I doubt my comment will be seen, now that the video is a little older... but, something to keep in mind, that *might* have been a part of what they were up to (we won't ever know for sure): I was a traffic crash investigator for many years - the damage on the shafts *looks* different to me - I obviously can't examine them myself - and one test is just one test. Destructive testing is expensive, and resource heavy - so not easy to do a full run of tests. All of that garbledeegook about my resume out of the way, the notch shaft looks like it took a harder impact, at the tip of the shaft. Meaning - in a way, the split shaft acts like a crumple zone on a car. The clovis point was not only easier to re-shaft, when/if the point struck a bone, the point itself would get pushed back into the shaft, and actually *save* the difficult to make point from breaking so easy. And the second additional thing, would be tip of the shaft strength - keep in mind, these people were *experts* at stone/wood work. Much like the bows, which carefully follow the wood grain, an shaft that is split carefully along the grain structure, *should* be more flexible than a cut notch - since all of the grain is intact, rather than cut. By carefully splitting the shaft, and using the clovis point - the point could slide into that split some, and maybe save a maker from needing to make another point. It would be interest to shoot some meat targets, and see what happens. Paul Harrell has a great setup he uses for his gun channel - leather jacket "skin" then pork ribs, bag o' oranges for lung tissue, pork rib layer, and lastly a leather layer again. It is a reasonably good analog for a chest cavity. I would love to see more photos of point and shaft damage from your experiments, to see if there is enough evidence to establish evidence to warrant further testing.
It also look like it allows for a bigger contact area between the shaft and the point, which could dramatically increase the friction. And that could help the point to stay on the shaft when extracted.
" in a way, the split shaft acts like a crumple zone on a car" But that is a bad thing. The whole point of the point is to transfer the energy into the animal and penetrate / cut while it is doing so. If the point is getting pushed back into the shaft then it is not doing the job of pushing forward into the animal.
@@adam-k No, not really. It is made to cut through the animal but if you hit bone with ether point then the arrow/dart will stop. The question is what happens after it stops.
@@adam-k That might have been offset by the actual hooks to either side of the rear of the clovis point which like the barbs on a fishhook would make it harder to dislodge from the animal. If you were hunting a grizzy with chopsticks that might feel a bit like hunting a mammoth. Maybe the objective isn't as much about the initial damage so much as scoring many points lodged into the flesh well enough that they will continue to damage and bleed the animal to death over the next day or two.
Loved the video , keep up the good work . I knew an old flintknapper that passed away about 50 years ago. His theory on flutes was the preform was fluted first and then the final shaping and flaking was done after the flute .
I found this idea in Dec 2022 and have made 7 this week How to flute a Clovis Point without breaking it: Take two slats of oak, shaped like they are cut out of a yard stick 10 to 12cm long. Pitch glue two buttons of wood to one end of each, four buttons total. wrap the tip of your Clovis preform in a one inch strip of buckskin/leather twice around. Wrap the two boards onto the point with the tip sandwiched flat and the buttons at the base, with a piece of string or cordage. Flute with an antler billet, works every time. Good luck everyone!
These kinds of videos are what sets your channel apart from other bogus and nonsensical channels out there! And I love it! Very much! Firstly, and maybe most importantly, you don't just claim and theorise from your sofa, you try it and you live by it, quite literally, using what you kill thus showing respect. Secondly the theory you provided is really interesting, and it works, so if it works then it is plausible. Everything that doesn't work is discarded and looses to the test of time. However proving it is a bit harder, of course. I would like to add something based on your observations. Let's say there were 2 kinds of fluted points, first being the flute that ends in a step fracture, the second being the one without it. Well, what if the ones with a step fracture were actually more desirable? What if they were an additional point of contact with the shaft, and for the first time in flint knapping you actually wanted to make a step fracture?! As noted at the end of the video,I would like to see the research and the concept being expanded upon. More tests, more statistical data and samples etc. Sorry for writing a novel here, I really like the stone age, our archaic sunrise, and can get carried away rather easily as shown :D Cheers!
No prob at all and thanks very much. I noticed the step fracture part too and also looked at it as a good thing as it smoothed the transition and potentially gave it a bit more bite. I think that is more of a happy accident. Long flakes usually step closer the end instead of shooting clean out.
I’m an engineer and fluting adds strength to the arrow head to resist bending kind of like an I-beam or a fluted rifle barrel resists bending better than the same full size diameter barrel.......
I don't think that's true, for exemple a square bar will be stronger than a same size H beam. It's not the actual strength that improves by removing material to make flutes, it will of course decrease somewhat, but it's the STRENGTH TO WEIGHT ratio that will improve greatly. Basically perform nearly as well with much less.
I used to think maybe the flutes were somehow the first flakes removed and the rest was knapped around them. Some examples of Clovis points look like that might have been the case.
How far would Clovis hunters have travelled from their camps when hunting? Is it possible that they chose the combination of a harder to produce stone point and an easier to produce wooden shaft, because they were travelling with only the points (which could have been made by the members of their group who were not physically suited to hunting), and then making shafts as needed at their hunting grounds?
I’m a little late to reply but am currently an archaeology student who has done excavations and work at Clovis/Folsom camps. The current model for Clovis mobility is called the ABC kill-camp model where rather than traveling away from camps to hunt and then bring back the meat, they would move their camp to a kill site. At most sites, the bison/mammoth kill will contain a site for meat processing and then a separate camp where we see evidence of tool-making and they are usually 60-100 meters apart. In winter camps especially we often see them located near a tool source and the most extensive knapping happening there. Rather than carry a bag of completed points though, they would often carry preforms which were not quite completed and we think that is because they are less fragile for travel. This doesn’t really completely answer your question but I’m sure the context will help you evaluate your hypothesis
@@seebasschipman293 Thank you so much! I only just saw your response now, but it completely answers my question. I thought hunters of the time had to travel much more from camp sites to find their prey. If they only traveled 60-100 meters, I'm guessing they didn't hunt by searching for animal tracks and following them, but did something more like how hunters today will set up a blind in a place they know deer tend to frequent, and then just stay hidden until the animals show up?
I’m in agreement with you and also what I thought about. It’s easier to bring your knapping kit than find/fashion new shafts. I do however think that long points were used, plenty of evidence to support them (finds at kill sites, weights of counterbalances, etc.). Additionally, you saw how the tips broke off but the bulk/body of the tip was preserved. Simply knap the broken tip down for a few minutes and new point. Why you also find them in varying lengths as well, although I’m sure they were eventually designed smaller as the game size decreased. I would disagree with the gent at the end saying this is the “beginning of the technology”. Bi-facial flintknapping using overshot flaking techniques were around 10’s of thousands of years prior, i.e. Solutrean laurel leafs. Clovis points are the pinnacle of the technology, ask anyone that has attempted to flute a Clovis point. Some of the large ceremonial points found covered in red ochre are so thin for their size that the are seldom if ever recreated and were knapped by true masters.
Love you throwing down the snapped point. I keep two snapped pieces in the center of my personal Clovis frame as snapping these during fluting is so prevalent. Keep up the good work.
With your extended experience in knapping points, what percentage failure do you see when performing the Clovis style flutes? And thanks for some really insightful videos! Wil
Now Ryan you need to see if the technology existed in the Siberian paleo period. See if you can find examples of the binding technique of hafting is present in their tool kits. Great hypothesis, keep up the good work
thanks. I may be wrong on this, but I think that fluted points are North American specific and so that leaves me to wonder if that was something that occurred after the population split and migrated. If there are no flute channels in Siberia (???) then that would indicate that they likely werent fit into split shafts, or perhaps even that they were fitted into split shafts, but the evolving clovis culture founds that thinning the base was a better method and that idea never reached back home before the idea of notch hafting came into practice.
even though there are no fluted point types in the Siberian paleo record, the hafting style might, if the paleo Indian came across from Siberia they would have used their hafting style and invented a point for that style
The mythology that has been built up around Clovis is giant, but entirely false. Fluting looks great, feels great on a point, and is entirely functional. I don't break Clovis points anymore, but I did for 30 years. They are now easy to make, long, thin and delicate like the Fenn, Simon or Drake Cache, and made prehistoric with antler and stone, no jig. Take two 15cm slats of oak, like they are cut from a yardstick and onto the end of each slat pitch glue two little buttons or twigs of wood (four total, 2 on each slat). Wrap the tip of your Clovis blank in a strip of leather, then sandwitch it in the slats and tie tight with a string with the twigs on the base, then flute. Great video. I empathize with that part of the video where the Clovis breaks in half. It's almost depressing how easy it is now.
I would think, that the forshafts were actually heat- hardened after splitting before inserting the fluted Clovis point. It's seems to me that the fluted point into the split foreshaft would actually be more effective at withstanding a hard hit, like a shoulder for instance. For the simple fact that a tighter fit, and ROOM to move down a little, like a shock absorber so to speak, would be better than a notched point, with no room to move but, simply fracturing the foreshaft. That's my 2 cents. Secondly, the target you chose to demonstrate on isn't representative of the usual targets primitive man would be striking , a piece of plywood, just isn't realistic, i would think try think again with something more realistic, like a beef shoulder quarter. Also, just my opinion.
I think mayve thay slight movement would absorb some if the imoa t energy and lessen penetration. Much the way a hollow point bullet gas less penetraton because of the bullets expansion. It all amount to energy absobtion. Still only real life experimentation can prove either theory. So feel free to experiment. I like science, and science is all about proiving theories not just coming up with them.
As to the why on the Clovis points - maybe they expected the shaft to split anyway, and the flute (as you say) makes a better fit, so they just pre-split the shafts and had a method of binding behind the point that prevented the arrows from coming apart during use.
I've always had the theory that it satisfied the human desire to have things geometrically equal even in pure utilitarian tools and applications we have a desire of design
Great reasoning behind the design styles. The one thing to keep in mind, Clovis culture disappeared with the event that killed off the large mammals around 12,000 years ago. The method of making points without Clovis-styled flutes was the modern wave of a second culture that filled the same areas but had no ties to Clovis technology. So two unconnected groups of people who invented different techniques to solve the same task of putting holes in animals. Lining up the projectile points by date also shows how the advanced Clovis knapping techniques went to a period of rough knapping and then to fine knapping again (but using the different 'technology').
You should try this from a further distance. The dart was still flexing in flight a lot, when it hit the plywood. I think that’s why it split the shaft on one side. Would like to see the dart hit straight, without the flexing. Probably not possible but I think it would give a better observation of how the point cuts straight into the shaft. Love the videos guy!👍
I have an interesting hypothesis. I think that Clovis flutes were “discovered by accidental necessity”. If you were a hunter and had 1 large biface and as Murphy Law goes it gets broken. You could possibly find both pieces. The tip may have a impact fracture and a reverse flute. It could easily be reworked into a second functioning point, and would have a flute. The basal end of the original point could be reworked as well. Practical ease of function is the key; if it works, it was used, if it didn’t work, you starved.
Ok Ryon your on the right track ---- i do nothing but split shaft an been doing it sence i was 17 an im 52 now so i will tell you how it works better if you get rid of all common arrow tec an do this instead. Put the clovis in the split do not put sinew on the stone instead soak rawhide an strech it tight as you can under the stone when it drys the stick an the stone shuls be as one an it shuld hold together on impact. --- you can do experment with sinew with rawhide ad a experement with pich an rawhide
Some Clovis points are so large - some over 7 inches long, and we now know that much smaller points are effective against deer, even bison. And yes, there still mammoth then, but to get deep into a large animal you don't want a large point. Here's my hypothesis: small points were functional ones, but large ones were for prestige or as a currency. Wampum was valuable BECAUSE it was difficult and very labor-intensive to make. Modern people display larger, fancier clothes, jewelry, cars and tools (Rambo knives) than any practical use would suggest. This also explains why large collections of Clovis points have been found - they were hordes, just like Roman-era coins stored under one of your bed posts or under a tent pole but when you died or didn't return from a hunt/journey, your relatives never found your horde.
Remember that the widest part of a Clovis is about two thirds up from the base so when that shoulder passed into the animal the hafting and fore shaft could then pass through the wound without further drag on it , allowing the atlatl shaft to fall out of the wound and the fore shaft and point to stay in the wound there you have your first repeating weapon the main shaft falls out pick it up and reload with another fore shaft... and also remember the bases were heavily ground to stop them from being pushed down into the fore shaft and I would shorten your fore shafts by about half.....regards Idaho Clovisman......
The flutes make it easier to mount into a shaft, obviously but, its also to have a better chance of letting blood the point gets grabbed by the flesh of the animal. Basically they are blood groves. The clovis point is also usefull as a tool to scrape and shape new shafts.
You are awesome. I find a lot of daltons they don’t normally have tip dings though. the little feet break more than anything you would think the opposite. I find big ones and little ones. I think the ones the size you made where knives because they are normally beveled. The bases are super ground and yours where not that ground. I love your channel man.
I remember this guy in the pacific northwest who is SERIOUSLY the best at primitive fire making and makes awesome videos . Can't remember his name . Is it Lupo ? THX
@@QuantumPyrite_88.9 😅 I'm still around. I've just gotten a lot more obsessed with my archery fumblings these days, but I have more planned for UA-cam too.
No disrespect meant whatsoever to you my friend , But all that explanation was not necesary , at least to me it was always self evident what fluting was all about . I absolutely love your work and learn something from every one of your videos . thank you
try first burning a small hole (heated copper pin) through the shaft at the lowest point of the split, then create the split. once the split reaches the hole, it'll stop splitting. drummers use a similar technique with cymbals that are beginning to crack. KEvron
Very interesting, I found a very small fluted point here in Southern Africa from the san people whom used small less powerful bows that relied on poisoned arrow tips.
After seeing this video I would assume that a smart archaeology/paleotology student might be able to write his dissertation based on your cloviis theory. Of course he should also bolster his dissertation with results of field experiments like you do. You're quite the scientist my friend. You do good research and come up with plausible explantions. Now if the climate scientists could learn something about your methods. Maybe we could stop worrying about doomsday for a bit. It is quite plausible that mankind has seen climate change throughout the history of mankind. We certainly saw the ice age come to an end, and we may actually still be in the process that warm up. So far we have survived and the world did not end. We simply adapted. That is what living things do.
I may be way off here, but what I noticed was the way the tip snapped, buy having it hafted in a split there may have been a shock absorbing effect and would reduce the amount of damage that the point actually would take, minimizing the amount of damage to the actual tip, it could easily have the tip knapped back to a point and given another go. Just a thought.
That was really cool. Don’t threaten me with a good time lol. I would love to go out and do the stuff. I recently found a large triangular point made of quartz with a very pronounced impact fracture on it resulting in the tip of the triangle point and a sliver about an inch and a half down one side being missing from the point. I believe the type of point was transitional Palio or early archaic Alamance point. I’ve also found evidence of other broken point tips and tools in the same area nearby. I’ve always wondered about how things were hafted to shafts. About a week after I found the triangular point I found another milky quartz broken point that looked like probably 1/3 to 1/2 of it had snapped right off and it appeared that concave channels had been ground into the quartz on both sides to accommodate hafting to a shaft. I think we can all agree on one thing… These people were very smart.
Excellent video. The Solutrean culture made it to north America concurrent to the Clovis people. I would like to see some work with Solutrean points as well.
As I first started watching this I thought, "Really? It's obvious that it was made to seat into a stick better"... then I saw your rationale. Yes, you are absolutely correct. That whole rounded notch notion came from folks who theorized well over 100 years ago. They didn't have any experience and were pioneers in the field, so their erroneous hypotheses are easily forgiven. :)
I've seen Gils video on a free hand clovis. I tried it on an ebay , way to fat spearpoint that I was practicing on. I set up a good platform and whacked it and got a decent flute. Flipped it over a got another. I'm like the worst knapper ever and failed to make a decent projectile out of that point but it had two nice free hand flutes.
My hunch is your spot on, but my bet is that there was a different shaft resource present that allowed the simple hafting technique that you proposed. So what resource could of been abundant at that time that would allow or lend itself well to simply splitting the shaft to haft the fluted point? Possibly coppiced willow, cane, I am not sure, but I am sure it is probably growing nearby these finds today, but probably not coppiced or caretaked as it was then.
I think they used split shafts with a notch at the bottom. The fluting adds strength and allows the shaft to close tighter than if you simply notched it. Perhaps they used an organic glue of sorts in addition to tying the top.
The answer to this question can be found online already. Well kind a . With the thawing in antartica going on right now whole atyl atyl shafts are being found some with the point and sinew or plant fibre wrapps still totally intact. Very nice pictures of them online now also to study from. Some of them also have the the feathers still attached a two feather fletch. There is also a video of archeologists finding them digging them and bagging and tagging them . I have some close up pics of them that i can share if you would like.
Hello, having chipped arrow heads most of my younger life, old guy now, I'm fascinated by how many there are out there on UA-cam that do this also. I've seen methods and techniques I never thought of, though my arrow heads looked good and functioned well for actually killing game. The flute your talking about has been a problem as you've shown, and there has been some who have made various devices to aid them in making this final cut on their arrow head or spear point, but being more of a purist is there any other more out doorsy way of doing this cut. I have never tried but I suspect some type of simple device was made by some natives to make this last cut, example, imagine two small lengths of limb ( one inch diameter for small points ) and larger diameters for larger points, one side of the sticks are carved out like a long channel, pieces of leather are placed in the carved out areas and your almost finished arrow head is placed ( sandwiched ) between these two sticks to hold it firmly and you TIE twine around the whole thing to hold it strongly, the material your about to chip out is free to easily be chipped in long lengths because it is along the center exposed between the two sticks .. I suppose wooded tongs could be made easily to and achieve similar results. Also I have wondered about driving 2 stakes in the ground near each other, perhaps even leaning back a bit, place plenty of soft leather on the ground between the sticks, lay your arrow head or spear point with it point down on the soft material and the body of the arrow head resting against the sticks, get your pointed piece of antler and hold the arrow head firmly with your hand ( palm ) against the sticks, chip the flute thats opposite of your hand because other wise you'll interfere with the chip being made, then reverse the arrow head or spear point and do the other side. The point is you can use more force with hands and shoulders and apply it directly to where you think its needed and NOT slam it with a hammering type of device.
Well Ryan, from how the flutes are made I surmise that no matter how they hafted the point. It's clear that it centralized all the force and or penetration into the "Center" region of the point....i.e. it could deflect off bone meaning deep penetration. Also the haft being at least half the point length would support and or prevent it prematurely breaking?? The Folsom clearly illustrates they refined it further even though those points were less robust. Look forward to your assesment.
There has been quite a few two piece bone for shafts associated with folsoms these are short like 6 inches or less but they were obviously very strong and reusable!
As for my perception Id want a Splayed shaft to open up giving 3 wound channels . For point adhesive i use soft gum from fruit trees , for firm solid adhesive i use pine or cypress sap mixed with pulverized campfire charcoal creating a field expedient epoxy .
What if, you split the shaft (presumably green while it’s easiest to manipulate) and then used fire to char the end to grind to shape on a rock easier (simultaneously hardening the wood) Maybe worth a try? Sounds like what I’d do if I was using this technology.
This is off topic,but I once read in a history book that the makers of the points/arrows would deliberately make the arrows so that they split after hitting their target, but this was only for war,not hunting.Tje split arrow caused more damage, and when you tried to remove it,the point stayed in the body, causing more pain. And they constructed the arrows and spear points, so that when you kill your prey, the point would stay fixed to the shaft when removing it from the animal, thus keeping it intact for reuse, and preventing loss of the point, particularly in a buffalo hunt,where you might have to remove the arrow and use it again to kill another buffalo immediately.Whicj kinda makes sense to me.
My work took me to Papua New Guinea, about 10 years ago. Atlatls actually used by people could be found. Not tourist replicas. Lots of original polished stone Celt axe heads. Lots of hardwood spears thrown with the aid of atlatls. As one fellow told me who grew up in what is called the Highlands, removed from the populated centre of Port Moresby……… Well you know, you guys didn’t find us until 60 years ago. That is true because interior jungles of Papua New Guinea was little known prior to WW2. Accordingly, the lives of people used tools mentioned fairly recently. I never saw a stone arrowhead on a spear (or a dart placement on a spear). Neither did I see a stone arrowhead on arrows. That does not mean they did not, only that I never found any, and since I did a lot of asking at Weekend Markets and of the residents I conclude arrowheads were not common place. So nor enlightened common to assist you Ryan regarding hafting stone points. However, I circumstance you did not mention was the advantage of MORE shaft contact support since the split shaft concept sets the stone point deeper. I also agree with the comment of an engineer (I am one too) that the thin longitudinal and thicker edge perimeters impart greater bending strength to the point. Your testing has brought forth considerable cause for reflection in a very practical way. Considerable logic to your hypothesis. In so many ways, fluted points are so amazing. We have come a long way from trom Guillotine mechanical contraptions used by some large number of modern knappers 15-20 years ago. The more I personally make, then break fluting, or get on side and not the other, or only get 1/2 inch flutes, I am inclined to side with Patrick Blank a.k.a. Jack Crafty the flutes are just another flake removal. An archaeologist whose name is Eugene Gryba who is a flint Knapper where I live in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, flutes by Pressure Flaking. The old timers who made fluted points prized high quality rock material. High quality rock is a joy to knapp as modern knappers know. So, Pressure Flaking and very basic Indirect Percussion both seem viable. (I think most modern knappers would agree the “tool kit” of the old timers was not chalk full of many antlers and bones, abrading stones sufficient to fill a 5-gallon bucket. I think the tool to flute and the approach was simple. As your a knowledgeable Knapper Ryan, would you not agree that “platform” and “end shock” are the two most important issues? Of the two issues mentioned “end shock” is the wild card and it wound and bound, in leather, that Can we effectively dealt with. Thanks for taking time to make your videos. They are both entertaining and make us viewers “think.”
Here's a thought I just had... perhaps the earlier clovis making people. being less civilized in terms of basic rules and laws later enacted by more increasingly stationary groups, found it necessary to be considerably more nomadic in their survival quests and therefore needed to quickly make use of green uncured or dried spear shafts and arrows. I mean if you had plenty of time to spend a few months in the same place as a result of a more settled society, perhaps you might be able to stockpile a lot of seasoned shafts as opposed to having to constantly resupply yourself during the constant run for survival. So my thought is that as groups began to be less on the move perhaps their changing flint technology was merely a reflection of that more stationary lifestyle. What are your thoughts?
I always thought in terms of a V Shaped Notch rather than a split shaft but either way I suspect that it was more about a smooth transition, ergo, improved penetration, than anything else.
I'm here somewhat randomly and I think this was a excellent video! I did have a off topic question what are those two arrow points? Behind you with the rope attached to them ?
I am a bow hunter of 30+ years. I honor my native heritage, and have made my own bows, and arrows. Cattails shafts and hardwood necks and for shafts are my thing. But, respectfully, I am your apprentice. I appreciate your work on this angle. I need to return to it. GOD bless us all.
What was more accessible the stone or the shaft? I think I would prefer to replace the shaft, it’s a lower skill to replace it. The stone if engineered to split and absorb through splitting the shaft preserved the point then less time and skill is needed.
Great test please keep it up for it gives us archaeologists a lot of important information. Would love to see the tests be in a more controlled environment with a high-speed camera for greater data. You could also test on a ballistic gel to get a feel for more realistic penetration data variables.
thanks much. We have lot coming in the future still so hang tight! If you haven't seen the latest "Newnan" project video we released, go check that one out. I think you will very much like that one.
To my mind, the Clovis flute increases resistance to the point pivoting to one side or another of the split. The effect might be pretty marginal given the forces involved but it also would seem to be something of an advantage. More importantly, you made the point that achieving a flute without breaking the point takes exceptional skill (and some luck?) to achieve so might it not be a way of the maker showing off his skill?
What we consider ‘great skill’ could probably be done by a young teenager back then. They started knapping as children as it was part of every day life
I would imagine that shafts break more frequently than points, in general? Not just in actual use, but every day activities, accidents. Isn't it easier to make a shaft for a Clovis point? Wouldn't it be more beneficial to spend more time on the point to make it easier on makeing shafts since you can reuse the point?
You also have your reason as to why they stopped making Clovis points. There seems to be no benefit to fluting the points when a non fluted point works just as well. In addition I’d say they successfully completed far more non fluted points than Clovis points. It’s interesting to see the change in thought process.
Ok soo have you seen a clovis point made by a core stone? It is similar to creating a bifacial point . I would suggest studying coring stones. So I have successfully though not prettily made a clovis point by taking a squarish edge of my corestone (i cheated and abraded my edge) striking the flute out of the corner. Before removing the point i abraded the rough size and began knapping the one side right on the core stone once i have the basic form i again cheated and made a groove where i wanted to detach the point . I removed the point it was thicker in the bottom than wanted. I flipped to the unfinished side and abraded the flute pattern then i pressure flaked the sides to match.cleaning away up to the abraided flute.then i reversed the grind angle on the shaft end and in three tries managed to flute the other side.
I think it was to pour hot sap into. More surface area when it hardens. Soak into the bindings on the inside too. Without that it would break points off the shaft when repeat stabbing an elephant.
negligible, but also I find it much more important to add weight that reduce it. But it is overal such a slight amount that one would never notice it one way or another.
What if it is about arrow-head preservation? If you're shooting a lot of animals with your arrowpoints, you don't want to destroy your hours of hard work for each arrow. So a fault line down the shaft, which is relatively easy to replace, is more preferable to a blunt one where the arrow-head cracks from the impact of the shaft hitting its butt. (Instead, the arrow splits the shaft.) Such as when hitting bone and the like. I think this might be similar to the antler spearhead of Neolithic europe, where they made the point be the fault line (Because antler was easy to come by comparably to wood) in the open steppes of that time.
Is it possible that Clovis people found that a narrow base and split shaft was a way to salvage more points after impact. After all , shafts are less labor than a point, more so if they used a shaft extension.
That was very interesting. My European perspective has not needed to consider Clovis points too closely especially as there has been little consensus so my imagination has been allowed to run wild. The points did superficially remind me of fullered metal blades which appear on everything from swords to kitchen knives and serves no reason other than to save weight. Of course Clovis points do not feature a fuller; the weight saving would be insignificant on a small stone projectile that is hafted and the technology is separated in location and time! It is perhaps odd that fullers are also erroneously called 'blood gutters' and serves to remind us that misconceptions can easily become entrenched.
If the sinew is strong enough to resist the force of the woods separating, then sure its a good method! Its a lot of force though, so I was pretty surprised.
Ryan, is it possible that they roughed out the point, made the flute first and then refined the point around the flute, so to speak? You made an unfluted point and then fluted it; maybe this makes the point more likely to break during manufacture? Brilliant video anyway, as always.
i was curious of that myself, but there are a lack of flake scars typically running into the flute which would signify that the flute was the last or nearly last piece removed.
@@huntprimitive9918 Thanks for the reply, seems like you thought through that already, lol. One more question; how good were stoneage people at making flint? Could it be that they were just so good that breaking the point wasn't a problem? On the other hand flint is flint? Thanks for your work.
While watching your explanation about how risky it is to cut a flute in a Clovis point, it occurred to me that maybe the makers cut the flute first and then shaped the point around it. That way if they broke the blade it wouldn't destroy so much work. It also occurred to me that we always assumed it was just one person working on the flint knapping, why couldn't it be two working at the same time, the way a blacksmith works with his apprentice. Maybe the apprentice would crouch next to the master and press the stone against the knapper's thigh, so that his master could use two hands to cut the flute. I'm picturing him using a stick and a hammer stone to gently flake out that flute. Is that possible?
very possible. We are still doing lots of work behind the scenes on this. Fluting earlier rather than later has proven to be much safer for sure, however if you flue too early, the bilateral flakes will erase the flutes as well.
I’m not sure your test confirms your hypothesis. Both hafting techniques resulted in the same result, but the Clovis point is still more difficult to produce. So the Clovis knapping skill allowed them to have a simpler haft, while later periods required simpler knapping and more complex hafting.
it definitely doesn't confirm the hypothesis at all, at his is just a tiny piece of the overall test to gauge interest and thoughts on it. lots lots more to come
And I do think you should have used a nice big tree 🌳 instead of that plywood,,, the arrowhead will perform differently, and they had those around. Tx for the video
A single glance at these and I'd immediately say there is a very simple and obvious reason, they would be more difficult to dislodge by man or beast. Having now watched further your mounting on a split also makes sense. If you consider primitive man hunting a mammoth both factors could combine to make this the preferred choice since a spear or arrow in a mammoth likely was not an instant kill. Much like you'd follow a deer in many cases until it dies after the shot they likely would have to follow that mammoth which would simply be an enormous amount of food. Possibly even follow for days, during which time the sharp stone points would be continuing to cause damage and profuse bleeding whereas a point that was dislodged might stop bleeding allowing the beast to escape. I could be wrong, I'm not expert, that just seems like fairly straight logic to me. If me and a few friends are hoping to take down a grizzly today with stone tipped chopsticks the tips better be sharp and snag in the flesh.
Very interesting video. I think you may be onto something that a lot of PHD's have not thought of in the past. How about folsom points? Possibly the same type of hafting technique but different way of fluting the points?
thanks. Not sure on folsom or columbian yet... I am sure they are hafted in the same way, but not sure why the severe flutes as to a purpose they serve, but I definitely hope to learn more along the way
What if clovis points were attached to a split shafted "dart" that sits in an arrow. Similar to atlatls darts with separate tips. In Many ancient throwing spears, the tips were attached to darts to prevent the longer shafts from breaking. I would assume this is still a possibility. Or maybe it goes the other way around, maybe the intention was to split the arrow, thus taking impact based pressure and forces from the arrow head and spreading it into the split arrow, maybe to try to reuse heads? I think it is more likely that the clovis points were meant to be disposable, where the shafts may have been more valuable due to their ability to be after a shot much easier than the point.
Thank you for the video. I have an alternate hypothesis concerning the Solutreans and the Clovis people. 10,000 Years of Cold Cuts You made a spear so sharp it cut the flesh like a laser. It finished the job faster. The conscience demanded it. They had compassion on the animals, which is why they painted them on their cave walls. It hurts worse to get cut by a dull thick point in very cold weather. And I don't buy into the theory that Africans were too stupid to develop this technology. They simply lived in a warmer climate, so it wasn't necessary.
The key to killing big game today is penetration. Clovis specialized in killing really big game. A mastodon was about the size of a modern dump truck. A Jefferson sloth about the size of an Airport shuttle bus. Penetration to a depth of 3-4 feet would be required to reach the vital heart-lung area. The flute and split shaft is most streamlined, thus yielding deeper penetration. Clovis points are uniquely found at kill sites of these largest of the large animals. There is no evidence that indicates the point was glued to the shaft in any way, nor that a detachable fore shaft was used. These two techniques have been extrapolated from the much later basket weaver culture that used a spear thrower for much smaller game. To my knowledge no Clovis dart shafts have ever been found at the kill sites indicated previously. This may be due to deterioration with time or removal. But clearly the points remain. Both broken and intact. Given the almost total consumption of the beast it is clear the points were recoverable but were left. Indicating that the points were not reused. Clovis points and the Clovis people were highly specialized to killing really huge animals. As the ice age ended and smaller animals such as bison predominated the Clovis culture disappeared too. Archaic bison kills yield the folsum point. Which lacks the distinct flute and is considered “crude” in comparison to the Clovis point. I suggest that the makers, both Clovis and folsum simply made the point “good enough to do the job”. The Clovis point had to be streamlined for deep penetration. Thus the flute and smooth fit to the shaft. The folsum point much less so. Folsum was short lived apparently with the arrow replacing it after only a few hundred years according to the record.
I doubt my comment will be seen, now that the video is a little older... but, something to keep in mind, that *might* have been a part of what they were up to (we won't ever know for sure):
I was a traffic crash investigator for many years - the damage on the shafts *looks* different to me - I obviously can't examine them myself - and one test is just one test. Destructive testing is expensive, and resource heavy - so not easy to do a full run of tests.
All of that garbledeegook about my resume out of the way, the notch shaft looks like it took a harder impact, at the tip of the shaft.
Meaning - in a way, the split shaft acts like a crumple zone on a car. The clovis point was not only easier to re-shaft, when/if the point struck a bone, the point itself would get pushed back into the shaft, and actually *save* the difficult to make point from breaking so easy.
And the second additional thing, would be tip of the shaft strength - keep in mind, these people were *experts* at stone/wood work. Much like the bows, which carefully follow the wood grain, an shaft that is split carefully along the grain structure, *should* be more flexible than a cut notch - since all of the grain is intact, rather than cut.
By carefully splitting the shaft, and using the clovis point - the point could slide into that split some, and maybe save a maker from needing to make another point.
It would be interest to shoot some meat targets, and see what happens.
Paul Harrell has a great setup he uses for his gun channel - leather jacket "skin" then pork ribs, bag o' oranges for lung tissue, pork rib layer, and lastly a leather layer again. It is a reasonably good analog for a chest cavity.
I would love to see more photos of point and shaft damage from your experiments, to see if there is enough evidence to establish evidence to warrant further testing.
It also look like it allows for a bigger contact area between the shaft and the point, which could dramatically increase the friction. And that could help the point to stay on the shaft when extracted.
" in a way, the split shaft acts like a crumple zone on a car" But that is a bad thing. The whole point of the point is to transfer the energy into the animal and penetrate / cut while it is doing so. If the point is getting pushed back into the shaft then it is not doing the job of pushing forward into the animal.
@@adam-k
Precisely.
@@adam-k No, not really. It is made to cut through the animal but if you hit bone with ether point then the arrow/dart will stop. The question is what happens after it stops.
@@adam-k That might have been offset by the actual hooks to either side of the rear of the clovis point which like the barbs on a fishhook would make it harder to dislodge from the animal. If you were hunting a grizzy with chopsticks that might feel a bit like hunting a mammoth. Maybe the objective isn't as much about the initial damage so much as scoring many points lodged into the flesh well enough that they will continue to damage and bleed the animal to death over the next day or two.
I couldn't hardly believe the way they looked after that cruelty . You always come up with great idea's . 👍
This would be cool to see on a high speed camera
Seeing the light shine through the edges on those points looks impressive, scary sharp
You're on to something Ryan! This is one of those things that is so simple, you wonder how you didn't think of it yourself first!
thanks very much!
Loved the video , keep up the good work . I knew an old flintknapper that passed away about 50 years ago. His theory on flutes was the preform was fluted first and then the final shaping and flaking was done after the flute .
I found this idea in Dec 2022 and have made 7 this week How to flute a Clovis Point without breaking it: Take two slats of oak, shaped like they are cut out of a yard stick 10 to 12cm long. Pitch glue two buttons of wood to one end of each, four buttons total. wrap the tip of your Clovis preform in a one inch strip of buckskin/leather twice around. Wrap the two boards onto the point with the tip sandwiched flat and the buttons at the base, with a piece of string or cordage. Flute with an antler billet, works every time. Good luck everyone!
Your theory sounds reasonable.
@@frankparrish5657could you give an illustration of this?
These kinds of videos are what sets your channel apart from other bogus and nonsensical channels out there! And I love it! Very much!
Firstly, and maybe most importantly, you don't just claim and theorise from your sofa, you try it and you live by it, quite literally, using what you kill thus showing respect.
Secondly the theory you provided is really interesting, and it works, so if it works then it is plausible. Everything that doesn't work is discarded and looses to the test of time. However proving it is a bit harder, of course.
I would like to add something based on your observations. Let's say there were 2 kinds of fluted points, first being the flute that ends in a step fracture, the second being the one without it. Well, what if the ones with a step fracture were actually more desirable? What if they were an additional point of contact with the shaft, and for the first time in flint knapping you actually wanted to make a step fracture?!
As noted at the end of the video,I would like to see the research and the concept being expanded upon. More tests, more statistical data and samples etc.
Sorry for writing a novel here, I really like the stone age, our archaic sunrise, and can get carried away rather easily as shown :D
Cheers!
No prob at all and thanks very much. I noticed the step fracture part too and also looked at it as a good thing as it smoothed the transition and potentially gave it a bit more bite. I think that is more of a happy accident. Long flakes usually step closer the end instead of shooting clean out.
I’m an engineer and fluting adds strength to the arrow head to resist bending kind of like an I-beam or a fluted rifle barrel resists bending better than the same full size diameter barrel.......
Yeah I knew that
I don't think that's true, for exemple a square bar will be stronger than a same size H beam. It's not the actual strength that improves by removing material to make flutes, it will of course decrease somewhat, but it's the STRENGTH TO WEIGHT ratio that will improve greatly. Basically perform nearly as well with much less.
You just be a shitty engineer
-actual engineer
is that true for something brittle rather than ductile?
I used to think maybe the flutes were somehow the first flakes removed and the rest was knapped around them. Some examples of Clovis points look like that might have been the case.
That might have been the result of resharpening older points.
How far would Clovis hunters have travelled from their camps when hunting? Is it possible that they chose the combination of a harder to produce stone point and an easier to produce wooden shaft, because they were travelling with only the points (which could have been made by the members of their group who were not physically suited to hunting), and then making shafts as needed at their hunting grounds?
I’m a little late to reply but am currently an archaeology student who has done excavations and work at Clovis/Folsom camps. The current model for Clovis mobility is called the ABC kill-camp model where rather than traveling away from camps to hunt and then bring back the meat, they would move their camp to a kill site.
At most sites, the bison/mammoth kill will contain a site for meat processing and then a separate camp where we see evidence of tool-making and they are usually 60-100 meters apart.
In winter camps especially we often see them located near a tool source and the most extensive knapping happening there. Rather than carry a bag of completed points though, they would often carry preforms which were not quite completed and we think that is because they are less fragile for travel.
This doesn’t really completely answer your question but I’m sure the context will help you evaluate your hypothesis
@@seebasschipman293 Very good info! Thanks for sharing!!!
@@seebasschipman293 Thank you so much! I only just saw your response now, but it completely answers my question. I thought hunters of the time had to travel much more from camp sites to find their prey. If they only traveled 60-100 meters, I'm guessing they didn't hunt by searching for animal tracks and following them, but did something more like how hunters today will set up a blind in a place they know deer tend to frequent, and then just stay hidden until the animals show up?
He's talkind about how far the camp was away from the butchering site where they killed the animal(s),
I’m in agreement with you and also what I thought about. It’s easier to bring your knapping kit than find/fashion new shafts. I do however think that long points were used, plenty of evidence to support them (finds at kill sites, weights of counterbalances, etc.). Additionally, you saw how the tips broke off but the bulk/body of the tip was preserved. Simply knap the broken tip down for a few minutes and new point. Why you also find them in varying lengths as well, although I’m sure they were eventually designed smaller as the game size decreased. I would disagree with the gent at the end saying this is the “beginning of the technology”. Bi-facial flintknapping using overshot flaking techniques were around 10’s of thousands of years prior, i.e. Solutrean laurel leafs. Clovis points are the pinnacle of the technology, ask anyone that has attempted to flute a Clovis point. Some of the large ceremonial points found covered in red ochre are so thin for their size that the are seldom if ever recreated and were knapped by true masters.
Love you throwing down the snapped point. I keep two snapped pieces in the center of my personal Clovis frame as snapping these during fluting is so prevalent. Keep up the good work.
With your extended experience in knapping points, what percentage failure do you see when performing the Clovis style flutes?
And thanks for some really insightful videos!
Wil
Now Ryan you need to see if the technology existed in the Siberian paleo period. See if you can find examples of the binding technique of hafting is present in their tool kits. Great hypothesis, keep up the good work
thanks. I may be wrong on this, but I think that fluted points are North American specific and so that leaves me to wonder if that was something that occurred after the population split and migrated. If there are no flute channels in Siberia (???) then that would indicate that they likely werent fit into split shafts, or perhaps even that they were fitted into split shafts, but the evolving clovis culture founds that thinning the base was a better method and that idea never reached back home before the idea of notch hafting came into practice.
even though there are no fluted point types in the Siberian paleo record, the hafting style might, if the paleo Indian came across from Siberia they would have used their hafting style and invented a point for that style
The mythology that has been built up around Clovis is giant, but entirely false. Fluting looks great, feels great on a point, and is entirely functional. I don't break Clovis points anymore, but I did for 30 years. They are now easy to make, long, thin and delicate like the Fenn, Simon or Drake Cache, and made prehistoric with antler and stone, no jig. Take two 15cm slats of oak, like they are cut from a yardstick and onto the end of each slat pitch glue two little buttons or twigs of wood (four total, 2 on each slat). Wrap the tip of your Clovis blank in a strip of leather, then sandwitch it in the slats and tie tight with a string with the twigs on the base, then flute. Great video. I empathize with that part of the video where the Clovis breaks in half. It's almost depressing how easy it is now.
I would think, that the forshafts were actually heat- hardened after splitting before inserting the fluted Clovis point.
It's seems to me that the fluted point into the split foreshaft would actually be more effective at withstanding a hard hit, like a shoulder for instance. For the simple fact that a tighter fit, and ROOM to move down a little, like a shock absorber so to speak, would be better than a notched point, with no room to move but, simply fracturing the foreshaft.
That's my 2 cents.
Secondly, the target you chose to demonstrate on isn't representative of the usual targets primitive man would be striking , a piece of plywood, just isn't realistic, i would think try think again with something more realistic, like a beef shoulder quarter. Also, just my opinion.
Shawnee nation 76, good point , but no matter what the target, the general principle still applies.
I think mayve thay slight movement would absorb some if the imoa t energy and lessen penetration. Much the way a hollow point bullet gas less penetraton because of the bullets expansion. It all amount to energy absobtion.
Still only real life experimentation can prove either theory. So feel free to experiment. I like science, and science is all about proiving theories not just coming up with them.
This is why experimental archeology is so important.
As to the why on the Clovis points - maybe they expected the shaft to split anyway, and the flute (as you say) makes a better fit, so they just pre-split the shafts and had a method of binding behind the point that prevented the arrows from coming apart during use.
I think this is a very reasonable conclusion thank you for explaining it all so well
This is the best thing I have seen in experimental archeology I cant say enough good about it to do it justice
I've always had the theory that it satisfied the human desire to have things geometrically equal even in pure utilitarian tools and applications we have a desire of design
Great reasoning behind the design styles. The one thing to keep in mind, Clovis culture disappeared with the event that killed off the large mammals around 12,000 years ago. The method of making points without Clovis-styled flutes was the modern wave of a second culture that filled the same areas but had no ties to Clovis technology. So two unconnected groups of people who invented different techniques to solve the same task of putting holes in animals. Lining up the projectile points by date also shows how the advanced Clovis knapping techniques went to a period of rough knapping and then to fine knapping again (but using the different 'technology').
Isn't it nice to feel a breakthrough after much research. Gratz sir.
You should try this from a further distance. The dart was still flexing in flight a lot, when it hit the plywood. I think that’s why it split the shaft on one side. Would like to see the dart hit straight, without the flexing. Probably not possible but I think it would give a better observation of how the point cuts straight into the shaft. Love the videos guy!👍
Makes sense to me. I'm a firm believer in form follows function.
I have an interesting hypothesis. I think that Clovis flutes were “discovered by accidental necessity”. If you were a hunter and had 1 large biface and as Murphy Law goes it gets broken. You could possibly find both pieces. The tip may have a impact fracture and a reverse flute. It could easily be reworked into a second functioning point, and would have a flute. The basal end of the original point could be reworked as well. Practical ease of function is the key; if it works, it was used, if it didn’t work, you starved.
Matthew Driggers. I agree, Could it be like a makers test also?
Great fascinating content as always!
thank you!
Ok Ryon your on the right track ---- i do nothing but split shaft an been doing it sence i was 17 an im 52 now so i will tell you how it works better if you get rid of all common arrow tec an do this instead. Put the clovis in the split do not put sinew on the stone instead soak rawhide an strech it tight as you can under the stone when it drys the stick an the stone shuls be as one an it shuld hold together on impact. --- you can do experment with sinew with rawhide ad a experement with pich an rawhide
Good video. Experimental archaeology is really important in trying to understand the past.
Wow, great video and experiment. Thanks for doing this and sharing!
thanks very much!
Very good stuff machanical advantage helps the mass of the dart to push the point through instead of splitting out
This is interesting. I’ve wondered about fluting but don’t have much practical experience. Thanks!
Some Clovis points are so large - some over 7 inches long, and we now know that much smaller points are effective against deer, even bison. And yes, there still mammoth then, but to get deep into a large animal you don't want a large point.
Here's my hypothesis: small points were functional ones, but large ones were for prestige or as a currency. Wampum was valuable BECAUSE it was difficult and very labor-intensive to make. Modern people display larger, fancier clothes, jewelry, cars and tools (Rambo knives) than any practical use would suggest. This also explains why large collections of Clovis points have been found - they were hordes, just like Roman-era coins stored under one of your bed posts or under a tent pole but when you died or didn't return from a hunt/journey, your relatives never found your horde.
Remember that the widest part of a Clovis is about two thirds up from the base so when that shoulder passed into the animal the hafting and fore shaft could then pass through the wound without further drag on it , allowing the atlatl shaft to fall out of the wound and the fore shaft and point to stay in the wound there you have your first repeating weapon the main shaft falls out pick it up and reload with another fore shaft... and also remember the bases were heavily ground to stop them from being pushed down into the fore shaft and I would shorten your fore shafts by about half.....regards Idaho Clovisman......
The flutes make it easier to mount into a shaft, obviously but, its also to have a better chance of letting blood the point gets grabbed by the flesh of the animal. Basically they are blood groves. The clovis point is also usefull as a tool to scrape and shape new shafts.
You are awesome. I find a lot of daltons they don’t normally have tip dings though. the little feet break more than anything you would think the opposite. I find big ones and little ones. I think the ones the size you made where knives because they are normally beveled. The bases are super ground and yours where not that ground. I love your channel man.
That is seriously insightful!
I remember this guy in the pacific northwest who is SERIOUSLY the best at primitive fire making and makes awesome videos . Can't remember his name . Is it Lupo ?
THX
@@QuantumPyrite_88.9 😅 I'm still around. I've just gotten a lot more obsessed with my archery fumblings these days, but I have more planned for UA-cam too.
Good news . I've been doing 2 workshops per month and thinking about getting back in to public YT videos . Stay warm Brian and have fun out there .
No disrespect meant whatsoever to you my friend , But all that explanation was not necesary , at least to me it was always self evident what fluting was all about . I absolutely love your work and learn something from every one of your videos . thank you
Yup it is logical. But what about Cumberland points with the flute full length? Did the shaft protrude in front of the point itself?
try first burning a small hole (heated copper pin) through the shaft at the lowest point of the split, then create the split. once the split reaches the hole, it'll stop splitting. drummers use a similar technique with cymbals that are beginning to crack.
KEvron
excellent video, thank you!
I think you are right. Believe it or not that was my theory as well however I did not want to risk breaking some of my clovis points .
Fascinating that fluting came along before notching. Seems like notching would be the natural option but I know caveman
Very interesting, I found a very small fluted point here in Southern Africa from the san people whom used small less powerful bows that relied on poisoned arrow tips.
After seeing this video I would assume that a smart archaeology/paleotology student might be able to write his dissertation based on your cloviis theory. Of course he should also bolster his dissertation with results of field experiments like you do. You're quite the scientist my friend. You do good research and come up with plausible explantions.
Now if the climate scientists could learn something about your methods. Maybe we could stop worrying about doomsday for a bit.
It is quite plausible that mankind has seen climate change throughout the history of mankind. We certainly saw the ice age come to an end, and we may actually still be in the process that warm up.
So far we have survived and the world did not end. We simply adapted. That is what living things do.
I may be way off here, but what I noticed was the way the tip snapped, buy having it hafted in a split there may have been a shock absorbing effect and would reduce the amount of damage that the point actually would take, minimizing the amount of damage to the actual tip, it could easily have the tip knapped back to a point and given another go. Just a thought.
And i think that you should do more tests on the impact damage to see if there is a steady and consistent pattern between the two
That was really cool. Don’t threaten me with a good time lol. I would love to go out and do the stuff. I recently found a large triangular point made of quartz with a very pronounced impact fracture on it resulting in the tip of the triangle point and a sliver about an inch and a half down one side being missing from the point. I believe the type of point was transitional Palio or early archaic Alamance point. I’ve also found evidence of other broken point tips and tools in the same area nearby. I’ve always wondered about how things were hafted to shafts. About a week after I found the triangular point I found another milky quartz broken point that looked like probably 1/3 to 1/2 of it had snapped right off and it appeared that concave channels had been ground into the quartz on both sides to accommodate hafting to a shaft. I think we can all agree on one thing… These people were very smart.
Thanks for the video.
Excellent video. The Solutrean culture made it to north America concurrent to the Clovis people. I would like to see some work with Solutrean points as well.
Hey do you ever ues sling weapons. There cool to
As I first started watching this I thought, "Really? It's obvious that it was made to seat into a stick better"... then I saw your rationale. Yes, you are absolutely correct. That whole rounded notch notion came from folks who theorized well over 100 years ago. They didn't have any experience and were pioneers in the field, so their erroneous hypotheses are easily forgiven. :)
Experimental archeology at its best
What if the shaft was wrapped around first and the crack made later by the fluted point itself? So that the crack wouldn't go that far in the shaft.
I've seen Gils video on a free hand clovis. I tried it on an ebay , way to fat spearpoint that I was practicing on. I set up a good platform and whacked it and got a decent flute. Flipped it over a got another. I'm like the worst knapper ever and failed to make a decent projectile out of that point but it had two nice free hand flutes.
My hunch is your spot on, but my bet is that there was a different shaft resource present that allowed the simple hafting technique that you proposed. So what resource could of been abundant at that time that would allow or lend itself well to simply splitting the shaft to haft the fluted point? Possibly coppiced willow, cane, I am not sure, but I am sure it is probably growing nearby these finds today, but probably not coppiced or caretaked as it was then.
I think they used split shafts with a notch at the bottom. The fluting adds strength and allows the shaft to close tighter than if you simply notched it. Perhaps they used an organic glue of sorts in addition to tying the top.
The answer to this question can be found online already. Well kind a . With the thawing in antartica going on right now whole atyl atyl shafts are being found some with the point and sinew or plant fibre wrapps still totally intact. Very nice pictures of them online now also to study from. Some of them also have the the feathers still attached a two feather fletch. There is also a video of archeologists finding them digging them and bagging and tagging them . I have some close up pics of them that i can share if you would like.
This man knows more than the scientists with doctorate degrees. Good job!
Hello, having chipped arrow heads most of my younger life, old guy now, I'm fascinated by how many there are out there on UA-cam that do this also. I've seen methods and techniques I never thought of, though my arrow heads looked good and functioned well for actually killing game. The flute your talking about has been a problem as you've shown, and there has been some who have made various devices to aid them in making this final cut on their arrow head or spear point, but being more of a purist is there any other more out doorsy way of doing this cut. I have never tried but I suspect some type of simple device was made by some natives to make this last cut, example, imagine two small lengths of limb ( one inch diameter for small points ) and larger diameters for larger points, one side of the sticks are carved out like a long channel, pieces of leather are placed in the carved out areas and your almost finished arrow head is placed ( sandwiched ) between these two sticks to hold it firmly and you TIE twine around the whole thing to hold it strongly, the material your about to chip out is free to easily be chipped in long lengths because it is along the center exposed between the two sticks .. I suppose wooded tongs could be made easily to and achieve similar results.
Also I have wondered about driving 2 stakes in the ground near each other, perhaps even leaning back a bit, place plenty of soft leather on the ground between the sticks, lay your arrow head or spear point with it point down on the soft material and the body of the arrow head resting against the sticks, get your pointed piece of antler and hold the arrow head firmly with your hand ( palm ) against the sticks, chip the flute thats opposite of your hand because other wise you'll interfere with the chip being made, then reverse the arrow head or spear point and do the other side. The point is you can use more force with hands and shoulders and apply it directly to where you think its needed and NOT slam it with a hammering type of device.
Well Ryan, from how the flutes are made I surmise that no matter how they hafted the point. It's clear that it centralized all the force and or penetration into the "Center" region of the point....i.e. it could deflect off bone meaning deep penetration. Also the haft being at least half the point length would support and or prevent it prematurely breaking?? The Folsom clearly illustrates they refined it further even though those points were less robust. Look forward to your assesment.
Yeah the Folsom probably did a lot of work hafting to make that gorgeous point stand up to the stresses.
I think they put a tiny flat piece of bone at the bottom for the point to hit against so it doesn't split the stick. Or a piece of grass
There has been quite a few two piece bone for shafts associated with folsoms these are short like 6 inches or less but they were obviously very strong and reusable!
As for my perception Id want a Splayed shaft to open up giving 3 wound channels . For point adhesive i use soft gum from fruit trees , for firm solid adhesive i use pine or cypress sap mixed with pulverized campfire charcoal creating a field expedient epoxy .
What if, you split the shaft (presumably green while it’s easiest to manipulate) and then used fire to char the end to grind to shape on a rock easier (simultaneously hardening the wood) Maybe worth a try? Sounds like what I’d do if I was using this technology.
This is off topic,but I once read in a history book that the makers of the points/arrows would deliberately make the arrows so that they split after hitting their target, but this was only for war,not hunting.Tje split arrow caused more damage, and when you tried to remove it,the point stayed in the body, causing more pain. And they constructed the arrows and spear points, so that when you kill your prey, the point would stay fixed to the shaft when removing it from the animal, thus keeping it intact for reuse, and preventing loss of the point, particularly in a buffalo hunt,where you might have to remove the arrow and use it again to kill another buffalo immediately.Whicj kinda makes sense to me.
My work took me to Papua New Guinea, about 10 years ago. Atlatls actually used by people could be found. Not tourist replicas. Lots of original polished stone Celt axe heads. Lots of hardwood spears thrown with the aid of atlatls.
As one fellow told me who grew up in what is called the Highlands, removed from the populated centre of Port Moresby……… Well you know, you guys didn’t find us until 60 years ago. That is true because interior jungles of Papua New Guinea was little known prior to WW2. Accordingly, the lives of people used tools mentioned fairly recently.
I never saw a stone arrowhead on a spear (or a dart placement on a spear). Neither did I see a stone arrowhead on arrows. That does not mean they did not, only that I never found any, and since I did a lot of asking at Weekend Markets and of the residents I conclude arrowheads were not common place.
So nor enlightened common to assist you Ryan regarding hafting stone points.
However, I circumstance you did not mention was the advantage of MORE shaft contact support since the split shaft concept sets the stone point deeper. I also agree with the comment of an engineer (I am one too) that the thin longitudinal and thicker edge perimeters impart greater bending strength to the point.
Your testing has brought forth considerable cause for reflection in a very practical way. Considerable logic to your hypothesis.
In so many ways, fluted points are so amazing. We have come a long way from trom Guillotine mechanical contraptions used by some large number of modern knappers 15-20 years ago. The more I personally make, then break fluting, or get on side and not the other, or only get 1/2 inch flutes, I am inclined to side with Patrick Blank a.k.a. Jack Crafty the flutes are just another flake removal. An archaeologist whose name is Eugene Gryba who is a flint Knapper where I live in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, flutes by Pressure Flaking. The old timers who made fluted points prized high quality rock material. High quality rock is a joy to knapp as modern knappers know. So, Pressure Flaking and very basic Indirect Percussion both seem viable. (I think most modern knappers would agree the “tool kit” of the old timers was not chalk full of many antlers and bones, abrading stones sufficient to fill a 5-gallon bucket. I think the tool to flute and the approach was simple. As your a knowledgeable Knapper Ryan, would you not agree that “platform” and “end shock” are the two most important issues? Of the two issues mentioned “end shock” is the wild card and it wound and bound, in leather, that Can we effectively dealt with.
Thanks for taking time to make your videos. They are both entertaining and make us viewers “think.”
😊 17:46 😊
Here's a thought I just had... perhaps the earlier clovis making people. being less civilized in terms of basic rules and laws later enacted by more increasingly stationary groups, found it necessary to be considerably more nomadic in their survival quests and therefore needed to quickly make use of green uncured or dried spear shafts and arrows. I mean if you had plenty of time to spend a few months in the same place as a result of a more settled society, perhaps you might be able to stockpile a lot of seasoned shafts as opposed to having to constantly resupply yourself during the constant run for survival. So my thought is that as groups began to be less on the move perhaps their changing flint technology was merely a reflection of that more stationary lifestyle. What are your thoughts?
I always thought in terms of a V Shaped Notch rather than a split shaft but either way I suspect that it was more about a smooth transition, ergo, improved penetration, than anything else.
I'm here somewhat randomly and I think this was a excellent video! I did have a off topic question what are those two arrow points? Behind you with the rope attached to them ?
I am a bow hunter of 30+ years. I honor my native heritage, and have made my own bows, and arrows. Cattails shafts and hardwood necks and for shafts are my thing. But, respectfully, I am your apprentice. I appreciate your work on this angle. I need to return to it. GOD bless us all.
Fluted would penetrate deeper, likely due to targeting bigger prey. Arrow design will relate to the types of prey being targeted and what works best.
What was more accessible the stone or the shaft? I think I would prefer to replace the shaft, it’s a lower skill to replace it. The stone if engineered to split and absorb through splitting the shaft preserved the point then less time and skill is needed.
Great test please keep it up for it gives us archaeologists a lot of important information. Would love to see the tests be in a more controlled environment with a high-speed camera for greater data. You could also test on a ballistic gel to get a feel for more realistic penetration data variables.
thanks much. We have lot coming in the future still so hang tight! If you haven't seen the latest "Newnan" project video we released, go check that one out. I think you will very much like that one.
To my mind, the Clovis flute increases resistance to the point pivoting to one side or another of the split. The effect might be pretty marginal given the forces involved but it also would seem to be something of an advantage. More importantly, you made the point that achieving a flute without breaking the point takes exceptional skill (and some luck?) to achieve so might it not be a way of the maker showing off his skill?
What we consider ‘great skill’ could probably be done by a young teenager back then. They started knapping as children as it was part of every day life
I would imagine that shafts break more frequently than points, in general? Not just in actual use, but every day activities, accidents.
Isn't it easier to make a shaft for a Clovis point? Wouldn't it be more beneficial to spend more time on the point to make it easier on makeing shafts since you can reuse the point?
Your video are amazing I just love your videos
You also have your reason as to why they stopped making Clovis points. There seems to be no benefit to fluting the points when a non fluted point works just as well. In addition I’d say they successfully completed far more non fluted points than Clovis points. It’s interesting to see the change in thought process.
Ok soo have you seen a clovis point made by a core stone? It is similar to creating a bifacial point . I would suggest studying coring stones. So I have successfully though not prettily made a clovis point by taking a squarish edge of my corestone (i cheated and abraded my edge) striking the flute out of the corner. Before removing the point i abraded the rough size and began knapping the one side right on the core stone once i have the basic form i again cheated and made a groove where i wanted to detach the point . I removed the point it was thicker in the bottom than wanted. I flipped to the unfinished side and abraded the flute pattern then i pressure flaked the sides to match.cleaning away up to the abraided flute.then i reversed the grind angle on the shaft end and in three tries managed to flute the other side.
Really love this video Ryan
I think it was to pour hot sap into. More surface area when it hardens. Soak into the bindings on the inside too. Without that it would break points off the shaft when repeat stabbing an elephant.
Do you think the flutes may also function to reduce weight or would that be almost negligible
negligible, but also I find it much more important to add weight that reduce it. But it is overal such a slight amount that one would never notice it one way or another.
What if it is about arrow-head preservation? If you're shooting a lot of animals with your arrowpoints, you don't want to destroy your hours of hard work for each arrow. So a fault line down the shaft, which is relatively easy to replace, is more preferable to a blunt one where the arrow-head cracks from the impact of the shaft hitting its butt. (Instead, the arrow splits the shaft.) Such as when hitting bone and the like.
I think this might be similar to the antler spearhead of Neolithic europe, where they made the point be the fault line (Because antler was easy to come by comparably to wood) in the open steppes of that time.
Is it possible that Clovis people found that a narrow base and split shaft was a way to salvage more points after impact. After all , shafts are less labor than a point, more so if they used a shaft extension.
Cool. Just so strange. You think it would be much easier to notch the wood instead of making a flute.
That was very interesting. My European perspective has not needed to consider Clovis points too closely especially as there has been little consensus so my imagination has been allowed to run wild. The points did superficially remind me of fullered metal blades which appear on everything from swords to kitchen knives and serves no reason other than to save weight. Of course Clovis points do not feature a fuller; the weight saving would be insignificant on a small stone projectile that is hafted and the technology is separated in location and time! It is perhaps odd that fullers are also erroneously called 'blood gutters' and serves to remind us that misconceptions can easily become entrenched.
If the sinew is strong enough to resist the force of the woods separating, then sure its a good method! Its a lot of force though, so I was pretty surprised.
Ryan, is it possible that they roughed out the point, made the flute first and then refined the point around the flute, so to speak? You made an unfluted point and then fluted it; maybe this makes the point more likely to break during manufacture? Brilliant video anyway, as always.
i was curious of that myself, but there are a lack of flake scars typically running into the flute which would signify that the flute was the last or nearly last piece removed.
@@huntprimitive9918 Thanks for the reply, seems like you thought through that already, lol. One more question; how good were stoneage people at making flint? Could it be that they were just so good that breaking the point wasn't a problem? On the other hand flint is flint? Thanks for your work.
While watching your explanation about how risky it is to cut a flute in a Clovis point, it occurred to me that maybe the makers cut the flute first and then shaped the point around it. That way if they broke the blade it wouldn't destroy so much work. It also occurred to me that we always assumed it was just one person working on the flint knapping, why couldn't it be two working at the same time, the way a blacksmith works with his apprentice. Maybe the apprentice would crouch next to the master and press the stone against the knapper's thigh, so that his master could use two hands to cut the flute. I'm picturing him using a stick and a hammer stone to gently flake out that flute. Is that possible?
very possible. We are still doing lots of work behind the scenes on this. Fluting earlier rather than later has proven to be much safer for sure, however if you flue too early, the bilateral flakes will erase the flutes as well.
Very cool. Have you ever found pre-clovis points?
I’m not sure your test confirms your hypothesis. Both hafting techniques resulted in the same result, but the Clovis point is still more difficult to produce. So the Clovis knapping skill allowed them to have a simpler haft, while later periods required simpler knapping and more complex hafting.
it definitely doesn't confirm the hypothesis at all, at his is just a tiny piece of the overall test to gauge interest and thoughts on it. lots lots more to come
HuntPrimitive awesome! I hope there is a revival in knapping and ancient history. People like you who bring it to the masses/life are heros.
And I do think you should have used a nice big tree 🌳 instead of that plywood,,, the arrowhead will perform differently, and they had those around. Tx for the video
A single glance at these and I'd immediately say there is a very simple and obvious reason, they would be more difficult to dislodge by man or beast. Having now watched further your mounting on a split also makes sense. If you consider primitive man hunting a mammoth both factors could combine to make this the preferred choice since a spear or arrow in a mammoth likely was not an instant kill. Much like you'd follow a deer in many cases until it dies after the shot they likely would have to follow that mammoth which would simply be an enormous amount of food. Possibly even follow for days, during which time the sharp stone points would be continuing to cause damage and profuse bleeding whereas a point that was dislodged might stop bleeding allowing the beast to escape. I could be wrong, I'm not expert, that just seems like fairly straight logic to me. If me and a few friends are hoping to take down a grizzly today with stone tipped chopsticks the tips better be sharp and snag in the flesh.
Great video 👍
Very interesting video. I think you may be onto something that a lot of PHD's have not thought of in the past. How about folsom points? Possibly the same type of hafting technique but different way of fluting the points?
thanks. Not sure on folsom or columbian yet... I am sure they are hafted in the same way, but not sure why the severe flutes as to a purpose they serve, but I definitely hope to learn more along the way
Make fit perfectly . thank you 🌹
read about Clovis culture on an SAT test today
Wouldn’t they flute first before making the point?
What if clovis points were attached to a split shafted "dart" that sits in an arrow. Similar to atlatls darts with separate tips. In Many ancient throwing spears, the tips were attached to darts to prevent the longer shafts from breaking. I would assume this is still a possibility. Or maybe it goes the other way around, maybe the intention was to split the arrow, thus taking impact based pressure and forces from the arrow head and spreading it into the split arrow, maybe to try to reuse heads? I think it is more likely that the clovis points were meant to be disposable, where the shafts may have been more valuable due to their ability to be after a shot much easier than the point.
Thank you for the video. I have an alternate hypothesis concerning the Solutreans and the Clovis people.
10,000 Years of Cold Cuts
You made a spear so sharp
it cut the flesh like a laser.
It finished the job faster.
The conscience demanded it.
They had compassion on the animals, which is why they painted them on their cave walls. It hurts worse to get cut by a dull thick point in very cold weather. And I don't buy into the theory that Africans were too stupid to develop this technology. They simply lived in a warmer climate, so it wasn't necessary.
The key to killing big game today is penetration. Clovis specialized in killing really big game. A mastodon was about the size of a modern dump truck. A Jefferson sloth about the size of an Airport shuttle bus. Penetration to a depth of 3-4 feet would be required to reach the vital heart-lung area. The flute and split shaft is most streamlined, thus yielding deeper penetration. Clovis points are uniquely found at kill sites of these largest of the large animals.
There is no evidence that indicates the point was glued to the shaft in any way, nor that a detachable fore shaft was used. These two techniques have been extrapolated from the much later basket weaver culture that used a spear thrower for much smaller game.
To my knowledge no Clovis dart shafts have ever been found at the kill sites indicated previously. This may be due to deterioration with time or removal. But clearly the points remain. Both broken and intact. Given the almost total consumption of the beast it is clear the points were recoverable but were left. Indicating that the points were not reused. Clovis points and the Clovis people were highly specialized to killing really huge animals. As the ice age ended and smaller animals such as bison predominated the Clovis culture disappeared too.
Archaic bison kills yield the folsum point. Which lacks the distinct flute and is considered “crude” in comparison to the Clovis point. I suggest that the makers, both Clovis and folsum simply made the point “good enough to do the job”. The Clovis point had to be streamlined for deep penetration. Thus the flute and smooth fit to the shaft. The folsum point much less so. Folsum was short lived apparently with the arrow replacing it after only a few hundred years according to the record.
Fascinating, but I'm wondering if you have Folsom confused with a later style. Folsom has a long flute
Form follows function.
bone foreshafts?