Solutrean Spearheads: The Art of Prehistoric Flintknapping
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 бер 2021
- Join James as he takes you back to The Solutrean (22,000 - 18,000BP), a sub period of the Upper Palaeolithic in Europe. This relatively short period in the European Palaeolithic saw the production of some of the finest stone tools in the entire Palaeolithic. The tools produced were spearheads, flaked on both sides to a leaf shape. Watch Dr. Dilley as he demonstrates the prehistoric technique of flintknapping as he recreates a Solutrean Spearhead.
Filmed Edited & Produced by Emma Jones of ELWJ Media - www.elwjmedia.co.uk
---------
To find out more about my flintknapping and experimental archaeology visit my website or follow me on social media!
Website: www.ancientcraft.co.uk/
Twitter: / ancientcraftuk
Facebook: / ancientcraftuk
Instagram: / ancientcraftuk
Patreon: / ancientcraftuk - Навчання та стиль
Man the quality of these vids is getting so good!
Both of you are fantastic educational content creators!
Hope you all enjoyed, if you have any questions that didn't get answered in the live chat, feel free to share them in the comments here. Thanks for watching!
Hi James, I've wanted to learn more about The Soultrean culture and technocomplex, do you have any recommendations at all? I've got the Jill Cook one you show, and I'm not bothered about reading 'Across the Ice ' Thanks
I’ll have a look, but I think papers in archaeological journals will be your friend for learning more about techno-complexes
This is nearly a year late, but watching the process, how long does it take? I've read here and there that hunter-gatherers had a lot more free time compared to us overall, but it seems like the toolmaking process is a bit arduous.
@@vehkvehk3624 If you're somewhat adept in the art, you can make a nice point in a few hours. Smaller tools can be made in even less time. Even though it's likely a skill that everyone learned, I'm sure there were some in a tribe far more skilled at toolmaking and made most of the points for everyone...and probably got better and faster at it with every passing year.
@muhammad koπtol (erectile dysfunction) I'm sure in the beginning they did. Bones, tusks, antler, horn, fangs...they'd all be functional. You can't keep a sharp edge on any of those for long, some of them you can't sharpen at all, and none of them can be made as thin, all of that adds up to a more deadly weapon with better cutting and penetration. That's why knapped tools were such a game changer when we figured that out all those years ago.
Man, these things were truly a pinnacle of prehistoric knapping.
I also love the logic behind the Solutrean hypothesis. "The points look similar, and some people in the Americas use needles, just like Europeans!"
Needles are really intuitive and pretty easy to figure out. It wouldn't surprise me if the Native Americans discovered them on their own, or even if they were discovered by those ancestral to both Europeans and Native Americans.
Agreed, there’s lots of example of technology appearing to ‘appear’ without external influence, even in the world of stone tools!
@@forestdweller5581 Even if they did hunt seals, how does that make them ancestors of Native Americans? Northern Europeans have been hunting seals for eons and we only just reached the Americas in the past thousand years.
Additionally, genetic evidence supports the "out of asia" theory.
And don't belittle my "chit-chat" about flaking and needles. I am an experienced stone knapper and primitive technology enthusiast. It's a bit insulting really.
The solutrean hypothosis is some white supremacist crackpot archeology. Nothing more.
@@forestdweller5581 Your Great Auks example is a bit lacking. If Great Auks were eveywhere, why would humans travel to America to hunt them? Sure, Solutreans hunted them and depicted them, but that doesn't mean they went to America. The Great Auk example works for pretty much any oceangoing creature.
Look, whatever the case, neither of us is going to drop our opinion in this bickering. You made some good points (the seafaring abilities of early cultures *are* in fact often underestimated) and I believe I did too.
I'll also admit "white supremacist" is a bit dramatic though this hypothesis still is a breeding ground for many racist ideas. It's a bit too similar to the Nazi's concept of all races stemming from the Aryans for my comfort.
Thanks.
@@forestdweller5581 I agree it's a natural question, did people transit the North Atlantic (either way) during the Pleistocene. Solutrean tech transfer is a special case of the possible interactions.
Very interesting about the Great Auks! Do we know what kind of boats were in use in Canada/Greenland/Europe at that time? Inuit and Norse could do the trip... but those are ~~10k years later
Another great one! Thanks from Germany
Very well presented - and what fantastic camera work and quality!
This is such an excellent in depth video, I really appreciate how your lecture was paired with actually showing how the flint was knapped.
This is great. Will use this to teach next time
Thank you for that fabulous film. Really enjoyed it.
Great video
that was awesome. thank you for making. I love this stuff
I like this new format of video.
And that prehistorically accurate outfit is great! =)
Lately the "Solutrean Hypothesis" (SH) has begun to seriously lose its luster as some critical thought and new data have emerged. The SH was in an important manner, a means of trying to locate a "homeland" for the Clovis technology which has a great deal in common with the Old World Upper Paleolithic. However, its weakness lies in the assumption that Clovis really is the oldest cultural expression in the Americas. With increasing numbers of sites contemporary with or older than Clovis, the need for an "ancestor" outside the New World has vanished. The similarities between Clovis and Solutrean methods of manufacturing extraordinarily beautiful pieces of chipped stone can be attributed to convergences of goals and the problems a flintknapper faces in thinning a long, wide, thin biface.
Great to come across another Dilley….been the only one where ever I’ve been….and this is one of my favorite subjects….!!!
I really enjoyed this, since decades ago, my father showed me rudimentary flint knapping; he was a beginner. & your next video [Brandon Flint Nodule] which appeared, I look forward to later. Thank you Dr. Dilley!
Hello Dr. James Dilley.
I have been watching several of your videos, and decided to purchase one of the Solutrean blades.
Can't wait to see your fine workmanship!
Just found your channel and am very excited to subscribe! I am a new knapper myself and have been watching videos on and off to pick up tips, but your videos are next level. great quality, excellent historical commentary, and awesome knapping examples. Please keep us the grat work!
So good,I will watch every doco
that is one damn fine spear you made, now I must make one, great work mate
The technique the solutrean’s used is similar to Clovis “over shot” however it’s a French term “outre pase” (hopefully I spelled it right) that the goal was to send extreme thinning spalls and flakes at the beginning of the knapping process to preserve the width and length. They proceed to do this to get flakes diving into the middle which result in bifaces with 1 cm thickness. It’s extremely dangerous technique because the chance of breaking it is high but omg does it produce such elegant and effective tools.
Excellent, thanks!
very well informed video, thank you
Amazing skills!
You're a fricken legend, mate! Awesome video! Thank you!
Looks good! Nice work.
Your a great stone tool maker.
Thank you, Dr. Dilley. That was very interesting and informative.
Just sane... :^) Saint
Thank you
Excellent video. Do you have a video on making a Clovis point?
So you're trying to tell me that this Solutrean culture, characterized by these brilliantly crafted stone tips, did not progress beyond said technology for 4 to 6 thousand years? Remarkable!
very interesting. thank yew
The Mesolithic composite arrow is for me the epitome of prehistoric arrow making.
I'm here as result of wanting to learn more about a flintlock kit I just started building. Now I've ordered beginner tools for a flint knapping hobby. Where will all this end?
GREAT VIDEOS AND INTRIGUING INFO.
Thank you, and GOD Bless you all and your loved ones.
It ends when all your friends are rocks
4:00 Lovely flint nodule. Where are you based? Great work as always.
Beautiful camera quality. What camera do you use?
I think one of the blades found in Chesapeake bay area was of french flint
Wasn't there some points found with mammoth bones on the east cost of America that could only have been quarried in France?
Very skilled,
Just wish you had talked about the adhesive formula a bit.
Thanks
Its called pine pitch. Its made by melting pine sap and mixing in charcoal powder and sometimes dried dung
Responding to vid at 10:41 What about solutrean points dredged up near the Chesapeake Bay area? The claim is that they are Solutrean Spearheads.
I find it hard to fathom that all of the
" waste " flakes would be left behind in favor of just the preform.
My biggest question about the idea of Solutrean presence in America is that a great deal of the archeology of the time is now covered in sediments on the continental shelf under several hundred feet of water, never to be seen. I’d like to know how well the trade winds from east to west were blowing during those days. Brazil and Africa aren’t so far apart and were somewhat closer together. I’m not insinuating intentional crossing of the Atlantic but accidents happen in storms. Coastal water travel could have become trans Atlantic.
Hey doc, just saw your video...my compliments...very instructional. By the way, what jacket are you wearing? It's cool.
Thanks! It's a softshell by 'Technicals' but I'm not sure you can buy it anywhere now which is a shame.
What is the size of that spear head?
Has anyone thrown these spears (big and little) and seen how they behave (if they are broken or easily fixed) if they hit or miss their target?
That looks great, would be even better if you tied more cordage lower down to make it even stronger, this would reduce the chances of the wood splitting.
Love to get my hands on a truckload of those kinds of nodules.
Take the preform and leave a treasure trove of workable flakes.
I want to know do the use the big Clovis points for hunt or using them as offering for the ice age spirits
There is no evidence of any spirituality mate. Plenty of evidence they were hunting. But making a big point is seen as practical as well. If the tip breaks you can still reshape it into a point again which is less work than making an entirely new point.
Wonder if DC Waldorf has chipped this kind of flint.
Anybody know if there are dna:s taken from solutrean people and comparred with other peoples?
where do people get these great spalls? I live in a New Mexico U.S.
There are several of us American flintknapping dealers that sell stone.
Do you as an expert see any relationship between Solutrean and Clovis technology? I continued watching and got the answer.
No relation it is only the same way to do the thinning on a bifacial point. Indeed the fruiting is unique and you never find this on any laurel leafs. It is normal that it looks the same because the physic laws of flint fracture are the same everywhere.
Is there any practical benefit to a leaf shaped spear point vs a point sharp triangle. Just curious about why different groups go to the extra length to form a “leaf” type of spear point.
It's likely there are a number of reasons as to why different groups chose different tool shapes, some of those contributing factors might be cultural, climate caused, prey specialism or even a fusion with other groups. Sadly it's very difficult to pinpoint the specific reasons for tool styles in early prehistory.
We have made a lot of penetration test with my labo and the benefit is nul in term of penetration. If the edge is retouched it is lesser weak but offer some resistance to penetration of the skin. The zic-zac edge cause terrible cut wounds. At contrary a brute edge like you can see on many gravettes points on one side or many posterior microliths are more fragile but penetrate more easy. These type of points are more easy to produce and replace. The conclusion for laurel leafs as spear points is: the investment in time is to important for quite fragile artefact (in fact a lot of pointes à crans, gravettes and others points were broken after the first use we find so much peduncle of pointe à cran that there is no doubt about this). It is then understandable that the solutrean finally adopt the "pointe à cran" easier the make and standardise. They were made with flint blades first with rigorous choice because the solutrean were not so advanced in pressure technique at the beginning. But progressively the technique became more efficient and they will be more confident, after they choose any blade and reshape with pressure technique. It is the hypothesis of Serge Maury who have make more than 145 of them to test it. There is a video on this experimentation.
Leaf shape is propably better for thrusting. I would at least think it would not give as good penetration when thrown. Maybe that kind of spears were used for war or for game that has tendency to face the hunter.
@@ReasonAboveEverything The traceology give tu us clear answer, most of laurel leafs were knifes (we have found on with his handle made of half of reindeer mandible). The smaller and unifacially retouched "feuilles de saule" wears frequently impact breakage. The most common seams to be "pointes à crans" they were clearly and undoubtedly thrown (maybe on spears thrown with atatl).
@@ReasonAboveEverything yeah I think it’s easier to get out of game so maybe it’s more for thrusting but could have also been done just to decrease likelihood of breaking when pulling the point out. Not sure how likely that second idea would be a concern.
What kind of glue are you using on the spear?
My guess is Birch bark.....pine pitch is another way ..rabbit skin glue..is a minor variant and still used in woodworking
Excuse me but if your explanation is interesting in certain points, for the laurel leaf you are in part wrong. The smallest version of these were probably spear point (probably used with spear throwers or Atlatl). We know it because we have some of laurel leafs with impact fractures. For the larger ones they are in fact knifes (a lot of traceology indicate butchery), A famous piece have a handle made of half of reindeer mandibula. The posterior part was sectioned, the teeth removed and a continuous groove have been done to insert a large laurel leaf. Bersac in Dordogne. And finally the volgu points wears no use traces and where pieces for prestige and not for use. Certain are so fragile that they were simply unusable (Pech de la Boissière for example). All the best.
How do we know they are spearheads and not dagger blades?
I'm a carnivore. A 45-55% fat content is essential for my healthy survival. 🐎 have very little fat. How did humans survive eating such lean meat?🤔 Supplements?
Thanks for your spectacular videos! They provide a brand new world for us to explore!
By eating things like bone marrow and brains. Things that today are discarded. By choosing game at the right time, when it is fattest and making sure that none of that valuable fat is wasted.
Any reason fine bifacial work like beaker/danish daggers and armorican prestige points ect dont really show up again until the late Neolithic ? I would have thought bifacial knapping would have been a natural progression from handaxe technology so why did hunters go back to the microith ?
It is a question of tendencies, culture and technology. A lot of cultures have adopt quite simple spear or arrowhead points. The best example is probably the gravette what are so easy to produce and easy to replace. The majority of spear points were unifacial (Font Robert, pointes à face planes and feuilles de saules), Certain are majorly unifacial sometimes (Font Robert and pointes à crans) and sometimes completely or almost bifacial (certain pointes à crans). Another idea it is to integrate flint elements in a reindeer spear point, almost unbreakable or easy to refit, with flint elements easy to replace (example of tiny blades produce by pressure flaking during the aurignacien and "pieces à dos" on pieces of blades during magdalénien). After during epipaleolithic arrow points on blades were frequent, in Mesolithic the only partial bifacial piece are feuilles de gui and sometime they are only unifacial. It is finally during the middle and final neolithic after the generalisation of pressure flaking that produce bifacial arrowheads (example on polished flakes from broken axes during the michelsberg). The conclusion is: most of armatures were unifacial and frequently with only one side retouched, the other was brute because it is considerably more sharp. A lot of armature were easy to produce and than to replace because it is as many flint piece: consumable. It is difficult to resume this thing in such short talk. I hope that I will be clear.
Conserved flint. They were starting to run out of all of the obvious surface supplies and began to develop techniques that utilised almost all of the flakes from a given "chunk" of stone. Look at the size of the nodule he had to start with to produce one biface then go back to see all the blades he had to work with for the unifacial style of points.
Is it really fair to say there was no such thing as 'European' during the upper paleolithic? These people are classified as Early European modern humans after all, and are distinguishable from modern humans elsewhere in the world, and did give rise to the Western European Hunter-Gatherers that contribute an average of 10% or so to the genomes of modern European populations.
Also, you just earned a subscriber.
What if this pre historic people were living on this one continent before the land shifted?
It is the debunked Solutrean Hypothesis that has kept me from researching the Solutreans proper. Everything I can find online is in regards to that outdated idea and not to the archaeology itself.
There’s plenty out there about the solutrean that has nothing to do with the ‘hypothesis’, though I admit I am in a fortunate position with access to archaeological journals via my university
Debunked? How is the Solutrean hypothesis debunked? Highly criticised and scoffed at would be a better way to say it. And that is usually meaningless.
Are you talking about the debunked North American solutrean hypothesis? Solutreans existed, just not in North America.
@@forestdweller5581 Use of the term "debunked" has been debunked lol. In science we gather and weigh evidence. The Solutrean hypothesis has limited evidence, nothing in the DNA for example has been found. But it might be found, so "debunked" is incorrect.
That said, imho the Solutrean idea often suffers from a narrow view... we should look for evidence of movement in both directions via the Atlantic, and to and from Africa as well.
Super quality video, mate. Your denouncement of the Solutrean Migration was a bit misguided though. A Solutrean laurel leaf point, found with a 22,000 year old mastodon skull, didn't appear magically off the east coast of America. People brought it there, almost 10,000 years before Siberians migrated into the Americas (and called themselves Native Americans). Maybe someday you can make another video explaining how you were wrong to dismiss the theory.
Why are they not found on land then? And why was there a 10k years pause before Clovis technology? To be clear I'm not a critic, it's a fine hypothesis, worthy of being questioned. There may be good answers.
@@nmarbletoe8210 The Solutrean laurel leaf was found on land. It just happens the land is now underwater because the oceans have risen 250 feet since the first Solutreans crossed the Atlantic. To your second question, there was pre-clovis artifacts found at the Cactus Hill (VA) site (from an earlier occupation) that predates standard clovis by 4 to 5 thousand years. The pre-clovis artifacts were ignored by most archeologists as the facts did not fit their White-people-can't-be-here-first model. Another question you may be wondering about (and I know I do) is why there was the refinement of serious Solutrean blades (that were labelled as "clovis" in the Americas) but no continued effort to create the impressive laurel leaf blades. Maybe that will be answered at more artifacts are discovered.
The guy looks like Legolas Greenleaf.
I have not rejected the Solutrean hypothesis. Ancient man did amazing things, and the Clovis people weren’t related to modern American Indians. They completely disappeared (archeologically) right before the immigration of those Siberians, who settled the Americas.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Verde
Anzick child shows Clovis was related to North and South Americans. However I have not rejected contact via the Atlantic, at any time of prehistory. This would require some excellent boating. Did Solutrians hunt seals?
The Solutreans were in America before the "Natives". There are caches of preforms everywhere.
Johnny Frenchman (and some froggy Canadians) say horse meat is good.
Unfortunately, there is a great deal of positive evidence that humans came to NA from many other parts of the world. And traveling by sea along the edge of Ice Age North Atlantic would have been all in a days work for peoples of the north. I worked in Alaska: “ land bridge? We don’t need no land bridge…”….There was a land connection of course, but those people went to sea after whales….what would keep them from traveling from the British coast to Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland…..New York for a show….nothing…then a whole new country to explore: 40,000 years ago….
So it's more likely that the asiatic people coming across beringia went from basic flake tool technology to the sophisticated and technically challenging Clovis technology in a blink of an eye? I think there is more to the story buddy
In fact it looks more like Clovis tech went from south to north. To be clear I don't accept the Solutrean idea yet. I'm just saying that people were here long before the ice free corridor opened, and when it opened, Clovis went north.
Makes a Clovis point. Says theory is widely rejected. Ok.
Congratulations on dismissing the Solutrean hypothesis of some migrations to the Americas. Rather than your snide claim that both cultures had needles, Dennis Stanford's extensive examination of unique Solutrean bifacial tool making with cross flaking along the entire width of the face, and those found at submerged sites that were dry land at that time is far more sophisticated than your dismissal. You can gladly join the ranks of the "Clovis First" religion and be left to explain the c. 21,000 - 23,000 B.P footprints in New Mexico. I think you'd be kindly described as a "woke" artisan who has drunk from the no-(pre-)Europeans in America cool-aid, even though those people weren't Europeans at all. Good luck with the store front.
Coastal migration theory is becoming more and more accepted. People are coming across more and more evidence that coastal migration to the Americas predate the clovis culture. One site that has provided ample archaelogical evidence is Monte Verde in Chile. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Verde
Yes, it is getting support from various finds. For example there were green islands all along the coast during the entire glacial period.
However, both inland and coastal routes are open before the last glacial maximum. The ice free corridor is only closed between about 22 kya and 13 kya. So peope from very very old sites such as Rio Puerco at 37 kya could have come by either route.
Great video