Wednesday, May 21, 2014


Cover photo and point  by Jake Webster (GHOST KNAPPER)
Here is Jake at the Loretta Lynn knap-in 2014 (By Nichole Simmons)

PHOTO ART BY: Giuliano Bastiani Sagrado D'Isonzo, Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Italy


CHIPS Hindsgavl Dagger Issue

CHIPS Hindsgavl Dagger Issue

Special Color Cover Edition Of CHIPS   Vol. 21, # 4.  Featuring the Famous Hindsgavl Dagger.   The front and back of this, first ever,...

DISCLAIMER: Any use of the information contained in this site by any and all persons is done at their own risk. The operator of this site shall be held harmless from any and all alleged claims, demands, causes of action, liability, loss, damage and/or injury to property or persons whether brought by an individual or other entity. This indemnification applies, without limitation, to all actions by an individual or other entity as a result of their use of information contained in this site.


No Jakes were injured or killed in the making of this Blog-zine.



Master flintknapper Emory Coons is known for his Ted Orcutt type giant biface blades. He is also known for his amazing notched eagles, giant fluted Clovis points and knapped winged ladies with big boobs. Here is one he made from clear glass at Quartzite. Note the way Emory draws his art before he knaps it.

Emory is carving his wood dresser with his signature eagle and some nice winged women with big boobs.

Emory Coons was born in Burns Oregon in 1971 and started flintknapping at the age of five, 33 years ago. He has resided in Burns most of his life and attended Burns Union High School winning awards in the crafts department for jewlery two different years. He has been perfecting his skills as a artist ever since, flintknapping, silversmith, lapidary and teaching his craft to others. He has been on OPB on The Caveman at Glass Buttes and Channel 2 News Boise Idaho about the Nyssa rock and gem show multiple times. Several newspaper articles have been written on his art from gem and mineral shows he has attended in Nyssa Oregon, Burns Oregon, Madras Oregon, The Dalles Oregon, Pendleton Oregon, Mission Oregon, Salem Oregon and the Oregonian in Portland Oregon and Golden Dale Washington. The Pendleton Mission papers had a mention for round-up as well as the blades he chipped were built into the Umatilla Veterans’ Memorial. He has taught classes in flintknapping at Indian Lake for the Umatilla tribe four years also the wild horse atl-atl demonstration as well as Pipestone Creek Alberta Canada and in Medicine Hat British Colombia Canada for the Jr. Forest Wardens, at Northern Lights out of Slocan Canada twice, also demonstrated flintknapping along the Oregon Wagon Train in 1993, Baker interruptive center, and Windows to the Past for the BLM and Forest Service. Then there's knapp-ins (arrowhead makers conventions) at Glass Buttes Oregon, Ed Thomas Golden Dale Washington knap-in, Richardson’s rock ranch knap-in and the Brad Boughman- Jim Hopper Knapp-in on the upper North Umqua some of the worlds best knappers come to these events to show there skills and teach. Emory attends gem and mineral shows like the Confederated show in Onterio, Nyssa Thunder Egg Days, Prineville Oregon, Hines Oregon Obsidian Days show his father started and the Madras, Oregon gem and mineral show. At these shows he can find most of the exotic materials from other countries, like fire opal from Australia, Brazilian agate, Condor agate from Central America, or crystals, Idaho star garnets and other gems to make arrowheads or jewlery out of. The Fire Obsidian is one of his favorites to find and work.
His work can be seen at Boise University (display), Omsi (display), Great Basin Art in Prairie City, Oards 'War Hawk'(tomahawk heads assembled by Great Basin Art), The Edge Company magazine (War Hawks), or some of the local Burns stores. Most of his work has been sought after by private collectors and as gifts. His friend in The Dalles, Jason Hinkle, has and has put a web page up for Coons Lapidary with pictures and contact information for the selling of his art.

The Art Of Flint Knapping

The Art Of Flint Knapping

The Art of Flint Knapping , by D.C. Waldorf has been i n print since 1975. It's come to be known as the Flint Knappers Bible. If you are interested...SEE ARTICLE IN THE NEXT ISSUE!!!!I

 "just got finished going through 39 years of business records to try and determine how many copies of The Art of Flint Knapping were printed since we first came out with it in 1975. As far as I could tell [Val just wrote "Printer" for book payments not stating which or how many] for all five editions the total lies somewhere between 55 and 60 thousand copies. It is hard to believe, but come next year, that book will have been in print for 40 years and I will have been chipping for 50!"
Return of the Gray Ghosts! 
Used with permission of D.C. Waldorf.


These are replicas of the Gray Ghosts like Brian Reinhardt made back in the 1940-70's. These were made with a lever type device we assume some what similar to the lever device that Reinhardt made his with, we can only assume because as far as I know nobody ever actually seen the device Reinhardt used. These are for sale and pricing can be seen at

You can view a video of the pieces at

To learn more about the original Gray Ghost made by Reinhardt visit

Gray Ghost #1    This one is 6 5/8 inches long. 

Gray Ghost #2     This one is 7 1/4 inches long.




gray Edward's Plateau chert Grey Ghosts (Lithic Casting Lab Photo)

The Gray Ghosts of Gustine (Harwood) . It was a warm day in Gustine, Texas, a small town in Comanche County. It was 1949 but in Gustine it could have been 1849, a town know for rodeo and cowboys, a town of only 584 acres and less than a person per acre. It was a quit, sunny, summer day . A slight breeze had come up as Bryan Reinhardt, a large, burly German, clean shaven, World War Two Vet with tattoos on his forearms, was polished up for the day and heading to town. Taking the trash out of the back porch on the way out, he tells his wife he'll be back in an hour or so. He checks his receipt and his wallet as he pulls his keys out of his pocket and climes into his truck. He pulled up in front of the hardware store in a nearby town, excited at what he knew would change his life. As he passed through the front door a tiny bell on the upper frame alerted the proprietor of his entrance. "I know what yer here fer Bryan, It's out back" They two men made small town small talk as they shuffled into to the poorly light musty back room. The proprietor pulled on a tied together string with frayed ends, a hanging light bulb with no shade brightened up the room. Recently swept wooded floor, slatted wooden shelves on either side. There, half cover in the shadow of the shelving resting on an old oak pallet, was a large cardboard box with the image of a lapidary saw. Bryan suppressed the excitement, he was not the kind to express emotion. "Yup, that's the One," said Bryan. The Clerk asked Bryan what he plans on doing with the saw and Bryan replies, `cuttin' some stone". The two men load the saw in the back of the pick up and off he went into the history of modern flintknapping lore. Bryan Reinhardt had developed a method of mass producing large flint spear points, none under nine inches long, (known by collectors as Gray Ghosts, for the color of the flint he used) with the use of a rock saw and complex lever flaker (fulcrum and lever). Reinhardt quarried and processed 100s of tons of gray Edward's Plateau chert. Armed with a crowbar, shovel and wooden creates Bryan would quarry material, drive it back to his home in Gustine, slab it and trim it on his lapidary saw. In the yard of his nicely kept middle class ranch house Reinhardt had an old fashioned trailer, with a wooden addition. In this trailer was his lapidary shop, the place where gray ghost blanks were cut and trimmed. Out behind the house, on the back 1/4 acre were several huge flint piles, a chest high pile of rejected slab cutoffs, a couple truck loads worth, a supply of raw flint, and a giant debitage pile of waste flakes, this testified to by Callahan. Several years later Charlie Shewey flew over that part of Texas in a plane he was piloting and confirmed the flint piles, they were plenty large enough to see from the air. Once he had the slabs cut and trimmed he would heat treat the material to the point that the flakes would remove with less effort but not enough to make them too brittle for the next stage of reduction. For the actual "flintknapping" stages, Bryan removed the first stage of conchoidal flakes, this was done with an elaborate jig set up. The jig was an elaborate set of holes and pins that allowed Bryan to apply fulcrum and lever pressure at any angle and from any direction to any size or shape piece of flint. The edging was done with micro-lever and shearing techniques. This gave the early Gray Ghosts their characteristic steep margin double bevels. Eventually Bryan had several saws buzzing and once, and piles of waste flakes accumulated daily, hence the massive debitage dumps. . His production was so successful he sold his flint work by the gross. Bryan began making good money, in the 1960s he was getting paid 25 cents an inch. According to Dr. John Whittaker (1999) , archaeologist and flintknapping historian, " the lore among Texas knappers is that Reinhardt only sold in orders of 10,000 inches, (to dealers) at a dollar per inch, and demanded payment in gold coins." Ads could be seen in the classified sections of lapidary journals, and The Farmer's Almanac for "ceremonial spear points" and most gift shops along Route 66 were fat with them. It is estimated that Bryan Reinhardt produced nearly one hundred thousand Gray Ghosts from 1950 to 1982. There is a Gray Ghost in nearly every collection of lithic art in the World. Charlie Shewey, world renowned arrowhead collector, collected dozens of Gray Ghosts, and even befriended Bryan Reinhardt and purchased his best work. In the Shewey collection is one Gray Ghost point over 23 inches long. Bryan Reinhardt had been a loner up through the 1960s, until he met three other knappers that had sought him out. It was the late 1960s when Errett Callahan, (a young graduate student from Virginia at the time) J.B. Sollberger (the father of Texas flintknapping), and Norman Jefferson (then a student of Callahan) ventured into Gustine to meet Reinhardt. At first Reinhardt denied being a flintknapper, and told the three men that he was simple a rock collector. The three wise men went into Reinhardt's living room and he was quit pleasant. On the walls in his home Reinhardt had dozens of magazine photos, each with images of artifacts, the articles claimed the items were authentic, but Reinhardt's, after finely admitting he was a knapper, insisted he had made them all. Even though he admitted that he was a knapper he never divulged his methodologies. Reinhardt had moved, and his old house was down street and around the block, Callahan and Sollberger, went and explored Reinhardt's previous dwelling and found massive amounts of debitage there. Sollberger, having experimented with fulcrum and lever methods, new immediately upon inspecting the debitage how the Gray Ghosts had been made, fulcrum and lever. Slab cut-offs were a dead giveaway as to lap-knapping (Callahan 2000). Callahan and Sollberger were very interested in Reinhardt's knapping as they could relate it to possible applications into prehistoric knapping technologies. Also, Reinhardt took an interest in the knapping styles of Sollberger and Callahan and after there acquaintance Reinhardt's knapping products had a more traditional look. True Gray Ghost collectors can see 3 distinct phases of Reinhardt's work: 1. His early years are very angular. 2. After meeting Sollberger and Callahan, a more traditional look. 3. After meeting two later knappers, Nelson and Warren, a more patterned and eccentric phase. Callahan and Sollberger met with Reinhardt off and on for several years and kept in touch by mail. Then Reinhardt, perhaps in fear of being arrested, became reclusive to the point of chasing Sollberger and Callahan off with a shot gun. The two men waited around and on Sunday morning Reinhardt went off to church, while he was gone the two men got a good look around the Reinhardt place, this when the first site of the "new home" debitage and cut off plies. Callahan was even able to secure some photos of this (Callahan 2000). On an earlier visit Callahan was out in the front yard with Reinhardt and the sheriff pulled up in his jeep, Callahan was sure that this was the end for the Gray Ghost, when the officer opened the tail gate and dumped a load of flint in Reinhardt's front yard. "Those German's stuck together" said Callahan of the occurrence. Callahan and Sollberger had traveled 142.7 miles from Dallas to Gustine several times, but this was the last trip. A few years later Callahan received a Christmas card from Reinhardt stating he had been reborn, and he was sorry for his behavior, Callahan phoned Reinhardt and told him he never understood why he did that, Callahan had been Reinhardt's only advocate. In the mid to late 1970s Bryan befriended two other "lapidary- flintknappers", Larry Nelson of Ironton, Missouri and Richard Warren of Llano, Texas. Warren, was inspired by Reinhardt, and later would produce a great many Gray Ghost type points himself. Warren's Ghosts were of black novaculite. According to Charlie Shewey, Warren's father-in-law was a wet stone miner and was able to provide him with perfect slabs for knapping. Warren learned the basics of knapping years earlier by Larry Nelson, a world class traditional knapper whom had a graduate degree in engineering from the University of Denver. 0rginally Warren would make the blanks and Nelson would finish them, much like a micro-factory or cottage industry, similar to what is speculated to have transpired by prehistoric Danish Dagger knappers. Warren was latter known as the founder of "teliolithics" or art knapping. Art knapping involves not only slabbing the flint and heating, as Reinhardt did, but taking the next step of power diamond grinding the shape and contour of the point. The only thing left to do is a final series of pattern flakes. Warren, an ex -Navy man, was going to be a doctor like his brother but dropped out in his final year to pursue knapping (Shewey 1999). According to Dr. John Whittaker (1999) Jim Hopper, who was largely responsible for spreading "lap-knapping" (short for lapidary knapping) among the early Fort Osage knappers, Hopper was inspired by Richard Warren. Warren also inspired two traditional Virginian knappers; Errett Callahan (considered the father of modern stone knife making) and Scott Silsby whom were responsible for the popularity of early pattern flaked knifes, they were the first to perfect the Warren style on hafted blades. Jack Cresson a traditional knapper from Moorestown, New Jersey credits Silsby for spreading art- knapping through the eastern United States, and notes that Silsby refereed to lap-knapping as "cheat and chip". But Callahan's Piltdown Productions catalog gave pattern flaked knives a world wide exposure. Callahan went on to show that pattern flaked knives could be accomplished without modern tools and later began a traditional knapping movement. While Silsby and Callahan turned Warren style points into knives, a southern knapper was fluting the Warren style points. Steve Behrnes, an acquaintance of J.B. Sollberger, from Baton Rouge, Louisiana had created a steel jig that could flute the wafer thin Warrens without breaking them. Steve eaked out a fair living knapping at his old style Cajun home. Jim Hopper, Steve Behrnes and Richard Warren met at Warren's place in 1992, within two weeks of the meeting Warren reportedly shot himself to death, however there were rumors that he moved to a ranch his wife inherited in Calgary, Canada. A few rumors of Warren and his wife sightings in Winnipeg have also been noted (Did they see Elvis there too?). According to John Whittaker, he met a man named Charles McGee, McGee had an "arrowhead making jig", McGee told John that before W.W.II McGee had been friends with another lever jig knapper, it turned out to be Bryan Rhinehardt. The Jig is quite elaborate and has a hinged lever and movable holding pins. PhotoIt is obvious a lot of thinking went into these machines. Robert Blue of Studio City, California was inspired by a collection of Reinhardt's points , Reinhardt had been long dead but Blue did find fellow Gray Ghost collector, Charlie Shewey in Missouri. Robert offered to buy all of Shewey's Gray Ghosts and Richard Warren points and that money was no object. Charlie refused Blue's offer, but directed Robert to Richard Warren. After Robert bought a fair number of points, Warren shared some of his secrets with Robert Blue and introduced him to Jim Hopper, whom Warren had taught. Jim Hopper and Robert Blue became good friends and Robert became very good at art knapping. Barney DeSimone, couched Robert through his early years of knapping. Later Robert inspired Barney to return somewhat to lapidary knapping. It was Robert Blue that taught Ray Harwood to knap in the lever style of Reinhardt, Ray produced dozens of "Raynish Daggers" with the lever flaker. The Raynish Daggers were simply slab points in the form of 10 inch Danish Daggers ("2-D daggers" -not 3 dimensional). These were what Callahan called the ugliest Danish Daggers he had ever seen. After Robert's death and some prompting from DeSimone and Callahan, Harwood returned to traditional flintknapping. One interesting bit of knapping lore I overheard at a knap in goes like this:" Steve Behenes had invented this steel fluting jig that could flute supper this preforms. Steve was close to Robert Blue at the time and he sent Robert a thin Folsom and the detatched flutes, Robery returned the detached flute -and he had fluted them ! Knapper, Billy Joe Sheldon a slab knapper from Folsom, New Mexico has produced a video on the lapidary method of flintknapping and he is really good. Many California knappers that I know have adapted his methods. Sheldon's methods intail using the Ishi stick as a lever on one's leg and slab knapping on a bench. Back in the 1970s Reinhardt, Warren and Nelson shared ideas and Bryan's work showed some change, some fancy pieces and a bit more of a traditional looking work product. But even then when a man commented to Bryan that his work did not look like "Indian points" , Bryan Replied; " I'm note trying to make Indian points, I make Reinhardt points!" It was true, Bryan, in inventing and producing the Edward's Plateau Gray Ghosts had not only invented a new point type and a new craft style, he would change the face of flintknapping forever. Bryan Reinhardt passed away in 1982 from either emphysema or cancer, but the legendary flintworker of Gustine and his Gray Ghosts will live on forever. The International Flintknappers ‘ Hall of Fame and Museum is encouraging individuals of all ages to “Be A Superior Example,” through a new education program as part of a new curriculum to promote healthy habits, while encouraging everyone to live free of drugs and other such substances or vices. It serves as the central point for the study of the history of flintknapping in the United States and beyond, displays flintknapping-related artifacts and exhibits, and honors those who have excelled in the craft, research/ writing, promoting events, and serving the knapping community in an ethical and wilderness loving manner.


be at the time had dismembered and burned his body. Before they
burned his body they cut out his brain and sent it to the
Smithsonian. In recent news releases it appears that Ishi's remains
may be returned to his Dear Creek home for burial. The delay in
returning the remains had to do with the fact the Ishi had no living
relatives, recent DNA testing has resolved the issue. In addition,
another bit of Ishi news came about when researcher, Dennis
Torresdale discovered a small cash of authentic Ishi points in Ishi's
waste flake collection in an old coffee can in the basement of the
museum at Berkley. Dennis was extremely noble and turned the points
in to the museum, according to Ishi collector Charlie Shewey, the
last authentic Ishi point sold at auction for a cool $27,000.00.

A. Statement of the Problem There has been a wealth of books and articles related to Ishi and his projectile point knapping. Ishi’s biface production trajectory and physical approach is used throughout experimental archaeology and “folk-knapping’ today (Shackley 2001) and can be traced directlyback to Ishi via Crabtree. However, little has been done thus far on an extensive debitage study, especially a systematic replication of his lithic works relating to the studies of said debitage. According to Shackley(2001) though the objects Ishi made are nearly deified in some circles, an examination of his lithic technology, with current advances, has simply not occurred, possibly as a result of the rather romantic effect of this historical figure.
Succinctly stated; the problem to be researched is the application of modern lithic
debitage analysis to the existing Ishi glass and lithic refuse. Debitage, defined as "residual lithic material resulting from tool manufacture. Useful to determine techniques, and for showing technological traits" (Crabtree 1972:58). The anomaly of glass and lithic reduction in the proto-historic era (protolithics), also known as contact or historic period lithic analysis, will be used to extract important data for this little known, and seldom studied, subfield of lithic technology. I use the term “lithic anomaly” here to designate an artifact class possessing a unique set of definable salient attributes such as might indicate distinct manufacturing and/or techno-functional behavior.It is the focus of this proposed research endeavor to increase the flaked glass and protolithic database with use of modern micro-lithics study methods for debitage classification and subsequent anayasis and and replicative verification through extensive flintknapping experimentation . Replicative studies will focus on the attribute and statistical analysis of the debitage created while maintaining close attention to precise, systematic and historically accurate replication. The lithic debitage will be processed into a precise taxonomy. Taxonomy (from Greek taxis meaning arrangement or division and nomos meaning law) is the science of classification according to a pre-determined system, with the resulting catalog used to provide a conceptual framework for discussion, analysis, or information retrieval. In theory, the development of a good taxonomy takes into account the importance of separating elements of a group (taxon) into subgroups (taxa) that are mutually exclusive, unambiguous, and taken together, include all possibilities. In practice, a good taxonomy should be simple, easy to remember, and easy to use. Flintknapping experimentation is one means of expanding the theoretical scope and application of lithic debitage studies. Flintknapping experiments, replicative systems analysis, have shown, when properly applied, to be a most reliable method, indicating the prehistoric agents responsible for the redundant and unambiguous patterns that occur in the prehistoric flaked stone record (Callahan 1979; Crabtree 1972, 1973; Flenniken 1980; Muto 1971). These identified attribute patterns have been found to vary according to the techniques of production and the stages of reduction, thus exposing clues to technique and methodology (Breschini and Haversat 1991). There is even an indication that the pressure technique used on the long glass points, Ishi made at the museum, was somewhat different than on the smaller obsidian points (Harwood 2001; Shackley 2001). According to Shackley (2001)
“there is no evidence on the performs at the Hearst Museum or in the literature
That Ishi abraded the margins during reduction, even when using obsidian and glass, but to produce the oblique parallel effect he was so proficient at doing, he must have prepared the platforms.” These theories can be tested through micro analysis of the debitage.
In spite of some support for this analytical technique (Patterson 1983), a number of potential problems with size class analysis, as well as, debitage replication have been recognized. These include: 1) different techniques to manufacture similar items; 2) the mixing of waste flakes from different flaking techniques; 3) failure of flintknapping to accurate replicate a collection under study; 4) variations in debitage due to raw material differences; and 5) the collection both prehistorically and historically of certain debitage specimens (Stahle and Dunn 1983:94).

B. Nature and Design of the Project
Described herein are the details of what the project intends to do and where the project will be carried out. The bulk of the research will be carried out at my home and will involve the systematic replication of 10 sets of 10 projectile points each and the subsequent debitage classified and categorized. Comparisons will be made with the actual degitage of Ishi and theories regarding the original; lithic reduction sequences speculated’
The raw materials and technical attributes in the Ishi debitage collection would be subjected to classification and close attribute studies. Various methods of flintknapping replication would correspond to ascertain the type and origin of the various debitage manifestations. From here statistical inferences and theories will be considered, correlations made and the final data used to infer viable reduction and notching scenarios.

The project would be carried out in several phases:
1. A close review and study of the existing publications relative to this study.
2. Initial inspection at the museum and the Ishi artifacts on display.
3. Interviewing key personnel in the lithic and Ishi research community.
4. A close inspection and study of the Ishi debitage, and possibly his tools and stone artifacts.
5. Extensive flintknapping replicate studies and creation of the Ishi lithics taxonomy reference collection; points, performs and debitage .
6. A follow up inspection of all debitage, both Ishi’s and that from the replication
Phase of the study.
7. Final conclusions, peer considerations, and outcome of research project published. Preliminary reports on the finding of this research project will be submitted to:
SCA Newsletter and SCA meetings paper presentation (2008), Journal of Lithic Technology,

C. Methodology
This section should describe the procedures and techniques for carrying out the project and should include at least the following points:
the nature of the data/information to be collected, studies will focus on the attribute and statistical analysis of the Ishi debitage to identify lithic reduction sytems used by Ishi.
1) the methods for collecting the data: Separate the debitage into categories based on raw material, then subclassify by attribute. Replicate material with flintknpping experimentation and create taxonomy.
2) the sources of information such as library materials and field notes (with descriptions of field methods where appropriate) will be provided.

D. Resources and Clearances
1) sources of funding (personal funds, and possible future grants),
2) facilities available (such as computer use and lab/office space in the field and at the home institution), CSUB Archaeology lab for analysis of replicated lithic debitage and corresponding projectile point reduction sequence studies, taxonomy and close analysis and classification of same. UCB Pheabe Hearst Museum for study of historic Ishi lithics. Personal residence for systematic flintknapping replication of 100 test units (“Ishi Points”) and debitage retrieval.
3) equipment available, if applicable; approximate replica of Ishi’s knapping kit will be prepared by student. Diagnostic and analysis tools for magnification and other micro-lithic evaluation are house at CSUB (for replicated protolithics) and UCB (for Ishi’s historical protolithics).
4) assistance available (e.g., contacts in the field or consultants to the project); Several contacts have been established at both the PhD level and that of experts in the field of “folk knapping”, also primitive archery experts have been consulted for their perspective of technological form and attributes of this projectile point style.
5) preparedness to conduct the research (e.g., background course work, prior related research experience, personal knowledge of the study site in terms of language and culture); The research student has familiarized himself with the back ground literature on both Ishi and the field of lithic studies. The research student has been flintknapping, as an amateur, off and on for 30 years and has learned to replicate all of the Ishi styles of projectile point. The research student has familiarized himself with castings of Ishi styles of projectile point procured from “Lithic Casting Lab”.
6) documents obtained or to be obtained (including Human Subjects and Informed Consent Forms, clearances from contact persons, letters of introduction from research director and from host institution, passport/visas, etc.). Letters of personal introduction provided were those used for my Graduate school application package.

E. Time Table
Specify the projected start up date, the period of fieldwork (broken down by time needed to set up and initiate the project, the time engaged in data collection, and the time required for data analysis and write up of the results), and a projected date of completion for the entire project. The initial inspection of the Ishi’s protolithic debiatge at USB Pheabe Hearst Museum will be the starting point. The replication, categorization and report completed and written by SCA meeting of 2008 in Burbank, California.
F Conclusion
In order to understand these stone and glass artifacts, and the person whom made and used them, archaeologists must understand the processes involved in the acquisition of the raw material, production strategies and stages of lithic reduction, and the function, and final disposition of these lithic artifacts. In the past years, experimental studies involving the manufacturing and use of stone tools have been integrated with studies of refitted or conjoined lithic artifacts and microwear analysis. The result is a much more dynamic view of the variability in assemblages of lithic artifacts. Continuing these research techniques into the Ishi lithics and subsequent debitage is a logical progression. COMMENT: It can be expected that a satisfactory fulfillment of items A through D, as well as G, will be directly applicable toward completing the final write up of the project.

G Literature Cited
This listing might contain references that have not been located or looked at yet but will likely be of use before the project is completed.

Adams, Rex K. 1980. Debitage Analysis: Lithic Technology and Interpretations of an Archaic Base Camp Near Moquino, New Mexico. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Eastern New Mexico University, Portales, New Mexico
Ahler, S. A
1989 Mass analysis of flaking debris: studying the forest rather than the tree. Alternative approaches to lithic analysis, edited by D.O. Henry and G.H. Odell. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association Number 1:85-118.
Ainsworth, Peter W. 1987 Comments on Austin's "Discovery" of Biface Notching Flakes. Lithic Technology 16(2-3):56-58.

Burrill, R. 1990. Ishi, America’s Last Stone Age Indian. The Anthro Company. Sacramento.
Burrill, Richard. 2001 Ishi Rediscovered. The AnthroCompany.
Burrill, Richard. 2004 Ishi in His Second World.
Callahan, E. 1979 The Basics of Biface Knapping In The Eastern Fluted Point Tradition. A Manual for Flintknappers And Lithic Analysts. Archaeology of Eastern North America 7: 1-180. ed. Brennan, New York.
Callahan, E. 1999 Ishi Sticks, Iceman Picks and Good For Nothing Things. Bulletin of Primitive Technology 18: 60-68, Rexburg.
Cotterell, Brian, and Johan Kamminga
1987 The Formation of Flakes. American Antiquity 52:675–708.
Cotterell, B. and J. Kamminga
1987 The formation of flakes. American Antiquity 52(4):675-708.
Cowgill, G. L.
1990 Artifact classification and archaeological purpose. Mathematics and Information Science in Archaeology: a Flexible Framework, ed. by A. Voorrips. Holos Verlag, Bonn:61-78

Crabtree, D. 1972 An Introduction to Flintworking. Occasional Papers, Idaho University Museum, Pocatello.
Dibble, H. L. and J. C. Whittaker
1981 New experimental evidence on the relation between percussion flaking and flake variation. Journal of Archaeological Science 8:283-296.
Flenniken, J.J. 1980. Replicative Systems Analysis: A Model applied to the Vein Quartz Artifacts from the Hoko River Site. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University.
Flenniken, J.J. (1984) The past, present, and future of flintknapping: an anthropological perspective. Annual Review of Anthropology, 13:187-203.
J. Jeffrey Flenniken, (1986) Anan W. RaymondMorphological Projectile Point Typology: Replication Experimentation and Technological Analysis
American Antiquity, Vol. 51, No. 3 (Jul., 1986), pp. 603-614
Flenniken, J.J. and P.J. Wilke (1989) Typology, technology, and chronology of Great Basin dart points. American Anthropologist, 91(1):149-158.
Harwood, Ray 2001 Points of Light, Dreams of Glass : An Introduction into Vitrum Technology. Bulletin of Primitive Technology (No. 21).Pp. 24-36 .ed. Wescott, Idaho.
Hayden, B., N. Franco, and J. Spafford
1996 Evaluating lithic strategies and design criteria. Stone tools: theoretical insights into human prehistory, edited by G.H. Odell. Plenum Press, NY:9-50.
Healan, D. M.
1995 Identifying lithic reduction loci with size-traded macrodebitage: a multivariate approach. American Antiquity 60(4):689-699.

Hoffman, C. M.
1985 Projectile point maintenance and typology: assessment with factor analysis and canonical correlation. For concordance in archaeological analysis, edited by C. Carr. Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, IL:566-612.
Janes, R.R. (1989) A comment on microdebitage analyses and cultural site-formation processes among tipi dwellers. American Antiquity, 54(4):851-855
Kelly, R. L.
1988 The three sides of a biface. American Antiquity 53(4):717-734.
Kroeber, Theodora. Ishi in Two Worlds: A Biography of the Last Wild Indian in North America. Berkeley: University California Press, 1963.

Magne, M. P.
1989 Lithic reduction stages and assemblage formation processes. Experiments in lithic technology, edited by D.S. Amick and R.P. Mauldin. BAR International Series 528, Oxford:15-31.
Mauldin, R. P. and D. S. Amick
1989 Investigating patterning in debitage from experimental bifacial core reduction. Experiments in lithic technology, edited by D.S. Amick and R.P. Mauldin. BAR International Series 528, Oxford:67-88.
Muto, Guy R. 1971. A Technological Analysis of the Early Stages in the Manufacture of Chipped Stone Implements. M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Idaho State University.
Prentiss, W. C. and E. J. Romanski
1989 Experimental evaluation of Sullivan and Rozen's debitage typology. Experiments in lithic technology, edited by D.S. Amick and R.P. Mauldin. BAR International Series 528, Oxford:89-99.
Nelson, Nels C.
1916 Flintworking by Ishi. In William Henry Homes Anniversary Volume, edited by Frederick Webb Hodge, pp. 397–402. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.
Newman, J. R.
1994 The Effects of distance on lithic material reduction technology. Journal of field archaeology 21(4):491.
Patterson, L. W., and Sollberger. 1978. Replication and Classification of Small Size Lithic Debitage. Plains Anthropologist 23(80):103-112.
Patterson, L.W. 1983. The Importance of Flake Size Distribution. Contract Abstracts and CRM Archeology 3:70-72.
Patterson, L.W. (1990). Characteristics of bifacial-reduction flake-size distribution. American Antiquity, 55(3):550-558.
Rondeau, Michael F. 1982a. Debitage Analysis: A Basis for Site Characterization. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for California Archeology, Sacramento.
Rondeau, Michael F. 1982a. Debitage Analysis: A Basis for Site Characterization. Paper presented at the Sixteenth Annual Society for California Archeology Conference, Sacramento.

Rondeau, Michael F. 1982b. Lithic Seasonal Rounds in the Northern Sierra Nevada: A Regional Model. Paper presented at the Great Basin Anthropological Conference, Reno.

Rondeau, Michael F. 1982c. The Archeology of the Truckee Site, Nevada County, California. California Department of Food and Agriculture, Sacramento.

Rondeau, Michael F. 1985. Lithic Techniques of the Tulare Lake Locality. Current Research in the Pleistocene 2:55-56.

Rondeau, Michael F. 1987. Bipolar Reduction in California. In California Lithic Studies 1, ed. by G. S. Breschini and T. Haversat. Coyote Press Archives of California Prehistory 11. Coyote Press, Salinas.

Rondeau, Michael F. 1989. Analysis of Debitage and Flaked Stone Artifacts from CA-Alp-104. Appendix A in: An Extended Archaeological Survey Report for the Proposed Road Widening on Highway 4 Near Lake Alpine, Stanislaus National Forest, California, by M.F. Rondeau. California Department of Transportation, Sacramento.

Rondeau, Michael F. 1990. Analysis of Debitage and Edge Modified Flakes from CA-Col-61. Appendix F in Report on Phase II Archaeological Test Excavation at CA-Col-61, State Route 20, Colusa County, California, by D. McGowan. California Department of Transportation, Sacramento.

Rondeau, Michael F. 1993. Behavioral Patterns Inferred from the CA-Gle-217 Flaked Stone Assemblage, Glenn County, California. California Department of Transportation, Sacramento.

Rondeau, Michael F. n.d. a. Cobble Core Reduction in California. Manuscript under revision. n.d. b. Intersite Comparisons of Selected Flaked Stone in Northern California. Report in preparation.

Rondeau, M.F., and V.L. Rondeau. 1987. An Analysis of the Flaked Stone Assemblage from CA-FRE-1333, Western Fresno County, California. Appendix 2 in: Archaeological Investigations at CA-FRE-1333, in the White Creek Drainage, Western Fresno County, California, by G. S. Breschini and T. Haversat. Coyote Press Archives of California Prehistory 12.

Rondeau, M.F., and V.L. Rondeau. 1989. Technological Investigations of Flaked Stone Assemblages from Eight High Sierran Sites, Alpine and Tuolumne Counties, California. Peak and Associates, Sacramento.

Rondeau, M.F., and V.L. Rondeau. 1990. An Archaeological Study of the Early Flaked Stone Assemblage from Clarks Flat, CA-Cal-S342, Calaveras County, California. Appendix G in: An Archeological Data Recovery Project at CA-Cal-342, Clarks Flat, Calaveras County, California, by A. S. Peak and H. L. Crew. Peak and Associates, Sacramento.

Rondeau, M.F., and V.L. Rondeau. 1992. Further Studies of the Flaked Stone from CA-SCR-160, Santa Cruz County, California. Rondeau Archaeological, Sacramento.

Rondeau, M.F., and V.L. Rondeau. 1993. A Technological Intersite Comparison of Selected Assemblage Components from Seven Prehistoric Sites in the Haystack Reservoir Area, Merced County, California. Peak and Associates, Sacramento.

Rondeau, M.F., V.L. Rondeau, and S. Grantham. 1990. The Technological Organization of Flaked Stone at CA-Plu-237, Plumas County, California. Peak and Associates, Sacramento.

Shackley, Steven M. 1996 Ishi Was Not Necessarily the Last Full-Blooded Yahi: Berkley Archaeology. The Archaeology Research Newsletter. Spring 1996 Volume 3, Number 2
Shackley, Steven M. 2000 The Stone Technology of Ishi and the Yana of North Central California: Inferences for Hunter-Gatherer Cultural Identity in Historic California. American
Shackley, Steven M. 2001 The Stone Tool Technology of Ishi and the Yana of North Central California: Inferences for Hunter-Gather Cultural Identity in Historic California. American Anthropologist 102 (4) : 693-712.
Spaulding, A. C.
1953 Statistical techniques for the discovery of artifact types. American Antiquity 18(4):305-313Sullivan, A.P., III and K.C. Rozen (1985) Debitage analysis and archaeological interpretation. American Antiquity, 50(4):755-779.
Stahle, D.W., and J.E. Dunn. 1983. An Analysis and Application of the Size Distribution of Waste Flakes from the Manufacture of Bifacial Stone Tools. World Archeology 14(1):84-97.
Taylor, Jeb (2005) Ishi: Not Wintu. Unpublished manuscript obtained from author.
Titmus, G. L. 1985 Some Aspects of Stone Tool Notching. In Stone Tool Analysis: Essays in Honor of Don E. Crabtree, edited by M. Plew, J. Woods
Tomka, S. A.
1989 Differentiating lithic reduction techniques: an experimental approach. Experiments in lithic technology, edited by D.S. Amick and R.P. Mauldin. BAR International Series 528, Oxford:137-161.
Whittaker, John C. (1994). Flintknapping: Making and Understanding Stone Tools, Chapters 5, 7, 8. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Whittaker, John C. Michael Stafford1999. Replicas, Fakes, and Art: Twentieth Century Stone Age and Its Effects on Archaeology.
American Antiquity, Vol. 64, No. 2 (Apr., 1999), pp. 203-214


Flint knapping is a part of the world lived in by a very few, but at one time it was part of everyone's world to some degree. The man named Ishi was at the end of that time and the start of this one. It was early in the morning, just the break of dawn, August 9, 1911, some miles south of Red Bluff, California, an exhausted and fearful man was found in the stable of a slaughter house. It was a middle aged American Indian man whom came in from the woods; he was taken off to the jail at Oroville. Sheriff J.B. W Webbe, who was the one who figured out Mr.Ishi was a "wild" Indian and locked him up in a cell for the insane, for Ishi's protection more than anything. Curiosity brought both locals and outsiders from miles away to see were described as a "wildman". Local Indians and "half breeds" came in and attempted to communicate with Ishi, but to no avail. He was the last human on earth that spoke his language. He spoke no English, he was starved and his black hair was burned off short as he was in morning. The man Ishi, the last of the Yahi. The Yahi, a small branch of the Yana, were situated in northern California. Ishi lived in the Mill Creek in the foothills of Mount Lassen, east of the Sacramento River and south of the Pit River. Fortunately for us Ishi was a master flint knapper and he still retained all the knowledge and skill from living a life as his tribe's flint knapping expert. The points Ishi knapped are so delicate, thin and well flaked; they far surpass nearly all points found in archaeological contexts and collections from prehistory. Ishi has a point style named after him, as well as a specific type of flint knapping tool. Ishi had lived his life in the wilderness, his tribe had been wiped out by murderous miners and hunters, Ishi lived alone - isolated. The story of Ishi's capture became headline news. One of the readers happened to be Professors Kroeber and Waterman, anthropologists at the University of California. The two men took an instant interest, as they had gone on an expedition looking for Ishi's people 3 years earlier as some surveyors had happened upon their camp and reported their discovery. It was this discovery that brought the demise of Ishi's people as the surveyors had stolen the Indians' winter supplies as trophies and the Indians did not make it though the winter. Years before the surveyor incident, Indian killers had attacked the tribe of peaceful Indians slaughtering men women and children, one killer switched to his pistol as his riffle was "tearing up the babies too much." You can see why Ishi feared white people; he thought he would surely be executed. Since Ishi's language was extinct, there was no communication with him. It was very discouraging for Ishi and the white men. Finally Waterman broke through with a few Yana words he had found. Ishi went and lived with Kroeber and Watererman at the museum, Ishi would give flint knapping demonstrations every Sunday to crowds of interested onlookers, he also sold his handiwork. On his time off from demonstrations and ethnographic data collecting, Ishi went to the near by hospital and made friends with Dr. Saxton T. Pope, whom was amazed at Ishi's skill as a woodsman and archer. Pope and Ishi went on many trips into the wilderness and Ishi shared his bow making and flint knapping secrets with his new friend. Ishi died at noon, March 25th, 1916. He told his friend Pope at the end "you stay, I go". It was Yahi tradition that the body be buried whole so it could make the trip to the land of the dead, but before Kroeber could do anything about it Ishi's body was autopsied and cremated and his brain cut out and sent to the Smithsonian. California Indians have been trying to gain Ishi's remains for burial but have been largely unsuccessful as no Yahi decedents survive. Just within the last several months, however, a turn of events have taken place and it appears Ishi's remains have been returned to his beloved Deer Creek for a final rest.

"lets step out-side you bastard!" As the curator goes
for the phone Charlie goes for the door. (to be continued...)

3. There he was headed for the door and mad as hell.
Charlie Shewey had been insulted by a jerk, groped by
hippies and he still hadn't seen what he came for-to
see the Ishi points. As luck would have it -justbefore Charlie got to
the handle of the museum exit
door, a young anthropologist stopped him. "I agree
about all the things you said to my boss, he is a
jerk, come back tomorrow-it is my day off, I can show
you the basement that has the entire Ishi collection.
We can spend the entire day looking at the stuff. (to
be continued...)

So as I was saying; Charlie Shewey heading for the
Museum exit in the summer of 1967...So the
anthropologist caught him on the way out.
The next day Charlie has the motel clerk ring his
room early, the night filled with half sleep dreams of
the Ishi treasure that sits in the museum basement.
Ishi too waits with anticipation, no one has cared
about his treasure for years - he must of watched from
around the fire in the spirit world. OOPS got
spiritual on my buttox...anyway Charlie does the 3 S's
gets dressed for the day and gets to the museum with
the breaking sun. |
Anyway Charlie Shewey walks up to the Museum door and
the young anthropologist opens the door from the
inside, come on in. As they walk through the museum
their foot steps echo through the empty corridors.
They get to a door and the anthro dude pulls out a wad
of keys and sorts through them. He unlocks the
basement door and switches on the lights. The lights
are still flickering as the two men enter the treasure
chamber. "Well what do you want to see first ? Fire
kit, Fish baskets, bow and arrows, clothes what? " I'd
kind of like to see his points first" says Charlie
Shewey. The two walk down the thin passage ways of the
basement - row upon row of thin wooden drawers to the
right and to the left. Suddenly they stop "here it is"
The anthro dude pulls open one of the lower wooden
drawers and with the smell of moth balls he pulls out
several old wooden cigar boxes and laid them down in
front of Charlie, he could not speak. "Looks to be
about 300 here" says the anthro dude.
The anthro dude sets out for cigar boxes out onto the
cold concrete floor of the museum basement. The
anthro dude say to Charlie Shewey "you stay and I'll
go- and Finnish my work" funny that is what Ishi said to
Pope when Ishi died' you stay I'll go". Charlie
nervously opened the first of the 4 cigar boxes. It
was like when they first opened King Tut's tomb. As
the box squeaked open hundreds of shinny and sharp
Ishi points sparkled like jules. 2 to 3 inches,
lenticular cross sections, perfect-dainty-teardrop
notching. All the colors of the rainbow- blue from
Milk of Magnesia bottles, amber from whiskey bottles,
green from whine bottles, white from milk glass
plates, and black from obsidian. Straight blades edge,
sharp functional margins, every flake scar a thought
from Ishi's mind. Each a work of art. Here they were
what Charlie Shewey had dreamed about, it was Ishi's
treasure- complete with ink number carefully applied
by Kroeber and or Pope so many years and dreams ago
--- When Charlie returned he inspected all of Ishi's
things ½ dozen excellently made Juniper bows,
arrows, fishing nets, rabbit nets, deer snares- every single thing he
made. After this Charlie was allowed
to spend a few more hours with the Ishi points.
Charlie states that he feels Ishi was striving for 1
inch wide, 3 inches long, notch ¼ up from the base, tear drop
notching and lenticular
strait triangular blade edge. It was getting late so
when the anthro-dude came over they decided it was
time to leave. Charlie reluctantly agreed- since he
took the bus from his motel he figured he best be
getting back--although the hippies didn't pose much
of a threat. He asked the anthro-dude if there was
something he could do for him for being so nice. The
anthro dude states to Charlie that a fluted point
would be nice...Charlie stated that those are a bit
hard to come by- but I could make you a damn nice one.
The anthro dude said that would be great. Charlie
made the anthro dude a very nice chalcedony folsom
point and took bee's wax and stuck the flutes back
in place so the students could see the point both
fluted and

The next morning Charlie got up and took the bus
inland to Stockton, California in the Central Valley
(not far from Bakersfield). There in Stockton was a
museum called "The Ishi Museum" it had several dozen
of Ishi's points as well as a wine bottle ulu crafted
by Ishi. After an enjoyable time at the museum
Charlie looked around Stockton a while and then took
the bus back to the "Bay Area". On the bus back
Charlie reflected on his trip to Kroeber hall the day
before and todays visit to the Ishi museum. Charlie
had read Saxton Popes book on archery in 1925 and Ishi
had been Charlie's hero ever since. By the way-
Popes bow was a Shortened bush type British long bow. You archery
dudes my correct me
anytime!...Charlie was
working for Payway Feed Company at this time as their
pilot so he was fortunate to have taken the Payway
employs on this vacation. It was time to fly them
back home. If it were not for this trip Ishi's stuff
may have been buried a lot longer and the 5 Ishi
movies may never have been made..THE END Ray H.
Special thanks to Charlie Shewey for the many hours of
interview he gave me while doing this and other research! The last part of
my interview with Charlie is lost, he somehow bought points from the old Ishi Museum
in Sacramento - from the security guard and received from from the Berkly Museum as well. Some of Charlie's points have the museum access numbers as those at the museum and the museum number were smudged.
CHIPS. Permission from D.C. Waldorf.
PhotoUsed with permission of D.C. Waldorf.
Charlie Shewey - Knapper

Used with permission of D.C. Waldorf.

produced the Second edition. Still considered an expert on stone
tools and flintknapping, but retired from actual knapping, now at
nearly 90 years old Charlie Shewey is considered an intricate part of
modern flintknapping history and a living flintknapping legend.
Archaeologists, collectors and most certainly flintknappers owe a
great deal to Charlie Shewey. I t was he, in the 1960s, that obtained
the authentic Ishi points that were cast by Peter Bostrom's Lithic
Casting Lab, and therefore made available to all. Charle was a pilot,
Army trained, and he had the job in the 1960s, of flying people
around the country. On one trip to California's bay area charlie made
the trade of his life. In one trip he ended up with 4 Ishi points and
and one Ishi knife./

Rare Gold Stone Points Made By Ishi at Knapping Demo.Authentic Ishi Points from Private Collections. THE GOLD STONE POINTS

Through a shadowy maze of secret connections and back room meeting and a plethora of mass mailings fallowing up on leads and dead ends. Here is a portion of the Ishi points given away or sold by Ishi from his museum flintknapping demonstrations. All on this first post verified as authentic by chain of position and eye witness testimony and expert lithic technology diagnostics.

This first set is extremely rare, two points made by Ishi from MAN MADE Italian “Goldstone” , a copper powder laced glass made by Italian monks and imported to America.

Point one is a classic side notch point with uncharacteristic wide notching, gold stone is brittle and tends to brake away on delicate tear drop notching.

The point appears to have ear snapped during notching and may have been picked up by the customer as a discard at the demo? The point may have been damaged by an earlier owner. No photo of gold-stone point #2
Rare Ishi Points From Private Collections
Through a shadowy maze of secret connections and back room meeting and a plethora of mass mailings fallowing up on leads and dead ends. Here is a portion of the Ishi points given away or sold by Ishi from his museum flintknapping demonstrations. All on this first post verified as authentic by chain of position and eye witness testimony and expert lithic technology diagnostics.

Today Ishi is well known for the arrowhead named after him, a
stylized side notch type, he commonly knapped at his museum home, In
this case, Ishi's short five-year stay at the Museum of
Anthropology, University of California, a legend born of an odessy
that began August the 9th, of August 1911 ending on Ishi's death
March 25, 1916. According to Nelson (1916) . Nothing gave Ishi, and
the visiting public, as much interest and satisfaction as his
arrowhead chipping. The Ishi Point type discussed, he made several
varieties, is as follows: The classic Ishi point is best known for
its symmetrical tear drop notches in the lower margin of the point.
The notch enters at less than a thirty-second on an inch at the
entry point then expand to an eighth of an inch wide or more in the
body of the point. The deep teardrop notches extend three eighths to
a quarter of an inch deep into the face of the basal region. This
gives the neck area, between the notches, a similar diameter of the
prospective arrow shaft creating the perfect haft.

The classic Ishi point has a blade edge that is either straight or
incurvate. The base is concave. The point has sharp angular ears
below the characteristic notches. The point has a triangular form
giving the point the overall delicate but deadly outline. The point
has diffuse diamond cross-section created by a medial ridge. Ishi
points have closed tear drop notches.

The medial section of the Ishi point has subtle oblique flaking
patterns, more pronounced on the elongated specimens. Oblique or
parallel flaking is done, according to Errett Callahan, to create an
extremely sharp edge, as oblique edges do not have delta flakes and
therefore less final retouch is necessary and the blade edge is
razor sharp. The blade edge on an Ishi point is usually incurvate,
this a result of the final pass of oblique medial flakes. The clear
glass material gives the point an ice crystal look, that combined
with its' oblique parallel pattern flakes and near perfect symmetry,
transcends all description of beauty.

"Goldstone (gemstone)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Goldstone is a type of glass made with copper or copper salts in the presence of a reducing flame. Under normal oxidative conditions, copper ions meld into the silica to produce transparent bluish-green glass; when the reduced goldstone melt cools, the copper remains in atomic isolation and precipitates into small crystalline clusters. The finished product can take a smooth polish and be carved into beads, figurines, or other artifacts suitable for semiprecious stone, and in fact goldstone is often mistaken or misrepresented as a natural material.

The most common form of goldstone gives the illusion of being reddish-brown, although in fact that color comes from the copper crystals and the glass itself is colorless. Some goldstone variants have an intensely-colored glass matrix—usually blue or violet, more rarely green—and a more silvery appearance to the suspended crystals, whose color may be partially masked by the glass or which may be based on different metals than copper (perhaps cobalt, manganese, or chromium).

The manufacturing process for goldstone was discovered in seventeenth-century Venice by the Miotti family, which was granted an exclusive license by the Doge. Persistent folklore attributes the discovery and secret of goldstone to an unnamed Italian monastic order, giving rise to the alternate name "monk's gold" or "monkstone". Another name, "stellaria", is based on the starry internal reflections.

Curiously, goldstone is one of the few cases where a synthetic simulant provided the eponym for the similar natural stone. The original Italian name for goldstone is "avventurina" or some similar word or phrase indicating its accidental discovery, hence the mineral name "aventurine" for forms of feldspar or quartz with mica inclusions that give a similar glittering appearance. Yet another name for goldstone is "aventurine glass", but this should be discouraged to avoid confusion with the minerals."

Blue Green Insulator Glass Point Made By Ishi.

Native Americans and Australian Aborigines both made arrowheads out of Insulators. The telegraph companies got fed up with the knappers steeling their glass isolators that they would leave free ones piles up by the poles so they wouldn't have to repair the section taken down by the knappers.This style insulator, nicknamed "signal", is one of the most diversely colored styles produced by Hemingray. Colors exist in practically the entire spectrum! The example shown above is blue/green and you can see the point made by Ishi, at the museum is the same color
Primary Embossings:
No Name

Style Number:

Date Produced:

This point is extremely rare, made by Ishi from MAN MADE blue-green insulator glass
Point one is a classic side notch point with uncharacteristic wide notching,Inulator glass is brittle and tends to brake away on delicate tear drop notching.

MY ISHI RESERCH PROPOSAL (BASED ON Rondeau, M.F., and V.L. Rondeau. RESEARCH FORMAT)  OOPS glad it got stolen!


Do to politics, law suits and high costs the Ishi statue was never made.  But here is the interesting story of how it almost came to be.

Hello All, I am excited to announce that world renowned Bronze artist, Estella Loretto, has expressed an enthusiastic interest in rendering an Ishi memorial statue, this is exciting news. Now is a good time for all those interested in helping with the project to start making contacts and generating ideas; artistic, political and financial.

Press Release
Press Contacts:
Marka Smith I Media Contact I 505.795.8186 l
Jude Byrne | Communications Director | 305.812.5473 |
Estella Loretto Fine Art & Gentle Spirit Studio Gallery Presents
Star Dancing: A Celebration of Indian Market 2010
Exhibition of Monumental Bronzes, Paintings, Mixed Media Masks and Jewelry by Internationally Renowned Native American Artist Estella Loretto, Saturday, August 21, 5pm-9pm
Santa Fe, N.M.–July 21, 2010 - On Saturday, August 21, 2010, Estella Loretto Fine Art & Gentle Spirit Studio Gallery will present Star Dancing : A Celebration of Indian Market 2010, at a private artist’s reception.
Known for her deep love and appreciation of Mother Earth, Estella Loretto has decided to showcase her monumental bronzes, paintings and jewelry under the stars amidst the beauty of her Gentle Spirit Studio Gallery and Sculpture Garden and forego the bustling crowds of the traditional Indian Art Market held on the town plaza. Located just 10 minutes from town, the sacred space offers panoramic sunset views and a sparkling night sky. Those present will experience one of Estella’s trademarks, i.e., art that has the power to create healing environments.
This event features the return of her powerful “Peaceful Warrior’s Prayer” which has been on loan to the Indian Pueblo Cultural Center in Albuquerque for the past 2 years. Measuring 10 ft. tall, this bronze tribute to the Sacredness of Life, Peace, Harmony and the Oneness of All People, is simply too “monumental” in size to fit the scale of the downtown Indian Market.
Locals may be familiar with the first edition of “Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha” which is prominently and permanently installed in the front entrance to St. Francis Basilica in downtown Santa Fe. A second Kateri in the edition commissioned by Archbishop Michael Sheehan of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe will join other monumental bronzes in the sculpture garden.
New art by Estella Loretto will also be available and on display including bronzes, paintings and mixed media masks. “My art is inspired by nature and the beauty of life’s unfolding. It is stylized, colorful, and contemporary, rooted in but not confined by my cultural traditions”, Estella says.
The evening will also present selected works by other Native American guest artists.
Pueblo hand-drummers and other Native musicians will offer traditional music.
About Estella Loretto

“Creating art is an unfolding prayer”, says the deeply spiritual Estella Loretto.
"My personal experience of her is this: sacred expression is her way of life. In her art, in her friendships, in her family life, she is expressing spirit. To know her is to be inspired... experience her sacred gifts. I, for one, am ever grateful." stated the artist, Carl Schuman.
Born and raised on the Pueblo of Jemez, New Mexico, Estella Loretto is currently the only Native American woman working in monumental bronze sculpting. She is recognized both nationally and internationally as one of the finest sculptors living today.
Her talents go beyond her sculptures and include paintings, mixed media masks, jewelry and other new combinations being birthed daily.
She has studied and trained with mentors including her mother, her grandmother, and most notably with Native American sculptor Allen Houser-Haozous. She was his last student before his death in 1994.

Estella left her native New Mexican home at the Pueblo of Jemez at age 15 and traveled the world for eight years studying with remarkable artists in Italy, Japan, India, Nepal, Mexico, New Zealand, and Australia.
Combining her life-long artistic studies and gifts with her spiritual vision of the world and her deep love of family and traditions, she brings the spirit of life into form for all to experience and enjoy.
Estella Loretto Fine Art
Gentle Spirit Studio & Sculpture Garden
34 Wildflower Way, Santa Fe, NM 

For private appointments, please call 505.986.8471


Hello fans of Ishi , I am a flintknapper, I went to C.S.U.N. and graduated with a degree in Anthropology in 1984. My academic focus was archaeology and lithic studies under Clay Singer. I worked as an archaeologist for a time and still do the occasional small project. During my life I was exposed to the reading and research relating to Ishi, “Last wild Indian In America”. Ishi was a huge influence in my life's journey of wilderness experiences.

(Steve Allely)
The purpose of this communication is to generate interest in a project of some magnitude. My plan is to erect a very large memorial to Ishi. I would like it to be in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco, where Ishi did many of his technical demonstrations. I am still measuring the feasibility of the project, so as of yet, the park has not been contacted.
Among other things, Ishi is the father of traditional archery, instinctive archery- hunting, bow making and flintknapping in North America. Furthermore, he embodies much of the Native American Indian experience, having lived in the traditional life-way and the brutal transition into the Industrial world. There have been numerous Ishi films and books, and even some small memorials. What I propose is something on a grand scale, yet showing the proper dignity and respect Ishi deserves. At first thought of a chainsaw art statue, but Pat Smith and Richard Burrill
gave better arguments for bronze sculpture.
Below are Ray and Bryan Harwood with some statues commissioned, in bronze, by the late Buck Owens. Hank Williams and Buck Owens.

Ray Harwood,

What I need now is to create "buzz" about the project, get a committee together, formulate a list of grants and endowments, and identify key individuals that can get this project to fruition. Thanks.

James and Ray Harwood with a Bronze of John Muir (Yosemite)


The Brain and Heart Of Ishi
by Ray Harwood
from "Knapping Knews"

The California Indians have been trying to get the existing remains of Ishi back from the Smithsonian for burial. Originally, Ishi wanted to be buried in the traditional Yahi fashion but the powers that be at the time burned his body. Before they burned his body, they removed his brain and sent it to the Smithsonian. Ever since the brain was transported, the California Native Americans have rallied for its return for proper burial. In recent months, something seems to have changed and Ishi may be returned to his Deer Creek home.

The latest Ishi "marker" that was established on May 31, 2008
and may be visited at the Narrows between Deer Creek and Mill Creek
(Richard Burrill)

At the corner of Oro-Quincy Highway and Oak Street in Oroville, CA stands a small monument. The latest Ishi "marker" that was established on May 31, 2008
and may be visited at the Narrows between Deer Creek and Mill Creek, led by Mountain Maidu/Pit River elder Beverly Benner Ogle, designed and built by Jeff Hack, and Leander McInturf of Oroville. Made of fieldstone rocks gathered from the Deer Creek Canyon area, it bears a bronze California Registered Historic Landmark plaque which reads: "For thousands of years the Yahi Indians roamed the foothills between Mt. Lassen and the Sacramento Valley. Settlement of this region by the white man brought death to the Yahi by gun, by disease, and by hunger. By the turn of the last century only a few remained. Ishi, the last known survivor of these people was discovered at this site in 1911. His death in 1916 brought an end to the stone age in California".

Ishi, emaciated. starving and confused, was about dead when he wandered into this area in 1911. He had been roaming the foothills alone since 1908 when Oro Power and Light Co. sent surveyers near his cave in the Deer Creek area, and he had tried unsuccessfully to scare them off. Professor T.T. Waterman, an anthropologist from the University of California at Berkeley, came to Oroville after reading about the stranger in the San Francisco Examiner. He took Ishi back to the university and was amazed to learn that he spoke a language that was thought to have been extinct for hundreds of years. Ishi then worked at the school both as a janitor and as a teacher of his culture. Three years after he left the wilderness, Ishi died of pneumonia. Dr. Saxton Pope wrote of Ishi when he died, "He closes a chapter in history. He looked upon us as sophisticated children, smart, but not wise. He knew nature, which is always true. His were the qualities of character that last forever. He was kind. He had courage and self-restraint, and though all had been taken from him, there was not bitterness in his heart. His soul was that of a child, his mind that of a philosopher".

To learn more about Ishi one may request to see the film about him at the Lake Oroville Visitors Center or read The History Of Modern Flintknapping, Ishi In Two Worlds, or Ishi - The story of an American Indian. In 1992 "The Last Of His Tribe" starring Graham Green as Ishi was filmed in the area. The movie was aired on HBO and is now available in video stores.

Ishi was an excellent flintknapper. His points are marveled at by even the greatest flintknappers of today. One point type that was one Ishi made most of the time was named after him, "The Ishi Point". Flintknapper Jim Redfearn described the point type in a 1997 issue of "Chips" - "One of my favorite points is the Ishi point. The one-inch by three-inch triangular point is one of the most beautiful and deadly stone points ever designed. The most incredible thing about an Ishi Point is the notches. Less than a thirty-secondth of an inch at the entry, they expand to almost an eighth of an inch wide, and vary from a fourth to three-eighths deep into the side of the point. The notches start in about one-fourth to five-sixteenths inch from the corners of the concave base" Redfearn knows these points well as he is a fine knapper and often replicates these type points and he has viewed the actual points made by Ishi in the Charlie Shewey collection. Modern knappers that have done very good work on replicating Ishi points are; Steve Allely (2010 World Champion Notching), Ed Mosure(2009 World Champion Notching) , Joe Dabill, Steve Carter, Barney DeSimone, and Errett Callahan. I have made many but not quite to the same level as these other knappers ... some day! To learn more about all these knappers read History of Modern Flintknapping. To learn more about this point type I recommend Chips, Vol.9 (1997), California Point Types, Story In Stone, and the Piltdown Productions Catalog. Chips and Story In Stone obtained from : Mound Builder Books, P.O. Box 702, Branson, MO. 65615

One of the most common flintknapping tools today is a long dowel-shaped stick with a copper, antler, or soft steel tip that is used for pressure flaking. This is the "Ishi stick", named for Ishi. The original Ishi stick was made and used by Ishi himself. It had a handle made of wood and a tip made from an iron nail, and the body was wrapped with rawhide. The actual specimen can be seen, with proper authority, at the Lowie Museum at Berkeley. For more information on the Ishi Stick, obtain 20th Century Lithics from Mound Builder Books at the address given before.(R.H.)



Anonymous said...
Massasoit isn't some random Native American that stands outside of the Capital just so the residents can get in their dose of the stereotypical Native American. He actually has a purpose that, if people stopped to take the time, would be realized.

Massasoit was friendly with the settlers in Massachusetts and helped them when they struggled to survive in this foreign land. Take what you want from the history of Massasoit, but he's more than just some Native American, and should have a purpose to those outside of Massachusetts.

Utah is what you decide to make of it, and what stereotypes you decide to play in to. By the way, 1988 was a while ago."


Missoula Montana

Simulation of Subtradition 18-E
By Ray Harwood. part 1

Based on research notes made in 1999, this article was send to CHIPS, but Dane Martin would not publish it.

Replications and simulations of knapped points is very popular.  Most notable are the Ishi points.

Many proto-historic flintknapping researchers feel that many of the classic Ishi points in collections, including museums, were actually made by Don Crabtree. Some of the research done by Steve Shakley, Flintknapper Jimmy Williams and myself have shed some light on this issue, for example Crabtree did not use abraided platforms on pressure flaked replicas, this was mistakenly attributed to Ishi as were the Wintu points.

Jeanne Day Binning, Don Crabtree. Flintknappers 

Photo: Tribute to Don Cratree
June 8, 1912 - November 16, 1980
“Dean of American flintknappers”
Giuliano Bastiani Italia
THIS ART BY: Giuliano Bastiani


Compiled by Ray Harwood
(Western Lithics)

DON CRABTREE. Book by: Ray Harwood (3) "Replicas". Many of the modern replicas are obsidian pieces produced by Don Crabtree, a self-taught researcher who was one of the first to master stone tool production methods. About 250 objects.

Jeanne Day Binning,  Don Crabtree

Don, Donald Crabtree, Dean of American Flintknapping.
Jeanne Day Binning,  Don Crabtree
Don, Donald Crabtree, Dean of American Flintknapping.
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
Don, Donald Crabtree, Dean of American Flintknapping.
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
Don, Donald Crabtree, Dean of American Flintknapping.
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
Crabtree, often referred to as "the Dean of American
flintknapping". He was born June 8, 1912, in Heyburn, Idaho.
According to Harvey L. Hughett of the University of Idaho: Don spent
his early youth in Salmon, Idaho where he first became interested in
Indians and their tools. His mother would have him run errands for
the next-door neighbor and as a reward this woman would give Don an
arrowhead which her husband had gathered. Young Don became fascinated
with these tools and even at this early age began to wonder why and
how they were made. There were, at this time, many Indians in Salmon.
Thanks to Harvey Hughett, at the University of Idaho, whom is now
curator of the Don Crabtree Lithic Collection, we now know much more
about Don Crabtree's childhood. I spoke to Mr. Hughett a few in
October of 1999 (Val Waldorf had no problem either) he gave me
permission to quote his copyright article on Don Crabtree in Chips
Vol. 11, No.3, 1999.: "Young Don became fascinated with these tools
and even at this early age began to wonder why and how they were
made. There were, at this time, many Indians in Salmon. Their custom
was to sit flat on the sidewalk with their legs stretched in front of
them. Don found it great fun to jump over their legs and to talk with
them, for which he was severely reprimanded by his mother.
When Don was six, his Family moved to Twin Falls. This was desert
country and Don spent most of his time hunting for artifacts, Indian
campsites and building his collection of Indian tools. The family's
home was just a stone's through from the Snake River Canyon and Don
spent every possible moment hunting in the canyon, collecting from
campsites and caves and adding to his collection. He also collected
obsidian flakes and began to try to reproduce the artifacts. This
meant more trips to the canyon for knapping material. Soon, young
Crabtree had gathered a fairly large collection of artifacts and his
interest in experimenting with different stones and methods of
manufacture to achieve replication increased. He tried many
approaches to holding and applying force but with little success and
much failure. After interviewing many local Indians, he was
disappointed that he was unable to learn anything of how these
fascinating artifacts were made. Flintknapping was essentially a lost
art even at the time.
Don was constantly in trouble with his father for being away from
home so much, for the many cuts on his hands and the permanent
bloodstains on his clothing. He received many reprimands for coming
home after dark. Even this did not cure him of his quest for
knowledge of the Native Americans and their tools. At one point, his
father became so disgusted with Don spending so much time knapping he
offered to pay him $100.00 if he would promise never to make another
arrowhead. Don wanted a bicycle and a gun so badly that he considered
this offer for some time. However, the love of Indian lore won and he
told his father that he could not give up his attempts to make tools
as the Indians had.
In the late 1930's he was supervisor of the Vertebrate and
Invertebrate Laboratory at the University of California at Berkley,
this is also where Ishi's artifacts are curated. Also, Ted Orcutt
still lived not far to the North. Crabtree also worked in the
Anthropology lab with the well known Anthropologist Alfred Krueber,
whom was Ishi's friend and caretaker at the museum a few short years
before. According to Dr. Errett Callahan (1979), following a
flintworking demonstration at a meeting of the American Association
of Museums in Ohio, in 1941, Crabtree was employed at the Ohio State
Lithic Laboratory with H. Holmes Ellis and Henry Shertrone. He was
also advisor in Lithic Studies at the University of Pennsylvania and
the Smithsonian Institution's museum.
During world war II, Crabtree was coordinating Engineer with
Bethlehem Steel in California. Between 1952 and 1962, he was County
Supervisor with the U.S.D.A in Twin Falls, Idaho. In 1962 and 1975,
Crabtree was research associate in lithic technology at the Idaho
State Museum in Pocatello."
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame

Not only was Crabtree a master flintknapper and an inspirational
flintknapper , he was also an expert on the theoretical aspect of
stone tool studies. Crabtree published papers on replicative
flintworking and other aspects of lithic studies in such publications
"American Antiquity" (1939,1968), "Current Anthropology"
(1969), "Science" (1968,1970), "Curator" (1970), "Tebiwa" (1964,
1966, 1967, 1968, 1972, 1973,1974), and "Lithic Technology" (1975).
Crabtree's textbook, "An Introduction to Flintworking", was the main
publication readily available from 1972 on. The Crabtree book,
although 26 years old, is still a classic and is one of the most
referenced books in lithic studies today. The book is easy to read
and is full of excellent drawings and text. The book is available
through the Idaho Museum of Natural History, Idaho State University,
Pocatello, Idaho. They also have republished Crabtree's articles,
papers, and videos, his articles are better than ours decades later.
Crabtree was featured in many archaeological films in his day, many
were shown around the world in class rooms from elementary school to
doctoral classes. These films influence many up and coming
flintknappers. The film "Blades and Pressure Flaking" (1969) won best
anthropology film at the 1970 American Film Festival.
In 1972, the Idaho Museum of Natural History received a grant from
the National Science Foundation for the production of several 16mm
films featuring the legendary flintknapper. Just a few years ago
these films were dubbed onto VHS video tape and made available to the
public through Idaho Museum Publications. Though faded somewhat, this
footage still maintains its detail and shows Don Crabtree at his
best. In the Shadow of Man , Don is shown quarrying obsidian at Glass
Buttes in Oregon. The Flintworker discusses the basics of
flintknapping, stone tools are made using simple percussion
techniques, and the Hertzian cone theory is introduced. Ancient
Projectile Points covers the making of bifacial points. The hunter's
Edge covers prismatic blade making. The Alchemy of Time concerns heat
treating, and the manufacture of Clovis, Folsom and Cumberland
points. In 1978, Crabtree had open heart surgery with stone tools.
The blades Crabtree made were so sharp that Crabtree's doctor agreed
to use them on him after seeing how sharp they were. The first
surgery one of Crabtrees's Ribs and a lung section were removed, an
18 inch cut. Crabtree's stone tools were so sharp that there was
hardly a scar.
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
Don, Donald Crabtree, Dean of American Flintknapping.
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
Don, Donald Crabtree, Dean of American Flintknapping. Don Crabtree flintknapped all types of artifacts including fluted
Folsom , parallel flaking, chevron flaking, notching, blade making
and even Ted Orcutt style large obsidian biface points. His large
points were very similar to Orcutts , some were so thin that they
looked like dinner plates, his obsidian arrow points were very
similar to those he helped to curate in Berkley made by Ishi.
While working agate Crabtree noticed that his had a satiny texture
and the Indian arrowheads out of the same material were like opal.
After much experimentation he rediscovered heat treating of flint
materials to improve knapping quality.
In the later part of his life Crabtree traveled the world meeting and
flintknapping with each nations leaders in lithic fields of endeavor
and really opened the door for all of us. During this time
flintknapping saw its heyday, "knap-ins", lithic conferences and
publications. Sort of what what is happening now but with the
Don Crabtree, Dean of American flintknappers, died on November 16,
1980 from complications of heart disease, within six months of
Francois Bordes . When Bordes and Crabtree passed away the 1970's
academic flintknapping heyday passed away with Them. THE PALEO
KNAPPERS : The Late Don Crabtree, of southern Idaho, is considered to
be the "Dean of American Flintknapping" not only for his fine
publications, but also for the vast amount of important information
he uncovered in a life devoted to the study of stone tools. Don was
most probably the first flintknapper in thousands of years to flute a
Folsom point, as early as 1941 Crabtree was employed at the Lithic
Laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania and the prestigious
Smithsonian Institution. He had experimented with fluting in the
1930s but became quite famous for his studies into the Lindenmier
Folsom in 1966 . Don Crabtree passed away on November 16, 1980.
Jeffery Flenniken and Gene Titmus, students of Crabtree carried on
the studies and are still considered to be among the best
flintknappers in the world. Don Crabtree was born on June 08, 1912 and died on November 01, 1980 at the age of 68. This person last resided in Kimberly, Idaho in Twin Falls County. Don Crabtree was assigned the social security number (SSN) of: 518-07-2993. Zip 83341. 3800 block E. Orchard Dr.

  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
Don, Donald Crabtree, Dean of American Flintknapping. Crabtree's Notable Publications:
Crabtree, D.E. (1966) A Stoneworker's Approach to Analyzing and Replicating the Lindenmeier Folsom. Tebiwa 10(1):3-39.
Crabtree, D.E. (1967) Notes on Experiments in Flintkanppnig: 3- the Flintknapper's Raw Material. Tebiwa 10(1):8-24.
Crabtree, D.E. (1967) Notes on Experiments in Flintkanppnig: 4- Tools Used for Making Flaked Stone Artifacts. Tebiwa 10(1):60-73.
Crabtree, D.E. (1968) Mesoamerican Polyhedral Cores and Prismatic Blades. American Antiquity 33(4):446-478.
Crabtree, D.E. (1970) Flaking Stone with Wooden Implements. Science 169:146-153.
Crabtree, D.E. (1972) An Introduction to Flintworking. Occasional Papers No. 28. Idaho State Museum, Pocatello.
Crabtree, D.E. (1972) The Cone Fracture Principle and the Manufacture of Lithic Materials. Tebiwa 15(2):29-42.
Crabtree, D.E. (1973) Experiments in Replicating Hohokam Points. Tebiwa 16(1):10-45.
Crabtree, D.E. (1973) The Obtuse Angle as a Functional Edge. Tebiwa 16(1):46-53.
Crabtree, D.E. (1974) Grinding and Smoothing of Stone Artifacts. Tebiwa 17(1):1-6.
Crabtree, D.E. and B.R. Butler (1964) Notes on Experiments in Flintkanppnig: 1- Heat Treatment of Silica Materials. Tebiwa 7(1):1-6.
Crabtree, D.E. and E.L. Davis (1968) Experimental Manufacture of Wooden Implements with Tools of Flaked Stone. Science 159:426-428.
Crabtree, D.E. and E.H. Swanson (1968) Edge-Ground Cobbles and Blade-Making in the Northwest. Tebiwa 11(2):50-54.

Don, Donald Crabtree, Dean of American Flintknapping. The International Flintknappers ‘ Hall of Fame and Museum is encouraging individuals of all ages to “Be A Superior Example,” through a new education program as part of a new curriculum to promote healthy habits, while encouraging everyone to live free of drugs and other such substances or vices. It serves as the central point for the study of the history of flintknapping in the United States and beyond, displays flintknapping-related artifacts and exhibits, and honors those who have excelled in the craft, research/ writing, promoting events, and serving the knapping community in an ethical and wilderness loving manner.

  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame





  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
Add caption
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame
  Don Crabtree Flint knapping Hall of Fame

Crabtree student and cook at the Crabtree Field school: Dr. Jeanne Day Binning

Crabtree student and cook at the Crabtree Field school: Dr. Jeanne Day Binning with Flintknapping Digest Editor:  Ray Harwood 1983
Don Crabtree Points
Flintknapping experiments of impact: Schools of thought as reflected in the work of Crabtree, Flenniken, and Pelcin. by Michael J. Miller, M.A. A great deal of knowledge developed through experimental method has been passed down by the numerous researchers of flintknapping. Our quest to understand the lithic implements created by our most ancient ancestors to their historic counterparts culminates in the 1960s as the advent of a new archaeology sweep through our discipline. The development of new theory, critique, experiment, methodology, and archaeology as a science produced several key figures whom I focus this work. Breaking these researchers into their own context works to develop them in their individual, unique, intellectual, and timely frameworks. The 1960s saw a great rise in the number of practicing archaeologists and thusly so an increased interest in lithic artefacts. The emphasis that was once placed on describing artefacts and establishing chronologies shifted toward a focus on the organization of culture and explanation of change and adaptation as portrayed in assemblages. The tools of prehistoric peoples were now looked at with a greater scrutiny, as well as, the roles they played in culture and nature. The replication studies of François Bordes and Don Crabtree had a major impact on lithic analysis. The use of experimental archaeology allowed them to conduct simulation studies and determine probable lithic tool production techniques. They were not the first to conduct and publish on flintknapping (see Evans 1872), but were looked upon by archaeologists for answers and methods to help scientific archaeology learn more about past technologies. The archaeological community found replication studies and background training in flintknapping of value; the framework was laid for lithic biface reduction sequence analysis, refitting, microwear, and assemblage analysis. Lithic replication studies utilize numerous experimental approaches to analyze stone tools. The fracture mechanics are a large part of this understanding and provide an insight into the production of assemblages. The differentiation between formal tools and the waste material left over from their creation act as attributes in the understanding of stone working technology. The work of modern flintknappers using primitive stone working tools and techniques provides a window for prehistoric lithic artefact examination. A brief review of the history of flintknapping and the replication of stone tools will give us a better understanding of lithic analysis in current archaeology. Since the very first reports on flintknapping (see Skertchly 1879) and occidental pondering of ancient stone tools, we have, until recently, little insight into these areas. The replicas of primitive stone tools by William Smith and Edward Simpson sold as relics to collectors may be the first recorded flintknapping experiments where skill in stoneworking techniques can be called replicative (Forrest 1983). Later academic studies of flintknapping fracture mechanics (see Cushing 1895 and Holmes 1891) were tested to help understand possible prehistoric technique. A relatively large gap in the literature exists between these early experiments and those undertaken in the 1960s. The new and mostly scientific works being published brings us to the first of the major contributors to lithic technology, Don Crabtree. Don Crabtree, an avocational archaeologist and flintknapper, uses experimental archaeology to engage questions of prehistoric tool manufacture and the minds of lithic artefact researchers. Focusing on biface manufacture, fluting techniques, and blade core technologies, he forged a relationship with the numerous lithic analysts and today is seen as the “dean of American flintknappers” (Knudson 1982). Crabtree’s work relates primarily to questions of process, he tries to get at the “how” behind the creation of lithic artefacts. His 1966 article is the first reported attempt to replicate a Lindenmeier Folsom point. The work is a model of replicative experimentation that carefully examines the archaeological specimen, its debitage and describes the salient technological characteristics. He lists the numerous methods and factors used to try to replicate the specimen; he believes these sorts need to be taken into account for successful replication. He follows a proper scientific approach by listing the procedures followed and the results obtained in each of the experiments. Although it seems arbitrary, he notes to what degree the completed point and associated debris resembled the archaeological specimens. The comparison between the replicas and artefacts indicate which method or methods replicate the specimen successfully. He concludes that indirect percussion with rest, pressure using a chest crutch, clamp, and rest, or a combo of the two can successfully produce a Lindenmeier Folsom. In his 1968 article on Mesoamerican polyhedral blade cores, he attempts to replicate the technology that produced them utilizing the insights provided by historical notes written by Spanish Franciscan Friar Juan de Torquemada (Holmes 1919, 323-4). By recreating the tools, working positions, and techniques described by Torquemada, Crabtree finds numerous faults with the written record. Breaking the text down to pieces and forming analogies between other texts allows him to create homologues in the tool morphologies and create stone working techniques from the inferences. It is interesting to note that he finds great fault in the translation of the text and ultimately takes very little of the described process to create his own method; Crabtree ultimately discovers his own technique using tools similar to those described in the text. The experiments create good empirical data and allow him to test several methods that may have been practiced prehistorically to produce blades; difficulties with securing the core, pressure flaker tips, movement of the knappers body mass, and even the placement of the knappers feet all provide answers to questions he never intended to ask. The use of slow motion photography, a novel idea, allowed him to see the actual detachment of the blade from the core; these helped him to fine tune the necessary downward and outward pressure to remove blades successfully from the core. The empiricist approach taken by Crabtree in his work is shown in his conclusions statement when he states “no amount of theorizing… will give a true picture of these techniques; only by replicating can we change theory to fact” (Crabtree 1968, 33). The processual school of thought Crabtree adhered to, endorsed his positivist approach to experiment and dominated in his understanding of past processes. The processual behaviour associated with flintknapping places primary importance on replication of flaked stone tool reduction techniques; Crabtree and the experiments he performed are likely to be the cause of the replication of this mindset in today’s practicing replicators and lithic analysts. In my own research I followed, without thinking, the basic map of all lithic experiments performed before me and successfully duplicated, in my own eyes and my advisors, the lithic reduction process of a past culture. As the work of other researchers needs to be reviewed and addressed in the work that we perform, it undoubtedly works to change and conform the thoughts of each and all who place relevance in the author’s words. Crabtree’s work was indispensable experimental archaeology. He was able to enlighten numerous students and colleagues. Such an influence has created a vast knowledgebase for today’s lithic analysts, but one must wonder how the face of lithic analysis may look today if he had not stepped up. Of equal stature are the works of François Bordes, esteemed archaeologist and flintknapper of the Old World. Crabtree first meet Bordes at a lithic technology conference in France (see Jelinek 1965) and found common ground and produced an article (Bordes and Crabtree 1969) on the Corbiac blade technique. In his publications written in English, he rarely addresses experimentation in flintknapping, but focuses on issues of typology and chronology (see Bordes 1968; Bordes & Sonneville-Bordes 1970) in assemblages. The Levallois technique, developed by Bordes (1961), as described in Andrefsky (1998) is a lineal reduction that shapes a core to create a continuous striking platform around the perimeter in order to shape the surface for the removal of a single large Levallois flake. Several researchers have attempted to refine the process in a systematic analysis of reduction techniques (Bradley 1977; Boeda 1986; Geneste1985) and all found a theme in that the specific goal of the reduction is to create the properly shaped core for the proper Levallois flake to be removed (Andrefsky 1998). Bordes initial identification and description of Levallois technology fits the temporal context and framework of knapping experiments and fills a void in the Paleolithic reduction knowledgebase allowing future researchers to apply archaeological analysis. In the 1970s the contributions to experimental archaeology became more academic and scientific in nature, relying on stone working techniques and how the final product was formed (see Bradley 1974; Flenniken 1978). The experiments performed by Flenniken in the late 70s till the late 90s reflect the mindset of many lithic experimenters adding greatly to the knowledge base of lithic analysis. Flenniken (1978) replicates the Lindenmeier Folsom point type by creating a research question based upon the work of his precursors taking greatly from Crabtree (1966). The proper research question proved to be very useful in his experimental approach to understanding the techniques and stages of manufacture. Building on the stages of Crabtree (1966) he focuses specifically on fluting sequence; it is of much debate when the flutes were removed during flaking (Irwin 1968, 230; Crabtree 1966; and Wilmsen 1974, 14-15). He creates an experimental procedure based on the analysis of an archaeological assemblage and informs the reader of the materials and the method making the experiment replicable. Defined stages of manufacture are provided and include figures, timing, methods, and numerous notes on successes and failures. His conclusions find Crabtree’s (1966, 22) work erroneous and suggest archaeologically significant fluting production techniques, as well as, the possible time input and failure rate of prehistoric knappers. Flenniken’s reification of past studies demonstrates his processual approach to experimental replication studies, underpinning his constructs of “stage” and mode in the interpretation of manufacture sequences. The study of morphology and typology by Flenniken and Raymond (1986) questions the idea of using stone points as time markers for prehistoric cultures. They believe that the “conceptual and procedural modes” put forth by Rouse (1960, 318) do no adequately reflect the production and use of artefacts (Flenniken and Raymond 1986, 604). By questioning this notion they construct an experiment which tests the modes of manufacture and fully undermine the concept of projectile point typology. A very well defined methodology is presented to test Elko corner-notched and eared point typologies in a hunting situation. The rejuvenation of broken points, based on prehistoric evidence of resharpening, found that due to the higher percent of basal damage to experimental replicas that temporal type could change beyond the boundaries set by the lithic analyst. They suggest that assigning type based on morphology is risky; only the technological analysis of the entire lithic reduction sequence can adequately mark time (611). By questioning the normative interpretation of tools and providing empirical evidence that one out of every three aboriginal projectile points may have changed temporal type while in prehistoric context, challenges lithic analysts to reform their ideas of typology and its application to the prehistoric record. Thomas (1986) questions the ability of a modern flintknapper to reproduce prehistoric human behaviour by suggesting that reality in understanding the life cycle of an artefact can never be fully identified. The range of variability in the production of replicas, the interpretation of process by modern day flintknappers, and the tool manufacture process of analogous forms suggests there is “absolutely no assurance that mere familiarity with specific techniques of lithic technology will automatically lead to accurate interpretation of the past” (1986, 621). The need for systematically controlled experiments in lithic replication work influenced lithic analysts to become more strict and scientific, but these studies in the lab were seen by others as no longer realistic or applicable. The resulting studies lead to a more archaeology based replication science as found in Flenniken and Wilke’s (1989) work on typology, technology, and chronology of Great Basin dart points. The two authors focus on the constructs of typology in the Great Basin and define general rules that archaeologists adhere to when placing a projectile point into a cultural type (Flenniken and Wilke 1989). They take from previous studies performed by Flenniken on dart points and their tendencies when utilized for hunting and dispatching animals to suggest that lithic technology studies can provide meaningful interpretations of the use-life of an artefact. The damage caused from use on the two archetypal forms of dart points suggests that nearly all sub-types may be directly related and temporally linked; the chronology of types is brought into question and the low number of significant attributes portrays stone dart points to be the least stable artefact type (153). The typological approach has created an illusion that Great Basin dart points can be set into periods and are static. Notions of discard are addressed to help our understanding of a dart point’s use-life and work to substantiate the conclusion; ‘mixing of archaeological units’ need to be attended to and not ignored by archaeologists opting out for an intuitive chronology based on the assumptions and hypothetical succession of morphological types (156). Based on a processual approach and empirical data, the conclusion is well substantiated. As the work of lithic analysts and the replicators becomes less focused on the end product the by-products of flintknapping are put to use interpreting the past via controlled scientific experiments. The most informative and elaborate scientific experiments in flintknapping were performed by Dibble and Pelcin (see Dibble and Pelcin 1995; Pelcin 1997). These studies of flake creation cover the numerous factors that can effect the formation of flakes and provide archaeological insight by informing us of key variables in the technology of stone working. Dibble and Pelcin (1995) effectively began a series of controlled flintknapping experiments that use scientific controls and a lab environment to successfully speculate on prehistoric flintknapping processes. The study of the effect of hammer mass and velocity on flake mass suggests that two independent variables, exterior platform angle and platform thickness, can be adapted by the stone worker to reliably change the needed mass to remove a planned flake. The methods are laid out as expected in any reproducible experiment, as well as the needed materials with detailed descriptions. They take a heuristic approach by testing and utilizing different mathematical formula to account for the variables in the experiment. Hypothesis testing helps them to refine their experiment and data to disprove the ‘belief if a flake is produced, neither momentum nor its individual components of mass and velocity has a major effect in determining flake mass’ (431). The platform angle and thickness are ruled by a mass-force threshold based on the percussors mass; this threshold effect explains why a flintknapper believes that momentum produces larger flakes. The value of this experiment is in the empirical data and its practical application to flintknappers creating flakes. By informing the experimenters of such realistic effects based on specific variables that the flintknapper typically assumes, they can control their platforms and scientifically create the desired flake morphology. Pelcin builds on the earlier work of Dibble and Pelcin (1995) in his work on core surface morphology (1997). The creation of an experimental data set to inform a specific hypothesis, controlled core surface morphology can effect the flake attributes of length and thickness, correlated to the notion that prehistoric and modern knappers recognize this and utilize it informs the archaeological record. The ability to produce a specific flake size and mass may have been utilized prehistorically when conservation of lithic resources was needed. Scientific means and measures are created to control, manipulate and influence variables and work to eliminate the irregularities introduced by the human flintknapper (750). The experiment provided the needed detail in understanding ‘how the flake mass is distributed by the core surface morphology in relation to platform thickness and exterior platform angle’ (754) and provides a model to determine the mass (thickness, bulb of percussion size, length and width) of a flake based on the platform angle and thickness. These data can be extrapolated to reconstruct the location and amount of flake mass removed during pressure flaking which directly relates to the use-life of the flake tool and material limitations of the prehistoric flintknapper/tool-user. The numerous experiments of lithic analysts and flintknappers take several forms in the literature. Noting the inquires made of experimental archaeology are often those of empiricists looking for data to infer interpretations and the processualists wanting to delineate process and/or test hypotheses. Often mixing of the aforementioned work hand in hand to produce viable scientific archaeology producing insight into problems initially addressed; new questions discovered during the testing create further knowledge and inform the research beyond original concern. Lithic experimentation has provided a means to test certain aspects of the archaeological record; in science we can never change theory to fact, only disprove and recreate question that help us to further our understanding of the ancient human past. References Andrefsky, W. 1998. Lithics. Cambridge: University Press. Boeda, E. 1986. Approche technolgique du concept levallois et évaluation de son champs d’Applicatioń: tude de trios gisements saaliens et weichseliens de la France septentrionale. Doctoral dissertation, University of Paris X. Bordes, F. 1961. Typologie du paléolithique ancient et moyen. Publications de l’Institut de Préhistoire de l’Université de Bordeaux, Mémoire 1, Bordeaux. Bordes, F. & D. Crabtree. 1969. The Corbiac blade technique and other experiments. Tebiwa 12(2): 1-21. Bordes, F. & D. de Sonneville-Bordes. 1970. The Significance of variability in Paleolithic Assemblages. World Archaeology 2: 61-73. Bradley, B. 1974. Comments on the Lithic Technology of the Casper Site, in G. Frison (ed.), The Casper Bison Kill Site. 191-197. New York: Academic Press. Bradley, B. 1977. Experimental Lithic Technology with Special Reference to the Middle Paleolithic. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge. Crabtree, D. 1966. A stone-worker’s approach to analyzing and replicating the Lindenmeier Folsom. Tebiwa 9(1): 3-39. Crabtree, D. 1968. Mesoamerican polyhedral cores and prismatic blades. American Antiquity 33: 446-78. Cushing, F. 1895. The Arrow. American Anthropologist 8(4): 307-349. Dibble, H & A. Pelcin. 1995. The Effect of Hammer Mass and Velocity on Flake Mass. Journal of Archaeological Science 22: 429-439. Evans, J. 1872. The Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons and Ornaments of Great Britain. London: Longmans. Flenniken, J. 1978. Revaluation of the Lindemeier Folsom: A Replication Experiment in Lithic Technology. American Antiquity 43(3): 473-480. Flenniken, J. & A. Raymond. 1986. Morphological Projectile Point Typology: Replication Experimentation and Technological Analysis. American Antiquity 51: 603-14. Flenniken, J. & P. Wilke. 1989. Typology, Technology, and Chronology of Great Basin Dart Points. American Anthropologist 91: 49-58. Forrest, A. 1983. Masters of Flint. Suffolk: Lavenham Press. Geneste, J. 1985. Analyse lithique d’industries moustériennes du Périgord: une approche technologique du comportement des groups humains au paléolithique moyen. Doctoral dissertation, University of Bordeaux I. Henry, D., V. Haynes, & B. Bradley. 1976. Quantitative variations in flaked stone debitage. Plains Anthropologist 21: 57-61. Holmes, W. 1891. Maufacture of Stone Arrow-points. American Anthropologist 4: 49-58. Holmes, W. 1919. Handbook of Aboriginal American Antiquities. Part1: Introductory and the Lithic Industries. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 60. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. Irwin, H. 1968. The Itama: late Pleistocene inhabitants of the plains of the United States and Canada and the American Southwest. Published PhD thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge. Jelinek, A. 1965. Lithic Technology Conference, Les Eyzies, France. American Antiquity 31: 277-278. Knudson, R. 1982. Obituary, Don E. Crabtree, 1912-1980. American Antiquity 47(2): 336-343. Newcomer, M. 1975. Punch technique and Upper Paleolithic blades, in E. Swanson (ed.), Lithic technology. 97-102. The Hague: Mouton. Pelcin, A. 1997. The Effect of Core Surface Morphology on Flake Attributes: Evidence from a Controlled Experiment. Journal of Archaeological Science 24: 749-756. Rouse, I. 1960. The Classification of Artifacts in Archaeology. American Antiquity 25: 313-323. Skertchly, S. 1879. On the Manufacture of Gun-Flints, the Methods of Excavating for Flint, the Age of Paleolithic Man, and the Connection between Neolithic Art and the Gun-Flint Trade. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of England and Wales. London: Geological Survey. Thomas, D. 1986. Points on Points: A Reply to Flenniken and Raymond. American Antiquity 51: 619-627. Wilmsen, E. 1974. Lindenmeier: A Pleistocene hunting society. New York: Harper and Row. +++++++++++++++++++ West J Med. 1982 Mar;136(3):265-9. Ancient technology in contemporary surgery. Buck BA. Abstract Archaeologists have shown that ancient man developed the ability to produce cutting blades of an extreme degree of sharpness from volcanic glass. The finest of these prismatic blades were produced in Mesoamerica about 2,500 years ago. The technique of production of these blades was rediscovered 12 years ago by Dr. Don Crabtree, who suggested possible uses for the blades in modern surgery. Blades produced by Dr. Crabtree have been used in experimental microsurgery with excellent results. Animal experiments have shown the tensile strength of obsidian produced wounds to be equal to or greater than that of wounds produced by steel scalpels after 14 days of healing. We have been able to demonstrate neither flaking of glass blades into the wounds nor any foreign body reaction in healed wounds. Skin incisions in human patients have likewise healed well without complications. The prismatic glass blade is infinitely sharper than a honed steel edge, and these blades can be produced in a wide variety of shapes and sizes. It is therefore suggested that this type of blade may find an appropriate use in special areas of modern surgery XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Francois Bordesonce declared that archaeology could recognize a “pre-Crabtree” and a “post-Crabtree” era. In this earlier era, most researchers classified stone tools by shape or assumed function. In the later era, researchers became more sophisticated, considering landmarks and other features on flakes indicative of manufacture and use. Ruthann Knudson, in her 1982 obituary (Knudson 1982), cited Don Crabtree as “the dean of American flintknappers,” a titleJacques Tixier, when alerted that we were building an exhibit on Don Crabtree, penned a testimony to his friend and colleague. It is presented here as an acknowledgement of the impact Don had on the field of archaeology. Professor Tixierwrote: Hommage. J’airencontrépour la premiere foisDon Crabtree le 22 nov.1964 pour la “Lithic Technology Conference a les Eyzies.” Cetteréunionpassapresqueinapercueà l’époque. Cefutpourtant unedate trèsimportantepour l’étudedu comportementhumainaux temps préhistoriques, pour troisraisons: Cefutl’officialisationde la valeurde l’expérimentationen Préhistoire. Cefutla première collaboration entre tailleursaméricainset européens. Grâcea Don, le monde de la pressionnous futrévéleà nous, Français, au point queplusieursd’entrenous (dontje fus) restèrentdeuxnuitssans dormir, émerveilléspar l’habiletéet les connaissancesde Don dansla reproduction des lames en obsidienne, les fameux“navajas” des Aztèques, et des pointes de projectiles des paléo-indiens. Se commentairesétaientjusteset raisonnables, patients et “à but non lucratif.” Commençaalorspour moi, en mars 1965, unesorted’enseignementpar correspondancesousla formesuivante: Don m’envoyaitdes modèlesde retouches et des pièces préforméesqueje finissais. Puisje les luirenvoyais, après mesretouches, pour appreciation. Il me les retournaitenfinavec un avis toujoursencourageantmaistoujoursobjectif. En èchangeje lui faisaisparvenirdu silexde France qu’ ilappreciaittout particulierement. Je fusdoncson élèveet je m’englorifie. Petit à petit cetteabondantecorrespondance(jusqu’enaout1980), entrecoupée de quelquesrencontresenthousiastesen Idaho, se transformaen un èchangeplus challureuxencore. En mêmetemps se développaunecollaboration scientifiqueainsiquenaquittout naturellementune amitiéprofonde. Je fusalorsson collègueet son ami. Je puistémoignericicombienila etéadroit et réfléchi, inventifet productif, pédogogueet chalureusementouvert. Il avaitle coeursurla main. Il étaitavanttout humain. Il a sudialogues avec les hommespréhistoriquesen refaisantles mêmes gestes, en passant par les mêmesconcepts. Il a redécouvertles traitementthermiquedes roches siliceusespour qu’ellessoientplus facilementtaillables, plus brillantes, plus colorées. Il resteun modèlepour beaucoup. Il resteaussipour moimonami. Il s’appelaitDon Eugene Crabtree. acknowledged by many practitioners. Emphasized in the obit was the close relationship between Crabtree and Earl Swanson, ISU archaeologist and Director of the Idaho State College Museum. The two close colleagues were to develop a seminal programCrabtree’s collaboration with Swanson, and Bordesand Tixier, fueled a surge of interest through the 1960s in replicating stone tool technologies. A major event was creation of the Idaho State University FlintworkingSchool in 1969 with funding by the National Science Foundation. Thirty-three archaeology students would pass through the schools over a six year span. These “Crabtree students” would go on to establish the importance of research in lithic technology in archaeology. in study of stone tool technology. Crabtree was appointed a Research Associate in Lithic Technology at the Museum in 1964. Publications, conferences, exhibitions and films were to result. “Man’s Oldest Craft Re-created” was an exhibit highlighting Don Crabtree’s work developed by George Gardner of Yang-Gardner Associates, New York, and Lynch Exhibits, Pennsauken, New Jersey, for the American Museum of Natural History. Dr. JuniusBird, AMNH Curator of South American archaeology, and Dr. Richard Gould, AMNH Associate Curator of North American Archaeology, worked with Don to create the exhibition, which was placed in AMNH from February through September, 1970. The exhibit was summarized in AMNH“Curator” (Crabtree and Gould 1970). A seminal step forward occurred with funding of an international conference on lithic technology at Les Eyzies, France, in 1964. Joint sponsorship was supplied by the Society for American Archaeology, the Universitede Bordeaux and the National Science Foundation. Scholars from France, the United States, and Canada, met over six days. Don Crabtree, an acknowledged expert in pressure flaking, and Francois Bordes, expert in percussion flaking, were featured. Jacques Tixier, another French knapper, also attended. It was here that Crabtree introduced his work on heat treatment to the Old World scholars. Bordes, Tixier and Crabtree were xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Don Crabtree From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Don Crabtree (June 8, 1912 – November 16, 1980) was a flintknapper and pioneering experimental archaeologist. Known as the “Dean of American flintknappers” he was mostly self-educated, however he was awarded an honorary doctorate degree by the University of Idaho. His 1972 publication An Introduction to Flintworking still serves as one of the primary terminology sources for students of lithic technology. Crabtree is well known for “Crabtree’s Law”, which states that “the greater the degree of final finishing applied to a stone artifact, whether by flaking, grinding, and/or polishing, the harder it is to conclude the lithic reduction process which produced the stone artifact.” Through practical experimentation and study of archaeological finds (both completed tools and the chips of stone left by their production) Crabtree learned to produce replicas of a variety of different ancient flint and obsidian blades.[1] Contents [hide] 1 Life and Death 2 Employment History 3 Awards and honors 4 Selected Papers[2] 5 References 6 External links [edit] Life and Death Don E. Crabtree was born in Heyburn, Idaho on June 8, 1912. He finished high school in Twin Falls in 1930, after which he worked for the Idaho Power Company. After a brief period he traveled to California where he enrolled in Long Beach Junior College in the mid-1930s with the intent to major in geology and paleontology. Crabtree was noted as being a thinker-while-doing, highly active, and not enjoying studying; due to this he dropped out of Long Beach Junior College after only one term to go his own route. In 1939 he discovered he had cancer, and this discovery briefly impeded his self-study in archeology. During the war years he met his wife, Evelyn, and married in 1943 while working for the Bethlehem Steel Company in California. Crabtree would spend the next 30 years educating and assisting some of the biggest names in archeology at the time such as Alfred Kroeber. Crabtree was also asked for his advice at influential sites like the Clovis type site. After a highly successful career he died in Twin Falls, Idaho on November 16, 1980 of complications due to heart disease. [edit] Employment History After graduation from high school Don Crabtree first worked for the Idaho Power Company. After dropping out of Long Beach Junior College in California he began working in paleontological laboratories. By the late 1930s he was the preparator in the vertebrate paleontology laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley. It was during this time he became acquainted with Alfred L. Kroeber and E.W.Gifford of the Lowie Museum at Berkeley. His time at Berkeley also included conducting flint knapping demonstrations for scholars and students and occasionally for museum visitors. After his battle with cancer was over in 1941 he worked for several months at the Lithic Laboratory of the Ohio Historical Society. It was during this period that Crabtree was called upon as an advisor in lithic studies to the University of Pennsylvania, where he was associated with Edgar B. Howard and the Clovis point type site at Black Water Draw. Frank H. H. Roberts of the Smithsonian Institution also called upon him around this time to consult on the analysis of the Lindenmeier Folsom point collection. When the U.S. entered into World War II the Lithic lab was discontinued and Crabtree returned to California to assist in the war effort as a coordination engineer for Bethlehem Steel Company, which built the ships for the Pacific effort until the war ended. After WWII he returned to Twin Springs, Idaho and became a successful real estate salesman in the postwar market. Crabtree was employed from 1952 until 1962 as a county supervisor for the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) in Twin Falls. In March 1962 he opened the First Conference of Western Archaeologists on Problems of Point Typology at the Idaho State College Museum with a demonstration of his flintworking skills. In 1964 he was appointed Research Associate in Lithic Technology at the Pocatello Museum - a job he maintained until 1975. [edit] Awards and honors Don Crabtree was awarded an honorary doctorate degree from the University of Idaho for his outstanding contributions to the field of experimental archeology. As a rule he was apprehensive to speak at lectures and publish his work therefore the majority of the archeological community did not realize the depth of his contributions until most of his papers were published in the Idaho State University Museum journal, Tebiwa. After this he became a household name in the U.S. and the “Crabtree School” of Flintknapping was begun during which he taught some 33 pupils from 1969 to 1975 many of which would produce dissertations that would educate students across the country in lithic technology. In 1969 some of Crabtree’s work was featured in a special exhibition at New York’s American Museum of Natural History. He is also credited with the creation of “Crabtree’s Law” which is integral in the modern study of lithics. Don Crabtree donated his entire collection of work to the University of Idaho for current and future archeologists to study. The Crabtree Award of the Society for American Archaeology is also named after him. [edit] Selected Papers[2] Mastodon Bone with Artifacts in California. 1939. American Antiquity 5(2):148-149. Notes on Experiments in Flintknapping: 1. Heat-Treatment of Silica Materials (with B. Robert Butler). 1964. Tebiwa 7(1):1-6. A Stoneworker's Approach to Analyzing and Replicating the Lindenmeier Folsom. 1966. Tebiwa 9(1):3-39. Notes on Experiments in Flintknapping: 3. The Flintknapper's Raw Materials. 1967. Tebiwa 10(1):8-24. Notes on Experiments in Flintknapping: 4. Tools Used for Making Flaked Stone Artifacts. 1967. Tebiwa 10(1):60-71. Archaeological Evidence of Acculturation Along the Oregon Trail. 1968. Tebiwa 11(2):38-42. Experimental Manufacture of Wooden Implements with Tools of Flaked Stone.1968. Science 159(3812):426-428. Mesoamerican Polyhedral Cores and Prismatic Blades. 1968. American Antiquity 33(4):446-478. Edge-Ground Cobbles and Blade-Making in the Northwest (with Earl H. Swanson, Jr.). 1968. Tebiwa 11(2):50-58. The Corbiac Blade Technique and Other Experiments. 1969. Tebiwa 12(2):1-21. A Technological Description of Artifacts in Assemblage I, Wilson Butte Cave, Idaho. 1969. Current Anthropology (10)4:366-367. Flaking Stone Tools with Wooden Implements. 1970. Science 169(3941):146-153. Man's Oldest Craft Re-created (with Ricard A. Gould). 1970. Curator 13(3)179-198. An Introduction to Flintworking. 1972. Occasional Papers of the Idaho State University Museum, No. 28. The Cone Fracture Principle and the Manufacture of Lithic Materials. 1972. Tebiwa 15(2):29-42. Experiments in Replicating Hohokam Points. 1973. Tebiwa 16(1):10-45. The Obtuse Angle as a Functional Edge. 1973. Tebiwa 16(1):46-53. Grinding and Smoothing of Stone Artifacts. 1974. Tebiwa 17(1):1-6. Unusual Milling Stone from Battle Mountain, Nevada. 1974. Tebiwa 17(1):89-91. Comments on Lithic Technology and Experimental Archaeology in Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools edited by Earl H. Swanson, Jr., pp 105–114. 1975. World Series in Anthropology. Mouton. Comment on "A History of Flintknapping Experimentation, 1838-1976". 1978. Current Anthropology (19)1:360. [edit] References 1.^ Plew, Mark G., James C. Woods and Max G. Pavesic. (1985) Stone Tool Analysis-Essays in Honor of Don E. Crabtree, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico. 2.^ Knudson, Ruthann, (1982) American Antiquities, Society for American Archaeology, Vol. 13, pp. 336-43 The Crabtree Lithic Technology Collection consists of approximately 8,000 examples of experimental flintknapping, samples of lithic source materials used for the manufacture of stone tools, and archaeological and ethnographic specimens of lithic technology from Europe, North American, and Australia. The collections also includes research papers and correspondence associated with Crabtree's research, his personal library on lithic technology, and photographic records of his research. The lithic research library is world-wide in scope, including works in English, French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Danish, Russian, Japanese, and Chinese published over the last 120 years.
 Crabtree Award
Established in 1985 to recognize significant contributions to
archaeology in the Americas made by individual who has had little if
any formal training in archaeology and little if any wage or salary
as an archaeologist. The award is named after Don Crabtree of Twin
Falls, Idaho, who made significant contributions to the study of
lithic technology and whose dedication to archaeology was a lifelong
personal and financial commitment. The awardees have been:

1985 Clarence H. Webb, MD
1987 Leonard W. Blake
1988 Julian Dodge Hayden
1989 J. B. Sollberger
1990 Ben C. McCary
1991 James Pendergast
1992 Stuart W. Conner
1993 Mary Elizabeth Good
1994 Leland W. Patterson
1995 Jeff Carskadden
1996 James H. Word
1997 Sidney Merrick Wheeler (posthumous)
and Georgia Nancy Wheeler Felts
1998 Reca Jones
1999 Gene L. Titmus
2000 Richard P. Mason
2001 John D. "Jack" Holland
2002 Richard A. Bice
2003 Dr. Guillermo Mata Amado ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CRABTREE MUSEUM Donald E. Crabtree - Biography "Crabtree was born in Heyburn, Idaho on June 8, 1912. His parents were Reverend Ellis and Mabel G. Crabtree and they lived on 140 acres in the Salmon River Valley. In 1917, the Crabtrees moved to a 10-acre plot outside of Twin Falls and established a garden and pickle business. Crabtree lived a close life to his parents and two sisters in the Twin Falls community. Don finished high school in Twin Falls in 1930 and worked for the Idaho Power Company. He then decided to move to California where he enrolled in Long Beach Junior College in the mid-1930s, intending to major in geology and paleontology. His interest in those topics and in prehistoric archaeology had developed during a childhood and youth spent exploring south-central Idaho. Crabtree tried flintknapping, but at the time, it was not his primary focus. Crabtree was a very active person and was not happy with just studying, and after one term at Long Beach Junior College, he dropped out and went the rest of the way by himself. Even though he was self-conscious about his lack of education and disliked public speeches, he was recognized internationally as one of the most thoughtful and provocative students of prehistoric technologies. Crabtree began working in paleontological laboratories and by the late 1930s he was the preparator in the vertebrate paleontology laboratory at the University of California, Berkely. He worked under the direction of Charles Camp and Ruben Stirton and did summer fieldwork in Nevada and California. Crabtree became acquainted with Alfred L. Kroeber and E.W. Gifford of the Lowie Museum at Berkeley, and in the late 1930s, worked as a technician in the anthropology program while he further developed his flintknapping skills. He also conducted knapping demonstrations for scholars and students at Berkeley and occasionally for museum visitors. In 1939, Crabtree was diagnosed with cancer and returned home to his parents' home during what were considered to be his last days. However, massive cobalt treatments and his mother's and his indomitable patience through months on intensive care, led him to recovery. He spent his recuperation period, when his mobility was limited and as he was trying to regain muscular strength, flintknapping - making arrowheads, spearpoints, and eccentric lithic forms by the hour. What had been a virtuoso performance until that time became a confirmed craft and art, all the time conducted amidst a personal search for information about lithic mechanics, systems of efficient core reduction, and the significance of variations among the newly identified paleo-Indian points from the Plains and Southwest. In the spring of 1941, fully recovered and with a year of concentrated flintknapping behind him, Crabtree was invited to demonstrated knapping techniques at the American Association of Museums' annual meeting in Columbus, Ohio. As a result of that demonstration, he was employed for Shetrone, replicating eastern lithic artifacts. Crabtree was also called upon as an advisor in lithic studies to the University of Pennsylvania, where he was associated with Edgar B. Howard and the Clovis type site and other Blackwater Draw materials. It was during this period that he had his first "hands on" acquaintance with the Folsom materials, one of his lifelong fascinations, when Frank H. Roberts of the Smithsonian Institution called Crabtree in as a consultant in the analysis of the Lindenmeier Folsom collection. Everything was going right in the fall of 1941; the cancer was in remission, Crabtree has employment doing that in which he was most interested (working with stone tools), and he was becoming recognized as one of the leading students of that subject by major archaeological institutions. Then the United States entered World War II, the Lithic Laboratory was discontinued, and Crabtree returned to California to join the war effort. From 1941 until the late 1950s, Crabtree's involvement with flintknapping was only as an avocation. He spent the war years in Long Beach where he worked as a coordination engineer for Bethlehem Steel Company, which built the ships for the Pacific effort. There he met his beloved wife, Evelyn Josephine Meadows; they married in Long Beach in 1943. Their relationship was a strong and close interdependency, she was serving as his housekeeper, traveling companion, secretary and editor, and always his closest confidant. They never had children of their own, rather "adopting" the young students who flocked around Crabtree to learn and consult. Evelyn's health problems were also significant; she had lost a lung to tuberculosis when she was a young woman, and spent her last years in a long fight against cancer. Their 33 years together were a true partnership, and one did not know Don Crabtree unless one knew Evelyn. Following World War II, the Crabtrees returned to Twin Falls. They purchased the big family home from Don's parents, and he soon was a real estate salesman in a booming postwar market. Evelyn was a manager of a large savings and loan institution, where she dealt in real estate and more general financial matters. They eventually sold the large house and bought a small place out in the country just east of Twin Falls and over the years they added rooms and a shop until finally they had a modest but complete lithic laboratory and guest facility. Crabtree was employed from 1952 until 1962 as a county supervisor for the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) in Twin Falls, spending much of his time in aerial photo interpretation of soil conservation problems. He continued to read voraciously, to keep up with archaeological publications, and to demonstrate flintknapping to local school and youth groups. He also continued his investigations into the archaeology of southern Idaho, particularly its prehistory. He was locally quite well-known for his knapping skills and knowledge, and that local fame led him to a reentry into the scholarly world of lithic studies in 1958. In 1958, Earl H. Swanson Jr., who established the first major archaeological program at the Idaho State University in Pocatello, Idaho, introduced himself to Crabtree after hearing from local people about the flintknapper with an amazing skill and major regional archaeological collection. Crabtree and Swanson shared a deep friendship and it lasted until Swanson's untimely death in 1975. Swanson's international credentials and participation in the "early man" network of American archaeologists gave Crabtree access to research monies and forums that he would not have entered on his own, and Swanson never hesitated to do whatever he could to provide Crabtree with that access by extension. "



Crabtree student: Robson Bonnichsen
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx t a Comment On: Ohio Archaeology Blog "DON CRABTREE AT THE OHS LITHIC LABORATORY" No comments yet. - Hide Original Post [Image] H. Holmes Ellis, Research Assistant at the Ohio Historical Society's Lithic Laboratory for the Eastern United States, in his annual report of the Lab's activities for "the year April, 1941 -- April, 1942, described one of their most important achievements for the year: [Image]"The Lithic Laboratory discovered a remarkably able flint chipper, Don E. Crabtree of Twin Falls, Idaho, and acquired his services for two months in the early summer of 1941. Mr. Crabtree, during his stay in Columbus, contributed largely to the rediscovering of two elusive 'lost arts,' Folsom fluting and the manufacture of flake knives. Achieving either one of these difficult techniques would have been worth his trip east; we had not hoped for both successes." [Image]Don Crabtree would go on to become the "Dean of American Flintknapping." His 1972 publication An Introduction to Flintworking, is still a useful reference for anyone who wants to understand what is involved in making stone tools. Crabtree taught many archaeologists, including my mentor, the late Rob Bonnichsen, the art of flintknapping. Rob tried to pass some of that knowledge along to me in a lithic technology workshop, but I am afraid I never got much beyond the Acheulean stage of craftsmanship. Nevertheless, the insights I did manage to glean from knocking rocks together have helped me immeasurably in my understanding of ancient stone tools. Don Crabtree and the OHS Lithic Laboratory were pioneers in bringing those valuable insights to the attention of the discipline of archaeology. [Image] Brad Lepper posted by Brad Lepper at 10:25 AM on Apr 4, 2013

Mastodon Bone with Artifacts in California. 1939. American Antiquity 5(2):148-149.
Notes on Experiments in Flintknapping: 1. Heat-Treatment of Silica Materials (with B. Robert Butler). 1964. Tebiwa 7(1):1-6.
A Stoneworker's Approach to Analyzing and Replicating the Lindenmeier Folsom. 1966. Tebiwa 9(1):3-39.
Notes on Experiments in Flintknapping: 3. The Flintknapper's Raw Materials. 1967. Tebiwa 10(1):8-24.
Notes on Experiments in Flintknapping: 4. Tools Used for Making Flaked Stone Artifacts. 1967. Tebiwa 10(1):60-71.
Archaeological Evidence of Acculturation Along the Oregon Trail. 1968. Tebiwa 11(2):38-42.
Experimental Manufacture of Wooden Implements with Tools of Flaked Stone.1968. Science 159(3812):426-428.
Mesoamerican Polyhedral Cores and Prismatic Blades. 1968. American Antiquity 33(4):446-478.
Edge-Ground Cobbles and Blade-Making in the Northwest (with Earl H. Swanson, Jr.). 1968. Tebiwa 11(2):50-58.
The Corbiac Blade Technique and Other Experiments. 1969. Tebiwa 12(2):1-21.
A Technological Description of Artifacts in Assemblage I, Wilson Butte Cave, Idaho. 1969. Current Anthropology (10)4:366-367.
Flaking Stone Tools with Wooden Implements. 1970. Science 169(3941):146-153.
Man's Oldest Craft Re-created (with Ricard A. Gould). 1970. Curator 13(3)179-198.
An Introduction to Flintworking. 1972. Occasional Papers of the Idaho State University Museum, No. 28.
The Cone Fracture Principle and the Manufacture of Lithic Materials. 1972. Tebiwa 15(2):29-42.
Experiments in Replicating Hohokam Points. 1973. Tebiwa 16(1):10-45.
The Obtuse Angle as a Functional Edge. 1973. Tebiwa 16(1):46-53.
Grinding and Smoothing of Stone Artifacts. 1974. Tebiwa 17(1):1-6.
Unusual Milling Stone from Battle Mountain, Nevada. 1974. Tebiwa 17(1):89-91.
Comments on Lithic Technology and Experimental Archaeology in Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools edited by Earl H. Swanson, Jr., pp 105–114. 1975. World Series in Anthropology. Mouton.
Comment on "A History of Flintknapping Experimentation, 1838-1976". 1978. Current Anthropology (19)1:360

Folsom projectile points are a  most remarkable   piece of lithic art.  It is considered the ultimate of projectile points of any lithic tradition in the world.

There is a significant difference between simulations .\

Benjamin Eble For those who may be interested, I believe that I have uncovered further details regarding Catlin's two man flintknapping account. First, the artistic renditions which appear to have been produced, de
To Philip ChurchillMeDeborah Wagner and 4 More...
Today at 6:59 AM
For those who may be interested, I believe that I have uncovered further details regarding Catlin's two man flintknapping account.  First, the artistic renditions which appear to have been produced, decades after Catlin's death, may well be wrong. 

Here is some of Catlin's text, followed by notes:

"The master workman, seated on the ground, lays one of these flakes on the palm of his left hand, holding it firmly down with two or more fingers of the same hand, and with his right hand, between the thumb and two fore-fingers, places his chisel (or punch) on the point that is to be broken off ; and a co-operator (a striker) sitting in front of him, with a mallet of very hard wood, strikes the chisel (or punch) on the upper end, flaking the flint off on the under side, below each projecting point that is struck. The flint is then turned and chipped in the same manner from the opposite site ; and so turned and chipped until the required shape and dimensions are obtained, all the fractures being made on the
palm of the hand."

The first thing that should be noted is that both the master flintknapper, and the assistant, are seen seated on the ground, with the assistant seated directly in front of the master knapper.  The second thing that should be noted is that Catlin does not say that the master knapper holds the flake in his left hand.  He says that Catlin "lays" the flake "on his left hand".  His use of the terms "lays", and "on", could be interpreted to suggest that his left hand is playing a fairly passive role.  The flake is simply "laid" on the hand.  

To give a comparison, in other early accounts of hammerstone knapping, authors usually state that the biface is held in the left hand, while being struck with a hammerstone that is held in the right hand.  By saying that the biface is "held in the left hand" - as opposed to saying that the biface is "laid on the left hand" - the left hand appears to play a more active role, in hammerstone accounts, and not a passive role, as seen in Catlin's account.  So, why would Catlin say that the flake is simply "laid on the left hand", rather than held in the left hand?

If we look further into this, what can be seen is that the flake must have been located somewhere between the master knapper, who is seated on the ground, and his mallet wielding assistant, who is seated on the ground, in front of him.  We can also see that the master knapper has to use two or more fingers of his left hand, to firmly hold down the flake.  This implies that enough force could be applied to potentially dislodge the flake.  So, where was the flake located, during this process?  And, where was the hand located?  If the master knapper simply held the flake freely in the air, then couldn't the blow potentially cause both the flake, and the hand, to move?  So, if we rule out holding the flake freely in the air, on an upturned hand, then where was the flake actually located, when this process was carried out?

I think that there is a logical explanation that can be inferred from all of the data presented.  My semi-educated guess is that the reason the two men were seated upon the ground is because they were working off some sort of stone or wooden anvil, that was also resting on the ground.  But, these men did not want to set the biface directly on the hard anvil.  Rather, the master knapper rested his own upturned hand on the anvil, and then "laid" the flake on the palm of his hand.  In this case, the left hand did not actively "hold" the biface.  Rather, the left hand served as a passive rest for the biface, while the biface was held down with the finger tips, of the left hand.  Meanwhile, the master knapper held the punch, with his right hand.  Possibly, the edge that was flaked overhung the edge of the palm.  Or, the flintknapper may have had a simple leather wad, under the flake, to support it during impact.  If the part of the biface that was being flaked overhung the edge of the palm, then the punch would have been held to the right of the hand, and it would have been easily accessed by the striker, who was seated in front of the master knapper.  Regardless, I believe that the context, and the use of the phrase, "...laid the flake on the left hand", suggests a passive role of the left hand, which could mean that the hand was actually rested on some sort of anvil, positioned between the two men.  If so, then decades of textbook illustrations, and failed experiments, were based on a faulty interpretation.

Also, Catlin writes:

"This punch is about six or seven inches in length, and one inch in diameter, with one rounded side and two plane sides ; therefore presenting one acute and two obtuse angles, to suit the points to be broken."

The very last phrase should be of note.  The angles on the edges of the three sides punch were designed to accommodate different "point" types.  And, the "points" that Catlin is referring to are what we would think of as "platforms".  So, what can be seen is that the shape of the ivory punch involves two flat planes, that create an acute angle, while the third side is "rounded", and would lead to two wider angles.  And, if we assume that the punch had squared ends - as seen in Redding's account of Consulu - then the cross section would reveal these three angles - one acute, and two obtuse.  And, this corresponds to different types of "points", or "platforms", with some platforms being wider, and other platforms smaller. 

If the account is interpreted in this manner, then the punch was a square ended tool.  And, the sharp shoulders of the punch would have been used to dislodge flakes, by a hard rebounding blow to the upper end of the tool.  When struck on the upper end, the hard rebounding blow would have caused the flaker to produce a hard "jab", or forwards motion.  The angular shoulder, at the lower end, would have struck the platform, and initiated a break.  If the biface had some undergirding support, in the center area, then the blow would have produced bending stress over the face of the point, that would have helped lengthen the flake's course, during detachment. 

What is more important is that if this interpretation is correct, then the practice would have been directly analogous to the more recent practice of the steel bolt flaking technique, that involves direct percussion with a steel bolt.  Only, in the case of square ended punches/flakers, made from lightweight antler and ivory, an indirect blow would have been required to carry out heavier flaking.  But, in terms of flaker morphology, and flaker direction, the process would have been essentially the same.  In Mexico, the tourist areas are littered with all sizes of obsidian bifaces, that would presumably have been made with antler billets.  Only, these bifaces are not made with antler billets.  They are made via hammerstone percussion, followed by steel bolt percussion.  In this case, the bolt is held between the fingers, and jabbed forwards, at the edge of the biface.  In Mexico, skilled artisans use this process to create massive amounts of bifaces, in short time.  In Guatemala, native knappers still use this same process, involving a steel bolt.  And, in North America, Marvin McCormick was using this process, during the early 1900's.  According to sources, he learned an entire reduction process from his great uncle, who had worked on the Santa Fe Trail, during the 19th century.  And, his uncle had learned the process from 19th century indians.  My conclusion is that the process Catlin saw, used by the Apachees, could have been the forerunner of such processes, that would have been an evolution up from the use of square ended punch flakers, and anvils.  

For whatever it is worth,


To those who are interested in Native American lithic technologies, both historic and prehistoric, I believe that I have just made another breakthrough.

This gallery shows the use of a heavy cylindrical flaker, in conjunction with a notched wooden anvil. The notch in the wood allows for flake release. Notched wooden flaking anvils were seen being used by a number of ethnographic observers, in the Americas. Between the 1870's, and the 1890's, archaeologist Franklin Cushing described how such anvils were used, by native knappers, in conjunction with tools of indirect percussion.    

This particular antler punch is a straight shaft of antler about 3.75 inches long. The chert being flaked is raw, extremely dense, and indurate. What can be seen is that the edge of the stone is placed so that it overhangs the edge of the anvil. This was described by archaeologists Mark Harrington, during the 1940's, when he elucidated several flaking processes recently used by native knappers, with one process involving an antler "cylinder", and a wooden anvil. The overhang - coupled with pressure - appears to create bending strains in the rock, prior to detachment.  And, it appears that these bending strains help to produce longer over the face flakes.  If this is the case, then the flaking process not only involves direct percussion, and indirect percussion, but even pressure, and leverage - all combined into a single anvil-based process. 

The hammer is a one pound smooth river cobble, that is held in the hand. The stone hammer is somewhat elongated, and can be used to generate a hard "slap" on the upper end of the punch, while the biface is held underfoot.

Several years ago, a skilled flintknapper, by the name of Marty Rueter, explained that the longer punches absorb more energy, during impact.  I believe he said that this leads to longer flakes, being formed.  Also, I heard from a gemologist that a Spanish sculptor told him that longer punches are typically used for detaching longer flakes, due to the way the longer punch absorbs/stores energy.  Anyway, it appears that this longer heavier section of antler (3.75 inch) typically produces longer flakes than a smaller two inch x one cm, cylinder punch.   

In the American archaeological record, there are scores of short straight sections of antler, that tend to have flattened ends, that are sometimes interpreted to be "billets".  In many cases, the tools are four inches in length, or less.  I believe that many such tools - if not all such tools - may have been tools of indirect percussion, that were used in conjunction with either wooden anvils, or anvil stones and a pad of skins. 

I can use the same punch to create the platforms, via simple freehand indirect percussion.  The tool that I am using is also comparable to the so-called "billets" that were recovered from Colha.  Most of those tools appears to be about four inches long, and made from thicker cut sections of antler beams.  A minority of them were fashioned from basal sections of antler - maybe less than one out of twenty.  If anyone has any thoughts, let me know.


Aaron Lincoln from Fort BruceWayne Indiana. Turkey Tail, Ghost Eagle and knife.



Elmer Snagnasty How to Sell $100 an Hour New Age Fear Based Religion

There is a scene in the X-Men movie; Wolverine’s claws shoot out of his knuckles and retract, and it heals up very quickly. Rogue asks if it hurt
To Me

May 17 at 10:22 AM
How to Sell $100 an Hour New Age Fear Based Religion

There is a scene in the X-Men movie; Wolverine’s claws shoot out of his knuckles and retract, and it heals up very quickly. Rogue asks if it hurts. “Every time.” He replies.
That’s knapping. If you do it long enough your hands will ache, your calluses will build thick and you’ll have dozens if not hundreds of tiny and not so tiny scars to show for it.
You work your hands to the bone, and you are so used to the pains that when other people see you accidentally smack your thumb getting it smashed between a literal rock and a hard place, they expect you’ll jump out of your skin, but you nonchalantly shrug it off, “Oh THAT old finger has been taking hell for years!” Anyone else would be screaming.

You have walked creek beds before, you’ve packed up a load of what you think is good stone, only to end up with a pile of less than good stone. You’ve bought stone that wasn’t really good to knap. You’ve got a few piles of that stuff too. You’ve filled buckets with odd bent flakes, knowing the curvature of those slivers simply will not work for anything you want to make. You’ve invested countless hours sitting, staring, abrading, and analyzing the stone. You’ve bifaced, you’ve pressure flaked, you’ve notched, you’ve made your own tools, you’ve bought tools, you’ve made some nice stone tools. You’ve broken, lost, dropped and have had stolen, some really nice stone tools. You’ve given them to friends as gifts, and you’ve been haggled down and have been beaten up on the price you were asking for your stones. You have had dreams which involve finding the perfect stone, completing the largest Eccentric, only to wake up and it just is a dream.
You realize that the time it takes to find a good stone, is about the same time and cost to buy the suckers. You’ve had friends get so excited, and hand you the stone they found, and you already know it’s a dud, and they’ve been telling you for weeks about it. You’ve got a small library of books pertaining to artifacts, knapping, bush craft, archery, survival, ancient cultures. You’ve watched every Youtube video about it; some of it you don’t even do, you just want to know about, blade cores, microliths, whatever.
You have become a living library. You walk around, and every flake catches your eye, and you can hardly take a walk without reading all the 5,000 years old newspapers lying around, oblivious to the common eye.

The hairiest, most troublesome feature of this thing you’ve gotten yourself into, is that you live in a time period where the intrinsic value of these points is no longer its utilitarian function. A blade used to literally just be a functional object. And if you could make one you were able to trade those objects for stuff you needed: Salt, Acorn flour, a basket, people each had their specialty, and they were familiar enough with each other’s economy that these trades made sense. Your goods traveled great distances by foot, by raft, by dog. How nice it would be to go to the store, and pick up some smoked sausage and a loaf of bread, some fruit roll ups, and a gallon of milk for the hafted blade you made that day. Unfortunately, it’s not that easy, and the cashiers tend to look at you funny when you pull out a knife during check out. “NO! I’M NOT ROBBING YOU! I just want to TRADE!”

I understand when people shy away from wanting to sell their work; I understand why people undervalue their work. But if you want to actually assign a value to your work, an honest, practical, fair wage, to justify the time and expertise, the research, the trial and error, the opportunity cost of knapping versus doing any number of other things, consider this: men and women who massage as a profession feel no hesitance charging you $1 per minute for their services. They rub you, you feel good while they are doing it, and afterwards you pay them the full frigging amount, and not just the 43 minutes they actually touched you out of that hour, but the time they spent asking which part of your back is sore, and for the time they spent applying oil, or lotion. For the time where wasn’t enough pressure or too much, the time they spent walking across the room to light an incense or put on some music. You are paying for all of it.

The hardest thing for me is remaining confident about my work, constantly having to reassure myself that this pursuit is an intrinsically valuable skill. I’m doing something that not everyone can do. I’m doing something potentially hazardous. I’ve spent time and money getting here. I’ve lost time and money getting to the “point” I’m at. I have things to offer in the conversations I have with people that supersede the value of the object alone, that when I converse I am opening their eyes to something they probably didn’t know, and am educating them. Their minds are changing a little bit. The minute and a half I spend staring at the stone, trying to find the perfect spot to hit is just as valuable as the swing I take to drive off the flake. The elders doing this might simply tell some haggler, “I don’t make cheap stuff.” And be done with that haggling person, but I’m still young, and I still look like I need the money. And to be honest most of the time I do.  Growing up poor, I know I don’t have the “rich man’s poker face”,  you can practice in the mirror, but essentially you have to bluff when you really need the money, so people don’t try to take advantage of you…young broke people, this applies to YOU especially.
There are people who brag about what they spent, and people who brag about the deal they got, and when it comes to your precious work, you must strive to avoid the latter.
When I work really hard on something and I let it go for too cheap, because I wasn’t confident enough in myself, or in my work, sure enough, I heal up, but it hurts every time. I just want less hurting and more “happy endings”.

PHOTO BY:PHOTO ART BY: Giuliano Bastiani Sagrado D'Isonzo, Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Italy Ishi point by Ray Harwood
2014 INFO PENDINGOn Saturday, May 24, 2014 3:11 PM, "Cunningham-Summerfield, Ben" <> wrote:

Good Afternoon All!

Can you believe that it is time again for the Yosemite Knap-In announcement!

I think I am a little behind the curve this year. I will be happy to mail those of you that I have addresses for a packet with a map and gate pass.  If I do not have your mailing address I cannot send you anything.

For those of you who have been before please forward the announcement to whom you see fit. To date the gathering has been small but boisterous. Last year my two year old grandson joined us and worked on his first point too!

Due to the timing of Tribal Events I have had to move the knap-in to the second weekend of August making it the 9th and 10th. 

At this time I can not seem to find the flyer so I will try to find it in the computer and send it later.

If you have any questions please let me know.


1/8 Apache native Ray Harwood gives a demonstration of flintknapping during Go Native Day, Saturday, Aug. 31, 2013, at Centennial Plaza. By striking it at precise angles, a flintnapper can shape flint or glass into knives, arrowheads, and other works of art. Gregory D. Cook / Tehachapi News

May 16th - 18th - hosted by Brian Fletcher, Tom Mosqueda and Mike Tari
3rd Annual North Columbia Knap-in Kettle Falls, WA October (dates pending) Host Patrick Farneman
4th Annual Kittitas Valley's Fall Gathering of Stone Age Craftsmen, Ellensburg, WA October (dates pending) Host Jim Baugh
Other Events - not PSK hosted events


Photo: This is our latest flier. I sorry for the delay...PhotoPhoto: Yo Yo Yo Yo Yo Homies here are new pieces 
I've been working on if your looking for great
new gifts or a piece for yourself!! All handmade
wrapped elegantly in Argentium Sterling Silver!!
Prices Starting at $65! All are ready to roll!!!Photo