of settling the question of age. [4] Abbott, C. C. The Stone Age in N. J., Sm. Rep. 1875, p. 247. [5] Ibid, p. 252. Rude "implements" were called for and they were found. The only requirements were that they should not be of well-known Indian types, that they should be rude and have some sort of resemblance to what were known as paleolithic implements abroad. Since most of these so-called gravel implements of Europe are also doubtless the rejects of manufacture resemblances were readily found. The early attempts to utilize these rejects in support of the theory, and make them masquerade creditably as "implements" with specialized features and self-evident adaptation to definite ice-age uses, now appear decidedly amusing. Gradually, however, the lines have been drawn upon this early license, and it is to-day well understood by all careful students, that since the rude forms are so often repeated in modern neolithic refuse, the only reliable test of a gravel "implement" is its occurrence in the gravels in place. That a particular "implement," said to have been obtained from the gravels, is of "paleolithic type," does not in the least strengthen its claims to being a _bona fide_ gravel implement; nor does its easy assignment to a "type" give any additional value to the collector's claim that the gravels said to contain it are implement bearing. The very names, "rude implement," "paleolithic implement," etc., carry with them a certain amount of mysterious suggestion; one thinks of unique, significant shapes and of strange, archaic uses. At their mere mention, the great ice sheet looms up with startling realism, and the reindeer and the mighty mammoth appear upon the scene. The reader of our paleolithic literature is led to feel that these antiquated objects carry volumes of history in their worn and weather-beaten faces, but this is all the figment of fertile brains. These objects have without exception the appearance of the most commonplace every-day rejects of manufacture without specialization and without hidden meaning. They tell of themselves no story whatsoever, save that of the oft-repeated failure of the aboriginal blade maker in his struggle with refractory stones. This will be shown with greater clearness farther on.