Experimental Archaeology Clovis Point Hypothesis 

I doubt my comment will be seen, now that the video is a little older... but, something to keep in mind, that *might* have been a part of what they were up to (we won't ever know for sure): I was a traffic crash investigator for many years - the damage on the shafts *looks* different to me - I obviously can't examine them myself - and one test is just one test. Destructive testing is expensive, and resource heavy - so not easy to do a full run of tests. All of that garbledeegook about my resume out of the way, the notch shaft looks like it took a harder impact, at the tip of the shaft. Meaning - in a way, the split shaft acts like a crumple zone on a car. The clovis point was not only easier to re-shaft, when/if the point struck a bone, the point itself would get pushed back into the shaft, and actually *save* the difficult to make point from breaking so easy. And the second additional thing, would be tip of the shaft strength - keep in mind, these people were *experts* at stone/wood work. Much like the bows, which carefully follow the wood grain, an shaft that is split carefully along the grain structure, *should* be more flexible than a cut notch - since all of the grain is intact, rather than cut. By carefully splitting the shaft, and using the clovis point - the point could slide into that split some, and maybe save a maker from needing to make another point. It would be interest to shoot some meat targets, and see what happens. Paul Harrell has a great setup he uses for his gun channel - leather jacket "skin" then pork ribs, bag o' oranges for lung tissue, pork rib layer, and lastly a leather layer again. It is a reasonably good analog for a chest cavity. I would love to see more photos of point and shaft damage from your experiments, to see if there is enough evidence to establish evidence to warrant further testing.

The most logical theory I have ever heard/seen behind the Clovis fluting, thanks for the video Ryan.

The more seamless a shaft to point is the deeper the penetration, because there's less surface to catch on the hide and meat ,I prefer the Clovis over other points for hunting . I start with corner notched ,then adeana points , however since I hunt with cane arrows and darts the Clovis has proved to be a far superior point, I hope this is helpful, thank you for the video upload

This would be cool to see on a high speed camera

I couldn't hardly believe the way they looked after that cruelty . You always come up with great idea's . 👍

Fascinating discussion! Fast becoming my favorite channel!

I once had an archeologist explain to me how he felt points may have been fluted. From what I understand, he successfully used a more controlled pressure flaking technique than the percussion technique. I feel that would result in less loss. I think his name was Eugene Gybra and he worked out of the University of Calgary in Alberta Canada. In either case, I do like the looks of a large fluted Clovis on a big ol' spear shaft but I can only back that technique up with conjecture and hearsay. I truly appreciate you sharing your knowledge and skill with us.

You're on to something Ryan! This is one of those things that is so simple, you wonder how you didn't think of it yourself first!

Seeing the light shine through the edges on those points looks impressive, scary sharp

Love you throwing down the snapped point. I keep two snapped pieces in the center of my personal Clovis frame as snapping these during fluting is so prevalent. Keep up the good work.

Nice explanation of your thought process. Lots of great data from this experiment, and directions for future tests. Keep up the great work!

I’m an engineer and fluting adds strength to the arrow head to resist bending kind of like an I-beam or a fluted rifle barrel resists bending better than the same full size diameter barrel.......

I think this is a very reasonable conclusion thank you for explaining it all so well

Good stuff Ryan. Its not always easy to destroy your own hard work to help the community gain a better understanding.

Great fascinating content as always!

This is the best thing I have seen in experimental archeology I cant say enough good about it to do it justice

Wow, great video and experiment. Thanks for doing this and sharing!

I used to think maybe the flutes were somehow the first flakes removed and the rest was knapped around them. Some examples of Clovis points look like that might have been the case.

Thanks for the video.

With your extended experience in knapping points, what percentage failure do you see when performing the Clovis style flutes? And thanks for some really insightful videos! Wil

I really like that you develope a theory from a common sense approach then test it yourself instead of just accepting what is assumed by many that simply look at a bare head.

Good video. Experimental archaeology is really important in trying to understand the past.

Top channel, adds a lot of our knowledge in relation to the past! Congratulations, deserves a million subscribers! I follow your channel here in São Paulo Brazil!

Extremely interesting, thank you for this.

excellent video, thank you!

Really love this video Ryan

Loved the video , keep up the good work . I knew an old flintknapper that passed away about 50 years ago. His theory on flutes was the preform was fluted first and then the final shaping and flaking was done after the flute .

Another thought is that if your using a stone knife and just saw into the end of a shaft it makes a V shape that the point would fit well if it was fluted, just an idea. Great videos! Keep em coming!

These kinds of videos are what sets your channel apart from other bogus and nonsensical channels out there! And I love it! Very much! Firstly, and maybe most importantly, you don't just claim and theorise from your sofa, you try it and you live by it, quite literally, using what you kill thus showing respect. Secondly the theory you provided is really interesting, and it works, so if it works then it is plausible. Everything that doesn't work is discarded and looses to the test of time. However proving it is a bit harder, of course. I would like to add something based on your observations. Let's say there were 2 kinds of fluted points, first being the flute that ends in a step fracture, the second being the one without it. Well, what if the ones with a step fracture were actually more desirable? What if they were an additional point of contact with the shaft, and for the first time in flint knapping you actually wanted to make a step fracture?! As noted at the end of the video,I would like to see the research and the concept being expanded upon. More tests, more statistical data and samples etc. Sorry for writing a novel here, I really like the stone age, our archaic sunrise, and can get carried away rather easily as shown :D Cheers!

love this, exceptionally inspiring

RYAN, that was the best insight to figure design change over time or geographic location reasons in the development of arrow points and shafts . I've read many opinions on this topic, yours is most reasonable.

This makes serious sense to me. I’ve always thought that primitive practitioners are the best people to consult with respect to why we see what we see archeologically.

This is why experimental archeology is so important.

This is interesting. I’ve wondered about fluting but don’t have much practical experience. Thanks!

Nice one man👍

Isn't it nice to feel a breakthrough after much research. Gratz sir.

Very interesting video I have noticed that on several occasions I've read articles that show the for shaft being like a split bone shaft which would really go along with the theory of the split shaft and also is very interesting that on clovis's the termination of the flute into a large step fracture, that would assist a shaft from going forward as well. Just a thought keep up the good work very interesting Thank you.

Great video 👍

Very cool. I love this stuff

Thats wasome i have some flint i got from texas im going to make one love your videos

How far would Clovis hunters have travelled from their camps when hunting? Is it possible that they chose the combination of a harder to produce stone point and an easier to produce wooden shaft, because they were travelling with only the points (which could have been made by the members of their group who were not physically suited to hunting), and then making shafts as needed at their hunting grounds?

The mythology that has been built up around Clovis is giant, but entirely false. Fluting looks great, feels great on a point, and is entirely functional. I don't break Clovis points anymore, but I did for 30 years. They are now easy to make, long, thin and delicate like the Fenn, Simon or Drake Cache, and made prehistoric with antler and stone, no jig. Take two 15cm slats of oak, like they are cut from a yardstick and onto the end of each slat pitch glue two little buttons or twigs of wood (four total, 2 on each slat). Wrap the tip of your Clovis blank in a strip of leather, then sandwitch it in the slats and tie tight with a string with the twigs on the base, then flute. Great video. I empathize with that part of the video where the Clovis breaks in half. It's almost depressing how easy it is now.

Your video are amazing I just love your videos

That is seriously insightful!

Very good stuff machanical advantage helps the mass of the dart to push the point through instead of splitting out

I agree !00%, that makes perfect sense!! I have broken many driving flakes for flute channels, plus the plains Native Tribes used notches to hold points which we don't see on the Clovis points...

I've always had the theory that it satisfied the human desire to have things geometrically equal even in pure utilitarian tools and applications we have a desire of design

Beautiful craftsman

Now Ryan you need to see if the technology existed in the Siberian paleo period. See if you can find examples of the binding technique of hafting is present in their tool kits. Great hypothesis, keep up the good work

I would think, that the forshafts were actually heat- hardened after splitting before inserting the fluted Clovis point. It's seems to me that the fluted point into the split foreshaft would actually be more effective at withstanding a hard hit, like a shoulder for instance. For the simple fact that a tighter fit, and ROOM to move down a little, like a shock absorber so to speak, would be better than a notched point, with no room to move but, simply fracturing the foreshaft. That's my 2 cents. Secondly, the target you chose to demonstrate on isn't representative of the usual targets primitive man would be striking , a piece of plywood, just isn't realistic, i would think try think again with something more realistic, like a beef shoulder quarter. Also, just my opinion.

Make fit perfectly . thank you 🌹

You are awesome. I find a lot of daltons they don’t normally have tip dings though. the little feet break more than anything you would think the opposite. I find big ones and little ones. I think the ones the size you made where knives because they are normally beveled. The bases are super ground and yours where not that ground. I love your channel man.

Very interesting, I found a very small fluted point here in Southern Africa from the san people whom used small less powerful bows that relied on poisoned arrow tips.

Makes sense to me. I'm a firm believer in form follows function.

A lot of clovis points were ground pretty far up the base which means they probably wrapped them pretty high. I can imagine that with a split shaft that was tapered and wrapped high it would make a really stable mount that would keep the point from yawing one way or the other while at the same time being low profile enabling better penetration, the wrap may even help smooth the transition especially if resin was used basically over the whole wrap especially at the transition. And last but not least, if you hit something hard and splitt the wrap and shear off one side of the shaft like you did in the demonstration it could be technically possible to rehaft the point to that shaft, especially if your point has a step fracture in the flute on at least one side, it could be placed on the intact side of the shaft as a sort of stop while a wedge could be attached via a wrap in place of the piece that had sheared off. Rather than cutting the dart shorter and re notching. The flute/tapered/split shaft give it side to side stability and the break away side could be repaired quickly.

Great reasoning behind the design styles. The one thing to keep in mind, Clovis culture disappeared with the event that killed off the large mammals around 12,000 years ago. The method of making points without Clovis-styled flutes was the modern wave of a second culture that filled the same areas but had no ties to Clovis technology. So two unconnected groups of people who invented different techniques to solve the same task of putting holes in animals. Lining up the projectile points by date also shows how the advanced Clovis knapping techniques went to a period of rough knapping and then to fine knapping again (but using the different 'technology').

I think you are right. Believe it or not that was my theory as well however I did not want to risk breaking some of my clovis points .

I have an interesting hypothesis. I think that Clovis flutes were “discovered by accidental necessity”. If you were a hunter and had 1 large biface and as Murphy Law goes it gets broken. You could possibly find both pieces. The tip may have a impact fracture and a reverse flute. It could easily be reworked into a second functioning point, and would have a flute. The basal end of the original point could be reworked as well. Practical ease of function is the key; if it works, it was used, if it didn’t work, you starved.

That was really cool. Don’t threaten me with a good time lol. I would love to go out and do the stuff. I recently found a large triangular point made of quartz with a very pronounced impact fracture on it resulting in the tip of the triangle point and a sliver about an inch and a half down one side being missing from the point. I believe the type of point was transitional Palio or early archaic Alamance point. I’ve also found evidence of other broken point tips and tools in the same area nearby. I’ve always wondered about how things were hafted to shafts. About a week after I found the triangular point I found another milky quartz broken point that looked like probably 1/3 to 1/2 of it had snapped right off and it appeared that concave channels had been ground into the quartz on both sides to accommodate hafting to a shaft. I think we can all agree on one thing… These people were very smart.

Excellent video. The Solutrean culture made it to north America concurrent to the Clovis people. I would like to see some work with Solutrean points as well.

Remember that the widest part of a Clovis is about two thirds up from the base so when that shoulder passed into the animal the hafting and fore shaft could then pass through the wound without further drag on it , allowing the atlatl shaft to fall out of the wound and the fore shaft and point to stay in the wound there you have your first repeating weapon the main shaft falls out pick it up and reload with another fore shaft... and also remember the bases were heavily ground to stop them from being pushed down into the fore shaft and I would shorten your fore shafts by about half.....regards Idaho Clovisman......

Awesome stuff your doing here. This is what I've heard don't know if it's true but I'll relay it.The fluting technology is rooted at least 25,000 years ago in France with the solutrean civilization and migrated to the United Stateswith seal hunters along the northern Atlantic glaciers that were there at the time. Almost all flute technology disappeared 11800 years ago at the boundary of the younger dryas, younger dryas cataclysm megafaunal extinction event. I had always heard the idea with the fluting was to make it possible to have the shaft of the spear or arrow fall off after impact so it could be picked up and quickly reloaded with a new point. I don't know if that's true but I've read it in books and museums.

If its stupid but it works, it's not stupid. Effort without payoff means going hungry. I suspect you're right that fluteing had to have a very specific, effective purpose and wasn't just for looks. Great breakdown and demo.

And i think that you should do more tests on the impact damage to see if there is a steady and consistent pattern between the two

And I believe I've mentioned that folsoms transitional point from mammoth to bison has a lot to do with rib spacing and being able to get that shot between the ribs even at acute angles which I'm sure occurs quite often with running bison !

This man knows more than the scientists with doctorate degrees. Good job!

Ok Ryon your on the right track ---- i do nothing but split shaft an been doing it sence i was 17 an im 52 now so i will tell you how it works better if you get rid of all common arrow tec an do this instead. Put the clovis in the split do not put sinew on the stone instead soak rawhide an strech it tight as you can under the stone when it drys the stick an the stone shuls be as one an it shuld hold together on impact. --- you can do experment with sinew with rawhide ad a experement with pich an rawhide

Interesting test

Flutes were most often put in at the relative beginning of the clovis lithic reduction process , sure on some clovis some small channel flutes are added at the end but on most real clovis points the large risky flutes are taken before the point is thinned and shaped . This can be seen on abandoned and cached preforms . However your hafting theory is excellent and makes sense

Absolutely your right.

What if, you split the shaft (presumably green while it’s easiest to manipulate) and then used fire to char the end to grind to shape on a rock easier (simultaneously hardening the wood) Maybe worth a try? Sounds like what I’d do if I was using this technology.

There has been quite a few two piece bone for shafts associated with folsoms these are short like 6 inches or less but they were obviously very strong and reusable!

As I first started watching this I thought, "Really? It's obvious that it was made to seat into a stick better"... then I saw your rationale. Yes, you are absolutely correct. That whole rounded notch notion came from folks who theorized well over 100 years ago. They didn't have any experience and were pioneers in the field, so their erroneous hypotheses are easily forgiven. :)

Experimental archeology at its best

Impact fracture has always amazed myself. Maybe flutes were their to reshape the point after kill. Maybe less impact to the projectiles. Lots of bannets had blood groves as well.

Some Clovis points are so large - some over 7 inches long, and we now know that much smaller points are effective against deer, even bison. And yes, there still mammoth then, but to get deep into a large animal you don't want a large point. Here's my hypothesis: small points were functional ones, but large ones were for prestige or as a currency. Wampum was valuable BECAUSE it was difficult and very labor-intensive to make. Modern people display larger, fancier clothes, jewelry, cars and tools (Rambo knives) than any practical use would suggest. This also explains why large collections of Clovis points have been found - they were hordes, just like Roman-era coins stored under one of your bed posts or under a tent pole but when you died or didn't return from a hunt/journey, your relatives never found your horde.

You should try this from a further distance. The dart was still flexing in flight a lot, when it hit the plywood. I think that’s why it split the shaft on one side. Would like to see the dart hit straight, without the flexing. Probably not possible but I think it would give a better observation of how the point cuts straight into the shaft. Love the videos guy!👍

Fluting allows for the smaller shaft for a larger projectile, splitting aside though, if one notches a smaller shaft to prevent splitting on impact then... due to the loss of notch side material against that of a slit that removes less material on a small shaft than slitting, you heighten the chance of what happened to the shafts in your video on plywood... the channel breaks at the one side of the side supports. That might always mean that no matter what method, split or notched, a missed shot will most likely destroy break the side off the channel in the shaft if it has lateral deflection but, if a successful shot into flesh is made, you still get to maybe recover a useable intact projectile from flesh without having to go to a larger size shaft to support a large point on a small shaft if you slit rather than remove more material by notching.... something very useful when you just can't make a larger, less flexible shaft to account for a wider notching to fit wider projectile point for a heavier, longer and more time consuming atlatl shaft over later arrows to begin with. There may not be as much of a learning curve or trade off as it appears between maybe splitting a small shaft when a small shaft is most needed in relation to function with a larger projectile point and the game hunted as to comparing it to maybe recovering an intact shaft from lack of one supporting side of a shaft breaking off weather it may be huge or smaller game with later bow & arrow technology if the arrow doesn't strike a soft target. With an atlatl, with a notch instead of slit groove, you have greater chance of broken arrow in 1 more way within required design parameters to get around rather than if designing around a smaller projectile point working as well for the size of game or different technology. With a smaller bow arrow shaft technology, not only is splitting the shaft still of concern but, notching and risking less side material support is just a necessity due to size of just about any projectile versus the size of the required shaft for bow technology. I bet they tried notching the shafts and fluting the points at the same time and found it just doubled the odds of a broken atlatl dart in one way or another. They just went with the one thing that was more required given the limits of their overall hunting equipment and the size of game they had available to hunt. If those using atlatls were using smaller points and dart shafts for smaller game like later bow hunters, they'd probably notched more often over fluting as well. Maybe, fluting a small arrow point has just as much or more risk of breaking the small point during manufacture than a larger point has due to all the stresses required on the point to flute it, just that later bow & arrow technology still required the notching of the shaft due to smaller shaft diameter for any size point but fluting smaller points was even more risky as well... IDK? I'm not a knapper, but I'd like to give it a go some day. Two good ideas to prevent overall projectile breakage, but with one working better with one hunting device technology than another out of design parameter necessity when using both preventatives together actually made things worse for the hunting technology at hand. You could test this by shooting, both notched and fluted shafts combined and then separate, atlatl darts and bow arrows into soft flesh, then apply lateral force to the side of the protruding shaft by running past it and letting it catch your arm as if game running through trees or falling after being hit. Check which type overall projectile may produce the least chance of a re-useable projectile.... what snaps just the point, splits the shaft, snaps the side supports of the shaft/point cradle or some combination. Is fluting an unneeded increased risk to recovery of a re-useable arrow to smaller arrow points even if slitting works as well as notching to prevent splitting of the shaft or is it that atlatl darts prefer fluting and splitting over just notching. You've already uncovered 1 reason why notching with fluting is not good for either atlatl nor bow and not fluting with a slit is not good for either as well but, I think there is a good argument to be made that it isn't as much those that hunted with atlatls hadn't learned to notch as much as notching with or without fluting did not help and maybe even hurt the odds of recovering a re-useable atlatl dart in most cases due the size of atlatl darts point size required for the game and that fluting smaller points for arrows may just require notching over fluting due the stresses on smaller points required to flute. Both methods work equally as well separately but fluting favors recoverability of atlatl darts and would as well on arrows but there may be no choice but to remove shaft side support to the point from lateral forces by notching a shaft on an arrow due to the smaller size of the points desired and the stresses upon them when fluting; notching shaft and unfluted points may only be the best options for arrows and splitting and fluting may be best for atlatl darts for all reasons when they are looked at as far as not only speed of manufacture but also design parameters given to work within to take down what size game with what kind of technology. I don't know if slitting and fluting is less desirable or antiquated over later ways considered an advancement of attaching a point to a shaft all things considered... I do think if they hunted laminated plywood, they sure would have added metal technology to their hunting weapons a lot sooner than waring with other people got around to it! lol

I've seen Gils video on a free hand clovis. I tried it on an ebay , way to fat spearpoint that I was practicing on. I set up a good platform and whacked it and got a decent flute. Flipped it over a got another. I'm like the worst knapper ever and failed to make a decent projectile out of that point but it had two nice free hand flutes.

No disrespect meant whatsoever to you my friend , But all that explanation was not necesary , at least to me it was always self evident what fluting was all about . I absolutely love your work and learn something from every one of your videos . thank you

try first burning a small hole (heated copper pin) through the shaft at the lowest point of the split, then create the split. once the split reaches the hole, it'll stop splitting. drummers use a similar technique with cymbals that are beginning to crack. KEvron

Fascinating that fluting came along before notching. Seems like notching would be the natural option but I know caveman

The flutes make it easier to mount into a shaft, obviously but, its also to have a better chance of letting blood the point gets grabbed by the flesh of the animal. Basically they are blood groves. The clovis point is also usefull as a tool to scrape and shape new shafts.

After seeing this video I would assume that a smart archaeology/paleotology student might be able to write his dissertation based on your cloviis theory. Of course he should also bolster his dissertation with results of field experiments like you do. You're quite the scientist my friend. You do good research and come up with plausible explantions. Now if the climate scientists could learn something about your methods. Maybe we could stop worrying about doomsday for a bit. It is quite plausible that mankind has seen climate change throughout the history of mankind. We certainly saw the ice age come to an end, and we may actually still be in the process that warm up. So far we have survived and the world did not end. We simply adapted. That is what living things do.

As for my perception Id want a Splayed shaft to open up giving 3 wound channels . For point adhesive i use soft gum from fruit trees , for firm solid adhesive i use pine or cypress sap mixed with pulverized campfire charcoal creating a field expedient epoxy .

Hmmm I always kinda thought fluting was as much a testament to the quality of the stone kind of a ancient quality control if it survives fluting it has been tested at the highest level of stress exposing any flaws in the stone that would cause it to fail in service of penatration

hmm would it be possible to desire the point to shear off and the shaft be able to be recovered?

I may be way off here, but what I noticed was the way the tip snapped, buy having it hafted in a split there may have been a shock absorbing effect and would reduce the amount of damage that the point actually would take, minimizing the amount of damage to the actual tip, it could easily have the tip knapped back to a point and given another go. Just a thought.

Great test please keep it up for it gives us archaeologists a lot of important information. Would love to see the tests be in a more controlled environment with a high-speed camera for greater data. You could also test on a ballistic gel to get a feel for more realistic penetration data variables.

Hey do you ever ues sling weapons. There cool to

My hunch is your spot on, but my bet is that there was a different shaft resource present that allowed the simple hafting technique that you proposed. So what resource could of been abundant at that time that would allow or lend itself well to simply splitting the shaft to haft the fluted point? Possibly coppiced willow, cane, I am not sure, but I am sure it is probably growing nearby these finds today, but probably not coppiced or caretaked as it was then.

I’ve always thought that it was just as simple as you said, it was a method of haft if. Before the method of side notches were popular

The answer to this question can be found online already. Well kind a . With the thawing in antartica going on right now whole atyl atyl shafts are being found some with the point and sinew or plant fibre wrapps still totally intact. Very nice pictures of them online now also to study from. Some of them also have the the feathers still attached a two feather fletch. There is also a video of archeologists finding them digging them and bagging and tagging them . I have some close up pics of them that i can share if you would like.

Well Ryan, from how the flutes are made I surmise that no matter how they hafted the point. It's clear that it centralized all the force and or penetration into the "Center" region of the point....i.e. it could deflect off bone meaning deep penetration. Also the haft being at least half the point length would support and or prevent it prematurely breaking?? The Folsom clearly illustrates they refined it further even though those points were less robust. Look forward to your assesment.

How many times do you think youd have to stab a strong ❤ ed bison or mammoth to bring it down?

Awesome video!! I get so excited every time you post new stuff. For the testing scenario, how were able to throw it at such a hard target and not have the fore shaft push back into the main shaft?

My work took me to Papua New Guinea, about 10 years ago. Atlatls actually used by people could be found. Not tourist replicas. Lots of original polished stone Celt axe heads. Lots of hardwood spears thrown with the aid of atlatls. As one fellow told me who grew up in what is called the Highlands, removed from the populated centre of Port Moresby……… Well you know, you guys didn’t find us until 60 years ago. That is true because interior jungles of Papua New Guinea was little known prior to WW2. Accordingly, the lives of people used tools mentioned fairly recently. I never saw a stone arrowhead on a spear (or a dart placement on a spear). Neither did I see a stone arrowhead on arrows. That does not mean they did not, only that I never found any, and since I did a lot of asking at Weekend Markets and of the residents I conclude arrowheads were not common place. So nor enlightened common to assist you Ryan regarding hafting stone points. However, I circumstance you did not mention was the advantage of MORE shaft contact support since the split shaft concept sets the stone point deeper. I also agree with the comment of an engineer (I am one too) that the thin longitudinal and thicker edge perimeters impart greater bending strength to the point. Your testing has brought forth considerable cause for reflection in a very practical way. Considerable logic to your hypothesis. In so many ways, fluted points are so amazing. We have come a long way from trom Guillotine mechanical contraptions used by some large number of modern knappers 15-20 years ago. The more I personally make, then break fluting, or get on side and not the other, or only get 1/2 inch flutes, I am inclined to side with Patrick Blank a.k.a. Jack Crafty the flutes are just another flake removal. An archaeologist whose name is Eugene Gryba who is a flint Knapper where I live in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, flutes by Pressure Flaking. The old timers who made fluted points prized high quality rock material. High quality rock is a joy to knapp as modern knappers know. So, Pressure Flaking and very basic Indirect Percussion both seem viable. (I think most modern knappers would agree the “tool kit” of the old timers was not chalk full of many antlers and bones, abrading stones sufficient to fill a 5-gallon bucket. I think the tool to flute and the approach was simple. As your a knowledgeable Knapper Ryan, would you not agree that “platform” and “end shock” are the two most important issues? Of the two issues mentioned “end shock” is the wild card and it wound and bound, in leather, that Can we effectively dealt with. Thanks for taking time to make your videos. They are both entertaining and make us viewers “think.”

I think they used split shafts with a notch at the bottom. The fluting adds strength and allows the shaft to close tighter than if you simply notched it. Perhaps they used an organic glue of sorts in addition to tying the top.

I think they put a tiny flat piece of bone at the bottom for the point to hit against so it doesn't split the stick. Or a piece of grass

It is a knife throwing stick, the wood is the flight, like feathers to arrows. Use it like a casting fishing pole