majority of these specimens are of slate, the harder, more finely grained, least shelly layers of this material having been utilized exclusively. Our collection of them, all from the neighborhood of Trenton, N. J., consists of slate, yellow jas­per, milky quartz, agate, and a micaceous sandstone, seldom used for any purpose, as far as our collecting-experience extends.

While these lance-heads are, we might almost say, never wrought with, that care which characterizes arrow and spear points, still they have had sufficient care bestowed upon them to show that they were for an important purpose. They are quite abundant in the bed of the river at Trenton; whether lost during a battle, or overboard during fishing ex­cursions, it is impossible to state but while, as a class, they certainly have a very warlike appearance, they would make admirable sturgeon-spears, for which purpose they were probably used, since sturgeon was once extremely numerous in the Delaware.

Figure 34 represents an average specimen of these long, slender, fine- edged slates, which we have designated lance-heads. They vary little from five to seven and one-half inches in length by from two to three and one-half inches in width; the longer specimens are usually the more slender ones, suggesting the possibility of the broader and shorter specimens having had a different use from the others; but whether for war or hunting, the larger, more slender slates appear to us to be the more effective weapon.

In no one of these lance-heads have we met with any deep notches in the sides, near the base, indicating whereby they were attached to hafts or handles, as is shown in an English specimen figured by Jewitt. Speaking of this specimen, he says, “It will be noticed that its sides, as they begin to diminish, are deeply serrated for fastening with thongs to a haft or handle.” One specimen in our collection has a single deep notch, presenting the appearance of having been purposely made, in chipping the specimen, but it is within one and three-fourths inches of the point, and the lance-head itself measures five and one- half inches in length. Many of these slate lance-heads are weather* worn, the faces produced by chipping being very nearly obliterated. Such worn specimens are associated with the less-worn and sharply# edged ones, and are supposed to be older specimens, discarded in con­sequence of the loss of the extreme point or the edge being dulled, and replaced by newer and better ones. The abundance of these lance- heads may be judged from the fact that in an area of not over one hundred acres in extent we have collected more than three hundred perfect specimens, besides a great number of fragments.

There is a curious fact to which attention is called with reference to these pieces of lance-heads, viz, that fully 95 per cent, of these frag­ments are the pointed halves of the specimens, their excellent state of preservation showing that they were broken off while the weapon was comparatively new. So unusual is it, in our own experience, to find the basal half of a lance-head, that we have sometimes thought it possible these so-called broken lance-heads were in reality not frag­ments, but purposely fashioned for war-club teeth, as was suggested with reference to one of the forms of chipped jasper under the heading of Hatchets.

As these points of lance-heads are very abundant in some limited localities, it may be that they were broken in battle, and that the owner of the lance retained the handle with the base still attached, to be re­headed. If such were the case, of course the battle-field would have about the proportion of points to bases, i. e., 95 per cent.

Figure 351 represents the largest and finest lance-head that has ever come under our observation. It measures eleven and one-quarter inches in length by but two and seven-eighths inches in width, and is placed at the head of the list of this class of specimens on account of its size and symmetry.

Of the history of this magnificent specimen we know nothing, further than that it was presented to the East India Marine Society, at Salem, Mass., by Jos. Story, in 1824. It is now in the museum of the Peabody Academy of Science of the same place, and is labeled as coming from New Jersey; associated with it is a specimen of another class, to be figured and described in a succeeding chapter. It is of the same min­eral, also from New Jersey, and presented by Mr. Story in 1824.

Figure 35 is chipped from yellow jasper, the same in every particular with the many jasper specimens that we have procured near Trenton, N. J. A glance at the illustration will, it is thought, satisfy any one as to its intended use, however difficult it may seem to us to securely attach to it a shaft such as would be required to effectively wield so formida­ble a weapon. Certainly, the well-defined point, and the width of the implement, in comparison with its length, both show that its use was for piercing. Any manner of using other than by thrusting would certainly break a piece of stone so slender and somewhat brittle; and if an edge had been intended to be used as a knife, would not the opposite edge have been left blunt, or at least, not been as well chipped as the cutting-edge? And if a bone handle had been fastened along one side, would not some trace of such handle be visible?

As specimens of such large lance-heads are very rare in New Jersey, it is more than probable that they were the peculiar property of “ chiefs,” or “kings,” and possibly were used on state occasions as a badge of office, rather than on the field of battle. There is too much work on such a lance-head as figure 35 to risk its being broken in a fight.

Messrs. Squier and Davis figure a flint similar to figure 35 in size and mineral, but varying from it in being pointed at each end. After mentioning the use to which the stemmed examples were put, they add, “There are others, however, the manner of using which is not so obvious. No. 3 is an example. It measures eleven inches in length by two and a half in greatest breadth. It has been suggested that it was fastened at right angles to a handle and used as a sort of battle-ax.” We think this latter suggestion a very plausible one, as the specimen is double-pointed, and with a handle at the center would make a good “double-headed” weapon; but, the base of figure 35 being as markedly blunt as the point is acute, such use cannot be applied to the specimen we have here described.

Flint lance-head-shaped implements, quite similar to many of our surface-specimens of jasper, but less symmetrical as a class, are charac­teristic of the “drift” in Europe. Tylor says, “A set of characteristic drift-implements would consist of certain tapering instruments like huge lance-heads, shaped, edged, and pointed, by taking off a large number of facets, in a way which shows a good deal of skill and feeling for symmetry; smaller leaf shaped instruments; flints partly shaped and edged, but with one end left unwrought, evidently for holding in the hand,” &c.

While the New Jersey specimens as a class are probably smaller, they were fashioned about eqaally as carefully as those Mr. Tylor has described.

Figure 36 is a beautiful specimen of a lance-head of bluish-gray “ flint,” mineralogically unlike any other specimen in our collection. It is the leaf-form of arrow-head enlarged, and is of excellent workmanship. This measures a little less than five inches in length by two and one-eighth inches in greatest width. We have met with but few specimens of this class of the size of figure 36 made of anything but slate, the jasper exam­ples generally being considerably larger. It would be interesting to know if these lance-heads were considered by their original owners as different implements, the size determining the ase. It at least seems fair to infer that these smaller examples were more used in hunting than in war, and just such a lance-head as this is adapted to the chase of such aquatic animals as are still to be found within the limits of our State, as the otter, muskrat, and, until within a few years, the beaver. These animals were hunted with spears, especially in winter, and figure 29 is still keen- edged enough to be as effective as the steel spear-point of the present day.

Figure 37 represents a good average specimen of the lance-heads of yellow jasper, that are met with about Trenton, N. J., but are compara­tively rare elsewhere in the State. The majority of the specimens found are somewhat narrower, and a little longer than the one figured, which is the only specimen we possess. Figure 37 measures five and one- quarter inches in length by three and one-half inches in width. Neatly chipped from a large flake of yellow-brown jasper, its edges are well defined, as also the point and base. It is nowhere thicker than five- eighths of an inch, and is far less heavy than its large extent of surface would indicate. Whether used in war or in hunting, it would be diffi­cult to determine, but it is of such dimensions as to combine the hatchet with the lance, and, in accordance with the mounting, would deal a tell­ing cutting blow or thrust. This specimen is one of a number that were discovered in plowing a piece of newly-drained meadow near Trenton, N. J. * They were found buried with the points up, and surrounded by a sufficient number lying flat to wall them in and hold them erect had they been originally placed upon the surface. The collection numbered about one hundred and fifty specimens. As stated in the Naturalist,t we had at that time found no isolated specimens, but since then careful search has yielded several, all, however, from the immediate neighbor­hood of this deposit. We give elsewhere a figure of a second example of this deposit, the specimen, though, not being a lance-head, but an agricultural implement. (See chapter on “ Shovels and hoes.”)

Figure 38 represents the minimum size of such “chipped flints” as we would call lance-heads. It is an exaggeration of the very common leaf-shaped arrow-head, but too heavy to have been used as such. This specimen measures three and one-half inches in length by two and one-quarter inches in width. It is chipped from bluish-gray jasper, and varies but little from the preceding except in size. The edges are still quite sharp and the point good, although the extreme point is appar­ently worn away. There is nothing about this specimen or the preced­ing to indicate in what manner a handle was attached, and yet without handles these implements seem comparatively valueless, the cutting- edges extending so far down as to jeopardize the hand if held naked when striking.

These smaller specimens of lance-heads are far less abundant than those of the larger, more slender type, which usually are made of slate, as figured in the first pages of this chapter.

Mr. Evans has figured and described several specimens of well-chipped flint implements, which he calls “ daggers.” They are usually longer, but otherwise identical with the average slate and jasper specimens we have called lance-heads, particularly such specimens as figure 36. Mr. Evans mentions, however, that these same specimens are also termed spear-heads, lance-heads, &c. We cannot think they were ever used as “ daggers ” or “ knives ” by the aborigines of New Jersey; either name suggesting a short handle, and the use that of a tool rather than that of a weapon ; for surely no dagger, as a weapon, would be useful with a blade as obtusely pointed as even figure 35. We have to describe in another chapter chipped flints, that we doubt not were true knives; but they differ materially from those we term “lance-heads.” The whole finish, size, and shape of the daggers figured by Mr. Evans, and the “ lance-heads ” illustrated in this chapter, would show that a long shaft was originally attached, and that the weapon was then used in trans­fixing animals in the chase, or, giving the weapon all the force that could be brought to bear upon it, in impaling an enemy in battle. As a head for such lance, these specimens seem in every way appropriate; but we perceive nothing desirable about them as daggers, especially after examining the beautiful flint-daggers of Scandinavia, which are in all respects admirable for the purposes implied by the term dagger.

There are abundant instances where the use and proper name of an implement are matters of doubt; but to call such specimens as we have designated lance-heads by a name that expresses a use to which we could not put them only increases the confusion caused by want of some safe rule ^y which to be guided. So, too, these “ lance-heads ” have been called knives, and excellent spear-points have been so called by Nilsson. He says, “A spear is, properly speaking, nothing but a knife fastened to a long shaft. It is, therefore, often impossi­ble to judge from the blade whether it has been a spear or a knife.” Of the American specimen above alluded to, he says that the handle was five inches long, and a loop was fastened to the handle. Judging from the plate, the loop and short handle were to be fastened, the one by the other, to a long shaft, which would thus make a good weapon of what seems now but a very awkward tool/and one that appears the more un­necessary as excellent and undoubted knives are quite abundant.


Chapter VII.


We may, perhaps, be charged with having carried the separation of relics into classes too far; and that, in some cases, we have been making a distinction where none exists. Indeed, where but comparatively few specimens are found scattered over fields, the impression is natural tbat the whim only of the arrow-maker dictated the various shapes and sizes; and that all the smaller “pointed flints” are arrow-heads, unless thesize is such as positively to render them unfit for such a purpose.

We have been fortunate enough, however, to make very large collec­tions of these relics, (over six thousand spear and arrow points,) and have been able to satisfy at least ourselves of the correctness of the separate designations adopted, inasmuch as the circumstances under which a great many of these specimens were found show that, while the lance-heads were largely, if not wholly, a war weapon, these so-called spear-points were as exclusively used in the chase. While lances are often abundant in a limited locality, and very frequently broken into halves, indicating a battle-field, spears are found singly, scattered over the whole country, upland and lowland, except where a great mixture of everything indicates a former settlement or an ancient arrow-maker’s work-shop.

Figure 39 represents a carefully-chipped dirty-white agate, whose size, outline, shape of base, and comparative thickness render it a good type for snch of our relics as are designated “hunting-spears.” Figure 39 measures four and five-eighths inches in length by oue and one-half inches in width at the base, where it begins to taper gradually to the point. The notches at the base are deep, similarly curved, and have the stem well shaped, projecting directly from them, but short, consid­ering the length of the main portion of the specimen.

The size at once indicates it use : a head for a long shaft, that was intended for thrusting at an object, and then withdrawn, the attach­ment of head to handle being secured by the deep notches at the base of the specimen. The length of this specimen is sufficient to securely its use, any of the larger mammals of the period of the occupancy of the country by the aborigines, unless it be the elk or #apiti, and, even in this case, a thrust between the ribs would cause an unpleasant wound were the spear-head buried its full length in the animal’s body.

More care has been exercised in making this specimen than was pot upon lance-heads as a class; and as huntiug-implements were more easily recovered than war-weapons, and less likely to be broken, we can readily see that pains would be taken to have more effective points and edges on specimens that were less likely to be lost or injured in using. Hunt­ing, too, was the sole means (if we except maize-culture) of existence; and war, although certain at intervals, was not an every-day affair, and thus is afforded another reason for the belief that these more carefully wrought specimens were set apart as a most important, if not the most important, implements for securing food.

Figure 40, like the preceding, represents a perfect specimen of the hunting-spear, being somewhat shorter and broader than figure 39. This specimen is chipped from a yellow jasper, veined with glassy quartz, a favorite mineral with the arrow-makers. It is very well, but not as finely cut as are many arrow-points, and shows, by its whole appearance, that it was worked with a view rather to strength and dura­bility than to elegance of finish. The point and sides are still very sharp, and capable of inflicting a fearful wound if thrust with moderate force. This specimen measures three and three fourths inches in length by a little less than one-half this measurement in greatest width.

Figure 41 is an elegantly-outlined and admirably-finished specimen of a spear-head, considering that the mineral out of which it was chipped is a tough, micaceous, quartz-like rock, which, in the shape of glacial bowlders, abounds in the drift about the central portion of the State. It has a most uncertain fracture, and was very little used as material for arrow or spear heads, as far as our experience extends.

This specimen exhibits a peculiarity not observable in any other of the series in our collection, but one which is seen in one of our arrow- points, viz, in having a twist to the body of the spear-point, whereby the edges are at a slight angle to the barbs, or projecting points, of the base. This feature, which is most noticeable when viewing the speci­men from the point downward, extends along the whole extent of the sides. We believe this peculiarity to have been intentional on the part of its maker, and was designed to give the spear a rotary motion, by fastening to a short haft, probably feathered, and known as a dart. Although worn now, the point has the appearance of being once very sharp, so that a strong throw would enable it to pierce the skin of small mammals. 

Figure 42 represents a very fine specimen of a beautiful style of spear­heads, which, however, have invariably lost their stems, suggesting that being thrust in only as far as the commencement of the stem, the animal has been able to break it there, and possibly escape. This sug­gestion conflicts, we know, with a previous assertion that spears were less apt to be lyoken than war-lances, but it would be very strange if occasional hunting-spears were not broken in the chase, and the slender stem, in comparison with the width of the blade of the implement, ren­ders this form peculiarly frangible. This pattern of spear head is not at all common, but having found several examples it cannot be properly considered as “quite rare.”

In workmanship, the specimen in question excels that of figure 40, a characteristic possibly due to the greater tractability of the mineral, which is a dark-yellow jasper, wholly free from veins of quartz or other minerals, and therefore most favorable for working.

It will be noticed that we have outlined a base in the illustration as simply a short straight projection of the width only of the fractured surface. We think this was the shape of the complete specimen, since a few fragments of about this size and shape have been picked up, none of which, however, would fit any of the specimens that we gathered. If our hypothesis as to the shape of the stem is correct, it was probably simply inserted into a slit made in the end of the haft, and, while secure enough when being carried about, was probably dislodged in the body of the animal into which it was thrust. Since the wound it caused would almost certainly be fatal, the spear-point could be recovered. Of course, such a spear-point as this, although intended for hunting, would be valuable, and was probably used in war. Perhaps no relic (used for a single purpose) was exclusively available for several uses; but everything considered, we believe this and the preceding and fol­lowing spears to have been intended for hunting.

Figure 43 is a very beautiful specimen, a very unusual form of spear­head, chipped from a pale pea-green mass of jasper. It is a pretty, regularly-outlined triangle of jasper, the base measuring two and five- eighths inches in width, which is the exact length of the specimen from the point to the commencement of the tang or stem. The stem itself is but a little over three-fourths of an inch in length, and a little broader than the length at the base of the body of the specimen. It suggests the chase rather than war. But in either, it would not require much force to drive such a spear-point through an animal, even though it might come in contact with a bone.

Figure 44 represents the ordinary hunting-spear, made of slate and other comparatively soft stone, so abundant in some portions of New Jersey. Three inches in total length by about one and one-half in greatest width, as a class they differ somewhat in the details of outline, but have a general resemblance that at once distinguishes them from everything else, unless they are looked upon as simply large arrow­heads. We have found very many single specimens of this form of spear-point in “ out of the way ” places along the shores of small streams, formerly and still marshy, and worthless for grain or grass, and therefore the resort of some of the few mammals that are rapidly becoming extinct by the encroachments of man. The finding of such single speci­mens in likely hunting-places is more confined to just such spear heads as the specimen figured than to any other class of relics, not excepting even axes, which are pretty evenly distributed over our State.

Figure 45 represents a rude slate hunting-spear, such as is occasion­ally found wherever relics of any description at all occur. It seems a little curious that so few specimens of this pattern, made of slate, should be met with, as it certainly is a good form for hunting or war purposes; nor are those of this shape made of jasper very abundant. Specimens of this size, of any mineral, are not common; and nearly all that we have found, and the majority of the specimens in the various cabinets we have visited, have been in a more or less fragmentary condition.

Figure 45 is now dull along the whole extent of its edges or sides; the point has been broken off, and a “blunt” point chipped subsequently, which is now also weatherworn; and the entire surface is now worn and appears soft. The decomposition, however, does not extend very deeply into the mineral, but appears to be rather a thin coating, as rust covers exposed surfaces of iron; and like the latter, too, the decomposed stone coating this specimen protects the mineral beneath from further decay, as the rust protects the metal.

Figure 46 well represents that even smaller form of spear-point that very nearly approaches the arrow-heads in size. We have previously considered it as the latter, but, by experiment with some of these inter­mediate forms, we are satisfied that the arrow was never tipped with specimens as broad as this, although occasionally an arrow-head was made and used with equal or even greater length. The one in question is of slate, the stem of which was formerly a little more prolonged, but the difference between the size as figured and the unbroken spear-point was trifling. It has measured two and one-fourth inches in length by one and one-half inches in width at the base. Any specimen, even of this length, that was narrower, we should class as an arrow-point.

Figure 47 represents an odd form of relic, bearing resemblance rather to a “scraper” than to either spear or arrow point. From close exam­ination of the base, however, we are satisfied that it was not intended for a scraper ;* the condition of the chipped edges and point indicate clearly that they were intended to be the useful features of the specimen. Figure 47 is chipped from a mass of mottled slate, and has by use or long exposure become quite smooth; it measures two and three-eighths inches in length by one and one-half inches in width at the broadest portion of the basal half. It is not apparent how this specimen was secured to a shaft, but the evident worthlessness of the implement, unless so attached, renders it certain that, inasmuch as the form is by no means an uncom­mon one, the aborigines contrived a satisfactory way of so fixing it.

We have a large number of specimens of slate spear points in our cabinet, besides those of jasper, but no pattern that materially varies from the eight illustrations herein given.

Judging from Loskiel’s description of the Indian manner of making war, it is not probable that any considerable number of these spears were habitually used for war-weapons. He says: “The offensive weapons formerly in use were bows, arrows, and clubs. The latter were made of the hardest wood, not quite the length of a man’s arm, and very heavy, with a large round knob at one end. Their weapon of defense was a shield made of the tough hide of the buffalo, on the con­cave side of which they received the arrows and darts of the enemy, but this is now entirely laid aside by the Delawares, &c.” While noticeably the “spear” is not mentioned among the weapons formerly in use, the " dart” is referred to in connection with the use of the shield; but whether this “ dart” refers to spears headed with such implements as we have described in this chapter, or to the lance-heads described in Chapter VI, it is impossible to say. Probably to both; the lance-head pattern being the more usual form of the “ dart” referred to by LoskieL* Several reasons have already been given in Chapter VI why lance- heads, or those long, leaf-shaped implements we have designated as such, were used in battle, and it is evident that since they served a double purpose, as implements of the chase and weapons of war, so, too, these hunting-spears were available in battle.


Chapter VIII.


In every collection of Indian relics, there will be found a few speci­mens of a certain long, tapering form of “ arrow-head,” which we desig­nate “ fishing-spears,” and we propose to describe them as a separate and distinct form, fashioned for the particular purpose^ implied in the name given them.

The form in question is comparatively rare in the fields or associated with other weapons or implements of the chase, but quite common on the shores and in the beds of those fishing-localities that are nearest to known sites of ancient Indian villages; hence the name chosen—fishing spears. They are abundant in the Delaware River, in the shallower pebble-bottomed portions of the stream, but usually broken; the same is the case at Crosswick’s Creek, near Trenton, N. J.

Figure 48 represents what may be taken as the type of this class of hunting-implements. With the exception of the loss of the extreme point, the specimen is perfect. Less than three-fourths of an inch in "width at the base, it measures four inches in length, and is as long, for its width, as any example of fishing-spear that we have seen. The shape itself, as it seems to us, would scarcely suggest any other use than that of fishing. Its adaptability for the purpose is admirable. Of hard min­eral, sharply edged, acutely pointed, and well stemmed, to insure safe attachment to the shaft, it meets every requirement for spearing rock- fish, shad, herring, gar, chub, or even young sturgeon, all of which were abundant in the Delaware, in the bed of which stream this implement was found.

Figure 49 represents a good-sized fishing-spear, which formerly we looked upon as an arrow-head. It is admirably chipped from a bluish- gray mineral, much resembling true flint. Occasionally such a specimen as this is met with in the inland localities where relics are found; but itis unquestionably a form used almost exclusively in spearing fish. We

*[In Loskiel’s original work, published in German, (Barby, 1789,) nothing is said about darts. The passage runs thus: “As defensive weapons they used shields made of hard buffalo skin, convex on the outer side for keeping off the arrows of the enemy-” (P. 183). The darts are an addition of the English translator.—J. H.]

have gathered a great many of this particular pattern aoout the shores of the rivers, near their mouths, where the larger and strictly marine fish are abundantly met with. In such localities, however, as the depths of the water and habits of the fish render spearing, at least now, a some­what slow process, it is probable that the bow was used, the arrows being headed with such spear-points of the kind figured; or.perhaps the number of the fish was formerly so much greater than now that the shallower waters were more frequented, and the fish secured therein by spearing.

Figure 50 is a style of fish-spear that is very abundant; and having occasionally met with several broken ones together in localities distant from water, the conclusion is they were most likely used occasionally in hunting small mammals. The specimen figured is chipped from a frag­ment of slaty rock; from great age, much use, or other cause, its extreme point has been lost, while the chipped edges are dulled. Like the pre­ceding illustrations, this specimen has a well-shaped stem, showing thereby that, whatever its particular use, it was intended to be securely fastened to a shaft. Where spears were used in capturing large fish, it would, of course, require much strength at the junction of the head and handle, as the struggles of some fishes are very violent.

Figure 51 represents a form of fish-spear that approaches very nearly to the arrow-heads, and to a series of broad-based specimens, to be sep­arately considered, which are by many archaeologists claimed to be stones so shaped for drilling other stones. This form is usually wrought in slate, and is not uncommon. It and other similarly-shaped specimens were gathered on the Pennsylvania shore of the Delaware River, oppo­site Borden town, N. J. The most conspicuous feature in its being dif­ferent from the preceding patterns consists in the plain, or unnotched, base. It does not appear how this shape of fish-spear could be very securely fastened to a handle, which, it would be supposed, was the important feature of a spear for such purposes. Certainly, arrow-head nfeking and similar work was no such easy matter, even to adepts, that the well-wrought points could be risked by insecure fastenings. Had not this pattern been found more frequently in fisbing-localities than upon the uplands, associated with other relics, it would not have been classed with fish-spears; but, under the circumstances, we believe it to be properly so classed, although the others figured are far better adapted to fishing.

Figure 52 represents a variety of fisli-spear that we previously have called an arrow-head. Of exactly this pattern, we have only seen this one specimen. From the locality where found we learn nothing con­cerning it, a very stony field that for over a century has been under uninterrupted cultivation; and it really seems incredible that a form so easily destroyed as this should finally have been picked up in its present, probably almost perfect, condition, for we doubt if there was a repetition of the symmetrical barbs. Beautifully wrought in dull-green jasper, it

has the slender stem of the fish-spears generally; but, unlike these, has the depressed barb like projections at or uear the base, which add to the beauty of the specimen, and also, we suppose, to its efficiency as an im­plement of the chase. This specimen is much flatter than the fish-spears generally, which usually have a median ridge running the whole length of the stem, and from it uniformly are sloped the sides to the sharp edges, which seem more carefully worked even than very many of the true arrow-points. This thin condition of the stem, it would seem, mast weaken the specimen very much, and so it may possibly be questioned if it were intended as a spear-point. If, however, we recall the compar­ative degrees of risk of loss to which such a specimen would be subjected, as a spear-point for Ashing or an arrow-head, we will be forced to admit that an arrow-head of this size could only be used to advantage with large game, and if it came violently in contact with a bone or was but partially embedded in the body of the animal, it would certainly he broken by the creature in its endeavors to free itself from it.

One capable of a correct opinion as to the use of any stone imple­ment says: “lam inclined to regard them,” (several specimens figured in American Naturalist for March afid April, 1872, including figure 52,) “ as boring-tools rather than arrow-points, though doubtless one imple­ment passes into the other.” We have ourselves given this subject of boring-tools much study, taking as the basis a very large mite of pointed forms in our collection, but are unable to see why such pointed flints should be considered tool** only. There is no trace whatever of wear on the point, and if designed as tools they were never so used, not one of all the many specimens of drilled stones in our collection showing any indication of being bored by such a specimen as this, while all the drillings of a larger caliber than the width of the stem of this specimen have been bored with a hollow tube, probably a reed, sand and water. We see no reason to look upon this specimen as a tool; but having many others that appear more adapted as such, we class the series of u pointed forms ” as tools instead of as implements of the chase, and shall consider them in detail with reference to the subject of “ Drilling in stone.”

Figure 53 represents a neat specimen of flint-chipping, which seems to be a fish-spear, but which has one or two peculiarities notin accord with modern ideas of a desirable implement of this kind.

In the first place, figure 53 can scarcely be said to have a point, such as would be requisite for fishing were this particular specimen de­pended upon for success. What point there is is blunt, and was always so. Moreover, the implement is decidedly twisted, and was so chipped, but otherwise the specimen is carefully worked, and exhibits at the base a peculiarity very uncommon to the New Jersey specimens, viz,

*       We are glad to have an opportunity to acknowledge our indebtedness to Mr. William A. Baker, of Auburn, N. Y., through whom we have received the above-quoted opinion

of Mr. Greenwell, of England.

a doubly-notched base. A third peculiarity of the specimen consists in one side being almost perfectly flat, while the other is about as ridged and sloping from a central line as in the ordinary spears and arrow- points. The flat side is not at all the result of a single plane of cleav­age, but has been carefully chipped, with fully as many distinct planes as the other side. That it was intentional on the part of the arrow- maker appears unquestionable, but what the object was in thus fash­ioning it is a mystery.

Figure 53 measures three and three-fourths inches in length by one inch and one-half at the upper edge of the base. The material is a brownish-gray jasper, with a delicate veining of light blue.

As an arrow-point, this specimen would prove too large and heavy, and the crooked point certainly does not suggest a drill for boring.

Figure 54 is a beautifully-shaped specimen, chipped from a hard piece of bluish slate-rock. The point and slender stem are admirably finished and well preserved. The large base is also chipped to a sharp edge, as though it were also intended for cutting. While no indication exists of the use of the specimen, since it was found associated with other forms of spears in the bed of Crosswick’s Creek, we believe it to be a fish-spear, or, at any rate, an implement of the chase. On comparison with the pointed specimens described in Chapter XV, it serves to show how one form of implement merges into another.

This specimen is three and one-eighth inches in length by one inch and one-half broad at the base. It is quite thin, but, unlike the preced­ing, is equally ridged about the center of each side.

Figure 55 is a smaller, but beautifully symmetrical, specimen of fish- spear, and forms a good connecting-link between these and the arrow­heads proper. We have seen few more admirably-wrought specimens of jasper-chipping than this one. With the extreme point, now broken off, this specimen measured two and three-fourths inches in length by one inch in width at about its middle.

That such a specimen could be used as an arrow-point is certain; but since the vast majority of true arrow-heads are shorter, or broader if of equal length, we do not believe this to have been intended as such an implement. Glancing over our collection of fish-spears as gathered about Trenton, N. J., we find that a very great majority of them are of slate, and well provided with notched or stemmed bases. The narrow portion is not always straight, but, with very few exceptions, the edges are as uniform as chipping will secure. There is but a single specimen of fish-spear in our cabinet with a serrated edge. It is now compara­tively soft from being much weather-worn, and the teeth along the sides are blunted, still they show that they were originally a marked charac­teristic of the specimen.

Mr. Evans has figured one specimen of fish-spear, which is beauti­fully worked and is very similar in detail to the specimen from the Del­aware River, (figure 48.) He says of it, it “ is so large that possibly it may be regarded as that of a javelin, and not of an arrow.” It is shorter by half an inch than our specimen, although otherwise of about the same dimensions.

In Chapter I, reference was made to the excellence of the fishing* grounds about Trenton, K J., at the time the first settlers arrived there; and it may probably be well to note some of the more common and larger species that frequent the Delaware River. Prominent is the well-known shad, (Alosa prcestablis, DeKay,) which enters the river, from the sea, in March, and continues to arrive and work up-stream through the spring months and June. North of Trenton, N. J., or above tide­water, they spawn in the river, and also in many of the tide-water creeks. This fish was probably more caught by weirs and other like means than by spearing, as they do not often enter shallow streams or wander from the channel of the river.

Loskiel remarks: “In Carolina, the Indians frequently use fire in fishing. A certain kind of fish will even leap into the boats which have fire in them.”

We can readily see how, in u fire-fishing,* the spear would be abso­lutely necessary, since few fish are more than attracted within reach by the light of a fire; but, as we know by experience, this attraction suffices to keep them hovering about the boat as long as the fire burns brightly, and that the “ false shots79 one may make in trying to spear these dazed animals does not at all frighten them off. The large cyprinoids, as Semotilus rhothem, and the so-called “ suckers,” are the most easily speared of all our fishes when once attracted by a blazing fire.

The pike, (Esox reticulatw,) rock-fish, (Roccus lineatus,) and yellow- perch, (Perea flavescensj) are all species that attain to a large size, and, judging from their present habits,* were no doubt eagerly sought with the spear by the Indian. The habit of the first mentioned of the three, that of lying in shallow water, underneath the leaves of the water-lily, {Nymphea^) makes it a most desirable species to “hunt,” inas­much as it can be got near to by the exercise of a moderate amount of care; and one cannot doubt the ability of the ancient or modern India to silently approach an unsuspecting fish or bird or mammal. This

•We say “judging from their present habits,” (for it is very certain that the habits of even fish have changed since the occupancy of this country by the European,) and, although this is not the place for the discussion of this most interesting question, would add, that, so far as our observation extends, the species of mammals, birds, and fishes remaining in the neighborhood of “ settled” localities have changed their habits so far as is necessary to protect themselves from the attack and pursuit of man. Mam­mals are more strictly nocturnal when living in thickly-settled farming-districts; birds also are more nocturnal in their habits, and locate their nests at greater elevations, and in thickly-tangled thickets; while fish, too, soon learn that they are safest in deep waters, and will regard with greater suspicion an unusual object when placed in a frequented portion of the stream than when the same object is deposited in remote localities where they are seldom if ever disturbed.

fact should be borne constantly in mind in discussing the probable uses of the various hunting-implements.

A stone spear, hatchet, lance-head, or arrow-point, may seem to us a most uncouth and almost impracticable weapon; but the capabilities of the makers and users of these implements very far exceeded ours 5 they knew the habits of their game better than we now know those of the same species. Traveling where we could not move, they could silently gain access to points that only study and mechanical contriv­ances enable us to reach. Bemembering this, it is easy to realize how a rude spear could be utilized in transfixing a wary fish, impaling it prob­ably while it was in rapid motion.

Loskiel says, “ Hunting is the principal and most necessary employ­ment of the Indians, and next to war the most honorable. For this reason, all Indians, but chiefly the Delawares, are very expert and ex­perienced huntsmen.

 The boys learn to climb trees when very young, both to catch birds and to exercise their sight, which by this method is rendered so quick that in hunting they see objects at an amazing distance. In detecting and pursuing game, they almost exceed the best-trained dog in follow­ing its course with certainty. They run so swiftly that if a deer does not fall upon the first shot, they throw off their blanket and seldom fail to overtake him.

u Their contrivances for decoying and securing game are innumerable. They study this from their infancy, and many remain whole years in the woods in the way of practice.”

We can see from this description how entirely familiar were the Indi­ans with the habits of the various animals pursued; and having all the advantages of agility, fleetness, strength, and keen vision, the rude quality of their hunting-implements was more than compensated for.

There were two species of fishes formerly very abundant in the Dela­ware Biver, still to be met with, but in rapidly decreasing numbers, viz, the sturgeon and gar, which we doubt not were most eagerly pursued by the Indian. The size of both, and the value of the former especi­ally as food, would naturally render them attractive objects of pursuit; but no such fishing-spears as we have here figured would be available in capturing a full-grown specimen of either.

The sturgeon (Acipenser) frequently attains a length of eight feet, while some gars (Lepidosteus) taken in the Delaware have measured five feet. With such fish to deal with, the very stoutest of the hunting- spears we have described would alone be of use; and even with them it would appear a laborious task to finally subdue and land these large and powerful denizens of the water.

Just as the broad-bladed, stout hunting-spear was frequently, we think, used in capturing the largest of our river-fish, so it is probable that these long, slender forms of spear-points were occasionally used for the smaller mammals, for which they are as available as any stone weapon

that could be devised; yet we doubt not the principal purpose of their manufacture was that of spearing fish, and that the other uses to which they were put were governed by the custom of adaptation to circum­stances.


Chapter IX.


As almost every variety of mineral is utilized by the arrow-maker, and a great variety of forms and sizes adopted, it is almost useless to attempt any classification of arrow-heads; for, whatever series of char­acteristics we may select to guide us in their study, we find in every thousand specimens so many exceptions to our limited rule that we finally abandon it in despair. One peculiarity, however, as regards dif­ferent localities is worthy of note, viz, that when the Indians selected a site for a settlement near a peculiarly suitable mineral in situ, they exclusively used this material, and thus arrow-heads of such a mineral became a feature of such neighborhood; and further, where such selected mineral could not be well worked except in the larger forms, then the feature of size would also mark such a vicinity; but when arrow-heads are in abundance—as in a locality like Trenton, 8. J.—where 110 suit­able mineral is in situ, then every variety of size, shape, and stone will be found.

Being evident that much skill was required to fashion these arrow­heads, it is a wonder why such a variety of shapes should have been adopted, since many of them are very delicate, and yet do not show that they possessed any advantage over the plain triangular flints; especially is this the case in the long, slender barbs rounded at the end, which require greater force than a sharply-pointed barb to enter the body, but which produce no more ugly or dangerous wound.

It is observed that there is a class of so-called u rude implements” the apparent use of which preceded that of the better-known stone axes, hatchets, and flint knives. So, also, is there a series of roughly fashioned arrow-points, which, although associated with the others, have every appearance of being older. Whether the “Indian” originated in America or came hither, which is not improbable, certain it is, however, that the arrow-points he used, and now found here, were made in this State 5 and as these rude specimens are the simplest in detail, made of the more easily worked minerals, and have undergone deep surface-decomposition, it may be concluded they are the first used after the thin flakes, shelled off in forming other weapons, were discarded as too prim­itive.

Figure 56 represents a “chance-flake,” it may be, that flew off at a blow of the hammer in shaping a hatchet, knife, or rough slate lance- head. Subsequently, it was given an indented or concave base, and, thus shaped, used as an arrow-head. Just such rough specimens are picked up every day by twos and threes. None are more primitive than this, but the somewhat better outlined are scarcely more finished or indicate any greater amount of care in their manufacture. There is no fine flaking about them, while the fractured surfaces are all large.

Figure 57 represents a well-preserved specimen of rude arrow-head, with a well-shaped “ tang,” or stem, for insertion into the shaft of the arrow. Like the preceding, there is here a total want of delicate chip­ping. The detaching of a few large flakes has formed the specimen, which, notwithstanding the rough workmanship, has a well-defined point and sharp cutting-edges. It measures nearly two inches in length, the stem constituting two-fifths. If tbe arrow-maker who chipped this specimen was disposed to improve the quality of his work, he should certainly have felt encouraged when comparing this with such as the preceding specimen. It may be doubted by many whether figure 56 really represents an arrow-point, but no doubt certainly can exist with reference to this specimen, figure 57.

Figure 58 represents a common form of rude arrow-head, such as is frequently found in the bed of the river, (Delaware.) It is a fragment of slate-rock, roughly shaped for arrow-head purposes, the edges and point being moderately well defined. There is a rude attempt at a stem, that places this specimen intermediately between figures 56 and 57. The surface in this specimen is as rough as in the preceding examples, with as large and irregular flakes hammered or pressed off. The speci­men apparently antedates the days of laborious jasper-chipping.

Figure 59 represents a marked improvement in the shaping of rough arrow-points. There is, in this instance, a moderately well-defined me­dian ridge, from which the sides taper or slope to a sharp edge. The point is thin, slender, and well preserved; the base, or stem, is well defined, but there are no attempts at barbs. The specimen measures just two inches in length.' The material is a compact sandstone that readily scratches glass. It is even more modern in appearance than the preceding figure, 57.

Figure 60 represents an admirably-shaped triangular arrow-point, that has been brought to a point and edge with more care than is usu­ally to be detected in u rude” arrow-heads as a class. There is a shal­low notch at each angle of the base, giving the specimen a stemmed appearance. It measures one and one-fourth inches in length and seven- eighths of an inch in width, and compares favorably with the jasper trian­gular arrow-points so abundantly met with in every part of the State.

Figure 61 represent a roughly-made slender u point,” that should per­haps be considered as an “ early” harpoon-point rather than an arrow­head. It is of soft material, with very crooked edges, but a well-defined point. It measures three and one-fourth inches in length, and is just one inch wide at the base.

Professor Nilsson* says, “ We may divide arrow-heads into such as have, and such as have not, a tang, or projection, for insertion into the shaft.” Sir John Lubbock quotes Sir W. R. Wilde, who divides the

*Stone Age in Scandinavia, Eng. ed., p. 43. t Prehistoric Times, 2d ed., p. 98.

arrow-heads of Ireland into five varieties. “Firstly, the triangular, which frequently had a notch on each side to receive the string which attached it to the shaft; secondly, that which is hollowed out or indented at the base; thirdly, the stemmed arrow, which has a tang, or projec­tion, for sinking into the shaft; fourthly, that with wings prolonged on each side, this passes into the barbed arrow; finally, we have the leaf-shaped form.” Mr. Lubbock continues by asserting that the true arrow-heads are about one inch in length, which we cannot but think is too small a measurement. Two inches, and less, we believe to be a more probable range in length.

The first specimen of the comparatively newer and better-finished arrow-points to which attention is called is that given in figure 62, which represents one of the most common forms of tanged or stemmed 44 points.” The specimen is of yellow jasper, of which mineral the great majority of this pattern is made. Unlike some forms, there can be no question as to the use to which this specimen was put. It is most admirably adapted as the head of an arrow; the sharp point, well- defined edges, and deeply-notched base combining to render it secure in its attachment to the shaft, and effective as a weapon when discharged from a bow.

Figure 63 represents the most perfect and beautiful arrow-head we have as yet met with. Most admirably chipped from a mottled pink- and-yellow agate, it possesses every requisite for a most effective arrow- heading. Exactly two inches in length, it widens with great uni­formity from an acute point to near the base, where small wing-like barbs project, which are themselves very nearly of a size, and rounded at the ends; a character not common among our barbed arrow-points. The notches are of equal depth and breadth, looking almost directly down. The base, or abbreviated stem, is chipped from each side to a dull edge. There are shallow but well-marked serrations down each side, more numerous and distinctly marked on one side than on the other.

The amount of labor expended in producing such an arrow-head as that given in figure 63 can scarcely be estimated. As far as killing game is concerned, there is really no advantage in such an elaborately- worked flint. The plain, triangular point could be shot with equal pre­cision, and would prove as deadly in its effect.

Figure 64 represents a third form, with a notched base. Like figure 62, this pattern is usually of jasper, and does not vary much in size, but is not so uniformly chipped as are the preceding shapes. We have gathered many of slate, identical in form and size with the one figured; but accu­racy of outline (i. e.f uniformity of the two halves, perpendicularly divi­ded) and general elegance of finish were never secured in using the latter mineral. This specimen, also, has slightly-serrated edges, a not uncom­mon feature of many of the smaller specimens; but these serrated speci­mens are usually broken, the explanation of which fact is afforded by care­ful examination of over three hundred examples. In comparison with

the same type with smooth edges, we find that they are invariably thinner. To secure the serrated edge, it was probably necessary to make them so; and, of course, these thin specimens were more frequently broken iu the manufacture, and more liable to injury in the daily me to which they were put, to say nothing of the two centuries of plowing and other exposures to which they have been subjected since the termination of the stone age in New Jersey.

Figure 65 represents a beautiful form of large arrow-head, which we have thus far only been able to duplicate once. It is of a slaty stone, not smoothly chipped over the surface, remarkable for accuracy of outline, and is of unusual size. Another noticeable feature is the small size of the stem, or base, in comparison with the body of the speci­men. The surface is so weather-worn and soft, that the exact mineralogical nature of the material cannot be determined. Exclusive of the base, the specimen measures two inches in length by one inch and three-quarters in greatest width. We believe it to be an arrow, rather than appear point, as the stem has never been very strong for so large a specimen, and there would be less strain upon it in its use as an arrow­head than as a spear-point; in the latter case, the struggled of the ani­mal would be likely to break it off while the shaft was being held in the grasp of the hunter. Moreover, weight is to be considered in the recog­nition of these doubtful specimens, and figure 65 is no heavier than many of the smaller jasper arrow-points.

Figure 66 is a form of notched-base arrow-head, more or less com­mon in all localities. In general appearance, it is much like figures 62 and 64, but is peculiar in having a central notch in the stem. The object of this third notch is not clear. The specimen is chipped from a black, slaty stone, is very thin, and the sides have been slightly ser­rated. These specimens are not very variable in size, but few having been found much larger, and but two or three smaller. Inasmuch as they are very noticeably serrated arrow-points, we give two illustrations of both the larger and smaller specimens.

Figure 67 represents a tri-notched, stemmed arrow-head, perfect in detail, and particularly interesting from the deep, well-marked serrations that extend along the greater portion of the sides. The specimen meas­ures two and one-eighth inches in length from the bottom of the cen­tral notch to the point. It is chipped from a porous, yellowish jasper or agate; the extreme point being more dense and glassy than the body of the specimen. There is no doubt this specimen was used exclusively as an arrow-point. We have a few examples similar in size and charac­ter from New Jersey, but all somewhat broken. The one figured is from Indiana.

Figure 68 represents a third example of triple-notched arrow-point; the barb on one side, however, being broken off. It is of yellow jasper, with deeply-serrated sides and an acute point. We have seldom seen an arrow-point better suited for killing birds and small mammals. With the impetus given to the arrow by the Indian bow, such a point as this would make a tearing wound that would bring down any of our New Jersey inland birds, the turkey-buzzard and wild turkey not excepted.

Figure 69 represents a fourth and still smaller example of arrow­head, with the central notch at the base. Like the preceding, it is well outlined. Mounted on a slender reed, it also would, if discharged with force, unquestionably bring down a large bird or squirrel.

Mr. Schoolcraft* says: “Boys were always furnished with small arrow-points, such as were expected to be spent against squirrels, or the lesser quadrupeds and birds. This was the second lesson in learning the art of hunting; the first consisted in using the blunt arrow, or Beelc wuJc,t which was fired at a mark.

A specimen such as figure 68 may be one of the boy-hunter’s arrow- points, but there is apparently too much work upon figure 69 to have allowed the mere tyro to risk it at a passing animal.

Figure 70 represents a beautifully-shaped arrow-point that ap­proaches figure 50 in outline, but has the ends of the slender barbs sharp; the barbs themselves are continuous with the line of the sides, aud not outwardly curved as in figure 63. For delicacy of finish and general beauty of outline, this specimen is scarcely to be excelled. As will be noticed in the illustration, the base is broken off; but we are confident it was sufficiently prolonged to enable the very accurately- finished barbs to be effective. Whatever the skill of the arrow-maker, to produce this specimen was undoubtedly a tedious operation, and the prehistoric hunter equipped with arrows tipped with points such as this hardly wasted them upon small game.

Figure 71 is a fine example of a triangular-bodied arrow-point, with a long, unnotched stem, and of a pattern not very abundant in New Jersey; the examples seen are usually less perfect than this, being in outline more like the following illustration, (figure 73.) Figure 71 is of bluish-gray jasper, one inch and five-eighths long, the stem being just one-third of the total length. The specimen is thicker than arrow- points of this pattern usually are; but the point is thin and still very sharp.

Figure 72 represents a form of slate arrow-heads, very numerous and uniform in size. They are never very well finished except in outline. We recall our once coming across a site of an arrow-maker’s hut in Hunterdon County, New Jersey, where the ground was covered with small fragments of a hard, slaty rock, and fragments more or less ap­proaching the perfect arrow-point, all of which were of this pattern. A resident of the neighborhood informed us that in blasting for the road-bed of the Delaware and Belvidere Railroad a large rock proved to have in it a cavity with its entrance below the surface of the ground,

"Researches, &c., North American Indians, pt. i, p. 77. t Algonquin.

which was half filled with arrow-points, “ very nearly if not quite the size of figure 72 and of that shape.”

Figure 73 represents a form of small arrow-point, very similar but less accurately finished than figure 71. This we suppose to be one of the u small arrow-points ” intrusted to boys learning to shoot, aj& described by Mr. Schoolcraft. They occur in considerable numbers, and seem to be about as much scattered abroad as any of the numerous patterns. Were these small arrow-points used exclusively by boys, they should be most abundant about the former sites of villages; but such localities do not appear to specially abound in them.

Figures 74 and 75 are further examples of the abundant form of stemmed arrow-points, without notches at the base. Figure 74 is wrought out of a jasper pebble, is well made and accurately beveled from the center or middle line to the edges. During the course of an ordinary day’s hunting for relics, this and the following class of specimens will be found the most abundant, except, perhaps, the triangular arrow-point, yet to be described. Specimens of this pattern and size are in a mod­erately good state of preservation, being pretty thick for the length, and fully capable to stand a hard blow against another stone, or the weight of a horse’s foot. Ordinarily, the extreme point is broken off.

Figure 75 does not vary materially from the preceding. It is a little smaller and made of slate. The point has been chipped so as to be a cutting-edge of about one thirty-second of an inch in extent, and not a' needle-like tip as is usual. In looking over a large series of arrow-points, we find very many that have such a rounded point, which might pass for broken-tipped specimens. In the resharpening of arrow-heads, we believe the rounded tip was usual instead of a fine point, as when the {specimen was first chipped out.

Figure 76 represents a fine example of flint-chipping, which we call an arrow-head, although in so doing we thereby probably contradict previous assertions with reference to hunting-spears. Figure 76, how­ever, is thin, light, and more like an arrow in appearance than like the ordinary hunting-spears. It certainly is the maximum size of arrow- points, if indeed intended as such. The base and deeply-cut notches approach figures 63 and 67 in general appearance, and the specimen, as a whole, much resembles figure 65, although the sides are here curved, instead of unusually straight, as in that specimen.

In studying the forms of arrow-heads, we have not been disposed to make any distinction between those of war, and peace, or hunting ar­rows, but if any arrow-head was specially reserved for use in war, that figured in 76 was most likely one. Buried its full length of two inches and one-half in the side or breast of a man, it would speedily prove fatal.

Figure 77 represents an ordinary sized and shaped stemmed arrow- point, moderately well chipped from a hornstone fragment, and notice­able particularly for one feature, that of being brought to a semicircular edge, continuous with the sides and of equal sharpness, instead of being pointed, as are the vast majority of arrow-points. The manner of flaking adopted in the manufacture of this specimen fully indicates of itself that the rounded end was intentional and so fashioned from the first, and that the specimen was not originally pointed, and after­ward, instead of being repointed, chipped to an edge. Arrow-heads of this form, and of nearly every pattern, stemmed and without tangs, are occasionally met with, having the peculiarity of being rounded instead of pointed. Perhaps the majority of such rounded forms are those without stems, and certainly the rudest of them, and such as appear the oldest, are the triangular arrow-heads of slate and even softer min­erals, that are simply rounded off, or are like the present specimen, the stem being cut squarely off.

Figure 78 represents a well-chipped jasper arrow-point, having a well- notched stem, and bearing considerable general resemblance to the pre­ceding specimens of stemmed arrow-points. There is one peculiarity, however, about figure 78, which is worthy of attention. The end of the , specimen is chipped off at almost right angles with the sides, and is sloped to a narrow, acute point at the middle, scarcely the sixteenth of an inch in length. This is not a mere accident or chance chipping, but a peculiarity frequently met with, and shown again in figure 85, which is an arrow-head of the triangular pattern. There was no doubt an object in view in so chipping arrow-points, but our limited knowledge of the bow and arrow does not enable us to discern it. It might be thought, from a cursory glance, that this specimen was originally much longer, and, the point having been broken off, that it was chipped to its present shape; but the general appearance of the specimen does not favor this view, and we cannot imagine an accidental fracture of such a character as to determine the present peculiarly-outlined pointing. We have found fully one hundred arrow-points of various patterns, which have had an extreme point, like this of figure 78 and figure 85.

Figure 79 represents an example of what we have considered an arrow-head, notwithstanding its size. It has been frequently remarked that arrow-heads, wherever found and of whatever age, all have very much in common 5 and if the labels of a collection from all quarters of the globe were lost, it would be a difficult matter to decide the locality from which any specimen was obtained, unless from the materials out of which they were fashioned. Another interesting feature is the similar­ity between arrow, spear, and harpoon points of an age long past and those now being used and made by the savages who are still more or less completely in the stone age. Bearing this in mind, we call attention par­ticularly to the “harpoon-point” which we give in figure 79, which, in all its important features, is identical with one figured by Professor Nilsson,* and concerning which he says: 46The stone points (for harpoons) vary in shape 5 sometimes they are as in PI. iii, Figs. 45, 47. Such are like*

wise found in Scania. * * * The broad head seems to indicate that they have been harpoons rather than arrow-heads. * * * It appears to me certain that PI. x, Fig. 203, has been the stone point of an har­poon. * * * A person who had long resided in Greenland recog­nized it at once as such.” Here we find a New Jersey, an ancient Scan­dinavian, and a Greenland specimen of the present day identical.

We have already described in detail and figured a series of such fish- ing-spears, or harpoon-points, as are characteristic of New Jersey, and suitable for the river-fishing especially that was and is to be had in our rivers. Figure 79 is not as well adapted to fishing as are those we have figured in Chapter VIII; and we have, therefore, considered this specimen an arrow-point for the larger game, its size and weight not being too great to render it suitable as an arrow-head, especially where the dis­tance to be traveled is not great, as when large game was surprised and struck before it was many yards away.

Figure 80 is a good example of one of the rough jasper arrow-heads that appear to have been hastily blocked out for an emergency, but which probably were meant for large game, as deer, at close quarters, and intended to make a torn rather than a cut wound, which would cause the animal to bleed to death if not killed instantly. The style of rough jasper arrow-head, of this size and smaller, is common. These larger examples approach in some characters the chipped jasper knives, to which we will call attention in another chapter.

Figure 81 is a pretty white quartz form of the ordinary triangular arrow-point. There is nothing about the base to show how it was secured to the shaft of the arrow. Such quartz specimens are found in almost every nook and corner of the State. They vary considerably in the relative dimensions of length to breadth. More quartz arrow-points of the stemmed pattern occur, however, than of these plain triangular specimens. White quartz was a favorite mineral, not only for arrow- points, but spear-heads and small hatchets.

Figure 82 represents about the minimum size of plain equiangle specimens. It is chipped from a flake of dark chocolate-colored jasper, and is very pretty. In many of these smaller specimens, we find the base equally carefully chipped as the sides, and the three angles brought to such equally acute points that it is difficult to see which side, if any, was intended for the base.

Figure 83 is another illustration of a triangular arrow-point, differing from the preceding in that the base is narrower than the sides are long, and is intentionally concave. This specimen is one of the hand­somest we have seen. Chipped from a pale-green jasper fragment, it is in perfect condition, and too pretty and carefully worked, it seems, to have been risked by slight insertion into the split end of an arrow- shaft.

Figure 84 represents a form of the triangular arrow-point, that is broader than long, and possibly was never sharply pointed. Such an

arrow-head as this must have been shot with tremendous force to render it effective. At best, it would but bruise or crush—it could not penetrate like a pointed arrow-head.

Figure 85 represents a variation of the immediately preceding form, is of slate, well cut, and but sparingly met with. The peculiarity con­sists in the manner in which the little poiut has been chipped. A single specimen of this style would excite no comment. The peculiarity would be considered as resulting from a chance blow of the arrow-maker. This is not the case, however, as we have a number of such specimens, from one locality, each, in size and mineral, the fac simile of the others.

Figure 86 is a pretty white quartz specimen, very smoothly chipped, and having very short but still distinct barbs, or projections of the angles of the base and sides. We have gathered numbers of this size, mineral, and peculiarity of base. They seem to have been rubbed after the chipping until the more prominent ridges were partially worn away. Occasionally rose quartz was used, forming gems among arrow-points.

Figure 87 represents a beautiful pattern of triangular arrow-head, usu­ally of white quartz, met with in but one locality—near Crosswicks, Burlington County, New Jersey. They vary little in size, and are well made, having the edges sharp and the point slender and acute. Like the preceding example, this specimen has the sides triflingly convex, the curved outline being more pronounced near the point than at the base. It measures seven-eighths of an inch in length and three-fourths of an inch in width at the base, which is slightly concave. Like figures 69 and 73, which are both stemmed arrow-points, it would, we suppose, be classed by Mr. Schoolcraft as one intended for the boys; but, like those represented in the figures mentioned, it bears evidence of too much work to have been manufactured for so casual a purpose. As far as our experience extends in experimenting in mineral chipping, these small arrow-heads are much more difficult, both to “ block out” and to finish, than are those of two inches or more in length, aud we doubt not it proved so with the ancient arrow-maker. In numbers, the large arrow-points far exceed the small specimens, while, on the other hand, the great majority of the little ones are far more elaborately worked out than are the larger examples. Again, we have found very frequently that these small well- worked specimens were more numerous in graves of adults than were the larger types, a circumstance showing that they were not wholly used by boys.

Figure 88 represents a handsome form of triangular arrow-head. It has the appearance at first glance of having been barbed; but the carefully- chipped sides of the base induce the belief that it is in its original con­dition. With a shaft much narrower than the base of the specimen, this would be one of the most effective arrow-points we have figured. This pattern is usually of jasper, and is not abundant.

Figrue 89 is a beautiful representative of a class of large triangular arrow-heads with concave base. They are mostly found of black slaty

stone, and are well pointed. The specimen figured is chipped from a flake of yellow jasper, having narrow veins of white quartz, which render it very attractive in appearance. It is about the maximum size of this pat­tern of arrow-point.

Figures 90 and 91 represent two beautiful examples of a form of arrow-head closely allied to the preceding specimen; the difference being in the concave sides and base, and in being much more slender. Indeed, were not the body longer than the barbs, being equal in width, it would be difficult to decide which of the three ends was intended as the point. There is no difference in these “ends” as to workmanship or outline; they are equally slender and acute.

Figure 90 is chipped from black hornstone, the base or junction of the barbs and body of the specimen being thickest, from which point the specimen gradually tapers to a thin, very carefully-worked edge. This arrow-head measures one inch and one-fourth in length by exactly one inch in width from point to point of the barbs.

Figure 91 is chipped from a dull-yellow jasper flake, and is similar to the preceding one in size and the details of working, but is less symmet­rical ; the barbs varying somewhat in width, and the body being a little 44 bent ^ over to one side.

Such a shaped arrow-point attached to a shaft would make an ugly wound, and, entering the body of the animal or person shot, would very probably remain in the wound; for a more difficult object to extract from a deep flesh-wound we could not imagine.

Figure 92 is a small jasper arrow-head, with a peculiarity the opposite of that of the preceding illustration. The base is convex instead of concave. It is well chipped, finely pointed, and has notches near the base to secure it the more firmly to the shaft of the arrow. It is not an abundant variety, but one found in sufficient numbers to show it is not a chance-shaped specimen.

Figure 93 represents a pattern of arrow-point very abundant, and varying from the preceding in that the base is prolonged into a steni, and has no traces of notches, as in figure 92. This elongated base ren­ders the specimen diamond-shaped. It is known in England as the lozenge-shaped arrow-head. As a rule, it is more slender, and has more of the appearance of a stemmed arrow-point than has the English lozenge-shaped one. We have seen some, however, from other States* which were identical with the European type.

Figure 93 is made of a sandstone pebble or fragment of rock, and Las been moderately well chipped. The point is still acute, and the edges well defined and sharp. It measures one inch and five-eighths in length and a little more than five-eighths of an inch in greatest width. The base has never been as sharply pointed as the true point or extrem­ity of the specimen, but the sides are as well tapered to a cutting-edge.

This pattern of arrow-point, of this size and mineral, are quite abun­dant in some localities, and seem to be a prevailing type, but, in other sections, are very rarely met with. About Trenton, BT. J., they occur comparatively seldom; but about the Delaware Water Gap, and in Sus­sex County generally, they are numerous.

Figure 94 represents a well-chipped, lozenge-shaped arrow-point, of black jasper or hornstone. It varies but little from the preceding except in size, being two inches and one-quarter in length and only three- quarters of an inch in width at the widest point. The base is more ab­ruptly tapered than the body of the specimen, and but one-third the length, giving the specimen a u stemmed n appearance. It constitutes a good link between the lozenge-shaped and stemmed arrow-points. The extreme point and termination of the base have been broken ofl^ but that they were originally both pointed and slender cannot be doubted.

Such a pattern of arrow-point was probably merely inserted into a cleft in the end of the shaft, and was left in the wound when the arrow was withdrawn. It could, of course, be recovered easily from the dead animal.

Figure 95 represents a beautiful example of the lozenge-shaped arrow- point, that is nearly a “stemmed” specimen. The angles of the base and body of the specimen are so chipped as to make barbs of these an­gles, or, more properly speaking, barb-like angles; otherwise, the speci­men is diamond shaped in outline, and a true lozenge-shaped example. As a weapou, this form is an excellent pattern $ the point and sides being well adapted to piercing and cutting, while the base is of a shape to make attachment to the shaft very easy and secure.

Figure 9G represents an elongate, lozenge-shaped arrow-point, admirably chipped and very symmetrical. It is of a variety of this pattern that we have found as yet but very few specimens. It measures two inches and one-half in length and three-fourths of an inch in greatest width. Notwithstanding its length, we cannot doubt that it was used as an arrow-point, and it is, therefore, au excellent specimen to show that arrow-heads were occasionally made of a length equal, or nearly so, to the average specimen of slender fish-spear. We call this an arrow­head rather than a spear or javelin point, because the means of attach­ing it securely to its shaft are too imperfect for utilizing it otherwise where the cleft in the shaft of the arrow is all that is required to hold the point when being shot. We have seen several specimens similar in size to the one figured, but with the base rounded instead of pointed in the middle, thus making the true lozenge-shape a leaf-shaped arrow- point, although more slender than these usually are.

Figure 97 is a pretty quartz arrow-point of the lozenge-shape and leaf shaped patterns combined. Such arrow-heads of white quartz are very abundant, and vary but little in size. This specimen measures one inch and five-eighths in length by seven-eighths of an inch in width. It is somewhat thicker than the majority of jasper specimens of its pattern, but has a very acute point and sharp cutting-edges.

Every collection of arrow-heads will show many variations of every so-called type of these relics, but no one pattern seems to vary more than the one we have termed lozenge-shape. We notice, however, that, as a class, they are made of the harder minerals, and are small; they have no abundant representatives rudely chipped in slate and other more easily-worked minerals. This pattern is not as abundantly represented throughout the State as the true leaf-shaped type, and it has occurred to us that probably very many of our lozenge-shaped specimens were blocked out for leaf-shaped ones, but being found too brittle, or badly broken at the start, they were finished as angular at the base instead of possessing that beautifully-curved base which makes the true leaf-shaped pattern so attractive to collectors.

Figure 98 is a rare form of arrow-point as far as our experience goes in collecting them in New Jersey. It is a well-chipped jasper specimen of five instead of three angles. It is a shape apparently well adapted to its purpose, but still possesses no advantage over the plain triangle and its variations that we have been describing. There is but one other specimen in our cabinet of this shape.

Figure 99 represents a second example of quintangular arrow-head. It is chipped from green jasper, is smoothly worked, and evenly beveled from the middle to the edges. The sides are all sharply chipped, and the point has been acute. This form is not at all common, although we have met with more examples of it than of the preceding shorter and broader form. The narrow base is very sharp, and was probably inserted into a slit at the end of the shaft, aud held by wrapping with sinew. This would secure it a firm hold, and, being so slender and sharp, it would penetrate deeply, if discharged with ordinary force.

Figure 100 is an average specimen of the white-quartz arrow-points of the leaf-pattern. They are very common, both of quartz and slate, but not as numerous as those of jasper, which latter mineral usually appears iu the shape of stemmed or plain triangular arrow-points. There appears to be no advantage in the leaf shaped pattern, and yet it was chosen by the arrow-maker very frequently. We have seen some u work­shop sites ” where it appeared to be a favorite pattern, just as the “ site” in Hunterdon County was characterized by the stemmed arrow-point form. Although, as we have seen, spearheads were sometimes leaf­ shaped, the true arrow-points are not very variable in size, few being larger than figure 100.

Figure 101 represents a more symmetrical and better-finished speci­men of leaf-shaped arrow-point than the preceding. It is decidedly the best-finished and most acutely-pointed specimen of arrow-head we have as yet met with. There is not a single flaw or fault in the specimen anywhere.

Figure 102 represents a third form of the leaf-shaped pattern, varying from the two preceding it in being shorter and broader. It resembles figure 101 pushed together; or, reversing the simile, 101 is 1Q2 drawn out.

This shorter and broader form is more abundantly met with than the longer and more slender specimens.

Leaf-shaped arrow-points are occasionally much wider than the pre­ceding* specimen, and, of course, also longer. Figure 103 represents a large jasper arrow-point of this pattern, which is not, however, as smoothly chipped as either of the preceding nor as regularly oval in its outlines. It may be, however, an unfinished specimen.

Leaf-shaped arrow-points of this pattern of the softer minerals, as slate, are not common, although the lance-head, of slate, is only an exaggerated arrow-head of this pattern.

Figure 104 represents a fine pale-yellow jasper form of arrow-point, found scantily in New Jersey, but more abundantly in the Western States. It is noticeable, particularly, that the edges are at an angle with the point, giving it a twist, which gradually disappears as the edges reach the barbs. This peculiarity is even more marked in some specimens that we have seen, but which unfortunately were broken. Messrs. Squier and Davis, in their brief notice of arrow-heads,* say, “ Some are so chipped that the line of their edges forms a large angle with their planes, as if to give them a revolving or tearing motion.” This twisted condition of the edges in figure 104 is sufficient to produce this motion, as we have tested. Of course, the feathering at the base of the shaft can be so arranged as to help this revolving motion, and it prob­ably was so fixed by the Indian. Whether or not this u tearing* mo­tion would make a more fatal wound or not is a question; for certainly the arrow-point itself would not penetrate as deeply.

Of the specimens of this pattern found in New Jersey, all have been smaller, but otherwise were as well-marked twisted arrow-points. The specimen figured was picked up in a field in Indiana, and is illustrated in preference to a New Jersey example only because it is in perfect condition.

Figure 105 represents a peculiar form of arrow-point, the shark-tooth pattern. This specimen is not a chance chipping or the mere whim of the arrow-maker, but is a copy in stone of a recent shark’s tooth, such as was not unfrequently used by the Indians along the sea-shore. We have also met with fossil shark-teeth in graves, that when buried were probably attached, as arrow-heads, to shafts. Figure 105 is carefully chipped from a flake of black hornstone, is sharply edged, and has an acutely-chipped point. The base is somewhat thicker, but is well chipped also j one side, or barb, being more slender and pointed than the other. We have seen more than twenty of these arrow-points all agreeing with the one figured iu every important feature.

Figure 106 represents a quadrangular stemmed arrow-point, that is unique, so far as our experience extends. If we take the little projec­tion as a stem, we find the sharp point to be directly opposite, and held or viewed in this position (as figured) the specimen appears as a stemmed triangular arrow-point, with a broad wing-like projection upon one side. It is not an unfinished specimen. The “ wing” is finely and evenly chipped, with its edges as sharp as are any other of the edges of the specimen. What object there may have been in such a shaped arrow point, we cannot imagine.

Figure 107 represents a very pretty form of arrow-point, with which we will conclude this portion of our subject. It is carefully chipped from1 yellowish-brown jasper, and is noticeable particularly for the ex­aggerated barb, which is considerably larger than the main body of the specimen. An examination of the reverse side of the base of this arrow-point shows that there has never been a second barb, but that the specimen is now as originally chipped. The barb, once beneath the skin of an animal, would be difficult to extract, and would make an ugly wound; but how such an arrow-head was attached to the shaft is not clear.

Before concluding this subject of arrow-heads, we would call atten­tion to certain large stones found on known sites of Indian Villages, which are called “ anvils” for want of a more correct designation. Dr. T. S. Stevens, of Trenton, N. J., to whom we are indebted for many favors, has called our attention to one such u anvil.” The stone in question is about twenty inches in height, has an hour-glass contrac­tion at the middle, and has a level circular surface at either end of about nine inches in diameter. Where contracted at the middle, it measures about five or six inches in diameter. Sitting on the ground, and placing it before us between the legs, we found the present shape of the stone to be admirably adapted as an anvil, or “bench.” Thus postured, one could easily imagine himself a prehistoric arrow-maker, resting one surface of a blade of jasper upon the upper face of the an­vil, and striking off the flakes, that a subsequent laborious chipping would transform into such delicate arrow-heads as many we have figured. Whether such ah anvil as this was shaped from a globular bowlder or not is a difficult question to decide; but, judging from the mineralogical character of the implement, we think that it originally bore some resemblance to its present shape, and was afterward chipped to per­fect the uniformity of its hour-glass contraction. Mr. Schoolcraft has described the method of arrow-head making without the aid of an an­vil, and it may be that the stone we have described was not used in resting the block upon it when broken in flakes, but as a bench for the later chipping, or in finishing arrow and spear points.

There is nothing that adds so much to the interest of arrow heads, and indeed to that of the other stone implements of a country, as the results of their comparison with stone implements of other and distant portions of the globe. Mr. Evans’s interesting volume on the stone im­plements of Great Britain gives us an excellent opportunity to make such comparisons with the English specimens, the work being profusely and admirably illustrated. This comparison is made at the conclusion

of the chapter, and is, of itself, more instructive and interesting than any comments can be as to the weapons themselves, unassociated with the thought of their cosmopolitan character. As will be noticed, we have drawn entirely from Lubbock and Nilsson for examples of identical forms of European and American stone implements in the preceding pages of this chapter. We have read with particular interest Mr. Evans’s exhaustive chapter upon arrow-heads, and are surprised to find that nearly everything that he figures under that head occurs in New Jer­sey, while we believe some of the forms given by us are not known to British archaeologists.

We must, however, be allowed to express our dissent from some of Mr. Evans’s statements concerning North American arrow-heads. He re­marks,* UA prevailing type in North America, viz, that with a notch at the base on either side, has already been mentioned more than once. This form shades off into that with a central dove-tailed tang, sometimes with well-developed barbs. Others, again, have merely a central tang, with little or no attempt at barbs. The triangular form, usually but little exca­vated at the base, is also com mon. A rare form terminates in a semicircular edge. The leaf shaped form is very rare. For the most part, the chipping is but rough, as the material, which is usually chert, homstone, or even quartz, does not readily lend itself to fine work.” With very much of this paragraph we do not agree. For instance, the arrow-point u with a notch at the base on either side,” although prevailing throughout North Ameri­ca, is not more abundantly met with than many other totally distinct patterns. A large series of the triangular arrow-points show a fiur pro­portion of those that have a deeply concave base; and some that have a convex base, passing thereby into the leaf-shaped pattern. Mr. Evans most unquestionably errs in stating that the leaf-shaped form is very rare. It is certainly abundant enough in New Jersey to satisfy any collector; and we believe the same can be said of every other of our Eastern States. We have given four examples of the leaf-shaped form, and could have added many more had it been necessary to give further illustrations of a form that necessarily can vary but little.

Further, we think Mr. Evans errs in asserting that “ for the most part the chipping is rough.” We do not fear comparison of our New Jersey specimens with similar stone implements from any part of the world; and especially are our quartz arrow-points as a class well finished, and this mineral is particularized by Mr. Evans as one reason why North American arrow-points are rough.

So far as illustrations of European and those of other countries enable us to determine, we have found within a radius of five miles of Trentou, N. J., every form of arrow-point that has been discovered and described by foreign archaeologists; and we have in this chapter figured two or more patterns that European archaeologists have not yet collected; and the same remarks will apply to the subject of the general finish of speci­mens.

Several of the specimens figured by Mr. Evans are identical wit& the hunting-spears and harpoon points described in Chapters VII and VIII; and these two forms, that appear to us to have had distinct uses, are called by Mr. Evans “javelin-points.” There is some advantage in studying these various forms of stone implements here in New Jersey, since they were in use down to historical times, and the writings of the travelers who visited this country nearly two centuries ago throw con­siderable light upon the manner of their manufacture and use. If, there­fore, the same implements the world over had the sameuse, then those now found in America, which were the latest made and used, should decide the names and purposes of all, wherever found. A careful survey of a very large series of arrow-heads, all gathered from one limited locality, has con­vinced us that when the bow was first brought into use in this neigh­borhood, the art of arrow-point making was unknown, or in its earliest infancy, and that the first “flint” heads to the arrows were but thin flakes of slate, and possibly of jasper, that were the necessary result of shaping out the rude hatchets that primitive man mainly depended upon as a tool and weapon, for food and defense. Our reason for thus believing is that, as a rule, the rudest, least symmetrical arrow-heads are those which show the greatest degree of “ weathering,” or surface-decomposition. Very many of these rude arrow-points are now of the consistency, or thereabouts, of chalk, except in the middle, where the mineral is hard, black, and flint-like. Some of these specimens have lost nearly all trace of their original shape, but, being softened down uniformly, by scraping off the chalky surface, we reproduce on a smaller scale the original outline of the arrow-head. It can be set down as a rule that “ rotten79 arrow-points are rude, and undecomposed jasper specimens are elaborate. Will it be said that the jasper is simply not decompos­able? If so, why were not those of softer stone, being so much more easily worked, made into the fantastic shapes that we find produced in jasper? The “ soft” minerals will admit of it.

We have no knowledge of the origin of the bow and arrow; but we believe it to have originated here, and many years subsequently to the first appearance of those rude implements we have described in the sec­ond chapter of this work. As it originated here, so did it elsewhere come into use; the same surroundings produced the same result, but it is useless now to speculate on the manner and time.


Chapter X.


The site of a former Indian village, of which there are many in New Jersey, may be recognized as the spot of a once busy community, by the “mixed” condition of the relics there found. While lately searching through such a heap of broken tools and weapons, a carefully-chipped flint (Fig. 108) of oval outline, sharply edged at every portion of the circumference, was found. Although not a novelty, it was better finished than others found singly in the fields.

It measures three and one-quarter inches in length, and one inch and seven-eighths in its greatest breadth. One side is straighter and much more finely chipped than the other, and has a sharper edge. The coarser- chipped side evidently was not intended for any use. A glance at this implement shows that, with a handle at the back, or coarsely-chipped it would be a beautiful “ scraper.” The typical scrapers having a totally different form,, however, the proper designation for figure 108 would probably be a knife.

Figure 109 is a second example of a chipped-jasper knife, not as finely finished as figure 108, but evidently identical in character. Such a speci­men might at first seem to be simply a rudely blocked-out arrow-head, which was subsequently thrown aside, but as the like are found singly, scattered over a large portion of the State, and are not very similar to the rejected specimens so abundant where an arrow-maker has worked, it cannot be doubted that they are finished specimens.

Figure 110 is a third example of these knives, and varies but little from the others, except in being somewhat thicker, and having the two sides more uniform than usual.

To what cutting purpose such knives were put is a pertinent ques­tion, but one to which my only reply is that I do not know. I have experimented with them to some extent and find that with patience they will cut a green twig, and even flesh.

Considering savage dexterity with flint, figure 108 appears fitted for use as a scalping-knife, though we have never met with any flint imple­ment which archaeologists have classed as knives used for this particular purpose.

Figures 109 and 110 may be looked upon as quite serviceable knives when we consider the skill evinced by savages in using flint tools. Sir John Lubbock states,* quoting Mr. Galton, that the dexterity with which the savages of Southern Africa butcher and cut up large beasts with the poorest knives is really extraordinary. The Dammaras had usually nothing but bits of flattened iron lashed to handles, or the edges of their flat spears. Yet with these imperfect implements they would cut up giraffes and rhinoceroses, on which, even with excellent knives of European manufacture, Mr. Galton had much difficulty in making any impression. Other savage tribes readily cut flesh with pieces of shell or of hard wood. After all, some of these jasper knives are not mean tools; and, guided by the same skill, we doubt not flesh and hide would yield as readily to the specimens we have figured as to the 44 bits of flattened iron ” just referred to.

Figures 111 and 112 represent examples of long, narrow, and finely- edged implements, which we have called knives. Such specimens, which are always broken squarely off at one end, are very abundant in some lo­calities. We have experimented somewhat with them, and are of the opinion that they were used as “fish-knives,” being very well adapted to scaling fish; moreover they have been found most abundant on the shores of the larger creeks and on the river-banks. They are usually smooth, or comparatively so, on one side, and roughly chipped and ridged upon the other. Both sides are brought to a cutting edge, and the square end is also chipped to an edge. Those we have found have generally been of slate and minerals of like character. There are a few, however, of jasper, but they do not vary in any important particular from the two examples figured, which are of slate.

Mr. Evans has figured two specimens of 44 flint” knives from Scotland, which bf ar a marked resemblance to those here given.* The Scottish ones are usually worked upon both faces, and have but a single edge sharpened by grinding. Figures 111 and 112 differ from this descrip­tion, in having two equally well defined edges, 44 chipped” and not sub­sequently ground. The “bases” of the specimens figured by Mr. Ev- aus seem to be 44 worked,” while ours are broken. As all the specimens; of this style of knife have been similarly broken, we are inclined to think it intentional rather than accidental. Again, a careful examination of this broken end shows that it has undergone much weathering, and must have been broken very long ago, if not, indeed, when the knife was manufactured. This form of knife blade seems to be rare in Great Britain, but with us it is fully as abundant as*are the more elaborately chipped jasper specimens, such as figures 108, 109, and 110.

Figure 113 represents a small chipped fragment of hornstone, in itself a completed implement, but of exactly what kind, it is difficult to de­termine. It combines the arrow-point, knife, and the 44 semi-lunar flake” which was used as a knife in Scandinavia. Of this form, also, Mr. Ev­ans t has given an illustration very similar to ours in all respects. The English specimen, however, is one-fourth longer. Mr. Evans calls such specimens  “trimmed flakes,” which describes precisely what the specimens are; but as their use was44 to cut,” we see no objection to class­ing them as  “knives,” especially as the so-called 4 “trimmed flakes ” and the “knives” blend so gradually that no line of demarcation can be drawn between them. Although much ruder and smaller, figure 113

bears considerable resemblance to certain “ semi-lunar knives” figured by Nilsson.* These Scandinavian forms are, however, usually of a toothed or serrated edge, and are more decidedly curved than is the case with figure 113. Although such specimens have not yet occurred, we doubt not we shall be able to find knives of the true semi-lunar pattern before the supply of specimens is exhausted in the localities which have yielded so bountiful a series of stone implements of the various types.

The chipped-jasper knives, figures 108-110, vary materially from ‘‘flints” that have been designated “knives” by Professor Nilsson and Sir John Lubbock; still we think they are true knives. One consider­ation to be borne in mind is, that there was scarcely a single instrument which was confined to a single purpose; and, as the modern pocket-knife is frequently a combination of tools, so the chipped-jaspers had a multi­plicity of uses. The edge being the prominent characteristic of the specimens, cutting must have been the principal design in the making; therefore, figures 108,109,110, are called “ knives.”

Commenting on a collection of Indian stone implements forwarded to him by the writer, from this neighborhood, (Trenton, N. J.,) Sir John Lubbock remarks: “The absence of flakes and true scrapers surprises me. How do you account for it ? Is there no flint in the neighbor­hood?” There is no flint in the neighborhood, and as jasper, slate, and sandstone do not flake off as readily and conveniently as flint proper, so we do not have in that abundance characteristic of European “finds,* true “flakes” and “scrapers,” such as may have been fashioned by almost a single blow; and so, too, our knives, if those implements which we have here figured are such, have not a smooth edge as is produced by a single plane of cleavage; nevertheless, they would surely be effect­ive for most of the purposes to which a knife of “flint” could be used. As we have noticed, both sides have the surface equally chipped. None that we have seen are identical with the semi-lunar knife found in Sweden, figured by Professor Nilsson,t but some few approach a shape that might be termed semi-lunar. Occasionally a specimen is met with that is concave on one side and convex on the other. In such instance the outer, or convex, side has the cutting edge.

Sir John Lubbock has figured}: an Esquimaux knife, that we can cer­tainly duplicate without difficulty, excepting the handle. Comparison of figure 113a with that given by Sir John Lubbock, as quoted below, will at once indicate the similarity, if not identity, of form. Many of the more elongated leaf-shaped arrows which had lost their points, might have been thus used, by placing the broken end in a bone handle, and so converting the base and sides into the edges of a (double-edged) knife-blade; but, besides these, we have occasionally met with chipped jaspers which were identical with Mr. Lubbock’s figure above referred to. Instead of being as thin and as nearly flat as an arrow-point, they had a well-defined middle ridge down one side, and were flat upon the other, thus presenting, in section, a triangular outline, which would increase the strength very much over an ordinary arrow-head.

Messrs. Squier and Davis* assert that44 knives of flint and obsidian have been taken from several of the mounds; and one figured is nearly (in shape) identical with an accompanying one from a Scandinavian barrow. We have not met with any of this pattern in New Jersey, which are, according to Squier and Davis, 44 not less than six inches in length (i e.j some of them) and three-fourths of an inch in breadth ; others are not more than two inches long, and of exceeding delicacy. Besides these, and constituting a much larger class, are found cutting-implements chipped with great neatness, so as to produce as clear and smooth a cutting-edge as practicable” These latter, in being 44chipped,w ap­proach our New Jersey specimens, and we doubt not the other pattern, if it does not now exist in some of the large private collections in the State, will yet be found. Obsidian, in the shape of arrow-points, but always broken, has been picked up in New Jersey.


Chapter XI.


When it is remembered that the primitive people whose stone imple­ments we have been describing were perhaps wholly dependent upon the skins of the animals captured in the chase, not only for clothing but for shelter, it is not strange that much care was exercised in fashioning and finishing implements for detaching the skin from the carcass and for its subsequent preparation for domestic use. We are prepared, therefore, to find in skinning-knives and in scrapers, to be separately con­sidered, stone tools that have been elaborately worked out from the most desirable minerals.

Wherever there is unquestionably the site of a village or town of the aborigines, there will we find specimens, sometimes many, of carefully- polished stone implements, having a well-defined cutting-edge; these we have called skinning-knives; a designation embracing the whole ground of use to which they were put by the race of men who made them.

Figure 114 represents a very fine example of skinning-knife plowed up in a field bordering the Crosswicks Creek, Burlington County, New Jersey. This polished implement is made from a large pebble of yellowish sand stone, of such fine-grained consistency as to be capable of the high pol­ish which is still to be seen in one or two places on the specimen in question. This skinning-knife measures six inches in length at the thick back, but the blade, or cutting-edge, starting at an acute angle with the ridge-like back, makes a gentle, perfect curve, which, at the mid­dle of the specimen, is but one inch and a half distant from the lower margin of the back. The back itself is bat seven-sixteenths of an inch in thickness, and tapers to a blunt point at the ends. The blade is only one-fourth of an inch thick where it joins the back, and from thence tapers to a very fine and really sharp edge. The edge is uniformly sharp throughout its whole extent. Taken as a whole, it is the best example of a skinning-knife we have met with, and its shape indicates its use as unquestionably as does the most symmetrical arrow-point sag gest the use of the bow.

Although centuries have elapsed since its last use, it is still available for separating animal skins from the carcass, and comparatively little was gained in substituting for it a metallic knife. It is the only speci­men of this pattern we have found j not even fragments referable to this form have been gathered among the thousands of relics found in the same neighborhood.

Squier and Davis figure a cutting-instrument somewhat like the pre­ceding in general appearance, and remark: “A variety is occasionally found in the Eastern States, of which figure 170 is an example. They are sometimes composed of slate, and are of various sizes, often meas­uring five or six inches in length. They are very well adapted for flay­ing animals and for other analogous purposes.”

Figure 115 is a remarkably pretty example of a skinning-knife of totally different shape and character, being a long, slender stone, edged at one end, instead of on the margin of one of its longer sides. The illustration will convey a better idea of the specimen itself than can any description. The specimen is a hornstone pebble, beautifully polished over the greater portion of its surface. One end is blunt, as though abruptly broken off, but is now equally well polished with any of the other parts. From this blunt end, the width of the specimen gradually increases, with about a corresponding decrease in the breadth or thickness for the distance of an inch, when the width decreases by a beautiful carve more marked upon the upper margin, which margin becomes the edge at the descent of the curve, continuing so until it joins the straighter portion of the lower outline of the specimen. The blade, or edged end of the knife, is slightly bent, or, at least, has that appearance, from the edge not being in a line with the middle of the thickest portion of the implement. If the specimen is held with the straighter side (lower side, in our description) up, then the blade is bent to the right and has just the proper “ twist” to most readily separate the skin from the muscles. On experimenting with this knife, in skinning a lamb, we found that when once an incision was made in the skin, the detaching, by breaking away the thin connective tissue, was easily done, but that the edge was not sufficiently sharp to cut a tendon or the skin itself. When used in deer-skinning, by the Indians, no doubt the liint-knife was brought into play in incising, as, in our experiments with this knife, we found that the implement figured in 108 would cut the tendons of a lamb, and also the skin, but not with as clean an incision as was desirable.

Figure 116 represents a comparatively common style of skinning knife, made from a piece of serpentine, pecked to a blunt point at the back, and from about the middle of the implement to the edge is very smoothly polished. The specimen measures a little less than three inches in length, and two inches in width along the cutting edge, and is a very good aver­age specimen of this class of implements. It approaches in general character the cylindrical hand axes with pointed butt, but is considerably flatter and somewhat broader. It does not appear as well adapted to skinning as does either of the preceding examples.

Figures 117 and 118 represent two more skinning-knives, one from New Jersey, figure 118, and the other from Indiana, figure 117.

Figure 117 is a better specimen than the other, inasmuch as it is thinner, and originally had a better edge. It is of very compact stone, similar to serpentine, but not exactly like this mineral as found in New Jersey. Figure 118 is also of a very compact mineral, approaching porphyry, but very heavy, as though largely charged with iron. It has been carefully polished over its whole surface, to accomplish 'which, considering the mineralogical character of the specimen, must have cost much labor. The specimen measures just three inches in length by one inch and three-quarters in width, along the cutting-edge. As figure 116 approaches the cylindrical, pointed hand-axes, so does this specimen come near the square-ended, ungrooved axes, of which figures have been given. Such skinning-knives as these appear to be common over the whole territory of the United States. We have seen them from nearly every State in the Union. Messrs. Squier and Davis* give illus­trations of two such specimens, differing only in mineral, and remark: “There is another variety (besides knives proper) of cutting instrument, which it may not be out of place to notice here. These consist of hard, compact minerals, worked into a chisel-shape. Some have a very sharp, smooth edge, and form quite a good substitute for metal. Engravings of two, of full size, (both are much smaller than our specimens of a similar shape, i. <?., figures 117 and 118,) are herewith presented. They are formed of very compact nodules of brown hematite, which have been ground into form and polished with great labor. They have a sub- metallic luster, and very nearly the specific gravity of iron. A file pro­duces a scarcely perceptible impression upon their rounded surfaces.” We have, as yet, not collected any specimens of these skinning-knives or other implements made from nodules of known hematite, although this mineral is abundant in the northern portion of New Jersey, but proba­bly there are specimens in collections made in that section of the State, not only of knives, but of grooved axes, and other of the larger imple­ments of stone. Figure 119 is a rude skinning knife, ground down from a globular porphyry pebble, and, considering its thickness at the com­mencement of the polished surfaces, one inch and three-eighths, the labor upon it must have been enormous. We have, elsewhere,* called this specimen an ax, but on comparing it with a large series of un­doubted skinning-knives, we are induced to place it with them; and, indeed, it may be that two other of the smaller ungrooved axes, which we have figured, should really be included in this chapter rather than under their present heading; but nowhere in the range of stone imple- ments is it harder to draw the dividing-line satisfactorily than between axes proper and true skinning-knives.

Figure 120 represents the smaller-sized skinning-knives found through­out the length and breadth of the land. Usually, those found in New Jersey are ground into form from a hornstone or porphyry pebble, and polished. The specimen in the figure has been pecked into shape from a fragment of serpentine, and subsequently highly polished on the sides. The cutting-edge is very good. It is very nearly equal in size to the smaller of the two hematite implements figured by Messrs. Squier and Davis, and referred to in our description of figures 117 and 118, bat somewhat more irregular in outline. Polished skinning-stones as small as figure 120 are as useful for the larger mammals as are those given in figures 114 and 118, and we do not understand why there should be such a variation in size, unless, in their making, stones of suitable shape were selected irrespective of size, and an edge, the length of which was decided by the original breadth of the stone, was given to them.

In the collection of M. Newbold, esq., of Burlington County, New Jer­sey, to which we have frequently referred, there is a fine series of skin­ning-knives, all gathered from the immediate neighborhood. The largest, we should unquestionably class as ahand-ax, as its length, nine inches, renders it too unwieldy for skinning-purposes, but it stands at the bead of a series which lessens in length very gradually down to two highly polished specimens scarcely two inches in total length. By placing these specimens in a row, it is difficult to decide where the ax ceases and the knife begins.

The smallest specimens of Mr. Newbold’s collection are flat, sharply- pointed triangles, very highly polished, aud, altogether, exhibit far more work than any we have figured, excepting, possibly, figure 115. The object of this sharply-pointed end is not easily determined. Cer­tainly it does not render the implement any more “ handy” in the oper­ation of skinning, and is not likely to have been needed to puncture the hide, especially as great care was taken to preserve the skin as entire as possible.

The skinning-knives in the above-mentioned collection are made of porphyry, serpentine, and hornstone, the majority being of tbe first- named mineral, and those from the other two materials are about the same in number.

The skinning-knives which we have figured, as well as those referred to in collections other than our own, vary considerably in outline, though but little in general finish, and may all be described as polished peb­bles, with some portion of the rim brought to a cutting-edge. It has also been shown that these and the hand-axes, or those without a groove, have many features in common, and, indeed, that they (the skinning- knives and hand-axes without grooves) are identical, except in size; but whether some of the specimens are classed as the one or the other implement depends much upon the fancy of the collector.

We now propose calling attention to the apparent identity of the more common forms of skinning-knives and of some of the smaller hand-axes with the class of stone implements known to European archae­ologists as “ polished celts.”

Mr. Evans* says: 44 The general form of stone celts is usually that of more or less flat blades, approaching an oval in section, with the sides more or less straight, and one end broader and also sharper than the other. In length they vary from about two inches to as much as sixteen inches.”

It will be seen from this description of  “celts,” as a class, that the specimens represented by figures 116,117,118, would be called in Eng­land “celts,” as would also all the “hand-axes” that we have figured. If, therefore, it were proper to separate the two forms in America, why should they not be so separated when studied abroad f Is it not prob­able that these implements, being identical in everything except the mineral of which they are made, had identical uses?

Some of the illustrations given by Mr. Evans of polished celts are very similar to those we have given ; and, in fact, he speaks t of  hema­tite celts found in North America of much the same size and form” as those occurring in Great Britain and France.

As to the uses to which our  “skinning-knives” and the European celts were put, Mr. Evans remarks: 44 They were used chiefly for cut­ting down timber, and for scooping canoes out of the trunks of forest trees; for dressing posts for huts; for grubbing up roots and killing animals for food; for preparing fire-wood; for scraping the flesh from the bones when eating; and for various other purposes in the domestic arts. But- they were also employed in times of war as weapons of offense and defense, as a supplementary kind of tomahawk.”

We see here, indeed, a wide range of uses, and so varied are they that we should think their separation might easily be based upon such a list of purposes for which these implements were intended. Surely a  “celt ” a foot in length, perhaps, available for cutting down trees, would rather be in the way than useful for scraping the flesh from bones when eating,” while one two inches in length would scarcely befitted for digging up roots or killing animals sufficiently large for food; yet such celts occur, and are moderately well adapted to skinning animals when once an incision is fairly made. While many specimens may have had various uses, certainly the extremes in forms cannot be confounded; and our ungrooved axes or true “ celts79 on the one hand and polished skinning-knives on the other are well-marked types of stone implements that are properly distinguished by names suggested by their probable uses, notwithstanding the varying forms which little by little effect a blending of the two types.


Chapter XII.


Among the very numerous “ flint” specimens of Europe are certain rudely-chipped objects, of various sizes, which have received the name of “scrapers.” Of these, Sir John Lubbock* says: “The so-called 4 scrapers’ are oblong stones, one end of which is rounded and brought to a beveled edge by a series of small blows. One side is flat, the other or outer one is more or less convex; sometimes they have a short handle, which gives them very much the appearance of a spoon. They have been found in England, France, Denmark, Ireland, Switzerland, and other countries. They vary from one to four inches in length, and from half an inch to two inches in breadth. *Modern specimens (Esquimaux) are in form identical with the old ones.” We have said that they are “ rudely chipped,” and, judging from the general appear­ance, as represented in the*illustrations, they unquestionably are; but this is very far from being the case with the New Jersey specimens. As a class, they are as well chipped and as uniform in shape as the majority of arrow-points. They usually have the “short handle” mentioned by Sir John Lubbock, but are not commonly as spoon-like in appear­ance, being similar in outline to the “ sheaf of wheat,” especially if viewed with the “ handle” down. They vary somewhat from this typi­cal form of the “ sheaf of wheat,” however, especially in the character of the handle, which is sometimes pointed; and, again, there are other examples, having no distinct handle, but the edge of the scraper is receded from at a gentle slope, making the complete specimen a tri­angular flint, with the peculiar beveled edge which characterizes all such implements as “ scrapers.” One feature of the European scrapers is having one side flat or uniform, the result of the breaking away of a large flake, thus giving on one side the smooth surface of a single plane of cleavage. We have all our specimens chipped upon both sides, unless it be those of about the minimum size, which appear absolutely identical with the European specimens.

During the summer of 1871,1 forwarded a number of “sheaf-of-wheat” scrapers to Sir John Lubbock, who kindly wrote me, concerning them: “None of your specimens are 1 true’ 4 scrapers,’ according to our ideas, nor have I ever seen one from a red-skin area.” Since then we have gathered hundreds of our scrapers; and of one of the smaller ones, smooth upon one side, Mr. Lubbock has written: “ I should certainly regard it as a scraper.” During the present summer I forwarded speci­mens of the scrapers found about Trenton, N. J., to my friend, Mr. Wm. A. Baker, of Auburn, N. Y., and of one of them he writes: “The small­est (black) one is, in everything except material, an exact duplicate of my Yorkshire scrapers.”

Scrapers vary, in the minerals from which they are made, to the same extent as arrow-points; but the majority of them, unlike arrow points, are of hornstone, chert, jasper, and quartz. Many, however, are of slate and sandstone, and are carefully shaped, but have not the same degree of fiuish as the harder minerals; but it may be possible that the slate and sandstone specimens were originally finished with the same care, but have been broken in the rough-and-tumble existence to which they have been subjected during the past two centuries. They have all softened upon the surface by the years of weathering, and, if judged by the surface only, would be considered much more friable than they really are. If the external coating of rotten stone is scraped off, the body of the specimen is found to be still sufficiently hard to turn the edge of the penknife.

These remarks upon the surface-decomposition of slate and sandstone relics are, of course, as applicable to arrow-poiuts of these materials as to scrapers. To what extent decomposition is indicative of age cannot well be ascertained; but that the very much worn, deeply rotted, and sometimes scarcely recognizable relics are considerably older than others of identical material, but hard upon the surface, there can be little, if any, doubt.

Figure 121 represents the largest scraper in our collection and one of the largest that we have seen. It is of slaty rock, and is rudely chipped on both sides, quite hard, aud in color very dark. The whole sur­face is much weather-worn, and is of a grayish hue, similar to the yel­low-gray Jersey sand in which it has been lying for so long a time. The specimen measures a fraction over four inches iu length and a little more than two and one-half inches in width. The handle is exactly one inch long, and one inch wide at the end, but increases a little in width as it nears the body of the specimen itself. The scraping end is rounded, and equally edged with the sides. There is, in this specimen, no bevel­ing of the front edge, as is the rule with scrapers; but that this is any­thing but a scraper no one will contend. We suppose that the short handle of this specimen was intended to be inserted in a bone handle of greater width than the body of the implement, since otherwise such a narrow and short projection would only be in the way iu using the specimen as an ordinary scraper.

The other slate scrapers in our collection are all of the true u sheaf-of- wheat” pattern, having the beveled edge at the front,, but as a class are thinner than those made from other materials*. As> slate was certainly

more easily worked than jasper or quartz and equally as good for a scraper, we cannot imagine why the harder minerals should have been used so much, unless that once made they were less liable to be broken- a probability which would seem of little moment when we reflect upon the little wear and tear on a stone solely used in scraping the soft fab from a scarcely harder skin. Nine-tenths of all the scrapers we hav6 gathered, however, were of the various kinds of jasper and quartz. While our slate and other scrapers vary considerably iu length, there is not this variation in width, and several in our collection are fully two- thirds as wide as figure 121, but less than half its length, and in some cases only about one-third as long.

Scrapers are seldom found singly, but are abundant on the former sites of Indian villages, and where arrow-makers had their workshops.

Without making any distinction between true scrapers and stretch­ing implements, as suggested by Professor Nilsson,* we proceed to the consideration of the average jasper scrapers as we have found them about Trenton, N. J.

Figures 122,123, and 124 are excellent specimens of the pattern we have called the “ sheaf of wheat.” To recognize the similarity iu out­line, the specimen must be viewed with the handle down and not as here given, which is, however, the true position of the scraper, considering its use. Two of these specimens have the beveled edge; but iu figure 123 the edge is equally chipped from either side, which fact inclined us formerly to consider this a blunt arrow-head,t but more careful study with an enlarged collection makes us confident that we were for the time in error. We have seen that figure 121 was so chipped at the edge, and certainly no one will class that as an arrow-head. Occasionally the butt* ends of the scrapers will be curved and give the specimen much the appearance of a barbed arrow-point, the tip of which has been squarely broken away. In many specimens, too, the blade is much shorter than these we have here figured, being but a third or a quarter of the length of the handle, instead of equal in length or longer.

Figure 125 is a well-cut jasper scraper, with a narrower front, or scrap­ing edge, than usual. The specimen bears a general resemblance to Esquimaux examples that we have met with and have also seen figured, The handle does not join the body of the implement as abruptly as in the four preceding figures.

Figure 126 is a beautifully wrought example of a jasper scraper, hav­ing much in common with figure 125, but is more symmetrical. The scraping edge is broader and flatter, and is beautifully beveled along the whole front, but the object has an ordinary straight or cutting edge along the sides. The handle is about one-third of the total length of the specimen, and is neatly chipped and brought to a sharp edge on both sides and at the end.

It is seldom that we see a chipped-jasper implement with its use stamped upon it as in tliis instance by the shape, size, and manner of finish. The beveled edge is very marked, being sharp on one side and blunt on the other, so that with the sharp edge the fat may be removed, the skin being softened by rubbing with the rounded edge—two implements, really, being combined in the one stone.

Figure 127 is a specimen of jasper scraper that more nearly ap­proaches the European form of this implement. It is smaller than the usual find of our New Jersey specimens. The scraping edge has been produced by a single flake being detached from one side along the whole width of the specimen. The handle is a short, narrow, stem like pro­jection, terminating in a blunt point.

Figures 128 and 129 represent two forms of scrapers possessing many points in common and which are also allied, but more remotely, to the preceding pattern. These two specimens were classed as arrow-heads in our paper in the American Naturalist 5 but, as with the scraper previ­ously called a blunt arrow-point, so with these, additional specimens rendered their peculiar forms intelligible. They are unquestionably scrapers. Why they should be so shaped is not known; but we were not a little astonished to find, duriug the present summer, other speci­mens exactly like the two figured, and varying among themselves just as these vary. Both figures, 128 and 129, have had very good points at the ends of the handles, and the additional specimens of these pat­terns are even better pointed. The chipped beveled base, however, of these supposed arrow-points furnishes a clew to their true character, and the additional examples, genuine duplicates of the preceding figures, are as evidently scrapers as any specimens we have figured. The only spe­cimens we have met with have been gathered from a single field, and were associated with the common style of this implement, with arrow- points, &c.

Figure 130 is a most interesting example of jasper scraper, having all the peculiarities of our sheaf-of-wheat pattern ; it is, however, exag­gerated, and the stem or handle, instead of being straight, has side projections, which make the specimen, when viewed upside down, a blunt, deeply notched, stemmed arrow-point. Its true character, how­ever, is that of a scraper, inasmuch as the edge is very carefully bev­eled, which would not be the case were it intended as a blunt point for an arrow. The object of the arrow-head-like u handle99 is not at all clear. In its present condition it does not offer a good hold for skin-scraping, and to attach a long slender shaft like that of an arrow to it, would ren­der it only more embarrassing for skin-dressing. This specimen, figure 130, was found in Indiana, and forwarded to the author with a number of others. They have all proved interesting lor purposes of comparison with our New Jersey specimens, but no one of them differed in any im­portant particular from those of this State. We have seen a New Jer­sey scraper similar to this, except in being a little larger; but being broken we preferred figuring the Indiana example.

Figure 131 represents a beautifully chipped jasper scraper of the tri­angular form, and is the smallest specimen we have met with. It is a little less than one inch in length, and almost three-fourths of an inch in breadth, and is, therefore, of the minimum size according to Sir John Lubbock. Although chipped upon both sides, as is the rule with New Jersey scrapers, it is very nearly flat upon the underside, the sloping from the middle toward the edges being very gradual. The front, or scraping edge is carefully chipped at about right angles with the upper surface of the specimen. A ridge extends along the upper side of the whole length of the specimen, and from it, the surface slopes uniformly to the edge. The object in fastening a handle on an implement so small as this, the use of which is supposed to have been that of* scraping, in rendering skins pliant and available for clothing, does not appear, unless it was used for skins of the smallest mammals.

Mr. Evans* has figured no example of a scraper that is equal to this, figure 131, in general finish aud workmanship, and only one that is as short. His specimen is broader, however, although otherwise it bears much resemblance to that from New Jersey.

Mr. Evans, in his most interesting chapter on “ scrapers,” has ad­vanced many reasons for his belief that some of our so-called scrapers were used in producing fire, in connection with pyrites, remarking of the English specimens, “we find some of these instruments with the edge battered and bruised to such ah extent that it can hardly have been the result of scraping,- in the ordinary sense of the word.”

We have many scrapers with battered edges, and of a quadrangular outline, very similar in general appearance to the modern “strikea- -lights,” which we doubt not were used, as Mr. Evans suggests. Figure 132 represents such a specimen of scraper.” It is of yellow jasper, an inch and a half long, an iuch wide, and half an inch thick near the middle of the specimen. The front edge is much battered and has every appearance of having been struck against a mineral as hard as pyrites.

Pyrites, in masses of various sizes, is very abundant about Tren­ton, N J., where these short, thick scrapers are found. It occurs in the beds of clay which crop out of the hillsides along the New Jersey shore of the Delaware, being there attached in large masses to the fossil trees imbedded in these strata.

In closing this chapter, an illustration is given of a slate specimen, fig­ure 133, which has particularly interested me from the very marked re­semblance it has to a specimen of scraper, found by Sir John Lubbock at Bourdeilles, in the South of France, and figured the natural size in Prehistoric Times. { Our New Jersey specimen is identical faith it in length, while the handle is immaterially broader, the only noticeable difference being that our specimen is chipped upon both sides.

There is, perhaps, nothing so interesting connected with the study of the “flint* implements of New Jersey as this identity in the more important features with those of distant countries. We have seen this similarity in the axes and arrow-heads 5 and now in the scrapers, we obtain an example of identity in a specimen from the South of France, and one from Central New Jersey; the former has existed as many cen­turies as the latter has years, and yet the latter must be more than two hundred years old.


Chapter XIII.


There are occasionally found about our fields, slender oval stones and some of more irregular shape, with grooves entirely around them, as in one pattern of axes, which stones would serve as good axes had they a cutting-edge. Being without such edge their use as hammers is un­questionable. Such an oval, grooved pebble is well represented in fig­ures 133,133a. There has been no chipping or pecking of this specimen other than was necessary to produce the narrow, shallow groove, to bet­ter secure the handle. This hammer is seven inches in length, about three inches wide in the middle, and tapers quite uniformly to the some­what narrower ends. To what uses such grooved stones were put it is not easy to determine. In this instance there is not the battered appear­ance at the ends, indicating use as a hammer for striking other stones, as in the ends of chisels and gouges. Very probably it was a weapon, as its weight and size certainly do not suggest any heavy mechanical works, such as the ancient copper-mining, where immense stone mauls were largely used.

Figure 134 represents an interesting form of stone hammer, being peculiar in that one portion has been pecked into such shape as to au- swer as a handle, instead of being so shaped as to require a wooden one. Probably the stone originally bore some resemblance to its present shape. There has been a rude edge chipped upon the lower margin of the head of this hammer of about one-quarter of an inch in width. When this specimen was first described by us,* it was suggested that a handle had been attached to the preseut stone stem or handle; but this is improb­able. Whether it was used as a weapon or a domestic tool is indeter­minable. This is the only specimen we have met with of this style.

Figure 135 represents the more usual shape and size of these stone hammers, as we find them in New Jersey. Of course occasional speci­mens of this and other styles occur that are several times larger. This specimen is exactly five inches in length. It was originally of the ordi­nary oval outline so common to the cobble-stones of the river-bed, and afterward pecked at the head to make it flatter. It has a very shallow groove pecked irregularly about it; the dressing down was apparently more with a view to obliterate projecting angles than to secure a de­pression or groove for the handle-fastenings. At the end or point there is a small pecked surface which may have been intended to produce a blunter end, or caused by hammering upon other stones, as in using the chisel or gouge. We have sometimes thought it possible that such hammers as figure 135, which are by no means rare, may have been intended as axes at first, but in consequence of the amount of work required, or from other cause, they were rejected by the implement maker. Were there not also hammers to which these remarks cannot be applied, and tools that require the use of hammers of some kind, we should be inclined to adopt this view of u unfinished axes,” especially since, at that time, as now, any stone of suitable weight and size, and conveniently manipulated, might serve as a hammer.

Figure 130 represents a cobble stone hammer, which has puzzled us considerably. There is a well-defined depression extending all around the stone at one end, but it is so smooth, aud uniform in color with the natural surface of the stone, that we are a little puzzled to determine whether the groove is natural, or whether the whole surface of the speci­men was polished or worked. That the stone is well shaped for a hammer is undoubted, whether it be a chance bowlder or not; also, it is equally available for hammering purposes, with or without a handle, not being too large to enable one to secure a firm grip about its head, or grooved por­tion. There is no indication of pecking at any part of this hammer, nor does it show those slight inequalities which indicate use against other equally hard or harder stones. This specimen was found near Lambertville, N. J., and was presented to the author by Mr. William Dean, of that place, whose interest in Indian antiquities has resulted in preserv­ing many valuable specimens. The neighborhood from which this ham­mer came is quite rich in the various classes of relics, and the fact of this specimen being found associated with other implements is largely in favor of the idea that it, at least, was iu use as a hammer by the Indi­ans, even if it was not grooved by them in the manner in which it now appears.

Figure 137 represents a very handsome form of stone hammer, found near the Delaware River, at Scudder’s Falls—a locality quite rich iu the commoner form of relics. This specimen, kindly lent by John fl. Scudder, esq., of Trenton, N. J., for purposes of description and figur­ing, was found some forty years ago, and has been used as a nut cracker j ever since. The specimen is a finely-grained sandstone, and has been carefully worked out into a very handy shape for hammering purposed It measures eight and one-quarter inches iu length, about four of which form the handle. The head of the hammer is quadrangular in outline; the whole outer and inferior inner lateral outline being at an angle of about forty-five degrees with the line of the handle. Both head and handle have a uniform thickness of two inches. There are now but few traces of tool-marks upon any part of the specimen, the inferior outer angle and extremity of the handle alone showing a roughness of the sur­face which has been so produced. It is probably an accidental fracturing of the cobble-stone which furnished the general outline of the specimen as it now exists, and that the uneven surfaces were ground down to make the stone available as a hammer. But there is no doubt that the aborigines could fracture stones into pretty much the shape they desired, as will be seen in the sculptured animals’ heads, which were first broken and then smoothed down to correct dimensions.

The outline drawing given above, of another specimen of “ handled ” hammer shows a decided variation from this example in that the handle was, and is, cylindrical, whereas iu figure 137 the handle is flat, pecked only at the end, and smoothed down with a polishing-stone. In figure 137, also, there is no trace of an edge; as in the example above mentioned, there is nothing but blunt hammer-head surfaces throughout. This specimen may have been used as a weapon for close combat; but if ex­amined in connection with the beautiful specimen of gouge represented in figure 139, it will be seen that one supplements the other admirably, and that, with the two, charred wood could be easily removed, or adug-out” canoe readily made. This specimen of hammer bears some gen­eral resemblance to a not uncommon form of pestle, where a portion of the length has been “ split,” as it were, giving the specimen a canoe-shaped handle and a nearly circular head. Such a specimen is always rough on the extremity, showing that it was used as a pestle, the blow being struck with the specimen iu a vertical position, and not as a hammer. We give a figure of such a pestle in chapter xxiv.

We have never seen perforated hammers of the general shape of figure 133 from New Jersey, except in one instance, where a fragment was found that much resembled such a perforated stone hammer as Nilsson figures,* and of which he remarks, “ it is of diorite, and of a very convenient shape. It was found in a bog in Scania, and fell into the hands of a carpenter, who provided it with a handle and used it a long time in his workshop as a hammer.” The New Jersey fragment was not as elaborately ridged and fluted, but was far more carefully shaped than any perfect ones we have seen. The specimen, however, was too fragmentary to determine positively whether or not it was a hammer. Inasmuch as we have so many specimens of carefully-drilled “ banner-stones,” “ gorgets,” and some stone pipes, it appears strange there should be such an absence of tools that have been drilled for handles. We have never yet seen a perfect or even recognizable frag­ment of an ax or hanmer sufficiently large to be useful as a tool, that was drilled for a handle instead of having the ordinary groove.

Stevens t figures a stone hammer found in Ireland, not materially differ­ing from figure 135, to which we refer as another example of the curious identity of the specimens of stone work found iu distant quarters of the globe. We have not collected any specimens of very large stone mauls, and it is to be presumed that they were exclusively used for mining purposes. Dr. Wilson describes* those found iu the. copper* mining regions of Lake Superior, as “ water-worn bowlders of green­stone or porphyry, roughly chipped in the center so as to admit of their being secured by a withe around them. But others are well finished, with a single or double groove for attaching the handle by which they were wielded. They weigh from ten to forty pounds.” It will be noticed here that his description applies also to the majority of the specimens we have found in New Jersey, where probably there was no mining, though copper occurs about New Brunswick, Middlesex County, New Jersey, and the surface lumps of native copper were eagerly sought for and utilized by the Indians. We do not remember ever having met with a stone hammer exceeding ten pounds in weight, the minimum weight of the stone mauls described by Dr. Wilson j but they may occur, however, as the weight of tlie largest grooved ax we have seen was twelve pounds lacking two ounce8.t The hammers found iu New Jersey are usually made of sand-stone; but the “mauls,” as described by Dr. Wilson, are sometimes of porphyry, a mineral generally used for line axes and “ skinning-knives,” but to our knowledge not at all for hammers.

Grooved hammers, for mining purposes, are described by Mr. Evans they are similar to many of the surface-found hammers of New Jersey, but are smaller generally than the Lake Superior u mauls.**


Chapter XIV.


Messrs. Squier and Davis,§ in describing the various forms of stone axes from mounds, as well as from elsewhere throughout the dinted States, remark that “the form of these relics seems to have been determined entirely by the manner in which they were designed to be used. Those intended for deadening trees, or as war-axes, have grooves for the adjustment of handles. There are many which are destitute of this feature, and which were probably designed for chisels or gouges.” The specimens of “ chisels” figured, however, are there also called, and very properly, “hand-axes,” and are identical with those we have figured as “ celts.” No true chisel or gouge—and they are different— is illustrated or, we believe, referred to. The implement we have called ! a 44 chisel,” is an elongated, oval, cobble-stone, that has been peeked over the greater portion of its surface; it is well rounded at one end, and at the other has been carefully ground to a sharp cutting-edge. The under side is rounded, very uniform throughout the whole length, and curved toward the ends, so that, while lying on that side, it will rock to and fro, if touched. Two-thirds of the upper surface have been smoothly split off, making it, not a hollowed “ gouge,” but a smooth chisel. Fig­ure 138 is such a specimen. We have gathered a large series of the kind, showing that they were intended for some chisel-like use, and not merely a chance variety of the ordinary cylindrical celt.

As we meet with no stone-work that has been fashioned by such an implement, the natural inference is that they were used in connection with wood; and no wood work of the aborigines suggests itself other than boat-building, and we have no doubt that logs were converted into canoes with some stone hammers, such as we have figured iu connection with this chisel. It must have been a laborious process, comparing the stone chisel with modern ones; but how else could figure 138 have been utilized f Moreover, this view of the use of chisels is upheld by Dr. Daniel Wilson.* He writes in his fascinating work: “On the banks of the Scottish Clyde the modern voyager from the Old World l<<oks with peculiar interest on the growing fabrics of those huge steamers which have made the ocean, that proved so impassable a barrier to the men of the fifteenth century, the easy highway of pleasure and commerce to us. The roar of the iron-forge, the clang of the trip-hammer, the inter­mittent glare of the furnaces, and all the novel appliances of iron-ship building, tell of the modern era of steam; but, meanwhile, underneath these very ship builders’ yards lie the memorials of ancient Clyde fleets, iu which we are borne back, up the stream of human history, far into prehistoric times. The earliest recorded discovery of a Clyde canoe took place in 1870, at a depth of 25 feet below the surface, on a site known by the apt designation of Saint Enoch’s Croft, when digging the foundation of a church dedicated, by a strangely apposite misnomer, to the antediluvian father of Methuselah. This canoe, hewn out of a sin­gle oak, rested in a horizontal position on its keel, and within it, near the prow, lay a beautifully-finished stone ax or celt, doubtless one of the simple implements with which this primitive ship of the Clyde had been fashioned into shape.” It cannot be urged that there is no evidence of “dug-out” canoes having been used in New Jersey. We know from historical data that the aborigines of this section had canoes of some so; t; and, that some dug-outs were used, we learn from the fact that one was found in Savannah River swamp, concerning which we have the follow­ing : “In 1845, while digging a canal on one of the rice plantations on the Savannah River, only a few miles distant from the city of Savan­nah, at a depth of three feet and a half below the surface of the swamp, the workmen came upon a canoe imbedded in the soil. It answered to the description of what is familiarly known as a dug-out, and had been fashioned from the trunk of a cypress tree.” If Dr. Daniel Wilson is correct in considering the oak log on the Clyde as hollowed by the celt found iu it, which celt is analogous to ours, (see figure 26,) then surely such a chisel, with a hammer, could effect as much with a cypress 1< g, or even the white oak, which grows to such perfection in New Jersey

Figure 139 is a curved chisel or “gouge” proper, and is a most beau­tiful specimen of workmanship in stone, being an absolutely perfect tool fashioned for some single particular purpose. It needs but one glance to see what the implement is and what was its use. It is a gouge (figure 139) of exactly five inches in length ; is polished over its entire surface, and hollowed throughout the upper side. The depth of the depression is uniform, but it narrows equally with the slope of the sides of the implement, giving the ridges above the depression a uniform thickness. At about one inch from the cutting end, the depres­sion descends rapidly until it meets with an upward curve of the bottom or uuder side of the gouge. At this angle is a sharp edge, beautifully worked and still well preserved, which describes mathematically nearly one-half of a circle. No modern gouge of steel is more accurately out­lined than is this one.

Figure 140 represents one of a pair of very beautiful gouges on the cabinet of Michael Newbold, esq., of Burlington County, New Jersey. It is of serpentine, very accurately cut, and highly polished. It measures three and three-quarters inches in length, and one inch and seven-eighths in width at the blade, which width does not alter as it nears the cutting- edge. The blade is just two inches long, and is headed with a curved knob, which is separated from the blade by a “neck” measuring about two-thirds of the width of the head or 44 knob.” The back of this implement is moderately curved, but less so than the gouge we have already figured. The front side is hollowed out, and shows, by the character of its edge and the curved surface of the blade that the spec­imen was intended as a gouge; but there is no indication of hammering upon its head, and this, we think, gives occasion for the question whether it could be used as a gouge in the absence of a hammer. It is just possible that wooden mallets were sometimes used, but we do not believe they were, as, with the tools in use, a piece of wood of suitable size and shape would be difficult to procure, and we know stone ham­mers were iu use. We shall find that this objection is urged with refer­ence also to another curious implement figured in chapter xxv, which bears much resemblance to a chisel.

We have seen no other specimens of this style of “gouge,” except the two mentioned as iu Mr. Newbold’s cabinet; aud that gentleman in­forms us that he has seen no other specimens from his neighborhood, where these were found, or iu any cabinet. The ridges at the sides of the blade in the one figured are quite thick and uniform, while the whole appearance of the specimen is that of a well-finished metal tool.

Mr. Squier has figured in his monograph on New York aboriginal monuments,* a very symmetrical 44 stone ax,” which has a well-marked rim about it, and an edge very similar to that of figure 140. Although there is so great a difference in the size, we doubt not there was a simi­larity in the uses to which the two implements were put. The one figured by Mr. Squier is, of course, not au ax at all, and should never have been so called.

The implements of themselves are not, we find, sufficient to give us a correct or complete insight into aboriginal ways of living during the stone age. It maybe that implements and ornaments of perishable ma­terial were made wholly or in part with some such a tool as figure 140; and that only the tools are left to us.

Mr. O. 0. Jones, jr.,* in his description of the Savannah River Swamp canoe, further states: ‘‘While there were no marks of sharp-cutting tools, tbe evidence appeared conclusive that the charred portions of the wood, both within and without, had been carefully removed by rude incisive implements, probably of stone f and still further on, “ It is entirely probable that the ordinary stone ax or chisel was the only implement at command for the removal of the charred surface, as the cypress tree was by degrees converted into the convenient dug- out. We agree with the author as to the chisel being used as he sug­gests; or better yet, the gouge, as represented in figure 139; but not the u ordinary stone ax.” It is very undesirable, certainly, to call an “ax” a “chisel", or vice versa, if there is really the difference between the two forms that we claim. Do not a stone ax and a stone chisel, or gouge, differ as much as do these forms of tools made of steel, and in use at the present time f Certainly, when such forms as figures 138,139, and 140 were made, no Indian would undertake to hollow out a cypress' log with an ordinary ax, such as we have described in the third chap­ter of this work.

Some of the English stone chisels figured by Mr. Evans bear much resemblance to the specimen we have figured on page 154; but none of the gouges can in any way compare with the beautiful examples we have given in figures 139 and 140.


Chapter XV.


There is nothing more interesting to the archaeologist than drilled implements of stone. It is scarcely necessary to remark that such drilled stones are rare, but only comparatively so, since the number of specimens now in museums and private collections is considerable, yet they are as nothing to the tens of thousands of arrow-points and allied implements. Their relative abundance may be apparent from the state­ment that during two summers of collecting we have secured but twenty-four specimens for our collection of about eight thousand ob­jects, and of the twenty-four only five can be considered perfect.

The object of drilling holes through any of the stone implements used by the aborigines was to afford a convenient means of suspending such articles. This particularly applies to thin objects, that have two or more boles of small diameter, such as those thin, quadrangular plates so commonly found in graves, and which were apparently breast-ornaments.

Mr. Wallace has found that plain cylinders of imperfect rock crystal, four to eight inches long, and one inch in diameter, are made and perforated by very low tribes on the Rio Negro.” “The perforating of the cylinders crosswise, or even lengthwise, is said to be done thus: A pointed flexible leaf-shoot of wild plantain is twirled with the hands against the hard stone till, with the aid of fine sand and water, it bores into and through it, and this is said to take years to do.

We shall find that in New Jersey also stone was drilled by wood, with sand and water, but not exclusively, for, on the site of an Indian settle­ment which was not merely the locality of a temporary or periodical sojourn, we find in comparative abundance slender-pointed stone instruments, arrow-points in appearance, but which were probably never used for weapons. We have figured some of these specimens of so-called “arrow-heads” in the American Naturalist, but reproduce them here with a number of others, under the name of44 drilling-stones.” That the two forms of arrow-points and drilling-stones merge into each other is very certain, it being but another instance of that gradation from one form to another so noticeable in most of the classes of stone implements we have thus far considered.

Figure 141 is an unbroken specimen of the slender-bodied, square- based, jasper implements, which we suppose to have been designed for drilling. We were once confident that such an implement could have had no other significance than as an arrow-point, and wondered why Sir John Lubbock should  “express this opinion only under reserve,” in stat­ing the possibility of their being arrow-heads. This specimen, with a number of others, gathered during the summer of 1871, were all charac­terized by a comparatively small base, which did not seem to interfere with their use as arrow-heads. During the summer of the present year we made careful search in a former Indian town, and gathered a very large series, and two constant features of the series convince us of the propriety of calling them drilling-stones. First, the majority have bases entirely too large for arrow-points, and all have bases which would be a defect in the arrow-head, if such they were; secondly, none have sharp points, while many have been broken square off at the point, showing that when in use the strain was there; and again, in many the points are rounded by rubbing, and are highly polished. Figure 141 is carefully chipped and has never been used, the edges of the flake marks being still sharp. The base has been chipped to a sharp edge, showing it was inserted into some kind of handle, and not held between the fingers as was sometimes the case.

Figure 142 is a much smaller specimen of drilling-stone of the same general outline. It is carefully chipped from slate, has the base sharply edged at its lower margin, and less so upon the sides. The stem or drill has probably been longer, is nearly cylindrical, and is highly polished at the end, which we think clearly indicates the use of this little imple­ment. The size of this specimen suggests the probability of its having been attached to a handle, and that it was then driven by a to and fro motion. In some of the specimens of 44 breast-plates79 which we have, there is a series of half ridges in the hole, showing apparently where the drill stopped to make a return motion. These ridges are similar in appearance to those in the larger drilled holes of “banuer-stones,” which, being perforated with a hollow drill, (probably a section of reed,) have unbroken circles lining the holes; while, when the stone drill was used, it has produced, at least in some cases, a broken or half circle.

Figure 143 is another example of the square-based drill; it is of slate, well chipped, and more fancifully outlined at the base. The stem or drilling portion is quite long and unbroken, except the extreme point, which was probably never very sharp. The stem is flatter than usual, but quite stout, with a well-defined median ridge the whole length. This specimen has a very arrow-head like appearance in its general outline. It is large enough to be held in the hand for use in the manner sug­gested. Why the base should be made somewhat flaring, or “barbed9 at its junction with the stem, is not clear, for, even if the object was used as an arrow-head, such a feature would not be of any value. Such a shaped base is not uncommon, however, in the slate drills; but the specimens of this mineral are usually nothing but bases.

Figure 144 is a beautiful piece of carefully chipped yellow jasper, a drill unquestionably, but the drilling portion is unfortunately gone. This instance, however, is instructive, inasmuch as the size of the remaining portion of the specimen throws light upon these implements as a class. If any doubt existed in the minds of others about the smaller specimens, certainly it is clear that figure 144 is not an arrow-head. Nor can it be said that it is unfinished. The edges of the quadrangular base are carefully chipped, and the lower margin in this specimen, as in the preceding one, is brought to what would be considered in a knife a good cutting edge. Such a chipped jasper, inserted into a wooden handle, and operated with a bow-drill, or held in the hand and operated by a wrist-motion, would prove satisfactory to the savage, to whom time was a matter of no importance. Many of the drilled stones, how­ever, were of much softer material than this jasper, and so would be perforated without much difficulty.

Figure 146 is an instance of how readily the drilling-stone passes into the arrow-point proper. We incline to the opinion that this is a drilling- stone and not an arrow-point, as the point or stem is well defined, and appears to have been worn rather than broken. This specimen possesses peculiar interest, in that it has decomposed to such an> extent as to now scarcely possess the consistency of chalk. Whether this degree of

softening is a matter of years or not we will not conjecture; bat it is strange that a stone once hard enough to be used for drilling other stone should become so rotten.

Figure 146 represents one of those specimens which we have before described* as an arrow-point. The specimen is of slate, and varies from the square-based specimens, only in having the junction of the stem and base less distinctly indicated.

Figure 147 represents a specimen of slate drilling-stone with the largest base we have as yet met with. The specimen at present has much the appearance of a short-handled, large-bowled spoon. As in figure 144, there can be *o confounding this fragment with an arrow- point. Judging from the slight bend in that portion of the stem which remains, we should consider the end of the stem to have been turned very considerably “ to one side f a peculiarity, however, not confined to this specimen or its class. Some arrow-points have a similar bend at their points, which appears usually to be due to some peculiarity in the mineral rendering this shape necessary. We recall picking up a small slate arrow-point, that had bath the point and the base, which were narrower than the body of the specimen, twitted in the same di­rection, making the specimen describe a part of a circle. This specimen was well chipped, and not crooked, because “ the work of a beginner,” as was suggested, but its shape was rather owing to the whim of the arrow-maker—a shape more difficult to chip successfully than if it were straight. The base of this specimen is well chipped, being at every portion of the margin brought to a good edge. The flakes struck off were unusually large, but five being taken from one of the sides.

Figure 148 is a finely-shaped fragment, chipped from yellow jasper. In this example, the base is quite wide, but not long, not exceeding the fragment of the stem which remains. It is well chipped on both sides, and has a beveled, and not a cutting edge. Held by the remaining portion of the stem, this specimen would make an excellent scraper, and possibly these broken specimens, with this shaped base, were thus utilized. The stem exhibits a well-marked median ridge, so far as the fragment extends, from which it is equally chipped to the edge, giving the stem, viewed in section, a diamond shape; the median angles being nearly as well defied as the outer ones.

Figure 149 represents a small specimen of chipped jasper drill, classed previously t as an arrow-point.. This specimen is somewhat interesting from the fact of its strong resemblance to specimens of arrow-heads from Scandinavia, figured by Professor Nilsson.}: The only variation iu the specimens from the two countries is, that the one from New Jer­sey is better chipped than the other; the latter not being, we think, used as an arrow-head.

Figure 150 is a crooked, rudely-shaped specimen, noticeably flat upon one side, and unusually ridged, uneven, and roughly chipped upon the other. This specimen had long been lying in our drawer of arrow-points, but in experimenting with it on a breast plate, its crooked point was found to take hold admirably, and by twisting it to and fro we made such progress in drilling slate, and that without much wear upon the specimen, that we at once classed it as a drilling-stone.

Figures 151 and 152 represent two forms of jasper drilling stones which are, however, nearly allied. They present a marked difference from the others, in that the bases are not so different in breadth from the stems of the implements.

Figure 151 is remarkably straight, beautifully chipped, and has, as usual, the edges (fuite sharp. In fact the base, in its shape, suggests the possibility of its having been used in drilling out the bowls of soap­stone smoking-pipes. The base is bowl-shaped in outline, and readily cuts soapstone. Were the stem a little more slender we should incline to the opinion that it was used to drill the stem of the pipe, and the base the bowl of the pipe. Figure 152 is much smaller, and like an arrow- point. The base is oval in outline, the width decreasing gradually as it passes into the stem portion of the implement. We doubt not the mode of using figures 151 and 152 was identical, and also that both were used in drilling other stones.

Figures 153 and 154 are “ points ”, or the drilling-ends of such speci­mens as we have been describing. They are quite abundant, wherever the bases with or without “stems” occur, and occasionally we have been able to find two fragments that “ fit” These “ points” are always rounded or blunt, and the sides, for a short distance only, are smooth, as though they were intended for drilling only very thin plates of stone. The thin, polished slate u breast-plates,” are by far the mofet numerous examples of perforated stones that occur in New Jersey; next come the thicker, flat, quadrangular stones, with a single perforation at one end. We think it very probable that such specimens were drilled exclu­sively with the species of implements we have been figuring in this chap­ter. These shallow drillings have never that wonderful accuracy char­acteristic of the banner-stones, and the two depressions, which meet in the middle of the stones, in the breast plates, are not always opposite each other, while they have just such an amount of irregularity as might be expected from a stone drill, held in the hand, and which had as crooked a point, for instance, as figure 150. Certainly, in the same stone, there is frequently a difference in the character of the perfora­tions, as though the boring of one-half the hole dulled the drill, and a new one was used upon the opposite side; and this difference appears to be explained when we look over a series of these pointed arrow-head­like implements which we have considered as the tools wherewith the perforations were made.

Figure 155 represents a perfect example of a form of implement of which we have collected three specimens. We have classed it as a drilling-stone, because it might have been used for such a purpose; but it was apparently never used, bat lost or discarded as soon as made. The specimen is a chipped piece of slaty rock, four and seven-eighths inches in length. The head or point is narrower than the main portion of the implement, oval in outline, and somewhat pointed. About au inch from the point there is a slight contraction of the outline, when it again widens and retains a uniform width of an inch and one-fourth. The sides are well chipped and brought to a good edge, as is also the base of the specimen, which is slightly rounded.

Figure 156 represents a beautiful example of chipping in white quartz, the specimen being the head, apparently, of such an instrument as fig­ure 155. As the three preceding examples are all of slate, this one is figured to show that the same instrument occurs in different materials. Although there is no indication of polish upon the point of this specimen, we believe it to be a drilling-stone—possibly one which was broken before being used. VVe fiud, by experiment, that with it but little time and labor are necessary to drill through the ordinary “ breast-plates,” such as those described in the following chapter.

We would also call attention to the similarity of this specimen with the “scraper,” figure 129. There is indeed little or no difference, except that in figure 156 there is no chipped or beveled edge for scraping, as in figure 129. It suggests, in itself, therefore, that when an implement like figure 155 became broken, such a fragment as figure 156 would usually be chipped smooth upon the broken surface and thus converted into a scraper. This would explain the presence of points, such as the scrapers, figures 128 and 129 have, which features do not appear to have any value so far as the use of the specimens as “ scrap­ers” goes, and indeed, to us, they seem a great objection as they make the instrument much more difficult to hold.

Figure 157 represents a very roughly chipped implement of slate, which bears some resemblance to the specimen, figure 155. We unhesitat­ingly pronounce it to be a drilling-stone, inasmuch as at the pointed end there is a polished surface, which has escaped the general weathering which the specimen has undergone. In this specimen it will be noticed that the narrow portion or waist is nearer the middle than in figure 155, so that the u head ” is very nearly one-half the total length of the in­strument itself. The sides of the specimen throughout their whole ex­tent are brought by chipping, to cutting edges as sharp as those of the majority of arrow-points or u flint ” hatchets. If viewed horizontally, figure 157 appears to be a slender tomahawk, and allied closely to some of the forms of “ rude implements” which we have described; the nar­row middle appearing to be notched for the better fastening of a handle. If such was the use and object of this specimen, then what we now con­sider the “ base ” was the front or cutting edge, and this it has cer­tainly never been, inasmuch as it is by far the most blunt and irregular portion of the margin of the implement.

The polished point, to which we have alluded, shows that the pur­pose of this implement was to drill other stones, and, although the min­eral of which it is made has suffered softening to some extent by long exposure, still with sand and water it drill now drill ordinary breast­plates.

Figure 158 presents another form of chipped slate, bearing some re­semblance to figure 155, which we have classed with the drilling-stones, but whether correctly or not we are by no means certain. They are abundant; almost always associated with the preceding forms, and al­ways made of slate. The one figured is a good example of this class. It is rudely chipped, three inches long, and two wide, at the widest por­tion of the specimen. The point is sufficiently sharp to drill the thinner “ breast-plates,” one side at a time.

Mr. Evans has figured* six specimens of flint implements, which he denominates “ borers, awls, or drills.” Four of them are very nearly identical with several we have figured in the foregoing pages of this chapter. Probably the most noticeable difference is, which in such of Mr. Evans’s figures as have broad bases, they are much less elaborately chipped than the New Jersey examples of the same implement. What­ever may be the advantage of true flint, which we do not have, over some veins of jasper, which we do have (not in New Jersey, but near it) in abundance, it is certain that the majority of our specimens, as scrap­ers, drilling-stones, &c., are manufactured with greater elegance, and evince a more thorough knowledge of the “flint-chipping” art. The English specimens of “ drills ” appear to be all u flakes99 which have had their edges chipped, that the requisite shape might be given to the specimen. The New Jersey specimens, on the contrary, are, like arrow­heads, chipped entire, from a fragment of jasper, or, it may be, from a jasper pebble, and no portion of the surface is a part of the natural sur­face of the rock.

Two of the specimens figured by Mr. Evans are quite blunt at the ends, but not more so than some of the drilling-stones which we have figured. These blunt forms Mr. Evans thinks may have been arrow- points, and not drills. Prof. Charles Eau, of New York, has given us a most interesting paper on drilling in stone, in which he claims that a wooden drill, with sand and water, was one method in use during the stone age, for perforating stone. We do not doubt that he is correct as to the larger holes drilled through polished stone ornaments, banner- stones, and pipes; but we hold to our opinion as to the use of the speci­mens we have described in this chapter.

We quote one paragraph of Prof. Rau’s paper, as bearing upon the question of the purpose of the specimens illustrated in this chapter. Prof. Eau writes: “ Mr. Desor thinks it probable that the drilling was effected by means of very thin flakes of flint fixed around a stick, which was made to turn in such way as to separate a portion of the stone, which, when the perforation was accomplished, would fall to the ground.* A drilling-stick of this description really may have served for perforating soft stones, but could not be successfully applied to hard materials.” We have carefully examined in detail all our sped mens of “ breast-plates” from slate and other minerals, and find that the holes through them can be duplicated by the aid of any of the specimens we have figured, merely twirling the drill between the thumb and fingers.

Figure 159 represents a flat slab of very hard, finely grained sandstone, which in outline bears some resemblance to a small mammal, crouching down; as a muskrat or small rabbit. This resemblance may be ac­cidental, and the outline produced in the more prosaic use of a whet­stone, as the margins are all polished and cut by contact with other stones. The five deep cuts upon the side of the specimen have been arti­ficially produced, and while they bear some resemblance to grooves on polishing-stones, such as were used in sharpening celts and skinning- stones, we rather incline to the opinion that they were made to give the stone a more animal-like appearance.

We shall again refer to the specimen in chapter xviii.

The object of placing the specimen in the present chapter, is to refer more particularly to the hole drilled through it, which, if the stone be a representation of an animal, corresponds to the eye.

When the specimen taken from a grave was procured, there was on each side of the stone, where the perforation now is, a shallow circular depres­sion, with a “nipple” in the center, showing that a perforation had been commenced; the drill used being a hollow reed. This of itself added to the animal-like appearance. By the aid of the two stone drills (figures 161,162) we completed the perforation j accomplishing it after eleven hours of not difficult but rather tiresome labor. While drilling, which was done by simply twirling the drills to and fro, we kept the specimen under water. The drill, figure 162, is of slate, and comparatively soft, but - it did not wear away more rapidly than the jasper specimen, in conse­quence of the latter continually splintering; the splinters amounting to about the same as the gradual wear of the softer specimen. Figure 160 represents a fragment of a large “breast-plate,” very carefully polished along the edges, and smooth on the broad surfaces. When found, there was a single hole drilled through it, the uppermost one in the specimen as now figured. The mineral is a dense sandstone, but more yielding than the “ animal” carving, figure 159. With the softer drill, figure 162, we made the nine perforations seen in the illustration. The time occupied in drilling each hole varied from a half to three-quar­ters of an hour; the wear upon the implement was scarcely appreciable Considering that thin plates of stone were so frequently perforated by the aborigines that they might be suspended to the person, and that implements of stone admirably adapted to such work are so abundant, we are of opinion that our suggestions as to the use of the latter are substantially correct.*


Chapter XVI.


On the site of ancient Indian towns, throughout the whole State, or wherever evidences occur of a fierce battle, and in every grave we have opened, are found tablets of easily-worked stone, varying in length and outline, and, as a rule, carefully polished, and perforated with one, two, or more holes. Such stone ornaments—and they were intended merely as ornaments—we have called u breast-plates,” because found lying near the breast of skeletons in the graves which we have examined, or “gor­gets,” a good name for them, suggested by Squier and Davis.

We have said that these breast-plates or gorgets vary in shape and size, which is the case, but those found in New Jersey are most usually of the shape of our first illustration, (figure 163,) and vary only in other details from this, which may be considered the typical form. The min­eral of which they are made varies much, but none have been found of stone as hard as porphyry.

Figure 163 is four and five-sixteenths inches long and one inch and five-eighths wide at the middle; this specimen has been drilled in two places from each side until the depressions met, the distance between the boles on one side being exactly four-fifths of an inch, a distance noticed particularly by Squier and Davis, in several of the specimens they figured. They remark, “ It is a singular fact that the holes in the three specimens first noticed, as also in some of those which follow, are placed exactly four-fifths of an inch apart. This could hardly have been the result of accident. These relics were found at different locali­ties, several miles distant from each other.” If this similarity of dis­tance between the perforations was intentional, it would seem that the stone had some use other than merely as a breast-ornament. Cer­tainly, iu such case, the mere distance separating the holes could have had no special use. In figure 163 this distance is variable, inasmuch as the hole is obliquely drilled, and so produces a greater space between the two perforations on one side than on the other. This crooked drill­ing and unequal interspacing is quite common, and seems more strange when the accuracy of the drilling in “ banner-stones,” which were much more elaborate ornaments, is taken into consideration. The rude drilling of some breast-plates may indicate that they are older than banner-stones, and were fashioned when the art of drilling was not much advanced.

On one side, at the extreme end of this specimen, figure 163, is a row of short notches carefully cut, and of a size throughout. Such notches being better preserved on the next figure, we will reserve our remarks concerning them until that specimen is described. Figure 103 was prob­ably considerably harder when fashioned into a gorget. It has under­gone a process of decomposition which has made it chalky on the sur­face, while the interior has not been unaffected. The specimen is of a reddish-brown slate with a greasy feel, similar to that experienced by the collector in handling milky quartz, but to a greater degree.

The length and general shape of such breast-plates as figure 163 have rendered them peculiarly liable to be broken, especially when lying near or upon the surface of our long-cultivated fields. Usually such speci­mens, when so found, are but halves, or even smaller fragments; and whole ones are to be looked for only in the graves. Figure 163 was taken from a grave, in a little natural mound, on the tract of marsh known as Bear Swamp, near Lawrence, Mercer County, New Jersey. Associated with this breast-plate were several arrow-points and an ax. Figure 164 represents a most interesting specimen of breast-plate. Its shape is peculiar, the number of holes unusual, and the series of notches at the rounded end a marked feature of the specimen. The upper mar­gin measures two and three-fourths of an inch in length ; the lower, a trace over one inch and a half. The notched end is rounded at the an­gles, and the curves thence continue as a reversed and longer curve along the sides. The oblique end has been as carefully polished as the flat surfaces. The holes, four in number, were roughly drilled and evi­dently in pairs, and not promiscuously or even at one time. The pair quite near together are larger than the others, irregularly drilled, and are in the center of the plate. The other pair, better drilled, and smaller, are at the angles of the oblique end of the specimen. The chief feature of interest connected with this specimen is the series of carefully cut notches, very regularly distributed along the curved end of the plate; eleven on one side and nine on the other. The nine notches upon the under side are not mere continuations of the others, but are distinct, in some instances not being opposite the others. The thought naturally arises, what do these notches indicate f We believe that, as the specimen was a breast-plate or a breast-ornament, these notches were a record of the number of fights in which the wearer was engaged, or of scalps taken. The notches cannot be said to be either useful or ornamental for a breast-plate, they are not requisite at all, as are holes for suspending the same, while they are too inconspicuous to be considered merely orna­mental markings. The natural inference, therefore, is that they are in­tended as a “ records

Figure 165 represents a different form of stone ornament which may have been suspended by a cord so as to hang in front of the breast, or was suspended from the terminal lobe of the ear. At any rate, it was designed for ornament and not for any other purpose, as has been suggested, such as a fishing-line weight or a sinker. This specimen is not smoothly finished, nor accurately outlined, as is usual with this pattern of ornamental stones. The hole is nearly uniform in width, from side to side, being somewhat more flaring upon the “ wrongv side, or that which is not marked with ornamental lines. These lines are an interest­ing feature of this specimen. They are much less distinct than the notches iu figure 164, and are more than double their length; the spaces between them are much wider, and the lines themselves are engraved upon the sides of the stone, instead of on the end; yet, with all these dif­ferences, their object was no doubt identical with that of the notches in figure 164. About the perforation of this specimen are also four lines, similar in depth and width to those upon the sides, which are drawn at such angles to each other as to meet above, at each side, and beneath, leaking a diamond-shaped figure. Whether this was merely for orna­mentation, or, like the side markings, for a record of certain events, is not determined, but the probability is that it was only to compensate for the general roughness of the specimen both as to shape and surface.

Figure 166 represents a polished serpentine specimen of the same general character as the preceding one. It is longer, but of the same width; it is considerably thinner, flat upon both sides, and more highly polished along the edges than over the sides. The perforation is quite different from that of figure 165, being a cup-shaped depression, made upon each side, and meeting at the middle of the stone, the hole there being but one-third the diameter of the drilling upon the surface. There is no trace of any record mark whatever upon this specimen; it being, in this respect, different from all the preceding examples, and similar to one of the seventeen specimen^ figured by Messrs. Squier and Davis,* except that the hole is nearer the end than that of the Ohio specimen. Of the relics of this class, from New Jersey, the specimen figured is the usual size; but occasionally they have been found greatly exceeding it. Mr. Newbold, of Burlington County, New Jersey, has one specimen ex­actly twice the length, but otherwise like the one figured.

Figure 167 represents a small, but very handsome gorget, which has a marked peculiarity in the ornamentation upon one side. The specimen itself is short, being but one inch and three-quarters in length. The upper or perforated end is but three-eighths of an inch in width, and from this upper margin the specimen increases uniformly in width until near the bottom, when it rounds off in an almost regular curve. The hole appears to have been drilled wholly from the plain, or under side, being wider there at the surface than upon the opposite side, which has a slightly worn edge occasioned by the rubbing of the cord that sus­pended it. We believe this specimen to have been pierced with one of the smaller stone drills figured in the preceding chapter.

The ornamentation of figure 167 differs from any that we have seen elsewhere. The surface of the stone has been smoothly worn off, leaving, a short distance below the perforation, a quadrangular figure that may be called a hollow square, there being a cleanly-cut depression in the center of the projecting a square,” the width of which is just double the depth. Below this figure commences a second, which can be compared to an inverted pick-ax, with the iron arms straighter than usual. It is simply a “ raised ” ridge, the surrounding surface being cut away to leave it in bold relief. It is not exactly in the cen­ter of the specimen, but near it, the upper ridge or handle of the pick being slightly inclined to one side. Below this the specimen is smoothly polished and somewhat sloped to the end. We cannot see how any doubt can be entertained as to the nature of this specimen. If not a suspended ornament, it is safe to express doubt as to an arrow-head being an arrow-head or an ax being an ax.

Figure 168 is another most interesting specimen of this class of relics. It is a piece of black, well-worn stone, but with no polish ; it is thin, hot irregularly so, and has a greasy feel which is most deceptive. One can al­most smell the grease, now stale, with which the object seems to be satu­rated. The specimen is leaf-shaped, more pointed at one end than at the other, and, when viewed horizontally, has a striking resemblance to our common sun-fish (Pomotis vulgaris). We believe that this fish was in­tended to be represented, and that it was the tribe mark of the original pos­sessor of this ornament. If such was the case, then the hole which represents the eye of the fish was used to suspend the specimen from the person who carried it. Notwithstanding the unworn condition of the hole, which is of uniform width from one side to the other, we be­lieve that a soft string, probably a sinew, was passed through it and the gorget suspended from the neck. That such was the use of this specimen cannot, as in the preceding example, be doubted.

Figure 169 represents a split, water-worn jasper pebble, of somewhat irregular shape, with an extensive perforation through it. The hole is about one-half the diameter upon the under or split side that it is upon the upper. The under side, however, has an equally weather-worn polish with the upper, indicating that the perforation was made subse­quently to the splitting of the pebble, or that many years have elapsed since the split pebble was drilled, the peculiar gloss of the fractured surface indicating great age. The somewhat irregular outline of the perforation upon the split side of the pebble favors the belief that the fracture occurred after the drilling. This specimen is interesting from its resemblance to an African example figured by Sir John Lub­bock.* This African drilled stone is square instead of pentagonal, and the drilling is of much less diameter at the junction of the two depres­sions which, together, make the perforation.

Squier and Davist seem to be in doubt as to the use of such speci­mens as the preceding seven figures of this chapter. They remark, “ at first glance it seems obvious that they were designed for suspen­sion; but there are many circumstances which it is not easy to recon­cile with that conclusion. In common with the perforated copper plates, already described, they exhibit slight traces of friction upon the edges of the holes, which, for the most part, are as sharp as if newly cut. This could hardly be the case had they been worn suspended from the neck, or upon any part of the person.” Notwithstanding this objection we have considered these perforated plates to have been ornaments for the person, from the tact of their position, which is always the same when found in graves. On opening a grave, the invariable position of the trinkets and weapons has been as follows : weapons on the right side; pipe on the left; small vase.(pottery) at the feet, and the ornaments near the region of the breast. If these u breast-plates,” as we have termed them, had been some domestic implement, as a u bow-string twister,” it seems strange that they should have been invariably placed upon the breast of the person buried. Again, why so large an amount of ornamentation, as is sometimes seen, if the stone relics in question were not used for decoration ?*

Figure 170 represents a not very abundant, curiously-wrought stone ornament or implement, we cannot determine which, but one which was once used over a large extent of territory.t This specimen is a fraction over four and a half inches long. The body, or main portion, is very accurately sloped to the back, which is a narrow flat ridge, of a uniform width of one thirty-second of an inch. The “ head ” ot the specimen is nearly square, and not unlike the head of a blunt muzzled mammal in shape. The knob-like protuberances stand out from the head one-third of an inch, and have a narrow neck, about one-half the width of the u knob ” itself. The bottom of the implement, as the illustration shows, is flat. .There is at each end of the bottom of the speci­men a small hole, drilled obliquely upward and outward, meeting another drilled hole, made from above, and extending downward until it meets the other. These holes are characteristic of this class of relics. There appears to be a considerable diversity of opinion as to the nature of these relics, all of which are about the same size as the one figured, and, as a class, they are more than usually uniform. No illustration of this pattern of ornament that we have met with has the knob-like protuberance, or head, so noticeable as this.

170. Schoolcraft{ has designated this form of relic as a handle for a knife, the blade of which was obsidian or jasper. One of these “knife- handles” is figured, found on Cunningham’s Island, Lake Erie, New York, which is considered to be “ apparently a sacrificial or a flaying knife.” The relic is so described, although there is no indication of a blade.

We believe that Messrs. Squier and Davis f correctly cover the whole ground concerning them, in stating that “it may reasonably be con­cluded from the uniform shape of these articles, and from their appar­ent unfitness as implements, as also from the wide range of their occurrence, that they were invested with a conventional significance as insignia, or badges of distinction, or as amulets. We know that the custom of wearing certain stoues as preventives of disease, or as safe­guards against accidents or the malice of evil spirits, has not been con­fined to one continent, or to a single age*. It is not entirely obliterated among certain classes of our own people. Regal authority is still indi­cated by rich baubles of gold and gems. It matters little whether the index of royalty be a scepter or a simple carved and polished stone, so that it is sanctioned with general recognition.”


Chapter XVII.


The love of display that has survived the changes in human culture, and which is witnessed in some civilized communities in ail the glare and glitter of barbarian times, was and is a marked trait iu the charac­ter of the American aborigines. And, although in their painting there is nothing but harshness and most violent contrasts of gay colors, and in their pipe-sculpture but little to commend, we nevertheless have* in the series of stone relics which we have here called “ banner-stones,” a beautiful illustration of the fact that symmetry could be obtained in more complicated forms than the shapes of arrow-points; and elegance of design and accuracy in details were sought and acquired by this untutored race, their banner-stones being the more remarkable in that they are frequently of hard stone, to fashion, carve, and polish which the only tools available were those of the same material.

The variety of forms in this class of stone ornaments is very exten­sive, and so scarce are unbroken specimens that we have been unable to present any great number of figures. Of the more common shape, which may, perhaps, be considered typical of the class, we have but one absolutely perfect specimen. (Figure 172.) Of the varying examples we present one which is of peculiar shape—a broken specimen, “done up” for duty again as an ornament.

We have classed these relics as “ banner ” stones or ornamental stones, either used in the decoration of weapons or for suspension from the body, after the manner of breast-plates.

Figure 172 is a beautiful example of the more usual form of banner- stones, as found in New Jersey. In outline, finish, and perforation it is faultless. Of a very fine grained sandstone it was first carefully chipped and then polished until no trace of uneven surface can be detected in it The upper or convex margin is accurately curved from end to end, with the exception of a very slight depression at the opening* of the perfora­tion. One end is somewhat flattened, the other less abruptly outlined. The under or concave margin is less defined than the upper, and more sloping from the center toward each end than a segment of a circle. Both the upper and lower margins are flat, the width of each decreas­ing from the perforation at the middle of the specimen toward each end.

The hole which passes entirely through the middle of figure 172 is a very noticeable feature. It measures a little less than nine-sixteenths of an inch in diameter; it is perfectly circular, of uniform dimensions from end to end, and faintly exhibits those rings that characterize holes drilled with a hollow instrument, as a reed, as this perforation must have been.

Professor Eau, of New York, has so fully and accurately gone over the whole subject of drilling in stone without metal, that we refer our readers to his paper* for the details of the modus operandi of making these larger perforations which characterize such relics as we have called banner-stones. A superficial examination of the hole drilled through figure 132 shows that such perforation has been made with a hollow instrument. We presume it to have been a reed, and Professor Rau states, in the paper above mentioned,t44 It is very likely that the hollow drills of the aborigines of North America were pieces of that hard and tough cane (Arundinaria macrosperma, Michaux) which grows abund­antly in the southern part of the United States, mostly along the banks of large rivers, and forms at present an article of trade, being used for pipe-stems aud fishing-rods. This cane varies considerably in thick­ness; sometimes as thin as a straw, it assumes, when fully grown, the diametral proportions of a strong rifle barrel, and even of larger cylin­drical objects, in which cases it reaches the enormous height of 25 or 30 feet. A piece of this cane, from which the knotty joints have been cut, forms a regular hollow cylinder sufficiently strong to serve as a drill. I learned from Dr. Davis that many years ago a stone pipe with an un­finished hollow, partly filled with vegetable matter, was sent from Mis­sissippi to the late Dr. Samuel P. Morton, of Philadelphia. When sub­jected to a microscopical examination the vegetable substance exhibited the fibrous structure of cane, and thus appeared to be a remnant of a drill broken off in the bore. Squier and Davis % figure one exam­ple of a banner-stone, very similar to figure 132, and say of it, and others somewhat similar, “ It is clear, both from their form and mate­rial, that they were not designed for use. They may be regarded as having been intended simply for ornament or display.”

Whatever may have been the manner of exhibiting such stone orna­ments it is impossible to determine, but the fortunate possessor of such a specimen might well be proud of it. May it not be that such stones were the “charms” of the “medicine” men? Stones that were con­cealed from the general gaze of the crowd, and only brought to view with elaborate coverings on great occasions. They do not seem suffi­ciently abundant to be simply the ornaments of chiefs or warriors.

Figures 173 and 173a represent a second example of this form of perforated ornament, or banner-stone. It is shorter and broader than the preceding, but is well made, and drilled with that smoothness and beauty which are marked features of figure 172. The outline drawing of a sectional view of the specimen shows that the perforation is some­what oval, instead of perfectly circular, and the diameter of the drilling is a little less at the apex than at the base. The drilling ef this hole must, therefore, have been done with something different from a section or a number of sections of reed of identical diameter* This specimen has probably been drilled by the application of sand and water, in con­nection with a solid drill, as a pointed wooden stick, but the perforation began below has been continued from thence, but only half the distance on each side as is usual in such cases.#

Figure 174 represents a very interesting form of banner-stone, of a totally different shape from either of the preceding examples. This specimen is an oval or ovoid polished pebble of a soft mineral, approach­ing, but not identical with soapstone. The two halves, if we divide it through the center of the perforation which extends from the top to the bottom, will be found identical in every particular of shape and dimen­sion. The base of the specimen is somewhat more flattened than the top, and appears to have been in contact with another stone, as it is worn off smoothly, but with a variable width. This worn surface is of a lighter tint than the other portions of the specimen. The perforation is a little less in diameter than that of figure 172, but it is of equal beauty of workmanship. The diameter is the same throughout, the perfora­tion being accurately circular, and showing the rings which indicate drilling with a hollow tube. For a short distance from the base, extend­ing upward along the sides of the perforation, the “rings” are not dis­tinguishable, except by the closest scrutiny, and appear to have been worn away by the rubbing of whatever passed through the hole as a handle or suspensory cord. From point to point, this specimen measures two and five-eighths inches, and across the middle one inch and a half. The diameter of the perforation is just one-half an inch, or one-third of the total width of the specimen itself.

Figure 174 is quite similar in general appearance to a specimen of this character found in Mississippi, and figured by Squier and Davis, which specimen, however,44 measures six inches in length. The hole is half an inch in diameter at one end, but less at the other;” which latter feature is met with in figure 173, but not in either figure 172 or 174.

Figures 172 and 174 were both found in Burlington County, New Jersey, but not together, and were kindly presented to the author by Joseph Newbold, esq., to whom we are indebted for several favors of a similar character.

Figure 175 represents a form of banner-stone allied to figure 172, but is noticeably different in not being perforated for a handle or suspensory cord, but simply grooved upon one side; the groove, too, being narrow and very shallow. The specimen is of hornstone, and was first pecked into its present shape, and subsequently polished over the whole surface of one side and one-half of the surface of the other side. The groove is polished over its entire surface. The margins are all blunt, and, Although quite regular in outline, have had no care in finishing.

We have met with no other specimen of banner-stone that was grooved on only one side, and it may be, indeed, that we err in con­sidering figure 175 under this heading; but its size, shape, and gen­eral appearance show very plainly that it was never intended either as a weapon or a domestic implement, unless it is unfinished and was in­tended to be a double-bladed skinning-knife. This conjecture, however, we do not believe to be in any way correct.

Figure 176 is the half of a banner-stone of the pattern of figure 172, but much smaller than that specimen, and pointed, instead of bluntly rounded at the end. This fragment is interesting, as it shows that such banner-stones were highly valued by the people who fashioned them, and that a piece of one was not to be discarded if it could at all be utilized. The broken edges of this specimen, which has been fractured along the perforation, has been carefully smoothed down, and through the middle of one of these projecting edges a small hole has been drilled. This hole has been drilled from both sides, showing that the specimen was broken after the large hole had been completed. Along the lower margin, on one side only, is a long row of narrow, closely-placed lines, which appear to have been carved there by design as a “record,” such as we have shown on specimens of the breast-plates.

As a class, these banner-stones are found scattered over the country, at or very near the surface. They are turned up occasionally by the plow or spade, but are not found more numerously at one point than at another, as at localities known to have been sites of Indian villages for­merly. We have not met with any specimens of this stone in graves, as we have with the breast-plates described in chapter xvi.

These elaborate banner-stones bear witness to the great patience pos­sessed by those who fashioned them. Although it is true that time was not taken into consideration in the various undertakings of the aborig­ines, yet, in view of their well-known aversion to labor, these specimens are the more marvelous, since steady hard labor was required to bring them to their present respective conditions.

It must be noticed that these banner-stones are now no longer made by any of the western tribes. The rude brass trinkets obtainable at the trading-posts, and the bright-colored beads, have taken the place of these less gaudy, but far more beautiful ornaments. The contact of the Indians with the whites has certainly been fatal to their taste for art, from the banner-stone to the bead being a long step backward.

The stone implements of Great Britain do not include any forms which are analogous to our banner-stones. In Mr. Evans’s work there is nothing in any way similar to the specimens figured iu this chapter, ex­cepting, perhaps, an oval perforated hammer-head,# which, however, is double the size of the banner-stone, (figure 174,) which it resembles.


Chapter XVIII.


Lubbock says: “ The earliest traces of art yet discovered belong to the Stone age—to a time so remote that the reindeer was abundant in the south of France, and that probably, though on this point there is some doubt, even the mammoth had not entirely disappeared. These works of art are sometimes sculptures, if one may say so, and sometimes drawings or etchings made on bone or horn with the point of a flint”

We recalled this statement on finding our first specimen of New Jersey Stone-age sculpture, and could not but feel astonished to see so rude an attempt at art, when the pipes of the western mound-builders are so elaborate in all their features. The date of the production of these u ani­mal carvings ” is as yesterday, compared with the sculptures and etch­ings of the reindeer people of Southern France, and yet they are even ruder, and far ruder than the pipe-sculptures of the mound-building pep* pie. From these facts we conclude that the Atlantic coast Indian was inferior in art capabilities to the people of the western mounds, which may or may not have antedated them in their occupancy of American territory, and that, at one time, the aborigines of New Jersey were, in art capabilities, scarcely as far advanced as the reindeer people of the south of France.]:

Were we guided by the excellency of workmanship in our estimate of the comparative antiquity of stone implements and art productions of a Stone-age people, the rude profile carvings, of which but four ex­amples have as yet occurred, would be far older than the mounds of the Mississippi Valley, or the elaborately carved pipes they contain. As the photographic portrait is a later achievement of the ingenuity of man living, it is not surprising to find there was leisure for less necessary work, and that spare time found occupation in works of pleasure, as instanced in the sketches and sculpture before alluded to. And it is curious to trace bow they passed from the sim­ple exercise of industry to ornament, and at last to something of art, for such may well be termed the sculptured poniard handle, representing the figure of a reindeer, and which, while clever in its adaptation of the material to the purpose intended, preserves at the same time all the characteristics of the animal.” (Reliquiae Aquitanicse, p. 22-)

Tbe foregoing remarks are equally applicable to the early Indians of New Jersey to matters of art and ornament. They too, notwithstanding frequent wars with neighbor­ing tribes, appear to have found time to carve or, at least, shape slabs of compact stones into good resemblances of those animals with which they were familiar.

than the silhouettes which still adorn many old walls, so these profile carvings should be older than the useful and so ingeniously carved pipes. Such, however, is not the case; and the differences in the two classes of relics indicate different peoples as their respective producers—the one an older, it may be, but certainly a more advanced people; the other at the very outset, as it were, of human culture.

We must conclude, therefore, that the two peoples were wholly unlike and independent in origin; or, originating from a common center, that they proved very unequal in their progress in culture. The latter ap­pears to be the correct view, inasmuch as in all other respects their stone implement productions were identical, both in the variety of form in each particular weapon, and the skill exhibited in the flint-chipping art.

We say “ in all other respects,” because the art capabilities of a peo­ple are an index to their intellectual advancement. No better guide can be had to a proper estimate of the relative advancement of a race or tribe. More modern, less advanced, Indians, however, have occasion­ally proved themselves capable of the imitative art to a degree com­mensurate with the mound-builders of an earlier date; and the Chip­pewa pipe, figured by Dr. Wilson, certainly equals any animal carving the mounds have yielded, or the even more complicated and fantastic illustrations of Babeen pipe sculpture which the same author gives us.

It is to be regretted that so few examples of this profile-carving hare, as yet, been met with; and, further, that they should all have come from a single limited locality, since this gives rise to the thought that they are all the work of some one ingenious savage.

One of these specimens, a pebble of unusual shape, and one requiring bat little alteration to make it what it is, can scarcely be considered an animal carving; but the ingenuity displayed in utilizing nature’s freaks to secure a result similar to carving, shows skill akin to that requisite in carving.

Figure 177 represents the specimen above referred to as the first exam­ple of its kind we have met with. It is a plate of slaty stone, and has a nearly uniform thickness of half an inch. The margins have been carefully polished, as also have the two surfaces of the specimen, which latter, however, are less smooth than formerly, owing to scratching by the sand and gravel among which it was found. There is no attempt whatever at even an outline drawing of an eye or other feature; the whole attention of the artist having evidently been to correctly outline the stone, in which respect he has been successful. The curvature of the cranial-outline and the neck, and the commencement of the back are correct, while the nose, lower jaw, and under outline of the neck are equally so. From the highest point of the arch of the cranium down­ward the specimen is narrowed along the edge, being thinnest at the point of juncture of the neck and back. It is supposed that the animal intended to be represented by this carving is the seal, of which, at the present day, a single one will occasionally wander up the Delaware Eiver, one being killed daring April of the present year, at Salem. Salem County, New Jersey. Formerly the seal was not uncommon in Dela­ware Bay, and, at the time of the settlement of Little worth, now Trenton, New Jersey, iu 1680, they were numerous about the rapids, or so-called Falls, of the Delaware.

This specimen of stone-carving is by far the finest of the three exam­ples we have been able to secure, and shows in every detail that much care was expended in its production. How a block of stone of its den­sity could have been cut in the age in question is impossible for as to determine. We have found nothing in the way of weapon-making tools that would answer for such stone-cutting; and it seems incredible that it should have been pecked into shape and the margins and surface afterward polished. A few fresh fractures of small extent show the body of the stone to be of a dark lead-blue color, but the surface is a dull brown. Upon one side are four irregularly-shaped patches of small crystals in a matrix of apparently silicate of lime. These have formed upon the specimen after it was lost or thrown aside, and indicate considerable lapse of time since the date of its fashioning by the aboriginal artist. What could have been the object of a carving such as this ? How was it used when finished ? The holes in breast­plates and ear-drops explain their nature and the method of utilizing them, but in the present instance there is nothing by which to suspend the object, nor an indication of any method whereby a handle could have been attached, which latter, however, would scarcely have added to the value of such a specimen. Again, the aborigines were of too migratory a nature for stationary idols or ornaments for the walls of their wigwams. That the three examples figured are the work of the aborigines, and that they are intended to represent animals, cannot be doubted, but as to the meaning of the carvings, and the use to which the specimens were put, we can only conjecture.

Figure 177, 177a is a small, oddly-shaped pebble of a reddish-brown color, which, while it originally bore some resemblance to the head of a bird, has had that resemblance increased by the rubbing away of certain points about the margin, and the grinding of the convex surface on one side until it was flat, leaving in the center of the worn surfaces a circular projection, which correctly represents, in size and position, an eye of a bird. The under surface is irregularly concave, and has no such eye* trace or other markings upon it.#

Figure 178 represents the head and neck of a bird-like animal, rather than of a bird or mammal exclusively. Were it the only specimen of this kind we had seen, we should doubt the propriety of considering  an indication of stone-age art, although it has marks of human work­manship in the polished margins at the slope of the back of the head and neck and on the lower or basal outline of the specimen. The projecting point in front much resembles the beak of a bird, and although rough in finish does not appear to be merely an accidental fracture. This speci­men was found within a few yards of figure 176, and we do not doubt that it is an unfinished specimen of the same nature. Two-thirds of the original surface, upon one side, has been broken off in a single piece, and this newer surface has now nearly the same degree of weathering, and is of nearly the same tint as the natural surface of the specimen. There are no grooves, scratches, or other markings that appear to have been made when the stone itself recieved its present shape.

This specimen Is a finely grained, compact sandstone, readily scratch­ing glass, but is more easily worked than the jasper(?) pebble,*figure 177. With the exceptions of the two portions of the margin above referred to, there is no indication of any attempt to polish or smooth down the surface of the stone.

If it be objected that these stone figures are too rudely shaped to be considered specimens of animal sculpture, we can only say, in reply, that they are not accidentally fractured stones, as shown by their polished and ground surfaces at different points. Again, they are not more crude than those wonderful uanimal mounds” mentioned* by Lapham, as existing in Wisconsin; and it may not be inappropriate here to refer to a figure given by this gentleman, and called “ the stone bird.” Mr. Laphamt remarks: “At Hustisford a stone was shown us, which, by the aid of a little imagination, may be supposed to represent the head of a bird, and which was held in great veneration by the Winnebago Indians, who have but very recently been removed from this part of the State. It is a gneissoid granite, of accidental form, caused by the unequal decay and disintegration of the different layers of which it is composed.” Here we see that an accidentally shaped stone was vene­rated because of some resemblance to a bird; and if a modern Indian could see the resemblance in the case of the stone figured by Mr. Lap­ham, would it not require a less fertile imagination to see the resem­blance in the specimens we have figured, which are recognized as animal carvings by those who have seen them, and which, unlike the Wisconsin stone bird, are not chance shapings but designed cuttings.

We have in Squier and Davis’sf great monograph an account of several usingularly sculptured tablets,” one of which is figured. “It represents a coiled rattlesnake; both faces of the tablet being identical in sculpture, excepting that one is plane, the other slightly convex. The material is a very fine cinnamon-colored sandstone.” We have here a near approach to the general character of our specimen, figure 176; but the Ohio tablet has elaborate carving upon the sides, which alone enables the specimen to be recognized as a snake, while in the three figures we have given, the recognition of the intended likeness to ani­mal heads is through the outline alone.

Mr. Squier also, in his memoir on the aboriginal monuments of New York, figures a terra-cotta head of a fox and two other specimens of an indefinite character, which are also more elaborate in the details, but not more accurate in outline, than is figure 176 compared with the fox-head figured by Mr. Squier, or the two figures 177 and 178 as com­pared with the two ruder figures given in the above-mentioned mono­graph. We conclude, therefore, that our New Jersey specimens bear to those of the West the same relation that the old-time silhouettes bear to the modern photograph.

Considering that the difficulty of shaping hard stone is much greater than molding terra-cotta, surely the New Jersey outline carvings exhibit an equal amount of skill to those described from other States and re­quired a greater amount of patience; but there was little difference in the capabilities of the aborigines of New York and New Jersey, the ad­vantage in most respects being, probably, with the more northern tribes.

On page 140 we briefly referred to a u slab of hard sandstone,” which, it is thought, may properly be called an 4‘ animal carving,7* although, on our first examination of the specimen, its outline did not impress us as being very animal like. Our impression then was that the ground, or semi-polished surfaces upon the edges of the specimen, were produced in polishing weapons and repointing them; and, therefore, that the outline of the whole stone was accidentally formed. A subsequent examination, however, and a comparison of the specimens with the ones already described, added to a better knowledge of true polishing tools, led us to a different conclusion. The stone has been split to render it thin enough for ready working, while its original (if such there was) resemblance to a small mammal was in­creased and rendered somewhat perfect by subsequent grinding and polishing. The faint, eye like depressions make the resemblance to an animal more striking and unmistakable.

In a subsequent chapter, we shall call attention to pestles, some of which have carved heads. They are referred to here, merely to show that the disposition to imitate animals by figures in stone is evinced in ways other than by outlines such as we have figured, and that while these outline works are much ruder than the carved head of a wolf upon a pestle found in Vermont, they are not probably older, but show that at about the same period in the average progress or degree of culture of the red man there was the beginning of that art which was but little advanced at the period of the later pictorial writings of these same people, when a warrior would publish his autobiography by means of a long series of grotesque sketches upon his blanket.


Chapter XIX.


In Eastern and Western stone weapons and domestic implements there is apparently but little difference, except in smoking-pipes, where the difference is very great; although the two kinds of pipes, those of baked clay and those of stone, both occur in New Jersey.

Figure 179 represents the common shape of the stone pipes which are occasionally picked up in New Jersey. This nearly perfect specimen, like the majority of pipes of this shape, is made from a fragment of or­dinary soapstone, and bears no trace of ornamentation. It is an elon­gated oval bowl two and a half inches in length, and a little more than one inch in diameter at the mouth and five-eighths of an inch in diam­eter at the base. The front of the bowl is somewhat convex in outline; the opposite outline is more nearly straight. A little above the middle of the front of the bowl commences a projection a quarter of an inch in width and a little less than an inch in length. The hollow of the bowl extends throughout its whole length, the opening below being in the center of the base. This pipe-bowl was evidently intended to be set on a flat, hollow tube, closed at the outer end, and the mouth piece* placed at or made of the opposite extremity. The “ projection ” would be useful in holding the bowl securely to the stem, by affording a hold for the cord that wrapped the tube and crossed the upper end of this projection on the bowl.

We have said that figure 179 was the common shape of the stone pipes; but the pipes themselves are not common nor abundant, even where relics are plentiful. Of the majority of soapstone pipes that we have met with, the pattern figured is the prevailing one; but of the thousands of relics we have ourselves gathered, or seen in the cabinets of others, there were not probably two dozen specimens of stone or clay pipes.

Figure 180 represents a somewhat fragmentary specimen of a calumet or pipe of peace, carved from soapstone of even less density than the material of the preceding example. It bears a general re­semblance to the calumets figured by Laphamf and Squier; but in no wise approaches the artistic elegance of the mound-builders’ pipes. This specimen, figure 180, consists of a flat stem, one inch wide at the bowl, where it gradually narrows toward the end, or mouth-piece termi­nation. This stem is of a uniform thickness of seven-sixteenths of an inch. The hole for the passage of the smoke is smooth, and decreases in caliber as it nears the opening into the cavity of the bowl. The bowl-cavity is exactly half an inch in diameter, and half an inch deep. As, however, the margin of the bowl is broken throughout its entire extent, it is possible that the depth of the cavity may have been greater. This form of pipe is not as frequently met with as the preceding one, although not what might be called a “rare” pattern. We have seen several plain fragments of carved and drilled soft stone, which were certainly referable to the stems of this style of pipe.

Figure 181 represents a form of small clay pipe, of which fragments are occasionally found, but very seldom is a perfect or even nearly per­fect specimen met with. In the splendid cabinet of Michael Newbold, esq., of Burlington County, New Jersey, are several fragments of this form of pipe, of fine yellow clay, which had been very carefully baked. The stems were perfectly cylindrical instead of flat on the under side, as is the case with figure 181; the bowl, also, of this specimen figured is ridged and somewhat flattened upon the sides and front, which gives it a much less neat appearance than those referred in the Newbold collec­tion or than similar clay pipes found in New York.*

Figure 182 represents a very large, though roughly made, stone pipe, found hear the shore of the Delaware River, at Beverly, N. J. It is apparently carved out of a serpentine pebble, the bowl pecked out and then polished inside and out. The stem is flat, with rounded angles, while the whole surface is somewhat polished. The nearly circular bowl is two inches in diameter, with sides varying little from an average thick­ness of about three-eighths of an inch. The bottom of the bowl and the stem, which are continuous and straight, or flat, have not been polished, and appear to be the unaltered surface of the pebble of which the pipe is made. The only attempt at ornamentation consists of a number of oblique lines, pretty deeply cut, which are crossed by similar ones ex tending across the spaces between the long lines. The cross-lines are all short, none extending to, or encroaching upon, the others. These have been cut with a sharp-pointed tool not recognized in any of the large series of pointed forms, as drills, &c., which we have collected.

There is in the cabinet of Rutger’s College, at New Brunswick, ft J., a large stone pipe similar to this specimen in every particular, fig­ure 182, save that of ornamentation, of which there is none. These two specimens are the largest we have seen, that have been discovered in the State. We have heard of the existence of several specimens of large stone pipes, some with elaborate carving, but on tracing them up they have invariably proved to be either much less “extensive” than was represented, or undoubted pipes of the mound builders, brought from the Western States.

Figure 183 represents an interesting fragment of a “pottery” pipe» and is made of the same mixture of clay, shell, and mica as are most of the scraps of vessels that we find scattered over fields where Indian villages formerly existed. This fragment is unquestionably the front of the bowl, which was quadrangular instead of circular—a character quite uncommon in the pipe-bowls of  pottery.

The amount of surface ornamentation in this fragment is unusually great; and although composed of straight lines only, the human face was evidently intended to be represented in the three short transverse lines 5 the two upper ones representing the eyes, and the lower one the mouth. This is the more probable since the lower line is the widest, largest, and really somewhat mouth-like in shape. Besides these three there are eight lines, four upon each side, extending obliquely upward and out­ward. This fragment measures one inch and one-quarter in width, and one inch and an eighth in depth.

While we have been far from successful in collecting an extensive series of fine pipes, there is no doubt that large and finely-worked speci­mens were made by the Indians on the Atlantic sea board. Such pipes have been discovered elsewhere,* and it is fair to presume that what is occasionally met with in the Eastern States, in the way of 44 relics,” will yet be found somewhere in New Jersey. Mr. Perkins has described 44 a very pretty pipe” which 44 was dug up not far from Burlington, Vt., and is' now in the museum of. the University at Burlington.” It is shaped like a common clay pipe, but the bowl is smaller and thicker, and the stem shorter. It is wrought from a piece of dark-clouded gyp­sum, and is nicely polished. The bowl * * * is encircled by two rows of oblong cavities, about one-fourth of an inch broad, and from three- tenths to one-half of an inch long, and one-eighth of an inch deep, no two being exactly alike. There are seven of these in the lower row and eight in the upper, and they were probably inlaid with some ornamen­tal substance.” We have quoted this entire description of the Vermont pipe for the reason that we remember having seen such a pipe some years ago, which was said to have been found at or near the Dela ware Water- Gap.

The comparative rarity of aboriginal smoking-pipes is easily explained by the fact that they were not discarded, as were weapons, when those by whom they were fashioned entered upon the iron .age. The advances of the whites in no way lessened the demand for pipes, nor did the whites substitute a better-made implement; therefore, the pipes were retained, and used until worn out or broken, excepting such as were buried with their deceased owners. What was the ultimate fate of these can only be conjectured. Certain it is that in every instance an Indian grave in New Jersey does not contain a pipe. If the practice of burying the pipe with its owner was common, we must believe that the graves were opened and robbed of this coveted article by members- of the same or some other tribe* A serious objection, however, to this supposition is that the stolen pipes would be recognized; but while this is possible, we. do not think the fear of detection deterred the ancient grave-robber, and, besides, it should be borne in mind that a pipe could be easily altered in its general appearance, and, further, that the great majority of pipes were probably of a plain character, no single one being especially distinguishable from its fellows. But for the few lines upon the specimen figured in No. 182, it would not differ noticeably from that in Rutger s College Museum; and might not a dbzen others be but fac­similes of figure 180!

Chapter XX.


In certain localities, fragments of black, brown, and red pottery aw almost as abundant as arrow-points in others. Unfortunately, these fragments are generally too small for determining the shape of the vessels to which each belonged; they are, however, large enough to show characteristic of aboriginal pottery, viz, profuse ornamentation. This was principally by lines and dots, but the variety of the combinations of these is so inexhaustible that we have seldom met with two fragments, not of the same vessel, which were identical.

The lines and square “ dots ” have been formed by removing a small portion of the clay while soft, and not by mere displacement by pres­sure with a cord or sharp stick or bone. The edges are sharp and well defined, and never merely elevated ridges, which give the inter­vening depressions the appearance of carved lines.

Figures 184,185,186, and 187 are good examples of the usual “find” of pottery -fragments, both as to size and general character of ornamen­tation. These specimens are all formed of the blue clay (“triassic”), as determined by Prof. T. A. Conrad, of Philadelphia, which underlies and constitutes in part the bluff running parallel to the Delaware River and skirting the meadows from Trenton, N. J., to Bordentown and beyond. This clay, which is now used in terra-cotta establishments, was not used by the aborigines in its pure state, but was mixed with sand, mica, or pounded mussel-shells, or with all of them. The mixture of other materials does not appear to have affected the color, since we have found pieces of every shade of brown, black, red, &c. Judging from the degrees of curvature of even these small fragments, the vessels of which they are pieces were originally small, globular, and would hold not more than a quart, but usually they were of about two-thirds this capacity.

Figure 188 represents a fragment of pottery peculiarly ornamented. Besides a narrow line which is met near the middle of the fragment and, at nearly a right angle, by another, showing that but few lines were en­graved upon the vessel, there are rows of curious u dots ” formed by pressing the clay, while soft, with a hollow tube (in this case a spear of grass) 5 the clay rising into the tube leaves a bead-like formation on the pottery. We have not met with any other fragment with bead-like markings similar to these, either in rows, as in this instance, or scattered about.

Figure 189 is another instance of interesting ornamentation. In this case the intervening lines and spaces are of equal width, but the depressions or lines are curiously broken by transverse, narrow ridges, uniformly distant from each other. These transverse ridges are of the same size, distinctly carved or molded, and nearly on a level with the true surface of the fragment. The vessel to which this little piece belonged was, evidently, broken intentionally, there being, where the fragment was found, a mass of blackish powder and more than a quart of pieces, all smaller than that in the figure, but equally covered with ornamental lines. Although no store was in the immediate neighborhood of this and the other fragments when found, the mass of pieces indicated that the pottery was crushed by a large flat stone.

Figure 190 represents a perfect specimen of a small vase, such as is occasionally met with in the graves of aborigines, and, if buried by themselves, always in the immediate neighborhood of graves of adults. This vase measures three and three-fourths inches in height, and is of equal width at the mouth, including the flaring of the rim. The clay has but a slight admixture of shell, and is identical with much of the pot­tery found in fragments upon the surface of the ground. The ornamenta­tion is the rudest we have seen. It consists merely of lines in series of four each, at an angle with the rim of the vessel and of different lengths, the longest being not over one and a half inches. These lines appear to have been produced by drawing a pointed stick over the clay previously to baking. The capacity of this vase is one pint and five fluid-ounces. When taken from the earth it was filled to the brim with a black dust which, on examination, proved to be burnt bone and animal matter un­mixed with earth. On exposure to the atmosphere this black powder became gray, and shortly afterward, absorbing moisture very rapidly, formed a dull, lead-gray, pasty mass. The top of the vase, as it lay in situ, was covered with a plate of mica about one foot square and half an inch thick. Such plates of mica are quite common about the fields in the neighborhood of Trenton, but are seldom met with in as large size as that covering the buried vase. This vase is in size similar to those found in the western mounds,* but is not ornamented with the care which distinguishes the latter. It should be borne in mind, how­ever, that difference in ornamentation is scarcely a safe guide in the separation of pottery into the production of the mound builders and that of the modern Indian. In gracefulness of outline the New Jersey vase is the equal of that of the mound-builders, while we have seen a drawing of a large vase found in Vermont t which exceeds in elaborate­ness of details any figured by Messrs. Squier and Davis. The mound- builders were never inhabitants of what is now known as New Jersey nor of the State of Vermont, but pottery is sometimes found in these sections the equal, in some instances, of the pottery of the West in style of decoration, while in all cases it is as hard and durable.

We have seen one example of pottery which presented several peculiar features; it was, however* unfortunately broken up and lost previously to our interest in aboriginal remains. It consisted of a quadrangular box of black pottery mixed with mica, about fifteen inches long, ten wide, and six or seven deep. It was ornamented on all four sides with fine lines, closely engraved, and extending from the top to the bottom of the box. When taken out of the ground it was full of a reddish powder of a faint aromatic odor, and contained many of the smaller bones of a deer, (Cariacus virginianus.) These bones had apparently not been exposed to heat at any time, but were probably the remains of venison buried with and intended as food for the deceased, whose skeleton was found within a few feet of the “ box.”

Of course pottery, in fragments, is most abundant at localities where the aborigines had their villages, as near Trenton, N. J., but we have always found some fragments wherever we have chanced to search for relics in general. Especially is this the case along the old “ Indian trails 97 or the routes they used for their annual trip to the sea shore.

Under the heading of 44 pottery,” we now call attention to certain fragments of vessels which, instead of being formed of clay molded into the desired shape, were “pecked” out from a solid stone. When we come to the consideration of “ corn-mills ” we shall find that basins of considerable Capacity were pecked in stationary rocks, and smaller stoues were hollowed for portable corn-mills, and therefore it is not strange that vessels for other purposes should also have been made. We have not met with any perfect specimens of such stone vessels. Our knowl­edge of them is based solely on two fragments, one of which we figure. It is an ordinary sandstone bowlder, probably of an oval shape; being first broken into halves, the broken surface has been pecked at until a basin of some capacity has been formed.

Figure 191 represents the fragment referred to. The inner side of the bowl is noticeable from the fact of its being of a decided red tint, which is in marked contrast with the light gray color of the stone itself. Along the side of this reddish interior is a deeply cut groove, which ex­tends downward a distance of nearly an inch and a half, and then bend­ing at a right angle to its former course extends to the broken edge of the specimen. To what use such a stone vessel was put can only be conjectured. The other fragment which we have shows even more plainly that the vessel has been “ pecked79 out with a stone hammer, but it is so irregular in shape—so fragmentary a fragment—that the indica­tions of its having been a portion of a vessel are not as clear or un­questioned as are those of figure 191.

Mr. Evans* says of Great Britain, with reference to vessels of stone being found there: u Vessels without handles were also occasionally formed of stone. Six or seven of these, of various sizes and forms, were discovered in a ‘kist-vaen,’ in the island of Unst, and are now for the most part in the British Museum. Four of them were of a rude quadrangular form, with flat bottoms, and from 3£ to 7 inches high. The other three were oval. They were formed of schistose rock, and some of them still bear traces of the action of fire.” Mr. Evans also figures a stone cup, which seems to be but a “ restoration v of the frag­ment we have figured, and of that which we have in our cabinet.

There is really more difference in degree than in kind between such stone cups as figure 191 has been, and the “paint-cup” and corn-mil7 yet to be described; in the former, a vessel to hold a liquid has been required, and so was pecked at and hollowed out to a greater depth than were the mills and paint cups, which were needed only to reduce small portions of grain or lumps of clay to a fine powder. If the red color of the inside of figure 191 is a trace of the red paint which was so abundantly used in the toilets of the aborigines, then, indeed, the speci­men is a fragment of a “paint-cup,” such as we shall more particularly describe in the following chapter; but if such were its use it probably is an exceptional case, as paint-cups, according to our acquaintance with them, were small vessels for individual use only, and certainly such a frag­ment as figure 191 would hold enough paint to cover the entire body of the most stalwart warrior.

Fragments of the ordinary pottery are frequently abundant in the fresh-water or inland mussel shell heaps, associated with slabs of stone and rounded or oval cobble stones, on the former of which, and by means of the latter, the Indians crushed the Unios and Anodontas so numerous in our rivers and larger creeks.


Chapter XXI.


When it is remembered how elaborately the warriors of our modem Indian tribes are painted when on the war-path, it is not strange that we should find traces of this custom among the relics of the older Stone age of New Jersey. The traces to which we refer are certain hollowed stones, or diminutive mortars, in which the mineral mass of colored clay was reduced to powder and prepared for application to the body. Such paint-cups or small mortars are not common in the localities with which we are most familiar. They are usually only water-worn pebbles which have had a natural hollow or depression upon one side, which was either enlarged at first, or the original hollow was utilized as a paint- receptacle, and gradually increased by the rubbing action of the little pestle. Messrs. Lartet and Christy have figured a series of mortars from the caves and rock-shelters of France. Of these “ mortars,” we have many identical specimens; but it is curious that the most perfect or undoubted paint-cup in our collection should be so very similar to a specimen which they include among their “ mortars” as doubtful. This u doubtful” mortar or paint-cup is described as u a water-worn, irregu­larly-shaped fragment of soft friable gray sandstone, bearing a part of the natural impression of a bivalve shell which had ribs and prickles, such as Spondylus santonensis; but these markings caused by the shell have been nearly obliterated, either by the natural action of water, or by artificial rubbing, probably by both. Some slight ferruginous stains remain in little hollows in the cavity; but they may be due rather to the imbedding material than to the use of this saucer like stone as a paint-mortar or ocher-pot. It is safe, we judge, to presume such stones to be true u relics” when found associated with others of which there can be no doubt. Its presence with undoubted relics may have been accidental, but probably not, and if brought to a cave-dwelling or rock-shelter, it was for the purpose of using it just as has been suggested, as a u paint-morter or ocher-pot.”

The similarity of the weapons between the cotemporaries of the rein­deer of France and the aborigines of North America has been frequently pointed out by the authors of the Reliquira Aquitanic®. It would seem, too, that the custom of painting the face and body was also common to the two peoples, if such hollowed stones as Messrs. Lartet and Christy have figured from France, and the two figured in this chapter, were used, as we believe, for paint-mortars.

Messrs. Lartet and Christy remark: u With these early cave-dwellers the art of painting was, as far as we know, limited to that favorite aboriginal color, red. Various pieces of soft red hematite, covered with scratches, indicate how they scraped off a red powder, which, mixed with grease, would furnish as good means of personal adornment as is employed by many Indians at the present day.” We should think that the finding of the red hematite and the paint-mortars both would render the fact of their having painted the face an absolute certainty, and that the presence of the mineral indicated the use of the hollowed stones as mortars. The particular one we have referred to, as figured by Messrs. Lartet and Christy, appears more unquestionably a u mortar* than do some of the discoidal stones which have merely flattened sides and not a well-marked depression.

Figure 192 represents a medium-sized paint-cup, made of a water- worn pebble. Three and three-fourths inches long by two and one- quarter inches wide, this specimen has sides and ends of a uniform width of half an inch, giving thereby a large cup-shaped depression for the total dimensions of the specimen. It may be objected that the size of figure 192 is too small for the supposed use. Undoubtedly many paint-mortars were larger, but this specimen is not as small as some we have found ; and, in favor of the theory of its having been used as a paint- cup, is the fact that it was found in a grave, with a series of arrow-points, an ax, a knife, and some fragments of pottery. The locality and the evidently artificial character of the cup-shaped depression prove beyond a doubt that it is an Indian relic; and that its use was for paint-mixing seems more probable than any other that can be suggested. Associated with this delicate paint-cup was the little club-shaped pestle, drawn as resting in the cup. It is a pretty pebble, three inches in length, slender and oval at one end, and flat, oval, and double the width at the opposite end. This pestle has probably been worn away considerably in its use with the accompanying cup. The width of the club-like end, and that of the slender stem, seem to agree perfectly with the width and depth of the cup’s hollow, and the slender portion with the points of contact of the rim of the cup and the handle of the paint-crusher.

Figure 193 represents a very small paint-cup made from a water worn pebble, which has received its present hollow, or cup shaped depression, wholly by pecking, after the manner of working the deep grooves of the common stone ax. This paint-cup is circular in shape, being a little flattened on one side only. It is one inch and five- eighths in diameter, and has but a depth of three-eighths of an inch at the center or deepest part of the depression. There are still marks of the stone hammer in this hollow, which, however, feels perfectly smooth to the touch, and has the same color and amount of polish as the exter­ior surfaces of the specimen. This specimen, like the preceding, was found in the grave of a child, with a number of much-decayed bone beads (?), and a highly-polished black stone, having a number of small holes through it. Reference will be made again to this specimen.

As in the preceding example of paint-cups, so in this instance, a long, slender pebble, of considerable polish, and more worn at one end than at the other, was found with the cup. The two certainly seem fitted- for use with each other.

Similarly with arrow-heads and skinning-knives, which merge grad­ually into spear-heads and ungrooved axes, do these paint-cups or small mortars gradually increase in size until their use as paint-cups becomes doubtful and they assume the size, &c., of corn-mills. We have seen a few which were large enough for small corn-mills and yet small enough to suggest that at any time masses of red clay sufficient for a party of warriors might have been ground in one of them.

Loskiel says :* u They bestow much time and labor in decorating their faces; laying on fresh paint every day, especially if they go out to dance. They suppose that it is very proper for brave men to paint, and always study a change of fashion. Vermillion is their favorite color, with which they frequently paint their whole head. Here and there black streaks are introduced, or they paint one-half of their face and head black and the other red. Near the river Muskingum, (State of Ohio,) a yellow ocher is found, which, when burned, makes a beautiful red color. This the Huron warriors chiefly use for paint, nor do they think a journey of one hundred miles too long to provide themselves with it. Some prefer blue, because it is the color of the sky, when calm and serene, and, being considered as an emblem of peace, it is frequently introduced as such in their public orations. Therefore, when they wish to show a peaceful disposition toward other tribes or nations, they paint themselves and their belts blue. The figures painted upon their faces are of various kinds. Every one follows his own fancy, and exerts his powers of invention to excel others and have something peculiar to himself. One prides himself with the figure of a serpent upon each cheek, another with that of a tortoise, deer, bear, or some other creature, as his coat of arms and signature.”

We have not been able to determine what minerals were used as paint prior to the advent of the European settlers. That it was some mineral, naturally red, or made red by burning, we have no doubt, as we have found faint traces of a reddish powder in many of the Indian graves, which latter are usually only to be recognized by the black stain in the soil—naturally a light-colored sand—by the decomposition of the body, or by the relics which they may chance to contain. This reddish powder is always, as found, so mixed with the surrounding soil that we have not been able to separate a sufficient quantity for conveniently determining its composition. It has, however, invariably a marked pungent odor, not at all disagreeable. To what extent this may be due to chemical action that may have been caused by the decomposition of the body, with which the pigment had been buried, it is not possible to tell.

Describing an Indian burial, Loskiel says : “They used formerly to put a tobacco-pouch, knife, tinder-box, tobacco and pipe, bow and arrows, gun, powder and shot, skins and cloth for clothes, paint, a small bag of Indian corn or dried bilberries, sometimes the kettle, hatchet, and other furniture of the deceased, into the grave, supposing that the departed spirits would have the same wants and occupations in the land of souls.*

Seeing that not only paint but such a multitude of other articles were placed with the body in the grave, it is not to be wondered at that the light-colored soil should be stained black, but that any trace of the red paint should now remain. Of course, as the practice of burying the paint and other effects of the deceased with the body is still continued, it cannot be doubted that these reddish patches of earth which we have described as still existing in the almost obliterated graves of Indians, are really deposits of paint, such as Loskiel mentions as one of the list of articles usually buried.


Chapter XXII.


The cultivation of maize or Indian corn was carried on extensively by the aborigines throughout the southern, or more properly the cen­tral counties of the State. The fertile tract, comprising Burlington and Monmouth Counties, known as Cream Ridge, was a favorite spot with the Indians, as shown by the abundance of relics found throughout this section, and especially by the occurrence of certain implements wholly used in the cultivation of their corn. These im­plements, of which there are of two varieties, we have designated “hoes and shovels,” the latter being used by the women in preparing the soil, the former to keep down the weeds after the corn had sprouted.

Implements known as “hoes,” both of stone and elk-horn, have been figured and described by Prof. Nilsson,* which differ, however, from the New Jersey specimens in being perforated for the insertion of a handle, a feature wholly unknown in Indian antiquities, other than as regards those used for mere ornamental purposes. The Scandinavian hoes differ principally in being perforated instead of grooved for the secure attachment of a handle. Of the use of such “ hoes,” Prof. Nilsson says, “It must be acknowledged that if agriculture, as seems most probable, consisted originally in burning tracts of forest, and then * sowing among the ashes, these rude hoes must have been very suitable for such operations.”

Figure 194 represents a very beautiful specimen of a New Jersey stone hoe. It is admirably ground into proper shape from a light-gray sandstone pebble, mineralogically not similar to any other relic in our possession, except a corn-mill, to be figured and described iu the next chapter. This relic is now five and a quarter inches long by a little over two and a half inches wide. It was originally much longer, and, by the wear it shows, was much used. The under surface was almost perfectly flat. The upper or outer surface is ridged, the height decreasing as it approaches the front edge of the implement, thus making the greatest thickness, one inch and a half at the head, which is separated from the body of the implement by two deep grooves, or notches, which do not meet on the under or the upper surface; but the ridge that extends the whole length of the hoe has a shallow depression where it passes between the two side notches.

This hoe, therefore, has been attached to a handle at right angles to the blade, the handle being placed in contact with the hoeat the under surface and well lashed by raw-hide strips passing around it and over the side notches; or the handle has been split, or a forked stick, the ends being drawn about the hoe at the notches, and firmly bound by raw hide strips at the central notch, after the manner of securing han­dles to the ordinary grooved cobble-stone ax. The shape of the speci­men at once indicates its use as an agricultural implement. We do not see the advantage of a modern hoe over this one, except in being lighter and less liable to be broken on coming violently in contact with large stones. We have seen no other specimen from New Jersey as well shaped as that sketched in figure 194, but the few specimens coming under our notice were all similarly shaped in the essential parts.

Professor Rau, of New York, has twice published* notices of agricul­tural implements, which he has called “ shovels and hoes,” which latter bear much resemblance to the example here figured, but differing in being chipped instead of ground, or “pecked,” and then smoothed, either intentionally or by constant use. The hoe figured in Professor Rau’s later paper (1868) “ is seven and a half inches long, nearly six inches wide, and about half an inch thick in the middle. The rounded part forms a sharp edge. The material of which these implements (also, shovels) are made is a peculiar kind of bluish, gray, or brownish flint, of slightly conchoidal fracture, and capable of splitting into large, flat fragments. 1 never succeeded in finding this stone in situ. The agricultural implements of my collection were all found in Saint Clair County, in Southern Illinois.” It will here be noticed that the New Jersey hoes, while bearing a marked general resemblance to, differ con­siderably from, the western forms. The western specimens are all larger, or at least broader. The side notches are deeper, and the head is of a uniform thickness with the blade of the implement. Mr. Rau further* says, and our specimen agrees entirely with his statement, that “ if the shape of the described implements (shovels and hoes) did not indicate their original use, the peculiar traces of wear which they exhibit would furnish almost conclusive evidence of the manner in which they have been employed; for that part with which the digging was done, appears, notwithstanding the hardness ©f the material, perfectly smooth, as if glazed, and slightly striated in the direction* in which the implement penetrated the ground.” The New Jersey specimen has the polished surface and the striatiops perfectly, but being of a very different mate­rial, the specimen in question probably does not show them as plainly as described by Professor Rau. These hoes appear thus far to have been overlooked by archaeologists, except as occurring in the West Professor Rau mentions them as “ rather scarce, and merely confined to the States bordering on the Mississippi River.” We have seeu none from Pennsylvania or the New England States, and, as regards New Jersey, they seem to occur only in the favorite corn-fields of the aborigi­nes, now Burlington, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties. This hoe, illus­trated by figure 194, was kindly presented to the writer by Joseph Newbold, esq., of Plattsburgh, N. J. It was the only specimen of hoe in his large collection of American antiquities. In the collection of Michael Newbold, esq., of the same neighborhood, which is one of the finest and largest we have seen, are two implements, bearing much resemblance to figure 194, but so much smaller that their use as hoes is doubtful. One of them is of serpentine, the other of fine-grained por­phyry. That of serpentine measures three and three-fourths inches in length, and one inch and seven-eighths in width. The head of this small, beautifully shaped, and polished specimen is narrower than the blade, which is the case also, though to a much less extent, with the hoe figured in 194. The cutting-edge of the serpentine implement is almost as curved as the gouge described in chapter xiv. This peculi­arity, however, does not militate against its use as a hoe, although, con­sidering its size, such was probably not its use. The porphyry does not differ materially from the serpentiue example. Professor Bau,* in the two papers from which we have so freely quoted, in describing hoes, mentions a large oval, flat, flint implement, found by himself only, in the West, which he designates as a shovel. We have seen that the New Jersey hoes differed in some respects from those the professor has figured and described, but no question could arise as to the identity of their uses. We will now present figures of “flint” implements bearing some resemblance to the “shovels” of Professor Eau, which we believe were used as such, although the circumstances under which one was found would seem to class it with “implements not in a state of comple­tion, but roughly-edged fragments which were destined to be made into arrow and spear heads at some future time.” We cannot think this of the examples we have figured, although they certainly do not exhibit at their front edges a high polish and striation, the result of use as shovels and as hoes. Shovels of sandstone also occur, in New Jersey, a foot or more in length, and six or seven inches wide. These are carefully chipped, flat upon one side, and have a less regularly oval outline than the jasper examples. We have seen that the jasper lance-heads are re­produced in this common sandstone, in a less careful manner; and so is it with the shovels of sandstone, as compared with those of jasper. These, like all other forms of relics, also vary in size, but we have met with none that were too small for practical purposes.

Figure 195 represents a beautiful specimen of chipped jasper which we have twice referred to elsewhere, once as a lance-head and once as a hatchet but which, we now fully believe, was not designed as either, but as a shovel. It was, however, never used. It is one of a hundred and fifty which were discovered in plowing a piece of newly-drained meadow near Trenton, N. J., in 1860, and is shorter and broader than the others, which might have been hatchets, war-club teeth, or lance- heads, probably some for one purpose and some for another. They were certainly all finished specimens, being carefully chipped to sharp edges, many of them having well-defined points and bases. None were as crude as a “ rudely-shaped flint article discovered on the bank of the Mississippi, between Saint Louis and Carondelet,” and figured by Professor Rau. § Most of these buried jasper specimens, when discovered, had their points up, being surrounded by a sufficient num­ber of the series to wall in and hold in position those that were erect. We stated in the Naturalist that we had not met with any isolated specimens similar to those in this 44 deposit but since then we have found three in widely different localities, two of which were of the lance-head pattern, if not unquestionable examples of that weapon j the other was a shovel, similar in all its details to figure 195. This collection, which was of great interest as a whole, was unwisely divided soon after its discovery; but the bulk of the series formerly in the museum of the Philadelphia Academy, has fortunately been placed for safe-keeping with the American Philosophical Society at Philadelphia, where the specimens are open to examination.

On comparison with the measurements given by Professor Ran, figure 195 will be found to be much smaller than the western specimens, its greatest width being three and three-fourths inches, its total length six inches, while the western specimens measure above a foot in length, a little more than five inches in its greatest breadth, and is about three- quarters of an inch thick in the middle but just as our hoes, though considerably the smaller, are yet unquestionably hoes, so it is equally probable that such a specimen as figure 195, though much smaller than the western examples, is a shovel. In width, there is no important vari­ation in these specimens, but as there is a decided difference in the depth of the soil in the Mississippi River bottom lands, as compared with that of the corn-grounds of New Jersey, this may account for the difference in their length.

Figure 196 represents a large flint implement of  shovel shape, carefully chipped from yellow jasper, measuring nine inches and a quarter in length, by five inches and a quarter in greatest width. It is some­what more pointed at one end than at the other, but is too broad and blunt to have been put to any other use, and too finished in appearance to warrant the idea of being unfinished. This very large specimen of jasper chipping was presented to the East India Marine Society at Salem, Mass., by William Story, esq., and was found in New Jersey so long ago as 1824. It is much larger than any specimen we have found or seen in this State, but otherwise is identical with such as figure 195and the lance-head figured in chapter vi, figure 35. Professor Rau men­tions* with reference to several of the agricultural implements found at East Saint Louis, that 44 their material is a yellowish-brown variety of the flint77 to which he has already referred. In shape they corre­spond with the tools of the same class previously described by him; most of the shovels, however, instead of having the end opposite the cutting-part worked into a rounded edge, terminate in a more or less acute angle. This answers admirably for a description of this specimen from New Jersey, figure 196, which is a new shovel, not having been worn and striated, as used shovels of flint always are; but the base of this specimen would soon become 44 perfectly smooth, as if glazed, and slightly striated in the direction in which the implement penetrated the ground.”

All the shovels from New Jersey, that we have seen, were from local­ities where the aborigines cultivated maize; the jasper specimens from Mercer County, exclusively, and those of sandstone and slate from Burlington, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties. There may be an excep­tion in figure 154, which is simply labeled “ New Jersey,” in the Salem collection, it not being known from what part of the State the specimen came.

In the collection of Michael Newbold, esq., is one specimen of shovel, which in finish, shape, and dimensions, is identical with that figured by Professor Rau, in the Smithsonian Annual Report $ but is of sandstone instead of “ flint” or jasper. It was found in the very richest locality for Indian agricultural relics in this State.

Mr. Evans, in the fourth chapter of his work, has described in detail and figured many specimens of so-called “chipped or rough-hewn celts,” which have every appearance of being “ shovels” such as we have described; or our shovels are “ celts.” Certainly they could not have been put to a cutting use, while they are unnecessarily large for bone-splitting. «Mr. Evans himself remarks of some of these celts, “as has already been suggested, it is by no means improbable that some of these ruder un­polished implements were employed in agriculture; like the so-called shovels and hoes of flint of North America, described by Professor Rau.”

Considering that the polished celts are quite as abundant in those localities where implements of this character occur at all, it seems fair to presume that the “chipped or rough-hewn” specimens were thus made for some particular purpose, and not that they were rejected spe­cimens, intended to be polished but for some reason thrown aside. These chipped “ celts” such as we have figured under different names, as suggested by their size, are all carefully shaped and finished, but have no polished surface, and yet the art of polishing stones was well known to the Indians, as illustrated in the beautiful “ skinning-knives ” we have figured, and which would be considered as “ polished celts” in England.

Mr. Evans does not figure any specimen of “ rough-hewn celt” as large as the brown jasper shovel, figure 196, which bears more resemblance to many of the “drift implements” of France than any other American “ chipped flint ” we have seen, and exceeds in size the river- drift implements, figured by Mr. Evans; the nearest approach to it being his figure 472, from Midford Hill, Salisbury.*

Figure 196a represents a specimen of agricultural implement closely allied in general appearance to the “rude implements” in chapter II. It is a rudely-formed instrument for digging or hoeing roots or cultivated corn; is of sandstone and chipped over the greater portion of its sur­face, with one side, throughout its whole length, more rounded and even than the other, as though it formed the back to a rudely-edged blade.

The width of the implement decreases somewhat at one end, giving the narrower portion the appearance of being itself a handle for the instrument. The total length of the specimen is nine and seven-eighths inches. The width, for two-thirds of the length, varies but little from three inches. The width of the “handle” or narrower end is within a trace of two inches. The broad end, or that opposite the handle, is chipped from each side about equally, but on one side of the specimen, at this end, there is a more uniform slope, and a degree of smoothness which indicates a rubbing motion at this point, as in digging in loose soil If held by the so-called “ handle” or narrow end, with the smooth side of the opposite end down, it will be evident that this instrument was in all probability used as a spade; if held with the handle from and the*mo4 end toward the person, then the implement becomes a hoe. In either case the polished end is thereby easily explained; otherwise, it is inex­plicable and the rude implement is an enigma. This implement was plowed up in a field from which a majority of the specimens figured in this volume were obtained 5 and, although from this locality some truly rude implements have been secured, yet we have not considered this as belonging to that more archaic class of stone implements, although so greatly resembling them in general appearance and work­manship, and being identical as to mineral material. We ourselves have no doubt that its use was to dig up those roots and bulbs which the Indian used as food; or it may be that, with this and similar implements, the ground was prepared for corn-planting, and, as we have shown, may be called a shovel or a hoe in accordance with the manner ner in which it is held.

Of the Delaware and Iroquois Indians Loskiel mentions that “they used formerly the shoulder-blade of a deer, or a tortoise-shell sharpened upon a stone, and fastened to a thick stick, instead of a hoe and we readily see, on comparing such “hoes” with the one of stone, which we here figure, that the latter is fully as capable of doing the same work, and of doing it as well; and we doubt if there was as much work in flaking fig­ure 196a into its present shape as there would be in sharpening a tortoise­shell or a bone by rubbing, and then fastening the “blade” to a thick stick.

We have seen that among the rude implements of chapter II, was one which we considered as probably an agricultural tool; but we must limit its agricultural use to that of merely digging such roots as were used as food by the primitive people of this region. In the implements which have been described in this chapter, we see a wider range of work intended in their manufacture, even including figure 196a; all of them being designed for use in the cultivation of vegetables and grain, as well as in the mere gathering of the latter when fully grown. We have seen also that, according to Loskiel, both bone and shell implements were formerly used, and this explains why stone hoes and shovels are not abundant, as they certainly should be, considering the amount of maize grown, had stone been the only material out of which agricultural implements were fashioned.

Chapter XXIII.


The Indian women, upon whom fell all the drudgery of aboriginals ife, reduced the hard kernels of maize to coarse meal by pound­ing them in hollows of rocks, natural or artificial, with globular peb­bles, or with long cylindrical stones, carefully chipped for the purpose, and known as pestles. Wooden mortars and pestles also were used. We have, perhaps, made a distinction where none exists, iu saying “corn- mills” and “mortars,” but it appears proper to make this distinction, as the plan pursued in meal-making in the two varieties really differs. By corn-mills, we mean small, portable bowlders, that have a shallow hol­low pecked in them, and with which were used oval pebbles held in the hand and revolved around the hollow or basin of the mill. This motion ground the corn into coarse meal. By mortars, we refer to the deeper hollows, or basins, which were made in permanent rocks, and with which were used the long, slender, cylindrical pestles, which pounded the grain into meal, or, if used for grinding, were held upright in these deeper basins and a revolving motion given to them. The vast majority of the pestles which we have gathered were polished upon the end only, show­ing that this part alone of the implement was made use of.

Somewhat south of a line separating New Jersey into its upper hilly and lower level portions, a very marked peculiarity occurs with refer­ence to corn-mills and mortars. In the northern or upper section of the State, where rocks in situ abound, the large flattened stones with cup-shaped depressions (corn-mills) are rare, while deep basins hol­lowed in immovable rocks are very numerous, which is evidence that in the rocky sections of the State the site of a village was chosen with reference to the u mill.” Throughout the lower part of the State, on the contrary, rocks in situ are not at all abundant, while in many sections they are entirely absent, especially those suitable for “ mills,” and here are found stones weighing twenty or more pounds which were brought from a distance; a receptacle was first chipped on one side, which gradually by use became both deep and smoothly worn. The largest of these portable corn-mills that we have seen was a bowlder of conglomerated sandstone and iron-ore; it was a cubical mass, two feet by nineteen inches on the upper surface and twenty inches in height. The “ basin” measured nine inches in diameter by six in depth.

Figure 197 represents a fine example of the small mortars, or portable corn-mills. It is a flat, triangular piece of sandstone, somewhat less than nine inches along each side. The upper surface has been ground oat until a depression was formed about an inch deep. Associated with it was figure 198, an ordinary water-worn pebble. The under side of this stone is worn smooth by rubbing against the sides and bottom of the basin of the corn-mill.

Of the large stationary mortars, but little can be said that has not already been mentioned in reference to the portable examples. They are generally larger in diameter and of greater depth, and could be used only with the long pestles. The vast majority of these stationary mortars are natural “potholes ;” possibly, iu some cases, deepened in­tentionally, or by long usage in crushing corn. Such a “ pot-hole,” used as a mortar, formerly existed in a large glacial bowlder in Centre street, Trenton, N. J. (Figure 199.) That this was used as a “ pot-hole” is evi­denced by the circumstance that on excavating to remove the rock, several broken pestles were brought to light, also a stone ax and several dozens of spear and arrow heads of various sizes.

“ Hunter informs us that in some of ‘the Indian villages visited by him, there were one or two large stone mortars for pounding corn, which were public property. These were placed in a central part of the village, and were used in rotation by the different families.”*

Wooden mortars were also used by the aborigines, stumps of hard­wood trees being worn off and hollowed out. With these a stone pestle, sometimes suspended to an elastic branch of a tree, was used; but it would seem that such a mortar, necessarily yielding to the blows of a stone pestle, would but very slowly reduce corn to meal.

As even the smaller of these corn-mills are quite heavy, and the true mortars, of course, immovable, it is probable that two stones, of moder­ately smooth surface, were used as a “ corn-mill ” when merely a dish of mush or a cake was demanded. While there were a few permanent towns, the great bulk of the aborigines were constantly changiug their quarters, and we doubt, therefore, if the majority of their corn was ground either in portable corn-mills or stationary mortars. Besides maize, other articles of diet were reduced in the “corn-mills.” Loskiel states that they grind the maize “ as fine as fiour by means of a wooden pestle and mortar;” so, possibly, the stone mortars were intended for other articles, such as shell-fish, nuts, and berries.

Of the Delaware Indians the same author says: “They are fond of muscles and oysters, and those who live near an oyster-bed will subsist for weeks together upon them. They also eat the land-tortoise, which is about a span broad, and rather more in length; and even locusts are used for food. These come frequently in large swarms, covering and destroying even the bark of the trees.”

As the oysters and muscles were also dried in large quantities for winter use, it is very probable that portable corn-mills were used to reduce the dried shell-fish to a sort of powder or pulp. This, mixed with the corn-meal, made a dough, or batter, not unlike the modern <4 fritters.*5 It was a common practice with the Indians to mix other articles of food with the meal made from maize, and for this both corn- mills and mortars are admirably adapted. Loskiel mentions their mixing dried bilberries with corn-meal, and also smoked eels chopped fine.

Pestles, very abundant throughout the whole State, are those long, cylindrical stones, which, as a class, have been chipped, or chipped and ground, until their length is many times greater than their diameter. Of course, so simple an instrument will not vary much except in size. We have seen none in New Jersey showing any attempt at ornamenta­tion. Mr. Perkins,* describing some Indian relics from Vermont, in speaking of pestles, says: “ I have seen only one that had any kind of ornament upon it. This is a large one, over two feet long, in the museum of the University of Vermont. It is cylindrical, as usual, and is rounded at one end, while the other is carved to resemble the head of some animal—it may be a wolf.” Mr. F. W. Putnam, in a foot-note, referring to the above, adds: u Id the collection of the New York State museum at Albany, there is a long 1 pestle,’ of identical pat­tern and having the same rough carving as the one described from the Burlington museum. These are the only ones that have come under my observation having the handle carved to represent an animal, though most of the longer implements of this character have a knob at the handle, as if for the purpose of suspension.” We have seen pestles from New Jersey twenty-five inches in length, but all are plain through­out ; not a single example, with even u a knob at the handle,” having occurred in any collections in this State which we have visited.

Figure 200 represents an excellent average specimen of the stone pestles as found in New Jersey. This example measures seventeen and a half inches in length and nearly eight inches in circumference. It is somewhat polished and beveled at either end, which would indicate that the ends were used in the deep mortars, and not the sides, by rolling in the saddle-shaped corn-mills. There is no indication whatever of the sides having been used, they being now as rough, or nearly so, as when the implement left the hands of its maker. The marks of the stone-hammer are plainly visible even to the very ends of the specimen, showing that a great amount of labor was expended in producing the implement. Its weight is seven pounds, enough to make it a cumbersome article for carriage. As such pestles were useful only where there were stationary mortars, it is probable that this and allied specimens were used princi­pally in the permanent towns, as, for instance, the one where Trenton, N. J., now stands, which, according to Haeckwelder, was the headquar­ters of a great chief. Figure 200 was found within a mile of the big mortar we have mentioned as in Center street. We have, however, seen several fine specimens of long and heavy pestles in the cabinet of Michael Newbold, esq., of Burlington County, New Jersey, which were found in the immediate neigborhood of his residence; and here the small portable corn-mills are quite abundant, and were probably used solely in reducing grain to meal. This fact somewhat induces that col­lector to believe that these long 44 pestles * were in reality war-clubs; but we do not think it can be shown that they were ever used as snob. Neither does the fact that Indians now use wooden clubs of a very simi­lar shape and of about the length of figure 200 favor the belief that these so-called pestles were used as clubs. Indeed, the largest corn-mills we have seen in Burlington County could not be well employed in the absence of a pestle, as, for instance, the one we have described iu this chapter, the basin of which is nine inches in diameter and six inches deep.

Figure 201 represents a second example of a long pestle, with features that separate it widely from that shown iu figure 200. It measures sev­enteen inches in length, lacking one-eighth of an inch, and, instead of being a uniform cylinder, as iu the former instance, (figure 200,) is flat­tened along its whole length, giving it a width nearly double its thick­ness. Although smoother than the preceding specimen, it shows the marks of the stone-hammer very plainly, except at the ends, which are smoothed but not polished, and perfectly flat and square. There is a slight variation in the width at the two ends, the specimen gradually widening from the “ handle ” to the pestle end. Examples of this kind appear to be very uncommon : of the two hundred and thirty pestles we have, and of those we have seen in other collections, we have not met with a duplicate of this. Schoolcraft* has figured one that is similar in all respects to ours; and this is the only illustration we recall of such an one being found elsewhere. It may be, however, that we have merely failed to meet with them, and that they are not very rare. This flat­tened pestle, figure 201, weighs but five pounds and a half, and would make a far better “ war-club v than the preceding specimen, or any of the heavier, cylindrical examples; but in the hands of an expert Indian even, a powerful blow could not be readily struck with such an instru­ment, except the object were quiet, while as to throwing them, we do not believe it was done, or, if it was, it was not a customary thing iu aboriginal warfare. In case of surprise, these pestles might have been used for defense.

Figure 202 represents a very common style of small pestle, of which we have gathered a large series. They are cylindrical water worn peb­bles, such as are abundant in the bed of the Delaware River, at and above Trenton, N. J., measuring from eight inches to a foot in length, and from two and a half to three inches in diameter. These pestles are not chipped, pecked, or polished into shape, or altered in any way, except that from two-thirds to three-fourths of their length is split off; the splitting ending abruptly at what is apparently an actual cut into the body of the stone.

N. A. Indians, vol. 1, p. 86, pL 21, fig. 1.

Such a pestle as this shown in figure 202, wonld be well adapted, as a small war-club, either to be retained in the hand, or thrown, as were the smaller axes or tomahawks; but that it is a pestle seems more probable, inasmuch as the handle is the only portion of the implement showing any indication of polish, which it is not as likely would be the case were the specimen a club. Moreover, the extremity of the globular end is somewhat battered, showing that contact with another stone had been frequent.

Pestles, as a class, vary much in size. The longest we have met with was twenty-five inches in length. The shortest are those little, slender stones used to reduce red clay to paint-powder, in the stone cups which we have described. We have not seen any with flaring bases, such as those figured by Squier and Davis,* of which the description reads, 44 occasionally they are elaborately worked, but most are rude.”


Chapter XXIV.


With the one exception of arrow-heads, no class of relics is so abun­dant as the grooved globular or ovoid pebbles, known by many names, but which we have designated by the term “ poggamoggon,” as such stone implements are called by the present Shoshone Iudians.f

Figure 203 gives an accurate representation of an average specimen. Some of them are smaller, but none noticeably larger. In finish they vary much, the extremes being a rough pebble with an irregularly “ pecked79 groove, and a polished pebble with the groove accurately made and smooth. The absence of battered surfaces at the ends seems to indicate that they were never used as hammers; but, as it has been suggested, they were weights for fishing-lines.

Professor Nilsson, to whose work we have so often referred, says of specimens of this kind “ Those ancient plummets which occur most commonly are oval, or ovally rounded, and with a groove round the middle.” He figures such, (pi. xi, fig. 217,) and says of it: It has “ undoubtedly been a, plummet—it was brought from Pennsyl­vania. This specimen is not grooved entirely round it, but, according to the figure, is notched rather than grooved. Such specimens from New Jersey we will notice presently. They are always ruder than figure 203. There can be no doubt that the grooved stones, similar to figure 203, are used as plummets iu Greenland. Professor Nilsson remarks “I was some years ago informed by a person who has long resided in Greenland, how the stones were formed which were used by the natives as plummets. He sketched one. Subsequently, a student presented me with a stone of exactly the same shape as that represented in the sketch just mentioned. This stone was found in the earth in the province of Blekinge, and has evidently been used as  plummet.”

Mr. John Evans* figures a grooved pebble very large iu comparison with our New Jersey specimens, as a u grooved hammer,” (?) and says of it and similar ones, u They were originally regarded as stone hammers, but such as I have examined are made of a softer stone than those usually employed for hammers, and they are not battered or worn at tte ends. It seems, therefore, probable that they were used as sinkers for nets and lines, for which purpose they are well adapted, the groove being deep enough to protect small cord around it from wear by friction.” Our New Jersey specimens generally are hard enough for hammers, but are too small, and, like the English specimens already noticed, are free from battered ends. The main difficulty, we think, in considering them as net weights or net-plummets, is the absence of any proof that the America Indians ever used a net in fishing.

Loskielt describes the fishing methods of the Delawares and Iroquois, but says nothing of nets. His words are: “I am now to describe one of the most favorite diversions of the In­dians next to hunting, namely, that of fishing. Little boys are even frequently seen wading in shallow brooks, shooting small fishes with their bows and arrows. The Indians always carry hooks and small harpoons with them, whenever they are on a hunting party; but at certain seasons of the year they go out purposely to fish, either alone or in parties. They make use of the neat aud light canoes made of birch-bark,  and venture with them into spacious rivers.*

Loskiel describes a method of shad-fishing similar to that adopted by the early settlers at Trenton, as detailed in the first chapter of this volume. Having mentioned the habit of providing themselves with hooks, and noting, also, that deep-river fishing was customary among the Indians, we see that a suitable sinker should also be provided, and we think there can be no doubt that some, at least, of these grooved pebbles were used as such. We say 44 some of these grooved pebbles, since we believe they are separable into two classes; those rough and only grooved by pecking a slight hollow around them, and those ground over their whole surface, and having a wider, semi-polished, and uni­formly deep and wide groove. Figure 203 belongs to this latter class. The amount of work that has been expended upon some of these grooved pebbles, as mentioned, and the description of certain weapons now or formerly in use by savage races, induce us to believe that such a stone implement as figure 203 was used much after the manner of a modern slug-shot.

Lewis and Clarke* describe a weapon in use among the Shoshone Indians as follows: “The poggamoggon is an instrument consisting of a handle twenty- two inches long, made of wood, covered with dressed leather, about the size of a whip-handle. At one end is a thong of two inches in length, which is tied to a round stone weighing two pounds, and is held in a cover of leather. At the other end is $ loop of the same material which is passed round the wrist so as to secure the hold of the instrument, with which they strike a very severe blow.”

In this description we notice that a thong is tied about the stone, and to secure it a shallow groove would be desirable, if not necessary. Such a groove we have in the larger, better-made grooved pebbles we have described, and although our New Jersey specimens do not reach two pounds in weight, they are generally larger than the roughly-finished specimens.

Mr. George C. Musterst has given us a most interesting account of the weapons and hunting implements of the Tehuelche Indians, and in his description of the “bolas” now in use by these savages, refers to ancient bolas, which seem to be identical with the grooved pebbles, or net-weights, that we have described. Mr. Musters writes: “ Ancient bolas (globular stones) are not infrequently met with. These are highly valued by the Indians, and differ from those in present use by having grooves cut around them, and by their larger size and greater weight.” There is no reason for believing that the Patagonian bolas were ever in use among the North Americail Indians; but it is possible that the simplest form of such a weapon, a globular stone with a cord attached —the Bolaperdida of the Tehoelches—may have originated at some central point, say Brazil, and thence developed into the ordinary two and three balled bolas of Patagonia and the poggamoggon of the north­ern continent. Nevertheless we see nothing objectionable to the view that these two forms may have arisen separately, the country and game iu each case suggesting, in the one the bola, in the other the poggamog­gon; and, in the absence of a knowledge of metals, what was more natural than to choose a globular pebble, and to groove it in order to se­cure the heavy weight to a flexible cord or handle t As there are simpler forms of “ worked ” pebbles, which in our opin­ion were used as “ sinkers,” as well as the rougher specimens of grooved globular pebbles, we have assumed that specimens such as figure 203 were used as weapons allied to or identical with the poggamoggon. Other uses, however, may have been found for these same globular stones; for instance, we find in Schoolcraft’s work an illustration of a war-club with such a small round stone inserted in a notch in the end of the club, giving the completed implement the appearance of an ordinary wrench with a small object held in its jaws.

Having divided the grooved globular stones into weapons—the poggawoggon (!) and sinkers for fishing-lines—we would now call attention to a more primitive implement, which we have no doubt was used wholly as a sinker. Very probably such a sinker was improvised just before starting out into the river or lake; and again, as the globular form is preferable, not being as likely to be caught by snags or clefts in, sunken rocks, it may be that a few fiat stones were carried iu the canoe, so that if the good sinker were lost, a temporary one could be readily provided.

Figure 204 represents an ordinary specimen of these flat, oval-outlined stones, with a well-defined notch chipped on each side, these notches be­ing always opposite each other. No care appears to have been taken in choosing the pebbles, other than that of not having them too thick; in thickness they vary little from about half an inch.

Figure 205 represents about the maximum size of these flat, side- notched sinkers. It measures a little over 4 inches in length and 2 inches in breadth. The notches are always in the middle of the speci­men, so that the implement is balanced when suspended by a cord pass­ing around them.

The specimens of this class of sinkers vary but little in weight, bnt curiously enough, and in confirmation of their suggested use, we have noticed that the heavier specimens are found about the Delaware River shore, where the current is strong, and the smaller, lighter ones about the creeks, and where the current is scarcely noticeable. About the up­lands, where all relics are mingled together in the soil, both styles and all sizes and weights of sinkers are, of course, found together, no single form predominating, in a locality like the site of an old village.

We have never met with a sinker like those figured in 204 and 205 with four notches, or with the globular specimens having morQ than one groove, described by Professor Nilsson as found in Scandinavia.


Chapter XXV.


Our knowledge of the functions of stone implements is, as yet, too im­perfect to enable us to determine in every instance the use to which particular forms were put. A doubt as to their design is still connected with some of the simpler forms, and it is, therefore, not strange that in every large collection there should be a few specimens about which nothing can be positively determined concerning the purpose for which they were made.

Figure 206 represents an excellent example of a highly-polished horn stone pebble, which has been cut off square at one end and worn to a blunt but highly-polished edge along the curved margin. This would afford a fine specimen of what we have denominated “skinning knives,” were the edge sharp. (See chap. xi.) As it is, however, the specimen may have been used as such, the incisions in the skin being previously made with a flint knife.

Since the publication of Mr. Evans’s volume, to which we have referred so frequently, it seems more probable that it was used in rubbing down skins in the process of their preparation for clothing. The shape and size of the stone, its high polish, and prevalence among the relics that characterize the sites of villages, seem certainly to indicate that it was a domestic implement.

Figure 207 represents another example of polished pebble, that has been altered little, if any, iu shape. A noticeable feature is in its being perforated by five small holes, which are natural, however, being thread-like veins of softer mineral which have been drilled out. On* of these perforations occurring near the margin of the stone, the stone itself has been worn off at that point until much thinner than elsewhere, and the hole then enlarged by a very slender stone drill. A cord was passed through this hole to suspend the implement or ornament.

If an implement, this specimen was used in the same manner as the preceding one. The curved outline is of about the same thickness as figure 200, and appears, like that, to be more highly polished than the other portions of the stone. Either as a 44 skinning-knife ” or a skin- dresser, it is as available as the preceding example.

Professor Nilsson* has figured and described what he terms a 44 stretch­ing implement,” to which class of stone implements both figures 200 and 207 may belong. He says of the illustration which he gives,“The widened part, representing the edge, has been rounded off by constant wear, prob­ably from being rubbed against leather or something of that kind. A person who has lived many years as a mechanic in Greenland, thinks he has discovered a great resemblance between this stone implement and the bone implement, provided with a handle, which is there used for stretch­ing skius in order to give them the requisite softness. A somewhat similar stretching implement of iron is still used in those parts of Scania where the winter dress of the peasantry consists of sheep skin coats.” We can readily see that the specimens we have figured, although much smaller, could be used in just such manner as Professor Nilsson describes; and as the deer-skin was the principal material for clothing, these stones may have been used by laborious rubbing with the rounded edge to render the hide flexible; the edge appearing the same in both Professor Nilsson’s and our specimens.

In a previous publication t we have described a New Jersey stretch­ing implement, which is now' believed to have been a true scraper, and is so classed in chapter XII of this paper. With such scrapers as we find, wherewith to clean the skins, and with these polished porphyry pebbles to stretch and soften them, after their dressing of brains,, the aborigines could make most comfortable clothing of the hides of our common deer; and we believe we are not far from right in classing figures 200 and 207 as “stretching implements,” using that designation as it is applied by Professor Nilsson.

Figure 208 represents a very carefully-wrought stone implement, of which we can say but little positively. It appears to be a combination of the ordinary grooved oval poggamoggon and the little stone hammer, to be described in the next chapter. As either the one or the other, it is a pretty specimen, but why the characteristics of two such different implements should be combined is indeed puzzling.

The general surface of the stone itself, as well as the groove and deep indentations on each side, are worthy of notice. While not pol­ished to any extent, this stone has a far smoother surface than the ma­jority of either net*weights or hammer-stones. The groove is unusually narrow, and apparently has been ground out and not pecked, as is the case with net-weights. The hollows or indentations are much deeper than those in any stone hammers in our collection, and, like the grooves, are very smooth, as though drilled with a stone drill, such as figured in chapter xv, figure 155.

There are no indications of battering or roughness at the ends, as in all stone hammers; and, indeed, if such were the intended use, why the very carefully made grooves !

Our specimen, figure 208, bears much resemblance to two of those figured by Professor Nilsson,* but is a combination of them which we think overturns the theory that the use of the two kinds of implements was identical. If figure 208 had no encircling groove, it would be very similar to an oval tool-stone figured by Sir John Lubbock.t This author has not much faith in their having been stone hammers, and adds, “ It is very doubtful whether these implements really belong to the stone age.”

Whatever may be the use of the specimen we have figured, it is un­questionably a relic of the “stone age” of the North American aborigines, and one that was of value in its day, considering the character and amount of the work on it.

Figure 209 represents a very pretty specimen of those “discoidal stones,” about which there has been much conjecture.

We think the following paragraph from Du Pratz’s work correctly explains the use of the specimen we have figured:

“The warriors practice a diversion which they call the game of the pole, at which only two play at a time. Each pole is about eight feet long, resembling a Roman f, aud the game consists in rolling a flat, round stone about three inches in diameter and one inch thick, with the edges somewhat sloping, and throwing the pole in such a manner that when the stone rests the pole may be at or near it. Both antagonists throw their pole at the same time, and he whose pole is nearest the stone counts one, and has the right of rolling the stone.”

Squier and Davis,* in describing these discoidal stones, make mention of information given them by Rev. J. B. Finley, who states 44 that among the tribes with which he was acquainted, stones identical with those described were much used iu a popular game resembling the modern one of ten pins. The form of the stones suggests the manner in which they were held and thrown, or rather rolled. The concave sides received the thumb and second finger, the forefinger clasping the periphery”

This last sentence applies perfectly to the description of our specimen. The concavity on each side, although shallow, is well defined 5 that of the right side, or the one which the thumb occupies when held iu the right hand, being somewhat larger. Of course the stoue can be reversed so as to bring the second finger into this larger cavity, but it would naturally be grasped in the manner described by Mr. Finley.

Figure 209, while not polished to any degree, is very smooth, an accurate circle in outline, and has the beveled margin very uniform throughout. The most elevated portion of the beveled edge is not in the middle, so that when standing on edge the stoue naturally falls ou the right or more deeply concave side. When rolled, it generally tends to the right and falls with what we have considered the 44right” or upi>er surface down.

Squier and Davis t figure a great variety of this class of relics, and while giving many reasons and quotations tending to show that they were 44 game stones,” add, 4‘ they are certainly enigmatic in their purposes.”

These disks are not abundant in New Jersey, but in every considerable collection of 44 Indian antiquities” we have visited, we have seen one or more specimens, all exhibiting about the difference shown iu the illustrations given by Squier and Davis*of those found in the western mounds, except that none were perforated.

Figure 210 is a disk of very compact stone, measuring two and a half inches in diameter, and one inch in thickness. The sides are finely polished, and the edge beveled, having a sharp central ridge, not straight, and somewhat nearer one side than the other. In out-line this disk is not a perfect circle, and will only roll a short distance, unless thrown with much force.

This specimen is much ruder in detail than the preceding implement; and while it may be such a stone as Du Pratz describes, being  one inch thick, with the edges somewhat sloping,” it does not seem sufficiently finished for such a purpose.

This disk, figure 210, bears a marked resemblance to a44 stone object” found at the Cape of Good Hope, probably an ear ring, or rather button, for insertion into the lobe of the ear.” The African specimen is smaller than that from New Jersey, being an inch and a half in diam­eter and only three-eighths of an inch thick. Col. Lane Fox, in commenting on toe Gape of Good Hope specimen, remarks that such disks were usually supposed to have been used as hammer-stones; he thought, however, that this was too small to be used for such a pur­pose, and that the suggestion of Mr. Bowker, that it may have been used for insertion into the lobe of the ear, was a very reasonable one.

While the specimen, figure 210, is somewhat larger and, we sup­pose, heavier than that above described, we think it very possible that it too was used as a button for insertion into the lobe of the ear. It certainly is no larger, and probably no heavier, than many of the extrav­agant ear-rings which Mr. Catlin saw and painted in his portraits of the Indians of the present century.

Figure 210 is a very solid pebble of limestone, of a delicate bluish gray color, which, when wet, shows beautiful mottlings of pure white; and, as the stone is thus rendered so very handsome, is it not probable that it was an ornament, and that, when freshly cut and polished, the blue and white contrasted as distinctly as now when immersed in water ! If the present dullness of the tint is the effect of long exposure, to what extent does this fact bear upon the question of age I

Figure 211 represents an uninteresting-looking pebble, chiefly notice­able in that but little of the natural surface has been left by the grinder and for the astonishing surface-irregularity which it now presents. The pebble is a fine grained quartz—sand conglomerate, hard and heavy. No doubt the patient fashioner of this specimen had some important ob­ject in view in grinding off the natural surface into the many angular surfaces which now exist. Extending around three-fourths of the cir­cumference of the implement is a well-defined but crooked ridge, close to the middle. This ridge, which is the prominent feature of the specimen, was probably intended for some useful purpose; but what its object was, and even that of the stone itself, is a mystery. Asa pebble it would make a very good 44 sling-stone,” but the aborigine certainly did not use the sling. As a 44 bola” it would give a telling blow to a puma, as described by Mr. Musters; but although pumas (Felis concolor) were common, it is not known that our Indians ever used the bola. It may have been used as a war-club knob, such as Schoolcraft figures, described in the last chapter; but would a club be any more effective because of elabor­ate grinding and ridges such as are the surface of this specimen! We cannot think it was ever intended as a stone-hammer. It was never certainly used as such, having no trace whatever of violent contact with other stones; however it bears more resemblance to that class of relics than to any other.

We have met with only a few—eight or ten—examples such as figure 211, but all corresponded with this in size, shape, and mostly in mate­rial. One or two were hard jasper pebbles, with veins of fine-quartz running through them. All were ground over nearly the whole sur­face, and most of them were as irregular as the one here illustrated.

Figure 212 represents a form of relic of which we have met with but one example, and unless it be incomplete—an. unfinished specimen—we can form no idea of its use:

Squier and Davis have given a series of illustrations of pendants, to which this specimen bears much resemblance both in size and finish, although it is a little longer than those of the West They say, “ These pendants are of frequent occurrence in the vicinity of the ancient works, though seldom found, if found at all, iu the ancient works themselves. They, for the most part, resemble the plumbs of the architect, and are usually made of rare and beautiful ma­terials.” As will be seen at a glance, this specimen readily comes under the head of “ pendants,” as just described, but the specimens figured by Squier and Davis all have a groove encircling either one end or both, according to the shape of the specimen, whereby a cord was securely at­tached to pass through the opening in the lobe of the ear, if worn as an “ ear-bob,” or around the neck to let the u pendant ” hang upon the breast. If this specimeu, therefore, is simply unfinished, it is a pendant, and not of an “ unknown” use; but is it unfinished! A careful examination shows it to be uniformly polished or smoothly ground from one end to the other. There are no rough portions or unfinished places; hence we are compelled to think it had some other use.

The authors we have just quoted give on page 219 of their work fig­ures of two pear-shaped stones, the dimensions of which are not given. They consider it possible that they were used as club-heads or something similar, and quote Carver, who describes “ a weapon in use by the tribes beyond the Mississippi River which consisted of a curiously wrought stone, inclosed in leather, as above, (the Chippewayan poggamoggoni) and fastened like the slungshot of the present day to a thoug a yard and a half long, which was also wound around the wrist. These weapons were used iu battle.”

A specimen like figure 212 may possibly be a weapon such as above described, but it would appear, for two reasons, that it was not so used. In the first place the size, weight, and careful polishing are not in keeping with such a weapon as the “slung-shot” described by Carver; and, secondly, if a weapon, would it not be oftener met with ? It has been suggested that it was a mould, about which clay was spread, to form the bowls of the clay pipes used by the aborigines; but its size is too great for this purpose. We have not seen any clay pipes with a bowl of as great a diameter as this would make. This specimen measures four and a half inches in length, and one inch and three-quarters iu its greatest breadth, which is a little above the middle of the specimen. The material is a fine-graiued sandstone, and the whole surface being carefully ground and smoothed almost to a polish, the specimens can hardly be considered merely a pestle, as it might appear at first glance.

Figure 213 represents one of two specimens found together in a field near Trenton, N. J. We have seen a third, highly polished, of. horn- stone, showing the grooves very distinctly, and with a hole drilled at one side of the end, opposite that which has the grooves or indenta­tions. It is in the museum of Rutgers College, at New Brunswick, N.J. This specimen is an ordinary sandstone pebble, four and seven-eighths inches in length, two inches and a half in width at the grooved end, and sloping from there to the opposite end, which is but an inch in width. There has been a slight rubbing down of the surface generally, which is moderately smooth, and on one side are marks of a stone hammer at one point 5 but no depression or cavity has been formed that would attract attention.

The interesting feature of the specimen, figure 213, is a series of deeply cut grooves, the majority about an inch in length, which extend from or near the middle of the stone to the edge, running in an oblique direction to the left. There are eight, parallel on each side of the stone, and so arranged that, turn either side towards you, the direction of the grooves is the same.

We have seen no description or illustration of a stone implement cor­responding exactly with this.

Professor Nilsson* has given us one figure of a hammer-stone which bears considerable resemblance to figure 213, and says that it has at its edges u marks of the purpose to which it teas formerly applied so unmis­takably that, when once pointed out, no further doubts can be entertained on the matter.” This, we think, settles the question, and that, whatever the resemblance, figure 213 is not a stone hammer. Such regular grooves as these cannot be called or considered marks of blows against some hard brittle stone. When we come to consider u hammer n or “ tool stones,” we will find a vast difference between the marks on this speci­men, figure 213, and the relics we have figured as true stone-hammers. Nor can these grooves be considered the natural result of use as a whet­stone for sharpening skinning-knives and kindred implements. They are too close, regular, narrow, and short.

When treating of breastplates, we saw that many of them were notched, and concluded that such notches were records of battles, of persons killed, or scalps taken. Stones such as that here figured are placed in the same class, but with a query. It seems to us that the most probable use of such stones was as records, and we think the fact of having met with one that was perforated strengthens the view that figure 213 is a u record-stone.” The other specimen in our collection, however, is much more rude in finish, and has these grooves more scat­tered about the margin. This rather combats the idea, possibly, of these relics being record-stones, and so coming under the head of ornamental objects.

Figure 214 represents an oval, flattened cobble stone, about four inches in diameter and two inches thick. The under side has been worn off until it is now a perfectly level plane. The margins are sloping and somewhat smooth, and in the center of the upper surface of the stone is a depression, perfectly circular at the top, and deepening with regularity to a point at the bottom. The appearance is that of the commencement of a bole by drilling, and is very different from the “finger-pits” which we shall see on stone-hammers, when we come to describe them.

In the specimen here described, as in very many others, there is a decided discoloration of the depression, as though drilled with metal, particles of which had adhered to the sides of the cap or hollow made. It is not a metallic discoloration, however, as proved by examination with a powerful lens.

Just such stones as the one above described are very common throughout the State, and, overlooking the drilled (?) hollow, in the top, are considered simply the “ crushers 99 used with the portable corn-mills. They probably had some other use, as in that case there would be no object in making any mark, however slight, upon the upper sur­face, which in no way tends to assist in the crushing of the grain, the stone simply being held in the hand and revolved.

We have thought that these stones might be in some way connected with the production of fire. Sir John Lubbock figures a Dacotah fire drill bow, which .consists of two plates or slabs of wood, one at each end of the drill, which is itself revolved by a bow-string being looped around it and the bow then drawn rapidly to and fro. That is devel­oped by the rapid revolutions of the drill, and communicated to frag­ments of rotten wood applied to the lower end of the drill. Now, as we find these stone slabs most abundant on the sites of old Indian villages, they are probably a domestic implement, and we have thought they were used as the lower plate in which the fire-drill revolved ; fibers of dead wood being heaped about the drill, where it enters the little depression on the top of the plate, would be ignited very readily.

Sir John Lubbock does not say whether the slabs, seen in his illustra­tion of a fire-drill, are wood or stone.

We are under the impression, however, that fire was produced among out New Jersey Indians by friction in simply violently rubbing one stick upon another, and if solely obtained in that manner, we can give no explanation of the presence of these large stones, which by trial we find well adapted for the purpose suggested, in connection with the bow-drill.

Figure 215 represents a peculiarly-chipped piece of yellowish-brown jasper, which, when found, was exactly twice its present length, and was the more valuable because the fragment which was broken off extended nearly at right-angles to the portion here illustrated. In its present con­dition this specimen measures three and a half inches in length, is an inch and a half wide, and half an inch thick. The under side is comparatively smooth—about as the majority of jasper spear and arrow points the upper side is more uneven, having zigzag ridges made by the deep chip-pings which produce the large serrations so noticeable upon the outer side of the implement. Before being broken, the character of the chip­ping and general appearance of the fragment were, as they even now are, totally different from anything we have seen in chipped jasper, either from New Jersey or other localities. The other u half” of the specimen still left the implement incomplete, which appeared to have been much the size and shape of a modern horseshoe. Before it was broken, this specimen bore much resemblance to one of a number of flint implements from Honduras, described by Dr. Daniel Wilson, with an illustration; and also figured and described by E. T. Stevens.! One of these Honduras specimens is “a crescent with projecting points.” It is said to measure seventeen inches in greatest length. This New Jersey fragment is a portion of a crescent, without projecting points, which was about ten inches in greatest length. Whatever may have been the object of this Honduras crescent, in all probability the same object was had in view in our New Jersey specimen, and we know of no more interesting instance of similarity between specimens of distant localities than occurs in this case, unsatisfactory though it may be, iu consequence of our specimen being but a small fragment of the original implement.

Figure 216 represents a very curious and interesting form of stone im­plement, of a pattern of which we have seen but this one example, which is iu the possession of Joseph Newbold, esq., of Burlington County, New Jersey. The specimen is a polished horn-stone pebble, perfectly flat upon one side, and rounded, edged, grooved, and conically headed upon the other. It measures seven and a half inches in length and two and three-eighth inches in greatest width, this point being about one inch and three-quarters from the end, which is brought to a sharp cutting-edge. Four and a quarter inches from this cutting edge in front, the implement harrows very decidedly, and is also here grooved, the groove being something over an inch in width. The groove is followed by a conical head an inch and seven-eighths in length, the base being of equal width with the opposite margin of the groove and “ waist” of the implement. The cutting-edge of this specimen is so carefully worked and is still so well preserved that it cannot be overlooked in considering the probable use of such an implement. If we look only to the edge, we naturally conclude that it was a skinning-knife, of a some­what peculiar pattern, being flat upon one side; but when we take into consideration the length of the blade and the wide and well-wrought groove and conical head, we are forced to believe that it was not made for any but an important purpose; and as that was not, could not have been, with reference to the skinning of animals, what was its use?

As stated, we have seen but this one specimen, and find, on inquiry, no one possessing such an implement in his cabinet, or admitting that he had ever seen its like. The published works to which we have had access contain no illustration or description of just such a specimen as figure 210.*

It will be found, on comparison with the hoe which we represent in figure 174, that it bears some resemblance to it; but there is no indication whatever of figure 216 ever having been used for agricultural purposes; there are no scratches or striae, as would be the case had it been so used. It is smoothly polished over its whole surface, but the smooth surface is that of the hand-ax and skinning-knife, and not the scoured smoothness of a well-worn hoe.

Having a cutting-edge at one end, and that a very good one, it would seem proper to place this specimen in chapter xiv, with the chisels and gouges, a fitting place on some accounts, but the chisel was not available as a tool without a hammer, and the conical head of this spec­imen is as smooth, as highly polished, and as free as any portion of the implement from every trace of violent contact with other stones. If a chisel, it has never been used, and is more elaborately finished than any other specimen, with perhaps one exception, that we have met with. The whole amount of the work of fashioning chisels and gouges as a class is expended upon the edge. The gouge, figure 139, for instance, is beautifully wrought at the edge, which is accurately curved; but elsewhere this specimen is quite rough as compared with the edge.

It has been suggested by a successful collector and student of Indian antiquities, that this implement might have been used in detaching bark from trees, either for canoe purposes or for coverings for their huts; that by placing the flat side down or upon the body of the tree, and pushing the implement forward, the bark would be detached from the trunk of the tree without danger of cutting it, as the edge of the implement pressed upon the wood, and the curved back of the blade lifted the bark up as the blade moved forward. This certainly is an ingenious speculation on the part of Mr. Newbold; but we cannot see why the groove and tapering head of the implement should have been added, if such were its use, and certainly they are too well made and carefully finished to be placed there as ornaments merely. It may be, however, that the narrowed part was so made that a cord could be placed about it to facilitate its carriage, as it is easier to make a groove around such an object than it is to drill a hole. If so, the specimen may be a “bark detacher.”


Chapter XXVI.


Every considerable collection of Indian antiquities we have seen from New Jersey, has included certain globular, oval, cylindrical, and long, flat stones, each possessing certain characteristic marks, which de­cide that it is, iu archeological parlance, either a stone-hammer or a polishing-tool—a tool to block out or a tool for finishing an implement.

Figure 217 represents a good average specimen of a stone or flaking hammer such as found in New Jersey. It is a triangular sandstone pebble, the sides measuring about three inches each. The thickness of the specimen is a little less than two inches. On each side, very nearly in the center of the specimen, is a shallow, circular pit or depression, for the insertion of the ends of the thumb and second finger, the forefinger being curved over the margin of the stone-hammer. Held thus, we find it a useful tool, that does not weary the baud iu holding, and is admirably adapted for the purposes intended b,> the original owner, that of chipping stones into desired shapes for arrow and spear points, and “pecking” the unshapely water-worn cobble-stones into axes.

If this specimen, figure 217, is held in the manner above described, it will be noticed that the outermost angle of the stone as then held has a battered appearance, which feature is proof positive of the correctness of the designation of the specimen as a stone-hammer. In the case of figure 173, two of the angles have been considerably battered, one much more than the other, showing that when one projecting point was too much worn the stone was shifted so that a new angle was the outermost. Iu this specimen, one angle has been completely used up, another is somewhat worn or battered off, the third is still intact. We have sel­dom met with an example of stone-hammer that told the story of its use­fulness more plainly than this does.

Figure 218 represents a smaller circular stone or flaking hammer, of a size and shape like the majority of those which we find, the circular form being somewhat more abundant than the triangular. Figure 218, like the preceding, has the characteristic fingertips, which iu this case are considerably smaller in both measurements of diameter and depth. These finger pits are rudely pecked out, and are not smooth, truly circular, or uniform as in those evidently drilled depressions noticed in figures 209 and 215.

Figure 218 is  completely battered up” over the whole extent of the margin of the specimen, there being only a circular space about each finger-pit of the natural surface of the water-worn pebble that has been used in fashioning this hammer. These stone-hammers were continually turned in the band when being used, that they might retain their circu­lar form. After being worn too small for pecking” stone axes, they were probably utilized as net-weights or war-club knobs.

Figure 219 represents a third form of stone or flaking hammer which has some interesting features. It is from a mineral which we do not know, of blackish-brown color, and very smooth and polished upon tbe natural surface. It has much the appearance of, but is not, a hornblende pebble.

This implement, instead of having the finger pits of figures 217 and 218, has the natural, smooth surface of the pebble retained, and, curiously enough, a small, smooth spot also is retained on the margin of the specimen. It we take up this, as we would those having u finger- pits,” and place the end of the forefinger on the smooth surface upon the margin, we find that the point directly opposite the forefinger’s end is that which has been worn off and battered by contact with other and harder minerals. The margin itself has been purposely chipped to bring the pebble into proper shape, and the point above mentioned is the only one that shows the specimen to have been used, and that it was de­signed solely as a stone-hammer. As in figure 217, the battered surface at that one point opposite the natural resting point for the forefinger makes it a matter of certainty how this implement was utilized.

Figure 220 represents a pretty little stone-hammer, made from a small cylindrical pebble. The sides still retain their natural surface, but the ends are well battered, showing that the implement has done good serv. ice. Such a specimen is the most simple form of tool that we have in our collection. It is merely a pebble from the bed of a brook, and perhaps the battering it has received was caused by repairing a weapon of jasper which had become dulled on its edges or had lost the point. We think it probable that every aborigine was more or less competent to work iu flint; otherwise, on extended journeys or during a days hunting, many implements would be useless from some slight accident which would have to be repaired by the professional tool or arrow maker. We have often visited localities where jasper was extensively worked, and have seldom met with any but the more finished stone or flaking hammers.

Professor Nilsson* has described a series of stone-hammers from Scandinavia, with one from the Delaware River, which are in most re­spects similar to our New Jersey specimens. He says of them, “there are antiquaries who would deny that the stone implements here repre­sented and described (as hammer stones) were used in the manner just mentioned, but I have never heard any one able even to guess for what other purpose they were used. As grindstones for iron they do not answer; and the marks of blows found on them were, as must be evi­dent to every one not totally ignorant of the subject, occasioned by blows on some hard brittle stone; not against any kind of metal, whatsoever. Similar chipping-stones are, besides, found from the pole to the equator, among all nations who use stone implements. The only objection to my view is, that similar stones have been found among iron articles. I have hinted that possibly these were amulets. That they were grindstones for iron arms is, as above stated, utterly impos­sible. It rests with the doubter, therefore, to specify for what purpose they were used, according to his opinion. On all these stones we find at the edges marks of the purpose to which they were formerly applied so unmistakable, that when once pointed out no further doubts can be entertained on the matter.” The only real difference we notice between those of New Jersey and Scandinavia, is the absence of perforated specimens. We have seen that certain stones, bearing marks of human workmanship, have been, in part, the tools with which were fashioned the vast majority of the relics which we find.

A stone-hammer to block out and rudely shape another stone was not all that was required by the stone implement maker. The finished im­plements generally have lost the majority of the stone-hammer marks, and such wearing-off was evidently not done by the mere use of the implement. It was designed, and not accidental. This “rubbing-down was, at first, accomplished by simply taking the weapon and any other pebble of suitable size and rubbing the one upon the other; but in time there was an advance over the primitive method. Stones of a partic­ular shape, grain, degree of hardness, &c., were chosen as the best adapted for the purpose of smoothing weapons, and instead of being utilized once and thrown aside they were retained for future use, them­selves soon becoming altered iu shape and possessed of one or more of those long, slender, polished surfaces, common to them all, and whereby they are characterized as a distinct class. These relics we have desig­nated polishing-tool8.

Figure 221 represents a good average polishing-tool, or, as desig­nated by Nilsson, whetstone. This specimen is an oblong, flat­tened cobble-stone, such as are found by thousands in the bed of the Delaware River. The upper surface has been considerably used, and is now much smoother than the natural or unused surface of the implement At one side about half of the edge has been worn off, leaving the ends intact. This wearing away has extended deeply into the body of the stone, and the polishing space thus produced, with the oval ends of the stone, give the specimen a more tool-like appearance than is common to whetstones generally. This specimen, figure221, measures nine inches in length, an l about two and one-half in width, and is about the maxi mum size of polishing-tools as they occur in New Jersey, excepting, of course, portions of immovable bowlders, which being handy and of proper material, were used by stone-implement makers when not inconveniently distant from the workshop. The immense bowlder in Center street, Trenton, N. J., in which is the mortar described in chapter xxiv, figure 200, had a surface over afoot in length, and seven inches wide. The red man evidently was accustomed to go to this to renew the fine edge which characterized a well-made porphyry hand-ax or skinning-knife, or to give new polish to a cherished breast plate.

Figure 222 represents a second example of polishing-tool, being a stone of much finer grain than that of the preceding example, and having a number of very smooth, level surfaces, it is still admirably adapted for polishing porphyry and horn-stone implements. About seven inches long and one inch and a half wide, it is of just the size for a whetstone, and yet is easily carried about. Considering the amount of wear it has had, and its virtues as a sharpening-tool. and even now for metallic implements, we doubt not but it was a cherished specimen. At various points on the surface of the specimen there are narrow, deep lines, which, we doubt not, are the scratches of porphyry skinning-knives, whose dulled edges were being restored. The principal sharpening-surface is on the upper edge of the specimen, which is here about three-fourths of an inch wide, and extends over about one-half of the length, leaving one-fourth at each end, just as in the preceding specimen, which has not been used, and presents the rough, pitted, natural surface of the stone.

Polishing and sharpening stone with such a tool as this is facilitated very much by the addition of water and very fine sand, and both were probably used by the aborigines, as we know them to have been used in drilling the beautiful banner-stones.

Figure 223 represents a very common form of polishing-tool, and one perhaps more properly named than the two preceding specimens, which might be classed by themselves as whetstones. It is a small quadrangu­lar pebble of horn-stone, which has been 44 pecked” over the whole surface to bring it into its present shape. The middle of the specimen is widest and thickest, and from thence it slopes toward each side and end. One end, as will be noticed in the illustration, is curved instead of square, and polished instead of pecked. This polished surface is the polishing point, being that which was rubbed in the grooves of axes and other similar points to give them a smooth surface. This rubbing has produced a sort of an edge at one corner, but not sharp at all, like a skinning-knife. When once a rounded corner has been produced on a polishing-tool, as in this specimen, which is of hard mineral, it is com­paratively easy, with the addition of sand and water, to deepen, smooth, and accurately curve a groove such as we find on the ordinary cobble­stone ax, some of which, as we have seen, have beautifully-polished grooves, which, of course, are rendered smoother and perhaps deeper by the wear of the withes or sinews used in strapping the handle.



Having given such facts as appeared to be pertinent to the subject in describing the several classes of implements of which we have here treated, there is little remaining to be said. Until future discoveries throw more light upon the particular uses of each kind of implement and weapon, but little more will be learned from these specimens beyond the facts given of the unquestionable identity of stone implements throughout the world, and their indication of man’s original barbaric condition.

No question iu the whole range of anthropological science has re­ceived more attention than how America was originally peopled, and everything bearing upon it, however remotely, is of value to those who seek to answer it. The stone implements we have been describing have something to do with this question. Maintaining, of course, the develop­ment of all mankind from a palaeolithic to a neolithic condition, and believing that the rude implements which we have described in chapter ii to be strictly palaeolithic in their character and age, in order to prove that the aborigines came from another continent, it must be shown that such a paleolithic people were possessed of canoes winch would stand the hap-hazard rudderless journeys that Sir Charles Lyell has described as one great means whereby distant islands and continents have been populated.*

Sir Charles Lyell remarks: “Were the whole of mankind now cut off, with the exception of one family, inhabiting the old or new continued, or Australia, or even some coral isle of the Pacific, we might expect their descendants, though they should never become more enlightened than the Australians, the South Sea islanders, or the Esquimaux, to spread iu the course of ages over the whole earth, diffused partly by the ten­dency of population to increase, in a limited district, beyond the means of subsistence, and partly by the accidental drifting of canoes by tides and currents to distant shores”; but it is impossible to determine the range of capabilities of paleolithic people, even iu the matter of migrations; and estimating a people’s capabilities by a study of their “rude implements,” we are of the opinion that an overland journey from the southern continent or Central America was more probable than a canoe voyage from any of the islands of the Atlantic or Pacific. If we heed the traditions of the aborigines, that they came from another coun­try, then they sailed over some portion of the Pacific and not the Atlan­tic, all the various tribes having traditions of coming from the west; but it would be well to remember that these traditions refer also to some preceding or pre occupying people whom the incoming race conquered. If the Delaware Indians, who two centuries ago were in peaceful pos­session of New Jersey, really came from the west, and on arriving en­countered another people and drove them off, all of which their tradi­tions claim, the question arises, who were their predecessors. Were they a more primitive people than the red Indian, and the fashioners of the old, rude implements ? Were they the paleolithic folk of the Dela­ware Valley, and the red Indians the neolithic people!

While we cannot but accept the suggestions of Professor Huxley, as expressed iu our introductory chapter, in preference to the exotic origin of our red Indians asserted by Sir Charles Lyell, we are nevertheless compelled to return to the point from which we started, and admit that the origin of the aborigines is still enveloped iu what has proved an impenetrable mist; but now that so much attention is being paid throughout the world to anthropological science, it is almost safe to predict that the origin of the red Indian and his prehistoric history will yet be correctly outlined.

Sir John Lubbock has given excellent reasons for his belief in the indigenous origin of the Mexican civilization. He remarks: “Take the case of the Mexicans. Even if we suppose that they were descended from a primitively-civilized race and had gradually and completely lost both the use and tradition of letters—to my mind a most improbable hypothesis—still we must look on their system of picture-writing as being of American origin. Even if a system of writing by letters could ever be altogether lost, which I doubt, it certainly could not be aban­doned for that of picture-writing, which is inferior iu every point of view. If the Mexicans had owed their civilization not to their own gradual improvement but to the influence of some European visitors, driven by stress of weather or the pursuit of adventure onto their coasts, we should have found iu their system of writing and iu other respects unmistakable proofs of such an influence. Although, there­fore, we have no historical proof that the civilization of America was indigenous, we have in its very character evidence more satisfactory perhaps than any historical statements would be.”

Dr. Daniel Wilson, who endeavors to prove the Asiatic origin of the aboriginal American, says of him, he “is among the ancients of the earth” and that, “whencesoever he derived his origin, lie presents to us just such a type of unprogressive life as the nomads of the Asiatic steppes. The red Indian of the Northwest exhibits no change from his precursors of the fifteenth century; and for aught that appears in him of a capacity for development, the forests of the American continent may have sheltered hunting and warring tribes of Indians, just as they have sheltered and pastured its wild herds of buffaloes, for countless centuries since the continent rose from its ocean bed. That he is no recent intruder is indisputably proved alike by physical and intellectual evidence.” Further on the same writer observes: “Man entered on the occupation of the New World in centuries which there, as in older historic regions, stretch backward as we strive to explore them. His early history is lost, for it is not yet four centuries since the red man and this western world were made known to us; and he still exists as he did then, a being apart from all that specially distin­guishes either the cultivated or uncultured man of Europe. Does not this admission of the great antiquity of the American aborigines carry with it, of itself, a proof of the autochthonic origin of the Indian ? And the similarity of races—is it not but a repetition of what we have seen in the stone implements themselves, that like surroundings will pro­duce similar weapons and tools !

Certainly one would not endeavor to trace a relationship between the ancient people who fashioned and used the rude and elaborate stone implements of Great Britain and the red Indians who chipped and polished the specimens here figured, yet, excepting the minerals of which they are made, how similar are they to the English specimens!

What though the Mongol does resemble the American, does this in itself prove relationship? And, also, it may be asked, which of the American aborigines, as they now are, does the Asiatic Mongol most resemble; or has each American tribe a representative in the other continent t Dr. Wilson asserts that the theory of an aboriginal unity pervading our indigenous American race from the Arctic circle to Tierra del Fuego has been shown to be baseless but how can it be proved that the Indians appearing most nearly allied to Asiatic races are the oldest or original aborigines? We doubt that all American races are related, and if so different, as Dr. Wilson assumes, who can dem­onstrate now which type or pattern was the central from which came the others that climate, food, and surroundings generally, finally produced!

Whatever the origin of the American aborigine, however, there can be no question as to his condition from the date of his first appearance on American soil to the time of the arrival of the European settler, a period of immense duration, during which the puzzling red man passed from the paleolithic to a neolithic condition; and if we may correctly estimate the advance in culture which a race has made, by the traces of their arts that are still left to tell the story of their former presence, then in New Jersey the Indian was once a paleolithic man, and, from whatever source he came, here advanced without supernatural revela­tion, or the missionary efforts of a superior people, to a condition which is best known as  neolithic, or that stage of culture when stone was utilized to the best advantage, every quality of the mineral being recog­nized and the weapons fashioned accordingly.

The theory of the gradual progress of mankind, which needs no further discoveries to prove it true, is demonstrated, as in Europe, in the condition and general position of the stone implements found in New Jersey, although the older Stone age of the American race or races does not date back as far into prehistoric ages as is probable in other continents. It is true of New Jersey, as of Europe, that all our recent investigations into the state of the arts in the earlier Stone age, lead clearly to the opinion that at a period many thousands of years anterior to historical times, man was in a state of great barbarism and ignorance, exceeding that of the most savage tribes of modern times. He was evidently ignorant of all metals, and of the arts 0£ polishing stone implements and of making pottery.”! And finally, if the pride of man is to be considered in the demonstration of the truth in nature, is it not more pleasant to believe that we are an improvement over, rather than a degeneration from, our remote ancestry; and should we not be thankful to 44 Time, which antiquates antiquities, and hath an art to make dust of all things,” that he44 hath yet spared these minor monuments” to us to prove the advance which we have made over a distinct people of the globe, a fact which is now shown to be quite in accordance with 44 the convictions of the great body of the learned,” and with the facts of history and of prehistoric times ?


Fig. 3.

Fig. 8.—i nat. size.

Fig. 10.

Fig. 13.—Natural size.

Fig. 15.

Fig. 14.

Fig. 16.

£ nat. size (side view), f

Fig. 17.—i nat. size

£ nat. size, (end view).




Fig. 27—Natural size.

Fig. 28.—Natural size.


Fig. 29.—Natural size.


Fig. 32.—Natural size.

Fig. 33.—Natural size.


•Natural size.


Fig. 38 —Natural size.


39.—Natural eize.



Fig. 50.—Nat. sizs.

Fig. 49.—Nat. size.

-Nat. size. FilJi 52._Nat. size.


Fig. 77.

Fig. 80.—Nat. size.

Fig. 78.

Fig. 81.—Nut. size.

Fig. 86.—Nat size.


Fig. 87.

Fig. 91.


“Fig. 9i>.

Fig. 99.

Fig. 90.

Fig. 94.

Fig. 97.

Fig. 89.—Nat. size.

Fig. 93.

Fig. 100. Natural size.

Fig. 101.

Fig. 92.—Nat. size.

Fig. 95.

Fig. 98.—Nat. size.

Fig. 106.

Fig. 107.

Fig. 108.—Nat. size.

Fig. 112.

Fig. 109. I




Fig. 116.—Nat. size.

Fig. 119.—Nat. size.

Fig. 120.

Fig. 121.—Nat. size.


Fig. 128.—Nat. size.

Fig. 129.—Nat. size.

Fig. 130.

Fig. 131.

Fig. 132.

Fig. 133 a.—£ nat. size.

Fig. 138.—£ nat. size.



Fig. 147.

Fig. 148.

Fig. 149. Nat. size

Fig. 152.

Fig. 150.

Fig. 151.


Fig. 159.


Fig. 160.

Fig. 165.

Fig. 167.

Fig. 168.

Fig. 170.




Fig. 177.

Fig. 177 a.

Fig. 179.

Fig. 180.

Fig. 181.

Fig. 183.


Fig. 185.—Nat. size.






Fig. 193.

Fig. 192.

Fig. 197.

Fig. 196, wanting. Fig. 19Ua, wanting.


Fig. 199


Fig. 203.




Fig. 215.

Fig. 216.—^ nat. size.