Main Discussion Area > Primitive Skills

Bannerstone Discussion

<< < (14/15) > >>

JackCrafty:
I'm not sure anyone could answer you, Steve.  To show you "proof" would require a time machine.  And even then, when you come back, you would not have any "proof" to show the rest of us.   :-\

Honestly, I thought you wanted proof of the statements being made, not proof of the actual use.  The actual use of any artifact is difficult to prove, even when we have eye-witness accounts from explorers and settlers from back in the day.

caveman2533:
Don stated there was "documented proof" of use a ceremonial objects, I guess to me that means there is something written down by the original users.  Drawings or written manuscript would be "documented proof", or actual intact artifacts. Anything written about what we think it was is not documented proof, just documented theory. We may never know for sure.

JackCrafty:
OK, gotcha.

Zuma:
Good to see the desire for knowledge alive and well. The time and effort Patrick and others have put into
 this subject is staggering.
Steve, if you are refering to me about documented proof, I only wrote (Documented) (in original papers).
 I don't know if you read all the links on these bannerstone threads.
Some are really worth reading.
I am a stickler and always try to read between the lines. I wrote technical manuals for the military and
areo space support companies. Things have changed these days. Archaeology has become a free for all and no longer a discipline. If Webb did his job he would have just reported what he found and where.
The job of what the objects were should have been left in the lap of anthropologists. ( known speculators)
I think I'll do a little rant. lol  >:D
How the heck do all these archaeologists ever expect to be taken serious
about Pre Clovis hype if there is not as yet solid information on such more recent artifacts
as georgets and bannerstones. Perhaps the old school has clues in reports that are  buried or only for sale.
 I have reached saturation in the research dept.
Not saying I won't try a different avenue now and then.
 Bannerstones are really not that rare in the areas where I hunted artifacts back in NJ
 and PA. But they would be very rare compared to atatls that must have been in use.
That is if every archaic atatl  hunter was equipped with one.
The one major thing that keeps me in the drilling aide mode is----
I don't think the average Joe (hunter) back then could drill a stone.
The task must have been cutting edge. More difficult than striking flutes in finished Clovis points.
Sure most banners are made of relatively soft stone but some are quartz and granite.
There was much attention given to aesthetic value also. (competitiveness)
Perhaps because of a competitive nature between the drill masters?
No matter how these objects were employed they originated in the hands of the Drill Master.
A guy/gal in that day and age that may have been buried with a bannerstone or other drilled object.
Sure just my speculation, no different than the rest of the field.
Zuma

Zuma:
This is a good link. No dates unfortunatley. The Jackson Island workshop link
 is posted in the early pages of this thread.
Zuma
     
Get PDF (1511K) - Wiley Online Library

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page