FIG. 206. (S. 1–4.) Hand-hammers. W. A. Holmes’s collection, Chicago, Illinois. It seems that the hardness of the stone was a prominent factor in the time consumed in making an implement. Mr. McGuire once used a jasper hammer-stone during the total of forty hours’ work, and yet the surface of the stone showed slight wear. His opinion is that the hammer of quartzite—hard quartzite, for there are soft varieties of that stone—is hard enough to fashion a number of implements. ] “It is intended to discuss here the hammer used in stone pecking as distinguished from the chipping hammer. By the latter a slower and more deliberate blow would be given, and consequently its shape would not be material. “That nuts and bones could be cracked and paint and grain could be ground with hammers is admitted, but it is contended that no reasonable amount of such work would cause the implements to present the appearance they do if only so used. Moreover, any unshaped stone would have answered these purposes as well as a finished implement; hence, is it reasonable to suppose that savage man would trouble himself to fashion useless objects? [Illustration: FIG. 207. (S. slightly less than 1–2.) Two hammer-stones. Collection of C. Albee, Red Rock, Montana. ] “Hammers were made of any hard stone that could be obtained. It is common to find them of diorite, quartzite, or other tough material capable of the greatest amount of work with the least wear; they would be gritty, as is almost invariably the case, to grind the pecked surface as work progressed. It can hardly be doubted that men living in an age of stone must have been conversant not only with the best sources of material, but also with its adaptability for particular uses.