Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Cinmar Blade

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bill
    replied
    Two thumbs up for you CMD because nobody could have put things in better prespective than you just did.

    Leave a comment:


  • CMD
    replied
    As I mused earlier in this thread, the most developed debates on the subject of a Solutrean origins for Clovis, IMHO, have been/are on the PROS forum. And Bill had alot to do with enlivening and developing that debate. So thanks for that, Bill!
    Some excerpts from Across Atlantic Ice:
    "Heat treating first appeared during Solutrean times in Europe, and although it is not often recognized, it occurs in pre-Clovis and Clovis assemblages. Two heat-treated side scrapers and an end scraper were found at the Lower Meekins Neck Site, a Clovis site in Dorchester County, Maryland. Heat treating is also reported at the Anzick Site in Montana."(P. 169)
    "If pre-Clovis and Clovis tool forms descended from the Solutrean, why are shouldered points absent from the former? There are several possible answers. First, it is common for some artifact types to drop out of a cultural inventory, especially but not necessarily if functional requirements change. Second, not all Solutrean assemblages include shouldered points. If the particular Solutrean people who eventually found their way to North America came from a group or groups that didn't use shouldered points--perhaps, based on radiocarbon dates from the Chesapeake Bay sites, because they left Europe before the advent of this technology--one wouldn't expect these artifacts in North American assemblages"(p.181)
    "Stemmed and corner-notched projectile points have been found in Mediterranean and Portuguese Solutrean sites. These weapon tips, thought by some researchers to be arrowheads, are not present in northern Spain or southwestern France, so there is no reason to expect Vasco-Cantabrian descendents in North America to have used them."(p. 181)
    In fairness to Stanford, he's been searching for the origins of Clovis for some 30 years or so, for the most part on either side of the Bering Strait. This earlier work alone is a major contribution to Clovis origin studies, IMO. If he's wrong, (and what do I know), maybe he's earned the right to be wrong :laugh:

    Leave a comment:


  • gregszybala
    replied
    Thank you for that Roger, you have managed to expand the conversation way past a blade that may have been found of the East coast.

    Leave a comment:


  • Butch Wilson
    replied
    :huh: Whut ????

    Leave a comment:


  • pkfrey
    replied
    Re-writing my last post. Be back shortly.

    Leave a comment:


  • painshill
    replied
    [I'm amazed you persevered as long as you did, Greg!]  :laugh:
    The main problem with Standford’s book is that it’s being merchandised in the wrong section of the bookstore. It should be on the “fiction” shelf in my opinion. I nevertheless wish him well and hope it brings him a nice retirement income.
    One bunch of things I would like an explanation for (among soooooo many others) is this:
    The Solutreans were not a “people” as such. The term refers to an industry. It means a particular tool set, made from particular materials in a particular way. We attribute it to groups of people living in particular European geographic areas and – to some extent – their tool set relates to adaptation to their habitat and preferred lifestyle.
    Large spear points and blades with a resemblance to the Clovis’ industry is just one aspect of that. Incidentally, some of the larger laurel points are so flamin’ thin that they look more to be “showpieces” or ritual items rather than having any practical value as weapons, or any functional superiority as tools. These extremely thin points also exhibit evidence of mastery of controlled heat treatment of the raw material. Any evidence of that in Clovis technology?
    But I stress again that these kinds of tools are just one aspect. The Solutrean industry is also characterised by large lop-sided “single-shouldered” points; small elaborate points with barbs and tangs; bizarre asymmetrical tools; double-edged scrapers and other characteristic tool designs.
    If we look wider than lithics, the industry is also characterised by the first known use of the bone needle with an eye (and a presumption of “fitted clothing” adapted for the cold); the first identifiable (exquisitely carved) bone fish-hooks; characteristic bead bracelets, necklaces, pendants and pins. As well as evidence of body ornamentation, we have exquisite cave art drawings and examples of decorated caves used exclusively as shrines that never saw any habitation. Clovis or pre-Clovis cave art is non-existent, I believe.
    Most tellingly of all we have strong evidence for first adoption of the bow and arrow in Europe… often incorrectly referenced as a “Solutrean invention” (the bow came to Europe via the earlier Aterian industry of Africa). Where are the signs in America of these other innovative aspects of the Solutrean industry which, in some cases (like the bow and arrow for example) are far more revolutionary than a thin bifacial fluted point?
    That's a rhetorical question... ie I'm not expecting a satisfactory answer to be forthcoming! Maybe the bow-makers, the tailors and the artists all fell out of the boat during the long journey and drowned. :laugh:

    Leave a comment:


  • gregszybala
    replied
    Good luck PK !

    Leave a comment:


  • Bill
    replied
    Pkfrey, now I see what is causing the confusion. You are using the word Paleo-Indian to mean Clovis. Paleo does not necessarily mean Clovis.
    Paleo-American (or Paleoindian) should refer to either people who were here before Clovis or Pre-Clovis. People who were here during Clovis and were not Clovis related. People who were here after Clovis ended or Post Clovis (late Paleoindian).
    PreClovis people definitely were here and both percussion and pressure flaked their projectiles. The same thing can be said for the PreClovis folks were here when the Clovis people arrived. Some of these people may even have become Clovis wannabes and tried fluting their points but could not use the Outré Passé reduction method because they didn’t know how.
    The Post Clovis period was a mixed bag of surviving Clovis refugees and Clovis wannabes. Most Late PaleoAmerican cultures were a mix of Eden, Dalton, Meserve, Midland, Scottsbluff, St. Mary’s Hall, San Patrice, Golondrina, etc.
    These knappers percussion and pressure flaked their projectiles. They were master pressure flakers but none of their points featured outré passé biface reduction during the preform stages. The outré passé technique ended with the Classic Clovis people and was not seen again.

    Leave a comment:


  • pkfrey
    replied
    Bill, Actually, the black point I pictured is ( and your right on this one ) pressure flaked. That's because it's a finished point. The jasper blade is not pressure flaked. It's in the preform/cache stage, and PERCUSSION flaked in this stage. It needs to have furthur reduction, and then it will be ready to be finished, by pressure flaking. At this stage it exhibits not only outre passe, but Paleo style collateral/parallel flaking formed by percussion. Experienced flint knappers can pressure flake a point, which will exhibit the finest transverse flaking ever seen on a point.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bill
    replied
    CMD, I am happy to answer your question for them without waiting for their answer. Outré Passé biface thinning is limited to both Solutrean and Clovis.
    When you think Clovis, think Outré Passé!

    Leave a comment:


  • Bill
    replied
    Gregszybala, you have mistaken pressure flaking for something it isn’t. The Outré Passé bifacial thinning method disappeared with the Clovis/Solutrean people! Pressure flaking has been around longer both earlier and later.
    The Outré Passé bifacial thinning method has never intentionally been used prehistorically by any pre or post Clovis time period knappers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bill
    replied
    pkfrey, I beg to differ because none of your pictured points feature evidence of the outré Passé method. Your points were all produced by pressure flaking instead.
    On all relatively narrow bifaces, pressure flaking usually features flake removals that extend all of the way across the blade. On the other hand the unusually broad bifaces the Solutrean and Clovis knappers made could only have been thinned by the outré passé method of bifacal thinning. This process produced a biface that was flat in cross section regardless of its width. 
    Pressure flaking could never have accomplished that result.

    Leave a comment:


  • CMD
    replied
    Well, this has become an interesting thread. Thanks, guys! Bill, the Solutrean hypothesis won't be extraordinary if it's proven. I just think Stanford and Bradley have a long way to go, and I'm sure they realize that as well as anyone. I would like to ask them why they limit outre-passe flaking to Solutrean and Clovis if that's not really the case, since the limits they claim is central to their hypothesis.
    pkfrey, there are some really early dates coming out of SA sites. Not that they're accepted that easily or without debate, they are not, but initial entry to the Americas somewhere on the Pacific side of the hemisphere may be a fact, regardless of the origins of Clovis.

    Leave a comment:


  • gregszybala
    replied
    pkfrey wrote:

    Here are two examples of exact Paleo style flaking, including outre-passe flaking on the jasper blade. The black chert point is a northeren Piedmont, ca. 4000 B.C.; the jasper blade is one of the 160 piece Gresko cache. Notice the outre-passe/collateral/diagonal flake scars? The jasper blade is an Early Eoodland Fox Creek preform. With the thinness and parallel flaking, it fits right in with the Clovis bifaces. If this jasper blade would have been found any where near a Clovis site, it would have mistakenly been called a Clovis biface. So no, Paleo and Soultrean stlye flaking are not confined to those two cultures. It continued with several cultures to reduce the cache bifaces.
      I am with PK on this, posted a blade I found Saturday in what did I find, my guess Adena and may be wrong, but tell me you can't see outre-passe flaking in that blade.

    Leave a comment:


  • pkfrey
    replied
    Here are two examples of exact Paleo style flaking, including outre-passe flaking on the jasper blade. The black chert point is a northeren Piedmont, ca. 4000 B.C.; the jasper blade is one of the 160 piece Gresko cache. Notice the outre-passe/collateral/diagonal flake scars? The jasper blade is an Early Eoodland Fox Creek preform. With the thinness and parallel flaking, it fits right in with the Clovis bifaces. If this jasper blade would have been found any where near a Clovis site, it would have mistakenly been called a Clovis biface. So no, Paleo and Soultrean stlye flaking are not confined to those two cultures. It continued with several cultures to reduce the cache bifaces.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	image_17456.jpg
Views:	190
Size:	82.7 KB
ID:	440932
    Last edited by painshill; 04-13-2020, 05:58 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X