Video: Using simple antler flaker to make arrowhead

[BenjaminE]

Post showed how one type of flaker could have been used

Post showed how one type of flaker commonly seen in collections could have been used. But, I have deleted the post.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[ToddsPoint]

Why are you posting flintknapping stuff? This is a treasure hunting forum, not a knapping forum. We hunt arrowheads here. What does knapping have to do with treasure hunting? NOTHING! Post some of the arrowheads you have found. If you don't hunt arrowheads, why are you here? I know there are flintknapping forums, why don't you go there with your antler drift "theory"? Maybe too much push back from real knowledgeable knappers? Maybe you're trolling us. Gary

 

[BenjaminE]

Why are you posting flintknapping stuff? This is a treasure hunting forum, not a knapping forum. We hunt arrowheads here. What does knapping have to do with treasure hunting? NOTHING! Post some of the arrowheads you have found. If you don't hunt arrowheads, why are you here? I know there are flintknapping forums, why don't you go there with your antler drift "theory"? Maybe too much push back from real knowledgeable knappers? Maybe you're trolling us. Gary

This sub-forum is about "North American Indians artifacts", not specifically about "treasure".

Also, I was right about what I wrote in 2010, when I wrote that "it appears that Native Americans were using some sort of indirect percussion that has not been understood." I was right. And, W.H. Holmes the director of the US National Museum wrote practically the same thing in 1919. And, he was right, too.

So, it is wrong to not look at the evidence that has been compiled by over one hundred years worth of research. In fact, on this forum some of the collectors have some of the best examples of such evidence, in their own collections.

By the way, the antler baton theory was devised by a professor in England, around 1930. And, even into the 1960's American archaeologists wrote that they did not see evidence to support the antler baton THEORY.

Anyway, this sub-forum is about North American Indian artifacts. And, most people do not know how some of those artifacts were used. So, if there is a rule that says that a person cannot discuss, or explore, how an artifact could have been used, or was known to have been used, please let me know. It sounds like by suggesting that people should not discuss something artifact related that you do not agree with that you are somehow suggesting "censorship". At this point, it does not matter though, because I was right. And, at the end of the day, when I am communicating with archaeologists, it is always to my advantage to be able to point to these types of instances.

By the way, almost everything I was told by these "flintknappers" you cite, since 2010, was wrong. And, this is why I put together an entire website listing hundreds of quotes from archaeological research, simply to show that such people are "uninformed" regarding the facts. Have you seen my site: www.antlerdrift.blogspot

Did you know that in some sites, cylinderical drift punches outnumber pressure flakers one hundred to one? Did you know that?

Did you know that by the 1940's American archaeologists documented the entire reduction cycle of deer antler, in late Woodland sites? And, they could show how entire racks were being reduced into tools, including cylindrical antler punches, and handles for tools? Did you know that?

Did you know that in the 1920's the first archaeologist looked at an antler flintknapping punch under a microscope, and saw signs of "longitudinal cellular compaction" and concluded that the tool had been struck from the ends? Did you know that?

Did you know that other archaeologists found silicates embedded in the ends of such flintknapping punches? Did you know that?

Did you know that cylindrical antler punches were used CONTINUOUSLY at least from the advent of the archaic era, through the period of historic contact? Did you know that?

Did you know that, in the 1980's, protohistoric King Site burials of flintknappers was undertaken in order to study "billets". Only, they never actually found any billets. Yet, they did find small cylindrical antler punches. Did you know that?

Did you know that by the 1960', more knowledgeable archaeologists figured out that a flintknapper's burial, in the midwest, was typically identified by the presence of a single antler flintknapping punch? Did you know that?

I could tell you an awful lot more, if it is worth it. But, do you know what these people you cite taught me, since 2010, about the facts? Pretty much nothing. In fact, this goes back to the 1970's and before, as exemplified by the following quote:

1979 - “Then there comes the subject of “antler drift.” What is an antler drift? I have been knapping for 23 years now, and though I have seen dozens of antler drifts illustrated in archaeological reports, and have made up some myself, I have to this day to find anything that I would use them for. Would the archaeologist who so cleverly informed us as to their use please stand up and verify? Or is it the term rather than the tool which is archaic?”…”Yet, the site reports come pouring forth with poorly drawn projectile points illustrated upside down , with bifaces being called “blades,” having been flaked with “antler drifts” in holding positions that would only produce gravel, broken tools, or a lot of blood on the hands of the maker.
Yet, isn’t it a little bit our fault that we have let writers get away with this recycling of old myths? How many of us write in and complain to the publisher about the antiquated information relating to flintknapping found in their books? Sure, it is the duty of the writer to research this, to go to the knappers, and get their OK or advice on this or that aspect.” (Flintknappers Exchange, 1979)

So, let me inform you that I can demonstrate that these people were wrong, and instead of scoffing at all the evidence that had been collected, these people should have studied it. Anyway, this sub-forum is about "artifacts" not "treasure". So, if there is a rule that says that one cannot discuss, or explore, how an artifact could have been used, then it will be another reminder of a point that I have been making to archaeologists for years.

TO THE MODERATOR: If this post gets flagged, I would like to point out that between 2005 and 2010, I never had any trouble posting, anywhere, for five years. During that time, I confess that I was extremely ignorant of the facts, like most of the people I communicated with.

Afterwards, in 2010, I scoured hundreds of archaeological reports looking for signs of flintknapping technologies, that had been used by prehistoric people in the Americas. Much to my surprise, I discovered an artifact type that I had never heard spoken of on any forum, anywhere. The artifact looks like a small peg of antler about two inches long and a quarter of an inch thick, and straight. Also, I discovered that earlier archaeologists borrowed language from machine shop work, and called it a "drift", which is a type of punch used to dislodge bits of metal, and such, in a machine shop. So, finally, after months of research, I wrote publicly that it appeared that "Native Americans had used some sort of indirect percussion that has never been identified." This single statement led to a major backlash that was instant. I was told that there is "no evidence", the idea is a "pipe dream", I have to "prove it", and I am "digging my own grave". And, since I would not back down with regard to well documented evidence, the same people who used to practically love me, decided to try to have me removed from all of the forums where I was once welcome. Fortunately, I never let these people coerce me. And, now I can show that the archaeologists were right, and the flintknappers were wrong. And, I can show why the flintknappers were wrong. Anyway, what usually happens is that people have found that if they complain to moderators privately they can eventually get my posts pulled. So, if you start getting all sorts of private negative feedback, it is a tactic that will be used with the hope that they can simply get me pulled from the forum, via unhappy complaints. And, actually, it is not like I really need any of these people. But, in doing this, the real harm that is done is done to prevent people from learning about evidence. This is where the real harm happens.

TO TODD:

Here is a flintknapping punch, that was scanned with an electronic scanning microscope. If you do not believe that such a tool was used in flintknapping, then why was a silicate sherd found in the end? And, how come so many people much like yourself do not want such evidence seen? There are already people who have decided that this should not be shown publicly, in other places. Why?

 

[Kantuckkeean]

Why are you posting flintknapping stuff? This is a treasure hunting forum, not a knapping forum. We hunt arrowheads here. What does knapping have to do with treasure hunting? NOTHING! Post some of the arrowheads you have found. If you don't hunt arrowheads, why are you here? I know there are flintknapping forums, why don't you go there with your antler drift "theory"? Maybe too much push back from real knowledgeable knappers? Maybe you're trolling us. Gary

On 5/17/18 you said: "Of course your post is about flintknapping. What's wrong with that? There is no possible way you can understand the intricacies of stone tools without understanding flintknapping. Flintknappers have unlocked more secrets of stone tool manufacture than any archaeologist ever dreamed of." Gary

I personally don't mind seeing the flintknapping stuff here. I know very little about Native American cultures and technologies but I'm looking to learn. I think that there is a place for the knapping stuff here, as this is a forum for sharing knowledge and the knowledge of knapping may help me identify "treasure" when I'm out walking the fields, creeks, or farming. I can't currently describe and antler drift or punch and I don't know what a billet looks like or what the "distal bone of a raccoon's *****" would be used for, but maybe I will soon.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Why are you posting flintknapping stuff? This is a treasure hunting forum, not a knapping forum. We hunt arrowheads here. What does knapping have to do with treasure hunting? NOTHING! Post some of the arrowheads you have found. If you don't hunt arrowheads, why are you here? I know there are flintknapping forums, why don't you go there with your antler drift "theory"? Maybe too much push back from real knowledgeable knappers? Maybe you're trolling us. Gary

Please do not tell members to go else where, that is mod's responsibility not members.

There is nothing wrong with his knapping thread here, we do not have a separate knapping forum for this type of posts.

 

[NCPeaches]

Please do not tell members to go else where, that is mod's responsibility not members.

There is nothing wrong with his knapping thread here, we do not have a separate knapping forum for this type of posts.

IMHO wouldn't it be less distracting if there was a sub forum for flintknapping and education and have this one be where you discuss personal finds.

 

[quito]

IMHO wouldn't it be less distracting if there was a sub forum for flintknapping and education and have this one be where you discuss personal finds.

Many times the personal finds get a little far fetched and some education is in order around here. Flintknappiing abilities can contribute greatly at times imho.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

IMHO wouldn't it be less distracting if there was a sub forum for flintknapping and education and have this one be where you discuss personal finds.

Already requested a sub forum for flint knapping. Waiting on admins to build.