
Archaeologist explains innovation of 'fluting' ancient stone weaponry - diodorus
https://phys.org/news/2017-04-archaeologist-fluting-ancient-stone-weaponry.html
======
itchyjunk
I know that phys.org is probably looking at this from physics angle but I wish
they had more detail on what is being discussed. Knapping [0] as in shaping
tools is nothing unique.

"explain the flint knapping technique of "fluting" the Clovis points, which
could be considered the first truly American invention."

American as in North + South America [1] but it's not a universally accepted
idea that the origin was there[1].

It is also more likely that the fluting was done to make it more useful for
projectile use. The ones that were not fluted might have broken and hence we
don't see record for it as much. Not sure if circumstantial bias is a term but
we shouldn't come to drastic conclusions.

"It's amazing to think that people 12,000 years ago were flaking shock
absorbers and engineering stone weapons in a way that it took 21st century
modern engineering to figure out," Eren said.

They weren't designing shock absorbers, their design just happen to have that
as a secondary function if the experiments done suggests it does.

\------------------------------

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knapping](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knapping)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_point](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_point)

~~~
dfc
> it's not a universally accepted idea that the origin was there.

The section in the linked WP article discussing the origin of the technique
does not contain any references. you seem to be familiar with the topic, do
you know of any other resources for this claim?

Academic articles like this make me miss my university account access.

~~~
itchyjunk
Well, had to read about stone tools from about ~2 million years ago (mya) to 1
mya and the problems of trying to figure out what they signify. This one is
more recent ofcourse but archaeological record jump implies there is missing
information. (No fluting to suddenly a lot of fluting for example).

"The vituperative debate ended only when strong evidence for a pre-Clovis
settlement turned up in Chile in the late 1990s." "Clovis may no longer be the
oldest American culture, but it remains the oldest American culture we know
much about."[0]

This article talks about how the smaller "clovis" was probably part of
projectile weapon like a throwing spear as well.

\-----------------------------

[0] [http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-clovis-point-
and-t...](http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-clovis-point-and-the-
discovery-of-americas-first-culture-3825828/)

[1] [http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/taima-taima-
text3....](http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/taima-taima-text3.html)

------
hive_mind
The fluting looks like an affordance to attach a spear stem or arrow stem to.
To my admittedly "know nothing" self, calling it a shock-absorber might be
over-thinking it.

~~~
ajross
The distinction is in the language, not the fact. When someone says what that
feature "is for" it's in the same sense that a biologist talks about what a
particular organism feature "is for" despite the fact that the organism
clearly didn't design it.

The flute may well have been intended to make the head easier to attach, but
that's not the point. If such a head were brittle and failure-prone (per the
hypothesis in the article), its users would have collected less food and left
fewer descendants to use their particular favored technology.

The fact that the technology was pervasive and widespread means that it has
some clear advantage. And it's the advantage the archaeologists are looking
for, not the intent. And it turns out, I guess, that such heads turn out to be
less fragile on impact because the longitudinal force is better distributed.
So these heads are more likely to drive deep and deal a fatal blow, leading to
more food for their users and more children to instruct in spearmaking, and
ultimately more spear heads in the archaeological record.

~~~
ori_b
> _" It's amazing to think that people 12,000 years ago were flaking shock
> absorbers and engineering stone weapons in a way that it took 21st century
> modern engineering to figure out," Eren said._

Engineering implies forethought. If they didn't want to imply forethought,
they should have used different words.

~~~
Steko
They did use some different words, "perhaps first made by accident."

------
bananicorn
Interesting - upon seeing the images I felt reminded of the grooves which were
added to swords to improve stability, while reducing weight.

And I want to make some of these now - does anyone know which stones (besides
flintstones) can be used? They're hard to find in my area.

