Introduction Numerous elementary and higher transcendental functions of complex analysis possess representations in terms of continued fractions of the Stieltjes type. (An abundance of examples are given in the textbooks by WALL [1948] and PERRON [t957]; for some recent examples and applications, see MAEHLY [1960], CONTE and FRIED [t96t], MILLER, MOLMUD and MEECHAM [t962], BLANCH [1964], PATRY and KELLER [1964], W¥1~N [1964].) Similar representations also exist for the remainder terms of the asymptotic expansions of functions defined by certain Laplacian integrals (HESRICI [t963, 1965]). Such representations are of considerable computational value, both because of the ease with which a continued fraction can be evaluated recursively, and because of the fact that continued fraction representations frequently are convergent (and computationally efficient) in wider regions of the complex plane than, say, a Taylor series. In actual computation it is necessary to approximate the value of a continued fraction by some approximant of finite order. This paper makes an a t tempt to s tudy the error committed in this approximation. Both a posteriori bounds depending on the knowledge of a finite number of approximants -and a priori bounds depending only on the elements of the continued fraction or on the coefficients of its corresponding power series are presented. A solution of the problem of finding a posteriori bounds which in a sense is best possible is given in section 2. Several different a priori bounds are given in section 3. Although these bounds are not shown to be best possible, they are shown to have the correct order of magnitude in some important special cases. The tack of a generally accepted terminology and even of clear definitions in the analytic theory of continued fractions made it necessary to recollect, in a unified notation, some basic facts of the theory in section t.