 |
Points
Points are retouched flakes which have converging lateral margins. The shape of the margins, and the extent of convergence, is usually determined by the retouching. Retouched margins are typically straight and converge to an acute tip. Australian archaeologists have often described the form as a leaf-shape. While this description is in someways apt, it fails to depict the great diversity of point shapes that can be found.
Archaeologists have described the variation in points in a number of ways. Most common is the division of points into two main types, based on the direction of retouch along the lateral margins. When the retouch occurs on only one surface the specimen would be termed a unifacial point, but if retouch scars occurred on both surfaces it would be called a bifacial point.
Points also vary in their narrowness and elongation, when viewed from either face. This variation can be quite pronounced, as can be seen in the following specimens: | |
|  | Although it is carefully shaped this point is very wide relative to its length.
|  | This specimen has a length approximately twice as great as its width, giving it a more narrow, more elongated look.
|  | An extremely long, pointed look is found in this specimen, which has a length about three times greater than its maximum width.
| | |
|
While these kinds of variation have sometimes been seen as a reflection of the preferred style of the knapper it is clearly related to other factors as well. Two obvious causes for variation between points are 1. different raw materials and 2. differences in the extent to which each point has been retouched (including the extent of resharpening and repair). This second factor, the extent of retouch, is apparent in features such as the shape of the proximal end of the point (often called the base or butt): | |
|
|  | Points with intact platforms typically have flat butts. While some specimens have a flattened butt, despite extensive retouch, most points with a flat base have little or no retouch on the platform. |
|  | Points with rounded butts almost invariably have had the platform removed with extensive retouching. |
| Recognition that features such as butt shape may be related to the extent of retouching, rather than simply style, has led to broader statements about the link between the shape of points and the extent of retouching they have undergone.
One model of point manufacture suggests that much of the variation between specimens may relate to not only the raw material on which they are made, but also their stage of reduction when they were discarded. For example, in this model bifacial points are made from unifacial points and therefore exhibit a further stage of reduction. Details of this kind of argument are available here if you are interested.
Modification to the size and shape of points can be illustrated using assemblages of a single type of rock obtained from a single quarry. In the following table are points made on greywacke from Page Creek, at Lawn Hill, Queensland. (The tips of these points are often broken and they have different colours because of weathering). All of these points have been manufactured from large flakes, and were carefully retouched by knappers who used direct percussion with a hammerstone. As reduction proceeds a typical sequence of morphological change in point form might look something like this: | |
| Photograph | Explanation of phase |
|  | 1. Retouch one margin. This flake has been retouched along one margin only on the dorsal surface. This retouch has been enough to create the general point form. The platform remains unretouched, giving a flat butt shape. |
|  | 2. Retouch the second margin.This specimen is much the same as the first but has the second lateral margin retouched. Hence it is a unifacial point with both margin shaped through retouching. The platform remains unretouched. |
|  | 3. Retouch the platform and begin flaking the second face (ie create a biface). This specimen has retouch on both the ventral and dorsal (shown) faces. This retouch did not alternate between faces; the ventral flaking is more recent than the dorsal retouch, showing that it is a later phase. In this specimen the platform has now been removed by retouching. |
|  | 4. Continue bifacial flaking. In this specimen extended bifacial retouch has produced an elegant elongated point with straight lateral margins and a curved butt. The ventral surface has been covered with retouch scars and retouching has reverted to the dorsal surface. |
|
While many of the stone points found in Australia may be readily understood in terms of their position in this sequence, another kind of point stands out as perhaps representing a discrete manufacturing process. Kimberley points are bifacial points that may have been initially shaped through percussion knapping, as described above, but they have been completed by pressure flaking and eventually by serrating the thin margins. These kimberley points were made only in the extreme northwestern parts of Australia, and at least in the recent past they were often made as prestige items for trade. | |
|  | In the late prehistoric period Kimberley points were made on fine-grained rocks such as chert, which were often heat-treated to improve their flaking qualities. The indenters that were used by stoneworkers were probably bone or wood.
| | | |
|  | Since European contact the makers of Kimberley points have often employed artifical materials in their work. As a result, points have been made from glass or porcelain, and the pressure flakers that were employed were often made from metal.
| |
You are visitor 
to this page.
|
|
Author: Peter Hiscock, Dept. Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University.
Feedback:  peter.hiscock@anu.edu.au.
Date Last Modified: Thursday, 1-May-97
URL: http://artalpha.anu.edu.au/web/arc/resources/paa/point.htm
|
