Controlled coast to coast - Ishi's words

[BenjaminEble]

First controlled coast to coast, overshot flake with cylindrical punch, anvil, and wooden mallet - YouTube - after just a few hours of practice, I hit a full coast to coast flake. Click on images to see full refit, with fragments.

I have spent a year trying to resolve something that was known from Ishi. With regard to making a spearhead, large implement, or something larger than a pressure flaked point, this is what we know from Ishi:

"But if a large spearpoint or knife-blade is ultimately desired, an intermediate tool is needed. This is apparently (Ishi never made one for me to see) a short, stout, blunt-pointed piece of bone or wood serving as a sort of punch and sometimes as a lever. As a matter of fact, what is wanted in the case of producing a large implement is not the division of the obsidian mass but the trimming down of this mass by the detachment from it of all unnecessary portions." (Handbook of aboriginal American antiquities, W.H. Holmes)

Ironically, in the 1980's, American flintknappers repudiated the use of antler drift - or cylindrical punches - in flintknapping. Leading flintknappers said that drift punches were next to useless, except in cases like notching. But, no one believed that they could be used in full scale bifacial fabrication.

What I found is that modern flintknappers tend to look at tools in a sort of vacuum, with little or no thought given to the other aspects of the process. In this case, I practiced freehand indirect percussion for close to a year. And, I would have to admit that the process is very good for some things, but not for making thinning flakes.

Yet, recently, while going through ethnographic accounts, it dawned on me that there are probably between a half a dozen, to a dozen, accounts of native knappers holding the stone they are working on, against something hard. And, in the archaeological record, the incidence of pitted anvil stones seems to be almost unlimited, in nature.

What I have been able to demonstrate is that the cylindrical punch is not as "limited" as people may have thought. But, in order to use a cylindrical punch effectively, one must reckon with a number of variables - not just the punch, itself. One of the variables has to do with the properties of the striker. In this video, you can see me using a wooden striker. Wooden strikers have unusual properties. They generally contain more mass. But, the wood compresses upon impact. This translates to a very long loading time. And, long loading time can translate to longer flakes. In this respect, the slowing down of loading time produces an effect that is akin to pressure. Pressure flakes tend to be flat, bulbless, and rippleless. There are no real signs of shock. Using a wooden mallet, in indirect percussion, can produce a very similar effect, only the flakes come out much larger, due to the sheer mass involved.

Another variable that has to be reckoned with is support. In this case, I use a stone anvil support, against the knee. In general, the more one slows down loading times, the longer the support must be able to effectively withstand the blow. Otherwise, if the support gives, during the loading phase, then the flake will not carry, as desired. Also, the support must be able to withstand the full brunt of the blow. In other words, since longer, larger flakes are desired, a stronger blow is needed, and in turn, a stronger support is needed, to resist the blow.

Actually, it is very easy to demonstrate how a highly resistive support can be created. If one holds a stone in one's hand, and taps the edge with a hammerstone, then a certain amount of resistance can be felt. But, if one holds the same stone against a concrete wall, and taps the stone with the same hammerstone, it will immediately become apparent that the stone feels far more resistant. But, is it the stone that is now resistant? No, it is the support - a concrete wall is more resistant than one's hand, and this can be felt, via the tap of a hammerstone.

As a result of using a more resistive support, the knapper must "re-learn" to use appropriate angles. Using a clipping blow seems much more appropriate when using a resistive support.

Once a knapper learns the difference between anviled, and non-anviled, flaking, it becomes possible to divide the bifacial reduction process into two types of flaking. All flaking designed to turn the edge, or create platforms, can be done freehand, without the use of an anvil. And, all flaking designed to thin the point can be carried out with the use of an anvil, since the anvil will cause the flake to carry farther, as breaks tend to run towards support.

Here are a few examples of anviled hammerstone flaking, which is analogous to the same process that can be carried out with cylindrical punches:

Hammerstone + knee anvil - flakes - YouTube
Clip: Using hammerstone in conjunction with a knee anvil - YouTube
Antler Drift - Indirect Percussion Quotes

[drdave514]

Very nice. I'm on board except for the sitting on the floor part. And I didn't know they allowed knapping in solitary confinement.

Thanks for the post, description and videos.

[rokdok]

Thank's very much for posting this, Ben. I have a bone assemblage from a mound in N. Fla. and in it are several cylindrical bone punches(as well as inscribed racoon baculas and turkey leg bones with the spur's intact) I thought the cylinders were game pieces till i watched your video's. Thank you very much for the insight.Mark

[uniface]

It seems that, as with other puzzles, the closer you get to the answer, the more the picture simplifies.