Implements of Antler.

[136]Compare knife-like “hide-scrapers” of bone used by the Eskimo of Behring Straits and figured by E. W. Nelson in the 18th Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1896-97, Part I, pl. 50, figs. 3-6.

[137]In Moorehead,l. c., p. 272. Two similar objects from South America are figured by F. W. Putnam,l. c., pl. 11, figs. 10, 11, and are described (p. 227) as fishhooks.

The excavations furnish twelve objects of this type of implement, of which perhaps half were from stratum II. The remainder were found from the lower strata up to the eighth. Quite a number of the objects from stratum II were calcined, an evidence that they were deemed of value in life since they were burned with the dead.

The best preserved type of this implement, of which in most cases only small fragments were found, is shown in 1-8898,pl. 9, fig. 17, stratum VIII.

Figs. 30 and 31. × 1/2. Notched bones perhaps used in net-making or weaving.

Nearly all of these objects have a stereotyped form, being made from the shoulder blade of some large mammal, probably the deer. One, however, seems to have been made from a bird bone (1-8900, fig. 30, stratum VIII). On the specimen shown inpl. 9, fig. 17, about half of the length is taken up by the rounded handle, using the ridge-like end of the bone for this purpose. The other end of the object is incomplete, but according to the form in other specimens it was probably cut off squarely at the end. At any rate only a small piece of the implement is missing since the teeth cut into the thin convex margin of the bone are complete to the number of 15. The ridge-like edge runs next to the row of teeth, giving the implement greater firmness. The teeth vary considerably in different objects in size, in form, and in regularity (compare 1-8573, fig. 31, from stratum II). They also vary in degree of wear, which so far as observed is sometimes seen on the edge and sometimes in the spaces between the teeth. On one specimen the opposite edges of the bone are similarly toothed, although one side of the bone was quite thick. A smoothing or polishing of the object is never to be noticed, excepting on the under side.

Similar objects have frequently been found in California. Single fragments are figured by Moorehead.[138]As similar as these objects are to saws, it is probable that they were not used as such. The name “sachos” given to these implements by the Napa Indians, who possibly did not know their former use, is not to be taken as the slightest support for the idea that they were actual saws. In the first place it is hardly necessary to mention that the concept “saw” is missing among the Indians. The form of these objects and the general state of wear as already described shows that they were not and could not have been used as saws. It is remarkable enough that saw-like implements made of bone have a distribution much more extended than the Californian region. Since these occurrences are mostly local and entirely independent of each other, these implements must in their production have served certain practical aims. Why, however, saws made of bone should have such a wide distribution it is difficult to understand.

An analogous implement has been found in a shellmound in Massachusetts and figured by J. Wyman. He also in his description has shown that judging from the width of this implement it could not have been used as a saw.[139][140]

Another saw-like toothed bone implement was found in the cave dwellings in Franconia (Bavaria), which were inhabited in the early neolithic period. This has been described by Ranke as probably used in weaving.[141]

An implement having almost identical form as this just described above was figured by J. Murdock. This object was obtained from the Pt. Barrow Eskimo and was made of the shoulder blade of a reindeer. He received it as a model of a saw said to have been used before the introduction of iron.

After having made inquiries for the primitive form of the implement, this specimen doubtless was made for him.[142]His paper also contains a figure of another saw-like implement, of about twice the size of the first, made of antler. There was with this a kind of shuttle and a form of weaver’s sword with the statement that these three implements had been used in weaving feather girdles. In watching the process of making these belts he had, however, not seen any of these three implements.[143]In the opinion of the writer there is no reason to doubt materially the accuracy of the statements concerning the use of these implements by the Eskimo. It therefore contains the key to the understanding of all the remaining forms of this type of saw-like implements found in the northern region. And this explanation may be extended to the wrongly determined Californian bone saws. In our opinion the bone implement first figured by J. Murdock shows simply that the Eskimo remembered having had such an implement and that they gave to him the impression that it had been used in the way in which the investigator was inclined to think it ought to have been used. It appears that Ranke was on the right track when he supposed the Frankish bone implement to have been used in some processes of weaving. In like manner all of the Californian bone saws agree thoroughly with this supposed use.[144]In California many valuable feather girdles have been made, in the weaving of which these bone implements may have been used.[145]The exact mode of their use is not yet determined, but it is to be hoped, however, that even this may some time or other be discovered.

[138]Moorehead,l. c., p. 236, fig. 363.

[140]The stone points with saw-like teeth on the edge do not represent technically such an implement as a saw since the toothing is only a result of the method of reproduction.

[141]Am. Naturalist, 1868, Vol. I, pl. 15, fig. 15, 583.

[142]Der Mensch, II, p. 558-560.

[143]Ninth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1887-88, p. 175, fig. 147.

[144]l. c., p. 317, fig. 323.

[145]Recently a great deal has been written about the relation of widely separated peoples to each other. And this relationship has usually followed definite geographic lines. It is, however, worth while to notice the great similarity between the implements of eastern and western United States, and those of the caves of Switzerland and of the Arctic region. Many implements of similar type and use are to be found in these regions, implements which are not discovered in any other portion of the world.

It naturally occurs that in a shellmound in which so many implements of bone have been preserved there would be a number of bone objects the use of which can only be imperfectly determined. These implements are in part possibly only attempts to work bone, in part they are actually implements which had a use somewhat different from that of the other forms and a use for which the character of the material especially fitted them.

Figs. 32 and 33. × 1/2. Bone artifacts of unknown use.

Many fragments of bone show only a few cuts or marks as indications that they were worked. In one case, 1-8527, fig. 32, stratum IX, the marks which vary somewhat from those in the other strata may represent an implement of the paper-cutter type. The point is in this case calcined, as is also true of many other implements. This is evidently done intentionally, possibly in order to work the bone more easily. Other common bone fragments look as if they had occasionally been used as implements when they happened to have the right form, and that they were not intentionally worked into this shape. Still other bone fragments show knife-like incisions on the other edges, as, for example, that shown in fig. 33, 1-8877, stratum VIIa. They are probably not to be considered as marks of dog’s teeth, as which these could also be determined, for they are generally very numerous in one place or else they show exceeding regularity as if made intentionally.

The shellmound dwellers did not fail to notice the peculiar character of the tubular bones, which when cut into sections are easily made into small receptacles, similar to the cane plant, which is used in a similar manner by the inhabitants of tropical regions (for instance by the ancient Peruvians). Many such small objects with differing proportions were found, two of which are shown in fig. 34. 1-8922, stratum VIII; and fig. 35, 1-9076, stratum X.

For many kinds of implements antler is particularly valuable on account of its hardness. For this reason a number of implements of this character have been found in the shellmound; they are, however, not so numerous as those of bone. They are usually made of deer or elk antler.

Of these there are two principal types.

About half of the objects of antler are to be considered as complete implements. These are shown inpl. 8, figs. 2aand 2b, 1-8892, stratum VIII; figs. 3aand 3b, 1-8821, from stratum VIIa, represent the two subspecies of the same,viz., broad and narrow chisels. The main difference between the two is simply one of size and proportion.

The broad chisels are represented by about ten objects, which belong to the middle and lower strata of the mound only, down to the Xth stratum. Whether this is accidental or caused by other reasons remains undecided. These objects are from four and one-half to five and one-half inches long, to one and three-fourths inches broad, and even as thick as one and one-quarter inches. Oval in cross section, they slightly diminish toward the lower end. Frequently they pass one to two inches above the lower end into the flat, knife-like, one-sided slope, ending in a semi-circular edge about one inch broad. The sloping surface as well as the polished sides of the implement frequently have impressions due to actual use upon hard objects. In a similar manner, the straight surface is broken by the use of a hammer which was struck upon it.

The narrow chisels are represented only by one complete specimen (pl. 8, fig. 3) and two fragments of the knife-edge. The latter were found between strata VIIaand IX. The complete chisel is only three and nine-sixteenths inches long; while it is one and three-sixteenths inches broad at the upper end, and but seven-sixteenths of an inch thick, it nevertheless diminishes toward the lower end to a breadth of three-eighths of an inch at the knife-edge. The slope of the one side toward the latter is by far shorter than that of the broad chisel, and yet the same indications of its use with a hammer can be found. The curvature of the cross section of this implement corresponds to the natural form of the antler from which it was made.

Such chisels[146]partly took the place of an axe in woodwork among the Indians, just as, for example, this was still the case among the Hupa during the eighties of the last century,[147]in the construction of houses. The Klamaths in Oregon still make use of such chisels. The better known implements of recent times possess only the natural surface of the original antler.

It is of interest to know that implements of exactly the same kind were found in the shellmounds of the Atlantic coast,e.g., in Maine.[148]

Implement 1-8730,pl. 8, fig. 1, found in stratum V, has a length of nine and three-fourths inches and a breadth of one and seven-eighths and one and five-sixteenth inches. It will be seen that though of greater length and breadth it is flatter than the preceding. On account of its origin from a complete antler it is curved along its length, and slightly curved in on its concave side. At the lower end of the latter it is given a straight slant for three and a quarter inches in the diameter of the breadth. Its upper end shows the same signs of use with a hammer, while the slanting surface is greatly worn on the sides. This makes it probable that the use of this tool was in many respects different from the preceding. It was possibly used as a lever.

For this also a parallel exists in the form of an apparently identical implement from the shellmounds in Maine.[149]As regards form, certain implements of the bones of cattle found in the caves of French Switzerland are similar to this object. Rauch calls them “leather-cutters” (Lederschneidemesser).[150]

[146]A little information on this point is brought together by the writer in Mitth. der Anthrop. Ges. Wien., 1886, Vol. 16.

[147]A similar one from San Joaquin county has been illustrated by Moorehead,l. c., p. 271, fig. 410, No. 2. Cf. also F. W. Putnam,l. c., p. 229, figs. 106-108, wedge-like implements from southern California.

[148]Cf. Mason, Smithson. Reports, 1886, I, pl. xviii, fig. 19, with 10, 208.

[149]Cf. J. Wyman,l. c., pl. IV, figs. 2 and 2awith p. 583. Ch. A. Abbott, who represents the same implement,l. c., p. 211, fig. 196, says Massachusetts probably by mistake.

[150]J. Wyman,l. c., pl. XIV, fig. 1, with p. 582. Cf. also Ch. A. Abbott,l. c., p. 211, fig. 195. The implement is unfortunately represented in both places sidewise in an unfavorable manner.

Three such objects have been found. One of them is seven and one-eighth inches long, diminishing, horn-like, toward the blunt point. It came from the middle stratum of the mound. It is represented inpl. 8, fig. 7. Another is a young branch of an antler, and the third is a mere fragment. The use of these objects, which were doubtless implements, cannot be conjectured.

Only one fragmentary blade exists, about one inch long.

Two specimens of this kind came from stratum V of the mound. They are wanting in other parts of the mound. One of them is reproduced inpl. 8, fig. 4. It diminishes, horn-like, toward the lower end. Here it is truncated abruptly, having a breadth of five-eighths inches. Unfortunately the upper end is incomplete. The other implement, 1-8722, is absolutely identical with the one just described.

The collection contains also a fragmentary bone tool, 1-9066, which was found in stratum X. It may have corresponded to the peculiar implement, reproduced by J. Wyman,[151]pl. 14, fig. 3 (with the spiral cuts at the upper end), which was found in the shellmounds of Massachusetts.

Only one object made of tooth was found,viz., 1-8736, fig. 36, in stratum V. It is a bear’s tooth perforated at the root, serving the purpose of ornament or amulet, and corresponds exactly to the typical illustration of the one from New Jersey;[152]here Abbott emphasizes the fact that such ornaments were the most common among the earlier and present-day Indians.

Figs. 34 and 35. × 1/2. Fragments of bones. Fig. 36. × 1/2. A bear-tooth ornament.

The objects of this material mentioned among the grave finds are supplemented by two implements, one of which came from the IInd, the other from the VIIIth stratum of the mound. Both are made of the haliotis shell, the material preferred for ornamental purposes by the Indians throughout the country. Recovered in different strata, they differ completely with respect to their form. Yet, owing to the scarcity of the finds we are not permitted to advance the opinion that the form of one was limited in its stratum to the complete exclusion of the other.

1-8632, fig. 37, from stratum II, is about as long as broad, but rounded off at the lower part, while the upper rim is cut off straight. The three-sixteenths inch wide perforations in one row on the upper rim served for the purpose of suspending.

1-9106, fig. 38, from stratum VIII, represents the broken edge of a larger ornamental plate which was originally triangular or of a quadrilateral shape. The edge is now trapezoidal. Two of the four sides still show the well-worked rims, ornamented with indentations, of the original ornamental plate. The two other sides are rough surfaces of fracture.[153]

Fig. 37. × 1/2. Fig. 38. × 4/5. Haliotis shell ornaments.

Issued June 15, 1907.

[151]l. c., II, p. 556.

[152]Cf. F. W. Putnam,l. c., pl. XI, fig. 18.

[153]Ch. A. Abbott,l. c., p. 406. fig. 388.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 2

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 2.Emeryville Shellmound seen from the Bay. The cut made in the side of the mound had been filled when the photograph was taken, but the site of the excavation is seen in the light area on the western slope.

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 2.

Emeryville Shellmound seen from the Bay. The cut made in the side of the mound had been filled when the photograph was taken, but the site of the excavation is seen in the light area on the western slope.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 3

Plate 3

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 3.Topographic map of the Emeryville Shellmound. Contour intervals 5 feet. Scale: 1 inch = 60 feet.

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 3.

Topographic map of the Emeryville Shellmound. Contour intervals 5 feet. Scale: 1 inch = 60 feet.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 4

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 4.Fig. 1. Cross section of the western foot of Emeryville Shellmound, showing the extent of the excavations. Scale: 1 inch = 19.4 feet.1. Alluvial clay. 2. Thin gravel layer. 3. Basement clay, the stratum upon which the mound and the gravel layer rest.Fig. 2. Cross section through the principal excavated portion of the western foot of the Emeryville Shellmound, illustrating the stratification of the deposits. Scale: 1 inch = 6.46 feet.I-X, Recognized strata of the mound.A, B, C. Sections of the excavation designated in text.

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 4.

Fig. 1. Cross section of the western foot of Emeryville Shellmound, showing the extent of the excavations. Scale: 1 inch = 19.4 feet.

1. Alluvial clay. 2. Thin gravel layer. 3. Basement clay, the stratum upon which the mound and the gravel layer rest.

Fig. 2. Cross section through the principal excavated portion of the western foot of the Emeryville Shellmound, illustrating the stratification of the deposits. Scale: 1 inch = 6.46 feet.

I-X, Recognized strata of the mound.

A, B, C. Sections of the excavation designated in text.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 5

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 5.The open cut on the western side of the Emeryville Shellmound.

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 5.

The open cut on the western side of the Emeryville Shellmound.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 6

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 6.Figs. 1-21. Flaked cherts principally from the lower layers of the mound. Some of these, as represented by figs. 4, 5, 6, 11, 19, and 20, are possibly finished implements. The others are perhaps in part rejects, but all were probably used to some extent. × 6/10.Following are the accession numbers of the specimens, as catalogued in the museum of the Department of Anthropology.Fig. 1 (1-9007)Fig. 11 (1-8966)Fig. 2 (1-9095)Fig. 12 (1-9012)Fig. 3 (1-8551)Fig. 13 (1-9040)Fig. 4 (1-9031)Fig. 14 (1-8857)Fig. 5 (1-9005)Fig. 16 (1-?)Fig. 6 (1-8961)Fig. 17 (1-9093)Fig. 7 (1-9043)Fig. 18 (1-9012)Fig. 8 (1-9023)Fig. 19 (1-8815)Fig. 9 (1-9053)Fig. 20 (1-8929)Fig. 10 (1-9085)Fig. 21 (1-8756)

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 6.

Figs. 1-21. Flaked cherts principally from the lower layers of the mound. Some of these, as represented by figs. 4, 5, 6, 11, 19, and 20, are possibly finished implements. The others are perhaps in part rejects, but all were probably used to some extent. × 6/10.

Following are the accession numbers of the specimens, as catalogued in the museum of the Department of Anthropology.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 7

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 7.Rough bone implements and ornaments largely from the lower layers of the mound. × 2/3.Fig. 1 (1-8983)Fig. 10 (1-9072)Fig. 2 (1-8871)Fig. 11 (1-8875)Fig. 3 (1-9067)Fig. 12 (1-8989)Fig. 4 (1-9068)Fig. 13 (1-8988)Fig. 5 (1-8980)Fig. 14 (1-8987)Fig. 6 (1-8919)Fig. 15 (1-8920)Fig. 7 (1-8918)Fig. 16 (1-8986)Fig. 8 (1-8979)Fig. 17 (1-8984)Fig. 9 (1-8996)Fig. 18 (1-8975)

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 7.

Rough bone implements and ornaments largely from the lower layers of the mound. × 2/3.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 8

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 8.Implements of bone and antler from the Emeryville mound. Figures about one-half natural size.Fig. 1 (1-8730)Fig. 5 (1-8780)Figs. 2aand 2b(1-8892)Fig. 6 (1-8778)Figs. 3aand 3b(1-8821)Fig. 7 (1-8889)Fig. 4 (1-?)

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 8.

Implements of bone and antler from the Emeryville mound. Figures about one-half natural size.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 9

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 9.Bone implements from the Emeryville mound. × 6/10.Fig. 1 (1-8522)Fig. 10 (1-8735)Fig. 2 (1-8686)Fig. 11 (1-8869)Fig. 3 (1-8897)Fig. 12 (1-8868)Fig. 4 (1-8972)Fig. 13 (1-8916)Fig. 5 (1-8692)Fig. 14 (1-8917)Fig. 6 (1-8985)Fig. 15 (1-8870)Fig. 7 (1-8831)Fig. 16 (1-8694)Fig. 8 (1-8895)Fig. 17 (1-8898)Fig. 9 (1-8901)

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 9.

Bone implements from the Emeryville mound. × 6/10.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 10

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 10.Stone implements principally from the upper layers of the mound. Figures about three-fifths natural size.Fig. 1 (1-8613)Fig. 9 (1-8925)Fig. 2 (1-8611)Fig. 10 (1-8610)Fig. 3 (1-8615)Fig. 11 (1-8633)Fig. 4 (1-8718)Fig. 12 (1-8536)Fig. 5 (1-8614)Fig. 13 (1-8676)Fig. 6 (1-8618)Fig. 14 (1-8883)Fig. 7 (1-8719)Fig. 15 (1-8926)Fig. 8 (1-8616)Fig. 16 (1-8634)

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 10.

Stone implements principally from the upper layers of the mound. Figures about three-fifths natural size.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 11

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 11.Ornaments principally from the upper and middle layers of the mound. Natural size.Fig. 1 (1-8777)Fig. 9 (1-8791)Fig. 2 (1-8784)Fig. 10 (1-?)Fig. 3 (1-8879)Fig. 11 (1-?)Fig. 4 (1-8775)Fig. 12 (1-8843)Figs. 5aand 5b(1-?)Fig. 13 (1-8702)Figs. 6aand 6b(1-8788)Fig. 14 (7-8743)Fig. 7 (1-?)Figs. 15, 16, and 17 (1-8776)Fig. 8 (1-8783)Fig. 18 (1-8766)

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 11.

Ornaments principally from the upper and middle layers of the mound. Natural size.

UNIV. CAL. PUB. AM. ARCH. &. ETH. VOL. 7, PL. 12

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 12.Various artifacts principally from the upper layers of the mound. Figures 1 to 4, × 3/4; figures 5 to 13, × 2/3.Figs. 1aand 1b(1-8624)Fig. 8 (1-8630)Figs. 2aand 2b(1-8622)Fig. 9 (1-8711)Figs. 3aand 3b(1-8623)Fig. 10 (1-8608)Figs. 4aand 4b(1-8626)Fig. 11 (1-8620)Fig. 5 (1-8850)Figs. 12aand 12b(1-8671)Fig. 6 (1-8631)Fig. 13 (1-8628)Fig. 7 (1-8535)

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 12.

Various artifacts principally from the upper layers of the mound. Figures 1 to 4, × 3/4; figures 5 to 13, × 2/3.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS

DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY

The following publications dealing with archaeological and ethnological subjects issued under the direction of the Department of Anthropology are sent in exchange for the publications of anthropological departments and museums, for journals devoted to general anthropology or to archaeology and ethnology, and for specimens contributed to the museum collections of the University. They are for sale at the prices stated, which include postage or express charges. Exchanges should be directed to The Exchange Department, University Library, Berkeley, California, U. S. A. All orders and remittances should be addressed to the University Press.

AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY. (Octavo).

GRAECO-ROMAN ARCHAEOLOGY. (Large Octavo).

EGYPTIAN ARCHAEOLOGY. (Quarto).

ANTHROPOLOGICAL MEMOIRS. (Quarto).

SPECIAL VOLUMES.

Back to Index Next