Subjective: pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation, placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion, intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
While I believe both areas should be used when considering the quality of a piece of flintknapping work, and I have some subjective considerations listed on my main site at www.modern-flintknapping.com
Subjective considerations are left up to a lot of opinion and as the old saying goes, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I see some using terms such as "overall workmanship" "generally clean blade" "great style" "outstanding color" but yet it is never explained exactly what any of these words mean. It is all very vague.
And of course, all these subjective thoughts, could be argued by people in a never ending battle, once again the beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
For this reason, I prefer using objective considerations, taking precise measurements of many dimensions of the piece and running it through the Modern Flintknapping Grading System to get a score. You can visit my main website to see what measurements are taken.
Then the subjective considerations can factored in if you have two pieces of similar score.
We had a great time at the Flint Ridge knapin. I was surprised by the number of people who were familiar with our website www.modern-flintknapping.com and this blogspot. For those of you who were unable to attend, here are a few pictures of our table.
It is very important to use the proper devices for measuring the diameter of a blade. While measuring the blade it is also very important to keep the blade perfectly level, any changes in angles or twisting of the blade in any direction can change your readings. I like to place the blade where both ends are the only thing touching two elevated platforms which are at the same height(which keeps the blade level across). This gives much better results than trying to hold the blade in your hand.
Some types of micrometers may be used for measuring diameters as far as accuracy, but I have found finding ones with proper throat depths can be a problem and using the devices themselves for measuring blades can be difficult.
This type of caliber shown below, is fine for measuring width and length but it IS NOT accurate for measuring diameters.
If you read my following post, you will see just why using proper equipment is critical.
I was asked by someone at the Flint Ridge knapin, what difference does .05 inches really make in the diameter of a piece. When I explained that it made a huge difference in W/T ratio which corresponds with the level of skill of the knapper. The person replied "so what, if someone is over a 10/1 ratio, it is all good, why does it matter?".
While I agree, 10/1 is a threshold and thus why the points awarded in my scoring system start to increase greatly at that point. But 13/1 takes tremendously more skill than 10/1, and once you get above 13/1, every slight increase takes more skill at an ever more multiplying rate. In other words, 15/1 compared to 13/1 take much more skill than the difference in 10/1 to 12/1, although they are is only two ratios difference in both cases.
If you go from .22 inches to .17 inches in diameter on a blade that is 3 inches in width, your W/T ratio goes from 13.6 to 17.6, that is a tremendous difference!
If .05 inches doesn't matter, then why do we keep score or run a time clock on any thing in life? The current record for the 100 meter sprint is 9.58 seconds, the tenth fastest time is only .28 slower, such a small difference, why not give them all a gold medal? What about when Michael Phelps in the Olympics beat his competitor by 1/100 of a second. 1/100 of a second! Did they both get gold medals?
I agree, give credit where credit is due, if someone makes a good blade, give them credit. But I think you get my point, slight differences in diameters on blades truly can make a big difference in the skill level being represented.
UPDATE---I just realized that a little over 1 week of making this original post, that someone set a better second place time in the 100 meter sprint. The difference between first and second is now .11 seconds.
I about fell out of my chair when I was working on my links to the Volgu blade and I found the following information. Am I reading this wrong, or does S.A. Semenov basically say The Volgu was made exactly in the same method as our theory about how The Sweetwater was made?
That being pressure flaking over percussion or a "POP" blade.
We had actually wondered about the flaking on The Volgu, because a lot of it actually had the same scarring pattern we discussed with The Sweetwater, but only having a picture to go by, made it tough to actually see.
If The Volgu, then why not The Sweetwater as well?
Here is the qoute from S.A Semenov from 1957 I am referring to:
"The peculiarity of this (bifacial reduction) is that it was a method of pressure on the edge of the flint rough-out (preform), used by Upper Paleolithic man, not just to remove tiny flakes and alter the angle of the point and shape of the (core) blade, but also to take off large and relatively thin flakes from the surface of the rough-out (preform). In other words it increased the plastic possibilities of stone working. By this means the irregular rough-out (preform) could be given a desired thickness at any point, made flatter, the end sharpened; the curve taken out of the top, edge or base."
Here is a qoute from my Sweetwater article, discussing our theory of how the Sweetwater was made, which can be found on the second page of this blog dated August 7th.
"The most intriguing part of all, he actually has identified at least 8 percussion flakes on Sweetwater, although the other 40 plus are pressure flakes. One of which, is obvious from the scarring cutting into the percussion flake from the pressure flake next to it, that the percussion flake was flaked first. So we believe the Sweetwater was percussion flaked to a thin preform similar to a rectangle in shape, then the large pressure flakes were removed, then the ends shaped with pressure flakes to finish the blade."
The above pictures show some examples of Greg Nunn's edge to edge flaking. I have always been a fan of parallel flaking, but just something about this edge to edge is extra pleasing to my eyes. My father purchased Greg's video and after viewing it and much work, he got it down, but due to two knee replacements, he can't use the same technique as Greg does. My father actually uses a similar technique that he does with his regular hand pressure flaking. In his opinion, this is the hardest type of hand pressure flaking he has ever done and he is no where to the level Greg is with it. I highly recommend purchasing Greg's video.
This Volgu replica is 11.63 inches long and 3.2 inches wide, it is .26 inches thick at the thickest point with an average diameter of .25 inches. It has a standard W/T ratio of 12.3/1 and average W/T ratio of 10.2/1. The average W/T is lower due to the shape and size of the Volgu artifact blade itself.(not being as wide throughout the length of the blade).
The Volgu artifact itself(also pictured) is 13.75 inches long, 3.4 inches wide and "slightly over" .25 inches in diameter. If you use .25 inches this gives it a stand W/T ratio of 13.6/1. We have no way to figure an average diameter or average W/T ratio because there is no cast available of the blade. The problem lies in the "slightly over" part, because if the blade is actually .27 inches thick, that slight difference brings the W/T down to 12.6/1, right in line to our current replica. This is an example of why precise measurements are needed when figuring W/T ratios. Here is a good link to learn more about the Volgu and see more pictures. http://www.lithiccastinglab.com/gallery-pages/2008januarysolutreanpage1.htm Here is a link to some other pictures I recently found http://paleobox.forumactif.com/ou-voir-des-originaux-f12/les-feuilles-de-laurier-de-volgu-t241.htm
UPDATE: I have learned there is actually a cast of the Volgu which can be purchased from someone in France, although it is very expensive. My friend Jim Winn has purchased the cast and although it is thin, it isn't a thin as the Sweetwater. Hopefully in the future I will have the opporunity to measure the Volgu cast.
We now have a slide show DVD with audio commentary which shows the step by step process of the method developed by Bill Earnhardt covering the making of the Sweetwater Replicas.(the top blade in this picture is the Sweetwater cast and the other is the replica)
It shows the complete design of the table used, the lever device itself, the support mechanism used, correct platforming, the shape of the tip of the pressure flaker, method and technique used for the lever pressure flaking along with ruler comparisons so you can get the exact right angles to apply the pressure . All this with close up picture shots, drawings, and instructional commentary from Bill.
Below are the scores for the Sweetwater, the Volgu and dad's best Sweetwater replica to date. But keep in mind I have not actually measured the Volgu. I am using measurements I found listed online and I am using a standard W/T and L/T ratio with the Volgu(since I have no way of knowing the average diameter) but using an average W/T and L/T on the Sweetwater and replica.
The Sweetwater has a total score of 6606.6, getting 3800 points for the W/T and 2300 for L/T. The Volgu has a total score of 4083.5, getting 936 points for W/T and 2250 for L/T The replica has a total score of 3609.6, getting 1584 points for W/T and 1450 for L/T.
The Sweetwater has a W/T of 17/1 and L/T of 55.5/1 The Volgu has a W/T of 13.6/1 and L/T of 55/1 The replica has a W/T of 14.7/1 and L/T of 46/1.
If you are not familiar with the Modern Flintknapping Scoring System, it can be found at www.modern-flintknapping.com under "grading and scoring". How I figure an average diameter can also be found by actually clicking on the "grading and scoring" link itself.
This video by Bill, titled "Adjust" gives detailed instruction and close up shots of his unique pressure flaking method with an Ishi stick. Just seeing the size of the Ishi sticks he uses alone is worth the cost.
Bill specializes in pressure flaking thin pieces. His highest W/T ratio with this method is 12.5/1 on a blade that .16 inches thick and 12 1/4 inches long. He has made smaller pieces, some as thin as .115 inches thick!
This video is dedicated in memory to Bill's younger brother Jerry who passed away in 2004. Jerry always supported Bill in his flintknapping endeavors and once commented referring to their making of bows/arrows and playing cowboys and indians as children that "it was a childhood game Bill never grew out of"
This link is a picture that shows the uniform "rippling" effect of the compression rings on one of dads blades. Although, you can not tell from the picture since it is so magnified, but that flake is actually over 1 inch long and nearly 1 inch wide.(the size most associate with percussion flakes)
This link is a picture of two flakes side by side on the Sweetwater cast, the one on the right we believe is a pressure flake and the one on the left is a percussion flake. We actually have better pictures of other pressure flakes from the Sweetwater that show this rippling effect of the compression rings in more detail. But we thought this one would make for easy comparison.
Sweetwater Replica----This blade has an average W/T of 14.7/1 measured accurately with the Fowler thickness gauge seen on this website.
This is the best of the Sweetwater Replicas made by Bill. It is 10 1/4 inches long with an average width of 3.24 inches and average diameter of .22, which gives it an incredible average W/T ratio of 14.7/1!
Here is a picture of the first Sweetwater Replica close to the actual Sweetwater blade in dimensions. This one is 8 3/4 inches long, with an average with of 3.08 and average diameter of .23, making it's W/T a 13.4/1.
The local newspaper did a profile on dad couple months back. But for the record, we never said "all knappers" goal was to replicate the Sweetwater blade.
Then a few days ago, this is the response we get in a letter to the editor. It is the second letter down. I will paste it below the link as well. For the record, dad has NEVER tried to represent any of his work as an artifact.
I recently read an article on "flintknapping" in the Salisbury Post.
Please don't misunderstand — I fully appreciate good craftsmanship, being a craftsman myself.
The problem, however, is that some unscrupulous flintknappers have created an extremely deceptive market.
The novice or unsuspecting amateur collector or anyone else is often deceived by these unscrupulous flintknappers.
Many true collectors have spent hours, days, weeks, months and even years talking fields, creeks and riverbanks, searching for true artifacts.
This is extremely frustrating when you know there's someone sitting at home chipping out a reproduction in 20-30 minutes and then possibly selling it as a true, ancient artifact.
I sure wish these guys would start woodcarving, etc.
After all, an appraisal of authenticity for just one flint point is $20 to $30.
I bought my father the Sweetwater cast for Christmas in 2008. I will never forget the look on his face when he laid eyes on it for the first time. He sat in total amazement of the blade. I could read his mind, how was this made he was wondering.
After the initial shock of it, his quest to figure out just how it was made began. Dad has always "thought out of the box" in his flintknapping work and coming up with new ideas or new ways to do things has never been a problem for him. For many years, this was out of necessity because he had very little contact with other knappers, just because they weren't many around. So i believe this helped to keep his mind open on his flintknapping projects. So i had faith, that if anyone could figure it out, he could.
We spent many a hour studying the platforms and flaking patterns and discussing possible options to how it was made. He spent countless more on his own, on a nightly basis, studying the cast.
Since the Sweetwater appeared to be made by percussion with the big wide flakes and that was the prevailing theory, he started concentrating more on percussion work. But he had his doubts from the start if the blade was actually percussion flaked due to the precise nature it would require to make it. You are talking about being able to a hit 1/8 inch platform prefect every time and be able to follow through with your swing without causing breakage. The hand eye coordination needed to do this for approximately 50 large flakes found on the Sweetwater blade would be an incredible feat, seemingly impossible.
He started to believe more and more, the Sweetwater was actually pressured flaked. But he had no real way to prove it and no idea how it was actually accomplished. He could get the thinness, he had actually made some that were thinner. But the width was the problem, it was too wide to hold in your hand and pressure flake. Also, the pressure required to remove such enormous sized flakes would require more force than you could generate with an Ishi stick over an extended number of flakes needed to complete the blade. But he did know, that he had produced such flakes on occasion while pressure flaking in the past, so he knew it was possible.
Although, he still wasn't certain it was pressured flaked, it was his theory. Then one day he calls me and says he has noticed something in the flaking pattern. The best way I can describe it is an uniform "rippling" pattern of the compression rings left on the blade where the the flake itself was removed. We compared this to other pressure and percussion blades, and it became apparent that only the pressure blades had this uniform pattern.(see pictures). We believe this compression rings rippling is caused by the speed the flake is removed at, with a slower removal such as in pressure, causing the more uniform pattern. You can see the rippling effect in percussion work as well, but it isn't as uniform and normally seen at the end of the flake run, when the speed of the flake removal is slowing down.
He had seen a few knappers using lever devices over the years at various knapins. He had also read about Reinhardt who supposedly used some type of lever device. So dad had considered this as a possible option to how the Sweetwater was made. Then while at the N. Georgia Knapin in April 2009, he visited Dan Spiers booth. Dan had bought our pressure flaking video "Adjust" in the previous year and dad wanted to see what Dan thought of it. Dan replied that the video showed the importance of lateral flexibility in the blade holding hand. Dan was also demonstrating the use of a lever device and suggested to dad that he should make one as well.
The problem with the lever as he had discussed with Dan, was you didn't have the lateral flexibility as you did in your hands and it took a lot of time to adjust for proper flaking angles. Dad knew being able to get the proper platforms and angles while applying the large amount of pressure needed would be the key to success, but also the hardest to accomplish.
But he had became convinced by this point that the Sweetwater was pressured flaked, and it encouraged him even more to figure it out. Then after 4 months of various ideas including a 8 foot long weighted "Ishi stick" attached to the rafters, various support devices and various lever devices(total of 17 different techniques)all leading to dead ends. He would tear them apart and start all over. This of course lead to a lot of aggravation and frustration. He atleast was learning what didn't work. Then one day, everything clicked, and it all came together.
It took 5 hours to finish the blade, having to stop and prepare platforms over 30 times. Each flake removal is critical and on the "edge" of breaking the blade. But the more he did it, the more astonished he was over the amount of pressure and force that could be applied to the stone. Once he had this breakthrough of sorts, he told me he learned more about pressure flaking in one day than he had in years. I hadn't seen him as excited about any particular technique in flintknapping in my life and he described it as a flintknapper's nirvanic experience of sorts.
The most intriguing part of all, he actually has identified at least 8 percussion flakes on Sweetwater, although the other 40 plus are pressure flakes. One of which, is obvious from the scarring cutting into the percussion flake from the pressure flake next to it, that the percussion flake was flaked first. So we believe the Sweetwater was percussion flaked to a thin preform similar to a rectangle in shape, then the large pressure flakes were removed, then the ends shaped with pressure flakes to finish the blade.This would explain why you have large flakes which appear to have wide platforms that would require a large billet to produce. When in actuality you are not seeing the original platform of that flake because it was removed when the ends were shaped. We also found from experience if you do not make the blade in this proper sequence, breakage is very high due to the torque applied to the blade.
So this would make the Sweetwater a POP blade(pressure over percussion), which is a similar technique to what some modern knappers are doing. After the percussion, it is possible there was some grinding before the pressure as well.
Of course, like many things in flintknapping, this is only a theory. We are not saying this is absolutely the way the Sweetwater was made. We are saying it is possibly how it was made.
We are not saying it is impossible to percussion such a blade, we learned long ago to never say never in flintknapping. But if any knapper can ever totally percussion a blade to the Sweetwater dimensions, I hope to be the first one to shake his hand.
I see the term "Master Flintknapper" being thrown about to describe many flintknappers nowadays. The thing is, i seldom see from the person making such claims, as to what it takes for a knapper to be a master.
So what constitutes a person as a Master Flintknapper?
Everett Callahan wrote an article on this topic in 2000, which is the best i have found to describe the qualifications of being considered a master flintknapper. This article can be found at http://errett-callahan.blogstream.com/ I like Mr. Callahan's qualifications and i believe it is interesting that he list the capability of making the Solutrean laurel leaves as a skill needed to be considered a master, since the Volgu laurel leaf scores the second highest on our scoring system. Mr. Callahan states there are only two living flintknappers he would consider as masters, Gene Titmus and Jacques Pelegrin.
I can not find much about these two gentleman online as far as examples of their work. Have they actually made laurel leaves comparable to the thinnest Volgu? If so, someone please let me know where i can view such work. I am not saying that they haven't, i just haven't found it and i would love to see it if they have.
I think Mr. Callahan has covered it pretty well concerning the mastery of replicating actual artifact pieces.
But what i want to concentrate on here in this article is what constitutes a master of modern flintknapping. I do not have a concrete standard at this time, but i am thinking if someone can make a percussion or FOG piece with a W/T of 12/1 or higher along with a Modern Flintknapping Grading System score of around 3000+ for percussion or 4500+ for FOG then they are a Master. If they can do either a FOG or percussion piece with a W/T of 14/1 then they are a Super Master.
If someone could fit Mr.Callahan standards to be Master as well as being a Modern Flintknapping Master, that would be totally amazing! I guess at that point they would be an Elite Super Master?
My main point is I think flintknappers should think about this topic and not be so quick to throw the term "Master Flintknapper" around so freely and without making qualifications to what that actually means.
Must a biconvex exist in every piece of flintknapping work?
John Whittaker, in his book American Flintknappers, says that they must. I respectfully disagree, contrary to what Mr. Whittaker states, not all of the old artifacts have a biconvex. Although, i agree certainly most of them did.
One that i know of is the Sweetwater biface. It is actually thinner at some points in the middle of the blade then within 1 inch from the edge. So it would actually have a "reverse convex" so to speak.I have been told(never seen a cast of it) that the Walnut Creek blade actually has points where descending flake removal makes it have a reverse convex as well.
If a knapper strictly wants to replicate an artifact that has a convex in it, that is fine and great, I DO NOT condemn them. But what modern knapper wouldn't be proud if they could duplicate the Sweetwater, Walnut Creek or Volgu blades?
If we agree that making a thinner piece takes more skill, then why not push the envelope as far as we can go with it. If you are capable of making a piece with no biconvex, i say more power to you. Otherwise, we are putting constraints on the art of flintknapping, by "allowing" knappers to go only so far with their abilities.
I would compare this to the art of painting pictures. Sure, the Mona Lisa is a great piece of art work. But today are the modern artist still only painting the same style of paintings as they did in the past? Of course not, we have modern art. Since flintknapping is another form of art, why not progress it into new techniques in modern day flintknapping. Of course, at this time, with percussion work, i know of no knapper who can match the Sweetwater, Walnut Creek or Volgu.
FOG pieces is another matter, i have pieces in my possession that although do no sink in the middle like the Sweetwater and Walnut Creek. They are completely flat across each side, with no biconvex existing.
Gotta have a convex? I think not, lets match some of these thinnest artifacts mentioned earlier. From there, where does it go, who knows? But that is the interesting part of modern flintknapping, it is a never ending process of development.
