Glass arrowheads

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Like I wrote, it seems like obsidian would be more fragile than good stone like flint.

All stones are brittle. We just think of glass as exceptionally brittle because we regularly encounter it in large thin sheets.

[mr beer]

Originally Posted by malloyd

But glass is also a tougher material than most people think it is. No it's not setting any tenacity records, and yes it *can* be fairly fragile if it's already scratched or cracked, but even household glass objects can survive impacts or falls that would definitely give you a serious bruise.

Originally Posted by Anthony

All stones are brittle. We just think of glass as exceptionally brittle because we regularly encounter it in large thin sheets.

This makes sense. Glass paperweights are pretty tough for example, I mean believe that you can use one to crack a human skull without it shattering.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Anthony

All stones are brittle. We just think of glass as exceptionally brittle because we regularly encounter it in large thin sheets.

I figured that. I just didn't know how it compared to the go-to stone blade material of flint.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by malloyd

It's worth remembering that the fact that it breaks when you hit it is the thing that *allows* you to knap a stone. One that absolutely wouldn't shatter on hitting something hard couldn't be made into a projectile point from in the first place.

There is a whole period in the development of technology where ground and polished stone was the boss, but it didn't last. It was out-competed by the technology of knapping because a) way faster and b) the flakes you knock off when shaping something are in and of themselves useful tools. You may only be able to make one or two cuts on butchering a carcass with a small flake, but that's one or two cuts you don't wear off the edge of your bigger tool. And you have a pile of them, so might as well use them.

Grinding and polishing stone when all you have is sand, leather, and your hands is a very slow and tedious process, and the material you remove is reduced to more sand and dust, rather than something useful.

But if you have an ample supply of basalt or granite, and no trade network to bring in chert, you work with what you've got. They tend to not be the most sharp tools (Frankly, I'd call them crushing - it just adds some damage to put an "edge" on them), but they're very durable and it's better to cut down a tree with than your hands.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Bruno

There is a whole period in the development of technology where ground and polished stone was the boss, but it didn't last. It was out-competed by the technology of knapping because a) way faster and b) the flakes you knock off when shaping something are in and of themselves useful tools. You may only be able to make one or two cuts on butchering a carcass with a small flake, but that's one or two cuts you don't wear off the edge of your bigger tool. And you have a pile of them, so might as well use them.

Grinding and polishing stone when all you have is sand, leather, and your hands is a very slow and tedious process, and the material you remove is reduced to more sand and dust, rather than something useful.

That sounds kind of backward. As I understand it, knapping is Paleolithic, and grinding is Neolithic. That seems to say that Neolithic is in some sense "more advanced," as they already had Paleolithic when they came up with it; why would they have bothered in Paleolithic had all the advantages?

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by whswhs

That sounds kind of backward. As I understand it, knapping is Paleolithic, and grinding is Neolithic. That seems to say that Neolithic is in some sense "more advanced," as they already had Paleolithic when they came up with it; why would they have bothered in Paleolithic had all the advantages?

They are more durable, and they are made out of a different kind of stone, which may be the only thing what you have in the area - particularly after all the surface sources of flint had been picked over and it started becoming necessary to actually mine for the stuff in some regions, which meant it became more expensive to trade for.

Most stone-tool cultures surviving into the historical use knapping for most purposes, but still retain the ground tools for specialized uses (things where a more rounded surface is either not a detriment, or is a desirable feature, and where a smooth side might be necessary: clubs/maces, bowls, tool-hammers). It does not excel at producing razor edges.

There's actually room for argument as to whether the polished hand axe or the knapped hand axe has an advantage for tree chopping, as at least you won't have to stop and touch up your polished stone axe (or make a new one) as often.

Copper axes are softer than stone ones, but get the "best of both worlds" of a sharp edge that can be touched up casually, smooth sides to make extraction slightly easier, and (relative) durability.

[Nereidalbel]

Originally Posted by Bruno

There's actually room for argument as to whether the polished hand axe or the knapped hand axe has an advantage for tree chopping, as at least you won't have to stop and touch up your polished stone axe (or make a new one) as often.

I would imagine this depends on what kind of wood you're trying to cut. Knapping is probably quite acceptable for softer woods, while the more durable materials are superior for hard woods.

[Flyndaran]

Primitive Technology on Youtube is a good source for those of us that need to see this stuff to understand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN-34JfUrHY

This one is specifically him making a hard stone axe from scratch.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Primitive Technology on Youtube is a good source for those of us that need to see this stuff to understand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN-34JfUrHY

This one is specifically him making a hard stone axe from scratch.

I love his channel, been watching it for years. That axe was made from basalt and was an example of stone grinding.