Clovis intentional bifacial overshot flaking: Two replica examples

Bruce Arlan Bradley

doi:10.2218/jls.v3i1.1614

Abstract

Understanding flaking technologies has become an important aspect for flaked stone analyses and interpretations. Experiments are increasingly being used to investigate aspects of technology. One of these aspects is the existence of a technique known as overshot flaking. While most researchers recognize that it happened some assert that it was an intentional technique unique to Solutrean and Clovis archaeological cultures. Others have disputed this assertion and have concluded that it was not a useful technique and therefore unintentional. This small study experimentally examines two reduction sequences that employed intentional overshot flaking and evaluates its usefulness. The conclusion is that it is a useful technique, for a number of reasons, and that it was intentionally employed in some past biface production strategies.

Highlights

There is an on-going debate as to whether or not ancient knappers used overshot flaking intentionally in the manufacture of bifaces. This has been asserted (Bradley et al 2010: 6871), rebutted (Eren et al 2013: 2934-2941) which itself was challenged (Lohse et al 2014: 46-64). While this issue may seem to be obscurely technical, the existence of overshot flaking being systematically employed in reduction strategies has been used as one criteria to make assertions about historical connections between two separate Palaeolithic archaeological cultures; Solutrean [LGM Basque refugium] and Clovis [Younger Dryas North America] (Stanford & Bradley 2012: 12)
Their only focus was on whether or not overshot flaking was an optimal thinning method. This was not asserted by Stanford and Bradley (2012), Eren et al stated that “If Solutrean and Clovis knappers intentionally practiced controlled overshot flaking, they were consciously choosing a technique that is not Journal of Lithic Studies (2016) vol 3, nr. 1, p. xx-xx doi:10.2218/jls.v3i1.1614
The relevant question becomes: Is it possible and advantageous to use controlled overshot flaking to the degree that it is an effective method in the reduction of bifaces? In spite of Eren et al.’s (2013: 2940) conclusion that “...Clovis and Solutrean knappers converged on a technique for thinning bifaces that happened to produce the analogous detritus of overshot flakes”, for me, the answer is a resounding “Yes!” It is a method that I, and some other contemporary knappers have learned well enough to use intentionally, efficiently and effectively, especially when replicating Solutrean and Clovis biface manufacture

Summary

Introduction

There is an on-going debate as to whether or not ancient knappers used overshot flaking intentionally in the manufacture of bifaces. In spite of Eren et al.’s (2013: 2940) conclusion that “...Clovis and Solutrean knappers converged on a technique for thinning bifaces that happened to produce the analogous detritus of overshot flakes”, for me, the answer is a resounding “Yes!” It is a method that I, and some other contemporary knappers (academic and amateur) have learned well enough to use intentionally, efficiently and effectively, especially when replicating Solutrean and Clovis biface manufacture. This is not to say that all overshot attempts are successful nor that mistakes are not made that occasionally lead to failure and abandonment. This was not entirely successful in that part of the cortical ‘mass’ remained (Figure 1e), the resulting edge was brought into symmetry with the rest of the margin outline near the biface plane

Results

Flake 2 - Overshot flake

Evidence of the overshot technique

Discussion