A lesson on knapping techniques

[kirby]

I am hoping to start a discussion regarding identifying various artifacts based on their flaking. This subject came up on another thread and it got me thinking that I'm probably not the only one around that is lacking in this knowledge.

I would appreciate those of you who have a better grasp of this to educate those of us who need more understanding.

It would be great if those of you with good examples would share your photos.

Here is my contribution. It is 5" long x 2 5/16" wide and 1/8" thick.

How would you assess this blade based on flaking techniques?

[manoman]

Great idea, and very much needed. To cut to the chase, I am saying classic archaic flaking. I arrive at this by my current knowledge base:

1. All signs of heavy percussion flaking gone.
2. Good signs of in-direct pressure flaking (with a hammer stone and punch-type tool) to completely even out the surfaces and make the piece uniform in depth. Very well thought out percussion flaking all along the edges.
2. Direct pressure flaking by using only a punch of some type, without a hammer stone. This removes just tiny flakes to complete the uniformity of the blade.

Now, I admit there is a lot missing. But that is what I know as to how to get there.

Compared to other flaking such as random, paleo, parallel oblique,etc...I don't want to spoil any further posts.

I am only able to give just the basic observation on this blade. I would stand by my assumption from what I have told above that it is archaic in style. But I want to emphasis that my thoughts are just basic, bullet points without any further reduction knowledge.

I hope this helps, and gets the juices flowing as to why I am wrong, why certain parts are right, and how to learn from my mistakes.

Great thread, I hope it keeps going. This is really going to be helpful to those who do not do any knapping at all.

[henry english]

i have to agree on the archaic flaking , i'll go a step further and say early , very early , bordering on late paleo to archaic , possibly transitional jmho . , awesome piece and flaking , congrats on it .

henry

[henry english]

manoman , it is my assumption that it is all relevant to what you believe , because they left us no written records , it returns to problematical suppositions and common sense on what an artifact was used for , the minds eye so to speak ,

henry

[manoman]

Originally Posted by henry english

manoman , it is my assumption that it is all relevant to what you believe , because they left us no written records , it returns to problematical suppositions and common sense on what an artifact was used for , the minds eye so to speak ,

henry

I agree, and nicely worded.

I re-read my post, and of course hind sight is 20/40 or something like that....I said pressure punch when I should have said a pressure flaking tool for finer control over exhertion of pressure to detach small flakes.

I think that reduction stratigies might be quite differant for out here in the West versus other parts of the country. I am saying that with just my observations of artifacts I have studied and how they were flaked. Paleo flaking, to me anyway, out West is really easy to determine. It is the later periods that give me problems. I don't think we have woodland styles, but I am sure there are correlations that would match up. I just don't know what they are. I have found post-contact Rose Spring points with the same great oblique parallel flaking that is found on archaic Humboldt and Pintos.

[tashunka]

Sure wish this thread was of interest to more knowledgeable point collectors. Novices like me could learn a great deal. Manoman, your comments will make me look differently at what few points I have, thanks.

Tashunka

[scancode]

The two in the center were found together. They were obviously made by the same individual. The right was worked first on the tangs. It has pressure scars, and the front still has the crust. The left is almost finished except for minor crust on the tip. I have a castroville done in the same way. You can see were stone and antler were applied.

[manoman]

That is fascinating. You captured a moment in time when someone was working on multiple points at various stages of completion. I wonder if this was common among knappers? It would be more efficent to work on sets of points, if time allowed, then to just work on one from start to finish. That is only my opinion....being a fly tyer in the past, I would lay out all my materials: hooks, dubbing, hackles, peacock hurl, quills, whatever, as it made for faster production. Does it seem logical for the ancients to have done the same?

[Mojave]

The OP's point is bizarrely thin and very rare. If it is truly only 1/8 inch thick it is about the thinnest artifact for its size I have ever seen.

[Mojave]

This is a great question that keeps coming up. I hesitate replying because folks tend to believe what they want to believe, mostly based on what they read or are told by other “experts.” I’ll humbly apologize ahead of time for offending anybody. I know several people here disagree with me so I guess we can agree to disagree because one person’s opinions are just welcome as another’s. My opinions are based partly on my own personal observations and partly on a wealth of knowledge I have been given over the last year or so by a friend who has been studying this professionally for many years. Sorry to write this book here but there are more examples that I can keep track of.

IMO, I believe there is a tremendous amount of misunderstanding on the various technologies and methods of flaking and more importantly, conclusions and assumptions based on the bad information. It reminds me of something that happened at the Bowie show last year. I walked up to a table that had many frames of impressive artifacts. The older gentleman there was explaining Andice manufacturing techniques to a couple people, presumably collectors. I don’t remember the guy’s name, perhaps Indy would – he was there. Anyway, the story was that Andice points were thinned AFTER they were notched. This was offered as an explanation as to why so few intact Andices are found. The theory is that they were all broken in the thinning process. I didn’t want to start an argument with a stranger at the time but I found it unfortunate that a couple people seeking insight walked away with an understanding of a concept that was a) based on one individual’s conjecture with zero physical evidence, and B) completely wrong. There are many real examples of thinned but un-notched Andice points, one of which I found last spring. (Message - Arrowheads and Indian Artifacts Gallery)

One of the biggest problems I have (again, I consider this a personal problem) is the notion that certain flaking styles are associated with specific time periods. I will try to illustrate this with real artifacts. It makes me cringe every time I see or hear the term “paleo flaking” or “archaic flaking.” Those terms are used ad naseum in MANY books and do a huge disservice to those who want to understand. It is as if at any moment in time, all points were necessarily made the same way from the Arctic to Argentina and from Nova Scotia to Nevada. There were hundreds of cultures over vast areas and periods of time that used myriad methods for point manufacture. There were some coincidences and some differences. The fact is that specific techniques for point manufacture were used for specific point styles that were all culturally associated. They were NOT individually time period specific.
First, consider what is generally referred to as parallel oblique or collateral flaking styles. All these terms confuse me to be honest. Most folks however, in many parts of the country consider that to be a specific paleo style. Here are a few points that belong to one of many confusing sub-styles of the Humboldt series of the far-west. They are middle archaic (very un-paleo) points. The fact that the technique used is similar to SOME paleo styles is a coincidence. It is simply not a function of time period.