AUS Aboriginal hand axe

Tim Simmons · 16th October 2013, 07:33 PM

Not strictly a weapon but we are interested in all forms of ethnographic cutting implements? If somebody surprised you at your camp and this was all that was at hand as a weapon, it could make a mess of the strangers face and head. Still to arrive. I show it with some other professional pictures from "A Record in Stone, The Study of Australia's Flaked Stone Artefacts, museum Victoria Aboriginal Studies Press, Simon Holdaway and Nicola Stern".

Tim Simmons · 18th October 2013, 05:02 PM

Just adding my pictures that are a little more clear.

Tim Simmons · 18th October 2013, 07:53 PM

Just enjoying disseminating useless knowledge, nos 6 and nos 12 are good similar examples from "Australian Aboriginal Stone Implements, F. D. McCarthy, Australian Museum Sydney"

josh stout · 19th October 2013, 01:59 AM

I am fascenated by hand axes. The one you show is strikingly similar to Acheulian forms dating to 2 millian years ago or so, made by Homo erectus. Yet yours may be little more than a century old to about 40 thousand years. The older ones tend to be larger, but the general shape is the same, particularly the sharp edge all the way around. There is a bit of a mystery as to what they were for, and why the design is so persistant. Even older tools, whose design also persisted, had a round edge for grasping, oposite the sharp one.
Most archeologists/anthropologists would not try and link the Austrialian versions with the much older African/Asian/Europian versions, but the similarity is clear. In my opinion they were all perpose knives that could be used as a throwing star.

Tim Simmons · 19th October 2013, 10:27 AM

Thank you josh. There is a great deal of debate about the use of stone implements like this. Students and collectors find many hand axes at campsite assemblages that show no sign of use wear which can lead to problems in cataloging finds. Signs of use may depend on what materials the axe was used on. This hand axe appears to be of quartzite which would not hold a fine sharp cutting edge like flint/chert or greenstone. I think a common sense view as a general forming to cutting tool is the answer. A fine sharp blade would be good for chopping and stripping large sections of bark from trees. I can see this stone being used to chop bone in sections in readiness for fine work with other tools. It could be used to roughly work many materials.

Use as a weapon, quote F. D. MaCarthy, Australian Aboriginal Stone Implements.

Missile Stones- natural stones of a convenient shape were thrown at game and enemies. Cook's landing parties at Botany Bay were attacked with them. No specially shaped types are known.

If you have grown up throwing stones as a weapon, then held as shown it would be a deadly weapon.

Tim Simmons · 19th October 2013, 10:31 AM

Ready to throw.

Billman · 20th October 2013, 01:02 AM

Why throw a stone axe that has taken several hours to flake, when a pebble of the same size will inflict pretty much the same amount of damage???

Tim Simmons · 20th October 2013, 09:18 AM

Perhaps there is more striking edge, like the concentration of force found with the striking edges on wood clubs. The shape might aid throwing rather in the same way one would select the right stone to throw and make skip over water. As you can see the knapping has clearly been done in a quick and deft manner.

Tim Simmons · 20th October 2013, 10:08 AM

While discussing throwing stones, why are these throwing stones from Vanuatu {New Hebrides} not just found rocks and pebbles. You can see that nos 9 -16 have clearly been knapped? No 7 looks like a lot of work has gone into it. I can only imagine these stone being hurled end over end. I think they might hurt a little if you caught one in the face.

Billman · 20th October 2013, 10:27 PM

These throwing stones appear to have some of the aerodynamic properties of boomerangs, the hand (?) axe shown is assymetric, and would probably not have a stable flight geometry due to its Cof G being eccentric...

josh stout · 20th October 2013, 11:03 PM

Tim-

I have been searching for historic examples of throwing stones, and these are the first sharp ones I have seen listed as such. Can you please give me the reference? (Just saw that you listed the reference above. Is that the one?)

I am working on testing the aerodynamics of cement replicas weighted with lead to match the originals. So far, they throw very nicely. I can stick the Acheulean version into the ground like playing mumblety-peg with a knife.

josh stout · 20th October 2013, 11:53 PM

The best paper on ethnographic throwing.

http://courses.washington.edu/war101...isaac_1987.pdf

josh stout · 21st October 2013, 02:22 AM

The basic shape of hand axes is incredibly consistent for over 2 million years. It is the thing we have made the most of for the longest time. They were replaced by the rich array of weapons developed by modern humans, but seemingly persisted in some cultures into modern times. How can we not know what they are? They have to be the equivalent of the ubiquitous hunting knife, and they have some similarities. The thick edge is more like that of a hunting knife than a chef’s knife. Flakes would be much finer cutting tools; these were for butchery, and perhaps the occasional fight.

Personally though, once you have held one in your hand, it is difficult to escape the idea that they would be very effective when thrown. Given that making a sharp edge all the way around is more difficult that leaving one blunt for grasping, there must be a reason for it.

16th October 2013, 07:33 PM	#1
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	AUS Aboriginal hand axe Not strictly a weapon but we are interested in all forms of ethnographic cutting implements? If somebody surprised you at your camp and this was all that was at hand as a weapon, it could make a mess of the strangers face and head. Still to arrive. I show it with some other professional pictures from "A Record in Stone, The Study of Australia's Flaked Stone Artefacts, museum Victoria Aboriginal Studies Press, Simon Holdaway and Nicola Stern". Attached Images

18th October 2013, 05:02 PM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	Just adding my pictures that are a little more clear. Attached Images

18th October 2013, 07:53 PM	#3
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	Just enjoying disseminating useless knowledge, nos 6 and nos 12 are good similar examples from "Australian Aboriginal Stone Implements, F. D. McCarthy, Australian Museum Sydney" Attached Images

19th October 2013, 10:27 AM	#5
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	Thank you josh. There is a great deal of debate about the use of stone implements like this. Students and collectors find many hand axes at campsite assemblages that show no sign of use wear which can lead to problems in cataloging finds. Signs of use may depend on what materials the axe was used on. This hand axe appears to be of quartzite which would not hold a fine sharp cutting edge like flint/chert or greenstone. I think a common sense view as a general forming to cutting tool is the answer. A fine sharp blade would be good for chopping and stripping large sections of bark from trees. I can see this stone being used to chop bone in sections in readiness for fine work with other tools. It could be used to roughly work many materials. Use as a weapon, quote F. D. MaCarthy, Australian Aboriginal Stone Implements. Missile Stones- natural stones of a convenient shape were thrown at game and enemies. Cook's landing parties at Botany Bay were attacked with them. No specially shaped types are known. If you have grown up throwing stones as a weapon, then held as shown it would be a deadly weapon. Attached Images

19th October 2013, 10:31 AM	#6
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	Ready to throw. Attached Images

19th October 2013, 01:59 AM	#4
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	I am fascenated by hand axes. The one you show is strikingly similar to Acheulian forms dating to 2 millian years ago or so, made by Homo erectus. Yet yours may be little more than a century old to about 40 thousand years. The older ones tend to be larger, but the general shape is the same, particularly the sharp edge all the way around. There is a bit of a mystery as to what they were for, and why the design is so persistant. Even older tools, whose design also persisted, had a round edge for grasping, oposite the sharp one. Most archeologists/anthropologists would not try and link the Austrialian versions with the much older African/Asian/Europian versions, but the similarity is clear. In my opinion they were all perpose knives that could be used as a throwing star.

20th October 2013, 01:02 AM	#7
Billman Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 129	Why throw a stone axe that has taken several hours to flake, when a pebble of the same size will inflict pretty much the same amount of damage???

20th October 2013, 09:18 AM	#8
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	Perhaps there is more striking edge, like the concentration of force found with the striking edges on wood clubs. The shape might aid throwing rather in the same way one would select the right stone to throw and make skip over water. As you can see the knapping has clearly been done in a quick and deft manner.

20th October 2013, 10:08 AM	#9
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	While discussing throwing stones, why are these throwing stones from Vanuatu {New Hebrides} not just found rocks and pebbles. You can see that nos 9 -16 have clearly been knapped? No 7 looks like a lot of work has gone into it. I can only imagine these stone being hurled end over end. I think they might hurt a little if you caught one in the face. Attached Images

20th October 2013, 10:27 PM	#10
Billman Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 129	These throwing stones appear to have some of the aerodynamic properties of boomerangs, the hand (?) axe shown is assymetric, and would probably not have a stable flight geometry due to its Cof G being eccentric...

20th October 2013, 11:03 PM	#11
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	Tim- I have been searching for historic examples of throwing stones, and these are the first sharp ones I have seen listed as such. Can you please give me the reference? (Just saw that you listed the reference above. Is that the one?) I am working on testing the aerodynamics of cement replicas weighted with lead to match the originals. So far, they throw very nicely. I can stick the Acheulean version into the ground like playing mumblety-peg with a knife. Last edited by josh stout; 21st October 2013 at 02:32 AM.

20th October 2013, 11:53 PM	#12
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	The best paper on ethnographic throwing. http://courses.washington.edu/war101...isaac_1987.pdf

21st October 2013, 02:22 AM	#13
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	The basic shape of hand axes is incredibly consistent for over 2 million years. It is the thing we have made the most of for the longest time. They were replaced by the rich array of weapons developed by modern humans, but seemingly persisted in some cultures into modern times. How can we not know what they are? They have to be the equivalent of the ubiquitous hunting knife, and they have some similarities. The thick edge is more like that of a hunting knife than a chef’s knife. Flakes would be much finer cutting tools; these were for butchery, and perhaps the occasional fight. Personally though, once you have held one in your hand, it is difficult to escape the idea that they would be very effective when thrown. Given that making a sharp edge all the way around is more difficult that leaving one blunt for grasping, there must be a reason for it.