Missing class of tool.

[tomf]

Wanted to have a discussion/make enquiries about the tools that make the tools. Specifically, the tools employed in pecking hard stone. Seems to me we have very little defined in that drawer of the kit. I'm sure there has been study on the subject, but I haven't stumbled on it. Paleo enthusiasts recreate the process, but I'm not sure how far that's based on research versus trial and error.
Just seems like the tools for this ubiquitous job are unrepresented in the assemblages - at least in what I know about California.
Too explain it by the generalization that a harder material was required, side-steps so much. Some hard stones are not very hard at all but others are extremely tough. Seems like a flanged pestle or 'man-killer' would require different technology than a simple boulder mortar. Were hard-stone picks hafted or hand-held? Were they specifically shaped? Why don't we pick them up?

Throwing it out to the panel....















What's the story?

[Cecilia]

Yes, thank you, TomF. Those objects ones sparked my initial interest in joining this site. In old CA article you referenced recently, writer speaks of watching ancient knapper’s use of an “agate chisel”. Are those the types of tools you're thinking of now?... if so, yay! am eager to read replies; think such picked up by knowledgeable members, but not thot of as near as glamorous, collectible, as forum’s namesake tool!

[tomf]

I was intrigued by that description of an agate chisel too. But agate would fracture too easily to be much use on hardstone. Could agate be used to pressure flake certain types of rock? I don't know.
The first rocks pictured on this post are examples of the kind of rock that might have been used. They are heavy and strong enough. They show some conchoidal properties too. Too hard to shape easily, this kind of material could have been used to chip into boulder and sedimentary stone easily, but it's also the type of stone that might have been used for a pestle or club, so is there a tougher stone that could work this type? And if work was as finely rendered as it often is, could a simple crude and relatively unshaped rock do the job?

[Ron Kelley]

Hey Tom, Dense quartzite makes a good pecking tool. Different sizes could be used for different jobs. I think what you're showing are a couple of cores and a beautiful pestle.

[tomf]

I put the pestle up as an example of a harder type of stone that was frequently worked. Boulder divot and other examples of pecking.
The pieces that might be cores, could also be the type of tool used for pecking jobs, imho. Material too tough for easy knapping ....

[Ron Kelley]

Hey Tom, That does look like some tough material. Looking at the flake scars on the cores It looks like they took some good sized percussion flakes or spalls off. It would be interesting to know what they used to take those spalls off.

[antmike915]

Great topic tom, looking forward to the responses.

[Ron Kelley]

Hey Tom, I hope "Kentucky Point" sees this. He has used pecking to make many hardstone tools. You might want to PM him to join in.

[CMD]

One of the tools used for pecking is known as an end pick. In the Massachusetts Archaeological Society’s Handbook of New England artifacts, end picks are classified with “stone bowl industry tools”, and indeed they were used to shape soapstone or steatite items. But they were also used to peck and manufacture pecked and ground hardstone tools. They are a class of artifact here in New England.





Here is an end pick made of Attleboro Red Rhyolite. We often tell folks that “fits perfectly in the hand” is not a qualifier to determine if a rock is an artifact. That is true with many of the rocks then presented, but, in fact, casually made, hand held tools, that were going to be used to deliver a hard blow, were sometimes ergonomically designed, in order to lessen the blow delivered backward into the user’s hand. You really don’t want to experience pain/discomfort to your hand with every hard blow delivered. The fact is, a fact that I have simply noted from experience examining such casual tools, is that there are often aspects to a casual hand held tool that show it was designed to be held in comfort. Here is such a tool, an end pick, with a flake detached as a thumb rest, a broad flat platform upon which to rest the index finger, and the butt of the tool fits in the fold of the skin between the thumb and index finger:







A large end pick, made of New England Argillite:

[Cecilia]

An “end pick”! Yay! Am happy,....!

[Quartzite Keith]

We are in the fortunate position that by the time people got to the Americas they were already "fully modern" Homo sapiens. As such they had the same bodies and same brains we do. This makes it possible to experimentally figure out how things were done. If doing it one way works better now, it worked better then, and they would have been smart enough to figure it out.

My experience in recreating hardstone axes has been this: Any quartz rich type of stone will do for the hammerstone, but the key to efficiency is to use a hammerstone that is "lumpy" not smooth. The pecking is much faster if the hammerstone can dig into the stone being worked like a pick. As the hammerstone gets worn down from use, efficiency is lost and that stone needs to be knapped to create new pick-like protrusions, or replaced. That is, if someone wants to start on a basalt or granite axe head, he would be well advised to first collect a small pile of rough quartz rich hammers to use up in the process. Specialization of tools and hafting are not economical since the stone tool dulls quickly and must be frequently modified or replaced.

As the medium worked becomes softer and softer, specialized tools and hafting makes more and more sense sense. Making and hafting a pick like stone tool for working soapstone makes sense. Using that same tool on Catotin greenstone would destroy the pick head fast enough that the time and effort to make and haft the tool is not economically justified.

[tomf]

Keith, thank you for explaining it in detail. You've answered many of my questions right there. I hadn't considered the wear on the pecking side of the equation which would limit the use of any given hammer.
Seems like the most important part is the tip and the butt.
I see a lot of pock marks on metates that seem to indicate the size and shape of the rock that shaped them. But I have a question about some scars that resemble chisel marks (there are a couple visible in the pics I posted up top) and also the 'v' shaped notches that appear on net weights and 'nutting' stones. Anything different about the rocks that made them?
Also interested in whetstones and if there examples like CMD posted out there to look at?

[paohrocks]

Great post Tom, looking forward to the responses and theories.

[tomf]

One of the tools used for pecking is known as an end pick. In the Massachusetts Archaeological Society’s Handbook of New England artifacts, end picks are classified with “stone bowl industry tools”, and indeed they were used to shape soapstone or steatite items. But they were also used to peck and manufacture pecked and ground hardstone tools. They are a class of artifact here in New England.





Here is an end pick made of Attleboro Red Rhyolite. We often tell folks that “fits perfectly in the hand” is not a qualifier to determine if a rock is an artifact. That is true with many of the rocks then presented, but, in fact, casually made, hand held tools, that were going to be used to deliver a hard blow, were sometimes ergonomically designed, in order to lessen the blow delivered backward into the user’s hand. You really don’t want to experience pain/discomfort to your hand with every hard blow delivered. The fact is, a fact that I have simply noted from experience examining such casual tools, is that there are often aspects to a casual hand held tool that show it was designed to be held in comfort. Here is such a tool, an end pick, with a flake detached as a thumb rest, a broad flat platform upon which to rest the index finger, and the butt of the tool fits in the fold of the skin between the thumb and index finger:







A large end pick, made of New England Argillite:

Great info, CMD. Follows that these techniques were pretty universal. Really interesting to see some bona fide examples. Can't help noticing similarities with the rock I posted above. I have picked up a lot of heavy quartz chunks over time and will re-examine them for potential as tools.
In some ways it's surprizing that these picking tools didn't develop more distinct forms over time. I imagine a good pecking tool might have been used over and over and it's repeated use gives it status - especially when employed in the creation of objects that often, themselves, had status - ceremonial bowl or pestle, for instance.
Fact is, that's not the case. Otherwise we would have found and identified them as a desirable tool class.


Still, I think they are a valuable addition to a collection and I'll be trying to spot likely rocks from now on.

[SGT.Digger]

It’s one thing to peck but I’m wondering how they achieved the smoothness. The hard stone pitted hammer stones and nutting stones in East Tennessee Are made of sand stone. Usually are nice and smooth and it’s hard to tell where the sidewalk ends and the road begins so to speak . Meaning that the pit and the surface have a smooth transition. I’m sure just any old depression would do but wondering why so much time was spent on a fine finish. Especially for just a nutting tool , which are also interchangeable with a hammer stone. Here’s a pic of a nutting stone cache .

[tomf]

Wow, that's a cache. A few real nice ones in there.
I think the way 'nutting' stones get to be so graceful is through use. Checkout the divot in the pics I posted, you can see it's pecked but not really worn smooth. It probably would have been ground down further before use, but even if it hadn't, it would have worn smooth with wear. Over time they develop the deep cleavage that the mature ones can show. Some folks think the entire divot is developed through use-wear, but I think the boulder mortar above refutes that. The divot is enhanced by use.
I think they are really beautiful objects.

[south fork]

tomf here's a water polished cobble with the start of pecking on reverse side . On its way to become a small medicine bowl like this one .

[tomf]

That medicine bowl is terrific, isn't it? Cobble looks like very hard stone. Lot of work to make a dent in it. I think 'work-in-progress' artifacts are of special interest and that's a great one.

[south fork]

My old friend Jack found half and I said I have the other half he gave his half . From same site N, California foothills .

[Cecilia]

That is so cool. SF, about your friend Jack finding other half incredible bowl!

[Mugwomp13]

I have found quite a few stone tools but rarely the tool they made them with only one was in a blow out it was a bipitted stone and hammer stone sitting in the divot even where I found my unfinished axe there were no tools I am guessing they were destroyed during manufacturing

[SGT.Digger]

A neighbor of mine in Hawaii (Kaneala)made poi pounders with traditional methods and tools and taught techniques to others in a class. It took him over 7 months to make one if he worked on every day he told me. ( around the rim of Mauna Loa you can see where ancients harvested the fine grained basalt for their adzes and tools) He brought me paiai that he would pound the traditional way and I would fry it in butter 🧈 can’t beat it . Finding the tools for those stone objects your talking about would be tough since they took so long to make unless it was abandoned and insitu . Whatever hard stone tool they had took a long time to make

[SGT.Digger]

This is Hawaiian basalt tools and the picks you show could have been attached to handles like this to save some tendinitis

[Cecilia]

I have tool to show, but first must digress because of food. It’s Digger’s fault tho, coz I also lived Hawaii, and don’t care for poi (purple tasteless paste), but love paiai, which granted is just solidified poi, but tastes sooo different and delicious. It’s crusty, savory, mushroom-meaty textured.... ok, that’s enuf. (The poi pounder pestle called pohaku kuiai; it has corresponding metate, wooden plank called papa kuiai. )



OK, this is anvil/cupstone, I think. Not so much “missed class”, but absolutely vital for creating the kinda tools I’d make (I’m leaving the knapping to you all, and maybe we could just trade-out). Truely, this is tool that serves as cradle for infant whatever-tool. ( Sorry, guys, must be tired)

[Cecilia]

TomF, I found this 1992 French article in magazine, Paléorient, pretty much on your very topic. The author says: “[g]round stone artifacts are an underused source of information about technology, subsistence and social relationships...” and complains:

“1). Many typologies are based on a diverse mix of criteria, often loose categories of shape and size (2) ; most are descriptions of (often small) samples from one or two sites, usually without general definitions that can be applied to different assemblages (3); others focus only on a few artifact classes (4) ; nearly all ignore ground stone debitage. Thus, comparisons of assemblages have been difficult to make. By contrast, chipped stone studies employ relatively standard terms useful for such comparisons (5). A standard descriptive classification is a prerequisite for addressing the significance of ground stone assemblage variations.”

I think she wants an Overstreet’s for ground tools.... and she proposes uniform definitions, terminology, descriptions, and even specifies that:

“The term "ground stone" is a misnomer...Such tools may be made on flakes detached from cores; some exhibit retouch; others are analogous to "core tools,” and any tools made by combinations of flaking, pecking, pounding, grinding, drilling and incising,” adding this neat diagram:

Please look at this article, TomF, coz I think you’ll find it very relevant (even tho title references “Levant”):

https://www.persee.fr/doc/paleo_0153..._num_18_2_4573

An example of its relevance is reference and illustration of subject Rio’s recent cubed Quartz post (she calls it “cubical pounder”):

[tomf]

Terrific reference material ,Cecilia. Thank you so much for taking the time to run it down.

[Rio Del Norte]

Thx for info C...solves some other questions too... Rio