a corner tang and a dog leg tang?

[bravowhiskey]

Have posted one corner tang biface before, this one (bottom) is not near as pretty.
The piece above is what I believe is a "dog leg tang" Only one like it that I have.
Sorry, nothing for size comp. both aprox. 3" and 4" respectively.

HH,
BW

 

[Tnmountains]

That is just the wildest form I have ever seen. You Texas guys have it all. Very nice pieces. Were they for skinning as well? Nice Bravo Whiskey.

TnMtns

 

[creek astronaut]

very nice bravo,sum sweet stuff you have been posting

 

[bravowhiskey]

Hey, Tn and Greg-rocks...thanks for the kind words.

Ya know, I've skinned/cleaned my share of deer, hogs, and other large animals, and I can say, when inside the chest cavity, it sure would be easier to work with a rounded blade than a straight one.
The corned tang is speculated to have been tied off to a strap and then to the wrist to keep handy for cleaning.
The dog leg tang/stem is much hardier and seems to me made to be hafted. I'ld really like to see how it was used. Some experimentation is probably in order.
Maybe Neanderthal has some museum examples. Pleased to have you join in Sir.

Ya'll have a good one,
BW

 

[allen]

sweet finds !

 

[uniface]

That top one is drop-dead beautiful material and workmanship, BW !

I'd at least consider the possibility that it wasn't so much "made that way" by design as ended up that way through recycling.

The outline of the base at the bottom of your picture is completely consistent with there having been an equal-and-opposite basal lobe, corresponding to the intact one @ the top of your picture.

The concavity ahead of the surviving lobe is clearly not the workmanship of whoever made the point. Somebody did that in a hurry -- and possibly later.

(edit) Third look : definitely was done later. The re-work took part of the face of the surviving lobe off along with the edge ahead of it. The difference in patina is clear.

Nice one !!!

 

[Bluesy]

Bravo, beautiful pieces, especially the top one!

 

[Tnmountains]

Bravo , Greg and thirty7 know this. I think when cleaning an animal you had a knife to get in and work the inside (removal of organs they ate everything except intestines and then they were used for storage. Main thing was to get the stomach out as it swells quick. A hide peels off pretty easy once you start it. A knife to get thru the meat to the joints and a chopper to split the joints and maybe the pelvic area to finsh removing small and large intestine and urine bladder as the stomach is still attached by the intestines.
What do you think Bravo?
TnMtns

 

[bravowhiskey]

Thought this one had gone to the end of the line.

Uniface...I would have to agree with your assessment ...you should really work for some forensic science tv show. You are uncanny in your read of the flint. I never saw what you pointed out, but now it seems pretty obvious.
Thank you for your insight.

TN...unsure of your question. If you mean a knife was used in addition to a chopper there can be little doubt. The knife, by itself, wouldn't be enough to split a pelvic bone. One knife would suffice for the skinning and internal work. i. e. to separate the organs from connective tissue without damaging them. Removal of tenderloin etc.

I say after you get that deer with the flint head, you further your research by using like items for the processing of same. If you would like to try, I'll send plenty of flint to 37 to work something for you.

Greg-O, Bluesy, Smurfett, Allen...appreciate you guys and your comments.

 

[naturegirl]

Hi Bravo, I'm glad this one came up again, I missed it first time around.

I've been studying what uniface said, and I'm pretty sure I can see it and understand it, thanks to both of you.

Tn- you have more than hunters tuned in to your experiment!

ng

 

[uniface]

Hi BW

Just glad to be of help

There's a proverb in the field of art history :

Everybody looks.
But you've got to learn to see.

That's it in a nutshell.