Main Discussion Area > Flintknapping

Zuma, I got a massive overshot video for you.

<< < (2/7) > >>

AncientTech:
Zuma,

"My only contention is like what you said. Separate the Clovis aspect from this technique."

Flintknappers make "Clovis" points.  And, I am showing a "Clovis" flaking process.  I am using their lingo.  But, I am using practices that were believed to have been used.

"And an also comical attempt to link Clovis with Solutrean cultures."

I agree.  I do not think that their technologies can be linked via "billet flaking theory".  If you switch to a different technology like "pressure aided by blow over fulcrum", then all of the effects seen in Clovis are very very easy to create, as I show in the video.  Not so with billet knapping.  When a modern knapper cites how great he is with his antler baton, I say, "Exactly.  You have become that great through years of practice."  But, if you go to a historically known technology like the one shown in the video, then Clovis knapping becomes easy.  But, since flintknappers were super presumptuous, and highly jaded by their own experiences, they thought that there was nothing of value in historical knapping records.

"Also does the five min time frame show any previous work on the blade prior to the removal of the overshot spall? In other words If I were wanting to show a fantastic overshot square edge removal with my moose antler billet. Couldn't I just film all my reduction until that one spall happens? Like they eventually always do."

In bifacial flaking the Clovis overshot is best in late stages.  But, I picked up a preform, and did the same thing randomly to show it on video.

"Would you agree that most authentic Clovis points are in the 3" range and required no such technology?"

It is not "a technology".  If you scale down from heavy hammer and heavy tine to heavy tine and small tine flaker, you can create very fine, organized finishing, on a very small scale, with initiations that could be as small as pressure flaking initiations.  It is a multi-faceted technology with many diverse applications.  It may work in blade core reduction as well.

"That is not to say antler tine techniques were not employed by Clovis knappers but I see them best used
after hammer stone and or billet reduction."

If you are referring to antler tine use in pressure flaking, then this is similar, only the flake could expand much larger than a normal pressure flake.

"Here is an early spear point made from our really tough local quartzite, I doubt the notches could have been
installed with out the use of a punch."

There were two basic forms of indirect percussion recorded by early American observers - pressure aided by blow, and the punch technique.  One is a flaking style operation assisted by lateral blow.  The other is a blade core technique with a rear driven blow.  Many varieties of both techniques can be used in various situations.

1442:
I didn't see anything in there that would make me think there was a clovis flaking process being used to create the one dang flake that was the entirety of the video.
If clovis people knapped like that they never would have finished anything.

Zuma,
You aint missing nothing I promise.
There is what looks to me like a flake thick on one edge tapering to nothing on the other. I caught a quick glimpse of the other side and could see what appeared to be very short flakes taken to get rid of the sharp edge along the thin edge. The thick edge was THICK with a steep angle all the way down it that you could hit anywhere and likely get an overshot just because of the angle. a flake had been taken across each end and left a nice ridge across the point about midways and had a low spot where the ridge met the thick edge of the point for a platform. The platform was lower than it needed to be to get a overshot anyways, but I swear! anybody could have hit that with almost anything and got an overshot flake that spread out and took off most of the edge off the far side like Ben did.
As usual, there was very little detail shown of anything but how the flake went all the way across and took off more of the far edge than anyone would really want to.
That's my quick review of it for you.

AncientTech:
Guess what.  This is the extreme end of the use of the process.  It is at one end of the spectrum.  This shows what can be done with control.  It is not monkey see monkey do.  It shows just one outcome that can be created using controls that are in the process. 

AncientTech:
It is not about the flake that was made.  It is about the process.  You guys have it backwards.  Technology precedes results.  And, this is just one of many types of results that can be created with control.  And, this is not "by hook or crook" knapping.  This was an authentically used process.  Kind of like the difference between real money, and made up Monopoly money.

aaron:
Zuma- I don't think Cushing linked this technology to clovis culture- his work was published in 1895, and the clovis culture was named by archaeologists in 1929. Cushing worked with the Zuni- so I think that we could say that this technology was used to make the type of points the zuni were making in 1895 or earlier. It seems like a stretch to me to say this (or any technique) was definitely used by clovis people. I'd say it's one of many techniques that COULD have been used. Ben seems to be stating that because overshot is easy with this technique, that it must be how clovis overshots were made. I'd say that what makes overshots easy is a combination of the geometry of the preform and the ability to hold the piece very steady while applying the blow. Cushings technique is an excellent way to achieve this steady hold on smaller and tougher bifaces.  For me, this is accomplished with the common precussion technique prevalent with most modern knappers. Note also that Woody Blackwell produced his expert-fooling clovis replicas with the more common flaking technique.many Other well known knappers have produced authentic-looking clovis using the commom technique.
So what I am saying is that either technique could have been used, or both, or a technique not yet discovered.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page