We have just returned from eight days in Sussex, and one of my aims was to get hold of some flint with which to practice. I know from experience that because nodules come in irregular shapes the quartering process can be complicated. Quartering is simply breaking the nodule up into pieces useful for the task at hand. Currently I do not have a systematic method for dealing with a nodule when I want to produce a handaxe. Less hit and miss, more hit and destroy. The flint nodules and cobbles I collected in Sussex came from two main sources: Birling Gap; and Selsey Bill. Birling Gap has nodules eroding from the chalk cliff face and so both smaller nodules and rounded flint pebbles were freely available at the foot of the cliff. I collected a small rucksack full. Selsey Bill offered a range of damaged pebbles of flint and other materials that look knappable. Again, I collected a sac full. I want to use the cobbles to learn how to systematically produce pebble chopper tools
The above is the best cobble chopper I have made to date, and it is the systematic production of these that I want to master. There is a really nice small example within the Brice Collection in our own department, and the aesthetic examples seem to be so because of their simplicity. A minimal series of removals to produce a useful tool. With the four or five small and flat flint nodules I want to produce four or five small handaxes. Let’s see how that goes.
I am currently reading a paper by Tim Ingold (2007) Materials against materiality. The gist of the paper seems to be that: if we focus upon the object first, and only then the materials it has been formed from, our understanding of those materials is constrained by our primary conceptualisation of the object. Ingold suggests engaging with materials directly to gain an interactive understanding of the material properties, and how these might change as activities change. I want to contrast a normative ‘Hard as stone’, ‘Solid as a rock’ approach with the relationship I have developed with four stones within my knapping toolbag. The first stone on the far left I use as a ‘soft hard hammer’ and I like its elongated shape for working on glass. In contrast, the second stone is harder and consequently I have used this as a ‘small hard hammer’ on flint. The third stone has a crystaline centre which is good for abrading. The final large white flint beach cobble is going to become something else at some point, but currently works well as a large hard hammer. So whilst all stone, and all hard, particular characteristics have emerged within a particular stone tool making context. I now look at materials differently based upon my experience from stone tool making, and this different view is the subject of this blog.
This is a free link to a PDF of the above article
This is one of two glass points made by Karl Lee. The glass itself is quite old, and removed from a metal grid that overlay a cellar. I think these blocks are called cellar lights. Each glass block was in differential condition, and they all proved really difficult to extract (thanks to Joe Curley). However, once out they were workable. Metin Eren used one of the blocks to make a point and described the material as good to work with. Karl had two blocks and produced two nice points, one of which went to Joe Curley. Although I never got to see the finished Metin Eren point, I did observe him producing the early stages. His style is interesting and seems different to Karl’s. With his knapping hand Metin rested his elbow on his knee, thus reducing variability from the shoulder. The only moving joints were his elbow and wrist and it allowed him to concentrate on where he needed to hit. This seemed to make sense and I have adopted the same approach.