Retouched Blade-like Flake

[uniface]

Not technically a blade, because removals were from various directions. One of many treasures (to me, at least) picked out of Tom Davis' junk box. Hard to believe people didn't appreciate artifacts like this back then. Hard for me to believe that not a few people still don't.





Clovis proper, as Doc G pointed out, used the blades they made the way they came off the core -- without subsequent modification. (He used this as a point distinguishing Clovis from European Achuleans, who used theirs as tool stock).

Whoever made this and many similar ones though, and apparently not that long after Clovis proper stepped off the stage, clearly didn't get the memo on that.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[uniface]

For the sake of comparison, a (true) blade (similarly retouched), of Delaware chert (Seneca Co., Ohio). Unusual in that pre-Early Archaic people's seem to have ignored it as tool material, although it was clearly good-enough stuff.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

For the sake of comparison, a (true) blade (similarly retouched), of Delaware chert (Seneca Co., Ohio). Unusual in that pre-Early Archaic people's seem to have ignored it as tool material, although it was clearly good-enough stuff.

View attachment 1906738

Care to spell out difference to a layman?
I see nearly identical looking specimens.

Blade VS true blade?

Just looking to learn.

 

[uniface]

Care to spell out difference to a layman?
I see nearly identical looking specimens.

Blade VS true blade?

Just looking to learn.

I did. On the first one, flakes were removed from both sides as well as along the axis. In the second one, all removals are along the axis, a though one of them rippled.

Going back & checking, the pictures don't show this clearly enough. Sorry.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

No need to apologize. I was just wanting it dumbed down for me.

I think that it is difficult for experienced eyes to remember how much all the very small details add up that they learned over the years.
In other words someone that is not educated only sees two green stone tools that were sharpened along the “left and right sides” for lack of better known terms.

I’ll pick up a little here and there and eventually get it.

 

[eyemustdigtreasure]

Please post a pic of the Ventral-side of the blade - is it Unifacial...??

 

[uniface]

Teso: the flake ripples show removal from the side (highlighted)



Eye: Of course. All blades/flakes (unless they're modified after creation) are unifaces.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

Are you saying these scars are what makes the distinction between what you posted and a true blade that has only been retouched? I apologize if this is elementary to most.

That the crown along the apex has been removed (thinning the piece)?
In contrast to a blade that only bears scars from previous blades that were removed from the core?

 

[uniface]

The edge retouching is irrelevant. In the very first picture, there's one flake removed from each side, where my index finger is. Those east-west removals distinguish it from the second one, where all three principal flakes are struck north-south (= blade).

 

[uniface]

Another example of a blade : both principal faces struck along the axis, then the blow that removed it from the core struck from the same spot. The subsequent touch-up up re-edging doesn't affect this.

Uncannily like another one identified in "Across Atlantic Ice" (book you'd like if you like this stuff) as a Solutrean Plane Face Point. For a long time I hoped it was one but probably just a coincidence.

Fort Payne chert, found by Cecil Hewett in Lincoln Co., Ky. ex John Duncan. No idea what the speckles on it might be, although I've seen them before on this material.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

Ok I think I’m getting what your saying.

The true blade being a product of simply being a calculated removal from the core...two blows to form the edges and the final strike to flake it off. Resulting in a unifacial core tool.

Thanks for the primer.

That last example looks useful for making things bleed (the owners hands). Likely a classic example of a pure blade? Assuming it was wrapped loosely in leather and held in the hand rather than hafted?

 

[uniface]

Yes. Prismatic blades have two faces ; trapezoidal blades have four. Both are still blades.

Trapezoidal blade: number four in the Large Retouched Blade thread.

 

[uniface]

Here's a clearer bladelike flake example. Like a blade in that it's twice as long as wide, but flake scars from multiple directions.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

I watched some video of a guy whacking off blades from an obsidian core. Obviously more uniform and predictable material. But what I was going to say is they cleaned up the core by striking it 90 deg to the platform. Basically flaked off irregular humps and bumps to keep a nice form going on the core.

I was just wondering if some additional flaking could have been done while it was still a core (prior to splitting the blade or flake off (probably misusing terms).

 

[uniface]

I watched some video of a guy whacking off blades from an obsidian core. Obviously more uniform and predictable material. But what I was going to say is they cleaned up the core by striking it 90 deg to the platform. Basically flaked off irregular humps and bumps to keep a nice form going on the core.

I was just wondering if some additional flaking could have been done while it was still a core (prior to splitting the blade or flake off (probably misusing terms).

In this country these are called core recovery flakes, and were struck from the opposite edge along the same axis, as a rule. These can be hard to distinguish from blades struck from bipolar cores. Both will show removals from each end meeting somewhere along its length.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

Interesting