TINDERFLINTS AND FIREMAKING IN THE HISTORICAL PERIOD

Author(s): Curtis Runnels

Source: Lithic Technology, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Spring 1994), pp. 7-16
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23272908
Accessed: 04-05-2019 09:19 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23272908?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Lithic Technology

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Runnels - Tinderflints and Firemaking In the Historical Period

TINDERFLINTS AND FIREMAKING IN THE

HISTORICAL PERIOD

Curtis Runnels

INTRODUCTION 17th century (Hamilton and Emeiy 1988: 4-5;

Kent 1983) with the invention ca. 1600 of the
In this paper I examine the characteristics of
snaphance firing mechanisms for guns, and by
1625the
historical period tinderflints, specifically themeth
true flintlock. As a consequence of the
ods of manufacture of tinder-flints of known
invention of age
the flintlock, the gunflint industry
and provenance, and the patterns of use-wear grew apace in the 17th and 18th centuries as
resulting from fire-making. The conclusion to this large European armies were equipped with flint
study is that it may be possible to identify lock rifles and muskets. Itis well known, however,
tinderflints in the archaeological record based onthat the flintknappers of France and England had
these or similar characteristics. A sample of been engaged in flintknapping before the advent
tinderflints is illustrated in order to facilitate the of flintlocks, and it is probable that flintknappers
recognition of these artifacts. in earlier periods, perhaps going back to antiq
uity, made tinderflints.
A little over 100 years ago, Sir Arthur Evans
described the activities of a flint-knapper in the Sydney Skertchly (1879) and Sir John Evans
town of Ioannina in northwest Greece (A. Evans (1872) made careful studies of the flintknappers
1887). In this paper he drew attention to the of Brandon in England, and they concluded that
evidence of a living tradition of stoneworking in the demand for tinderflints was responsible for
this part of the Mediterranean world, and in so the survival of flintknapping in England, from
doing he followed closely in the footsteps of his prehistory to the 17th century when the demand
father, Sir John Evans, who employed eyewitness for gunflints revived the industiy and led to its
reports made by travelers to Africa, the Americas, expansion. Skertchly attempted to place the scrap
and Australia, as well as his own observations of ers, tinderflints, and gunflints from Brandon and
the Brandon gunflint knappers, as the basis for the nearby prehistoric site of Grimes Graves in a
his classification and interpretation of prehistoric series by arguing that flintknapping techniques
stone tools, weapons and ornaments in Britain remained the same over long periods of time and
(J.Evans 1872). The importance of the paper by were adapted to produce new tools as necessary.
Arthur Evans is that in it he described a bifacial
flintknapping technique of the manufacture of Recent studies have confirmed that flaked
stone tools were made and used more or less
gunflints and tinderflints ( used with iron-strike
a-lights for firemaking), which was evidently continuously in Europe from prehistory to t
unknown among contemporary European present day (Harrison 1954; Runnels 1982; For
flintknappers. et al. 1984). Stone tools were useful in wood
working, agriculture (as part of threshing sledg
Arthur and John Evans were interested in the and many other craft activities such as seal
ongoing activities of flintknappers, but they cutting,
were basketry, and ritual purposes (Stevens
also aware that the manufacture of gunflints was
1870; J.Evans 1872; Runnels 1982;). The use of
a relatively recent activity that began in the flints
earlyto strike fire, however, was one of the more

Curtis Runnels, Department of Archaeology, Boston University. 675 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 LITHIC TECHNOLOGY, vol. 19, no. 1

atedin
important uses of flaked stone tools at least by repeated percussion, and are found in
Europe in the historical period, yet this artifact
Neolithic and Bronze Age contexts. Some of these
has received almost no systematic study. pyrites were in burials with flint flakes or scrap
ers, but the use-wear patterns on the flints
themselves have not been described (J. Evans
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF 1872: 285; Perles 1977: 33-34; Clarke et cd.
IDENTIFYING FIRE MAKING 1985:174,204). Other explanations for the wo
IN THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD. pyrites are possible in the absence of exper
tal or use-wear data. For instance, the pyri
It has been claimed that hominids in Africa could have been scraped to obtain pigments
were using fire by 1.5 million years B.P. orrather than sparks, and it is not possible to be
earlier
(Gowlett etal. 1981; Clark and Harris 1985; Brian certain about these identifications without fur
and Sillen 1988). The evidence for the first use of ther information.
fire, however, remains a controversial topic (Perles
1977:28; 1987; Issac 1982), and some scholars It is by no means certain, therefore, that the
maintain that unequivocal traces of the control percussionof method of firemaking using flints
fire appear in the archaeological record struck only by against hard rocks has any great antiquity
400 thousand years, B.P. (Perles 1977:21-23; or geographic distribution. Several years of stu
1987; James 1989:9-11; Lanpo 1989:202-203). It dent experiments under my direction with
is important nevertheless to investigate the cir percussion methods have demonstrated the dif
cumstances that favored the inclusion of regularficulty of making a fire by striking flints against
and controlled production of fire into the cultural commonly available natural minerals (as opposed
repertoire, because, as Perles (1987) has noted , to the use of flints with specially prepared iron
the controlled use of fire has important behavioral strikers). It is also striking that the percussion
and cultural implications. The technical skill of method of firemaking has a veiy limited geo
firemaking, as opposed to the collecting and graphical distribution in historical times. The use
controlling of wild fire, has sometimes been con of the wooden fire drill and its many derivatives,
sidered as essential for permitting the colonization e.g., the thong fire drill, the fire saw, and the fire
of parts of Europe and Asia by early hominids, plow (Hough 1892, 1916; Harrison 1954) is much
and these ventures would certainly have been more widely distributed.
veiy dangerous without the ability to produce fire
upon demand (Hough 1916). Despite the poten Reliance upon the percussion method of
tial significance of firemaking, and the interest firemaking with a flint and pyrite appears to have
that archaeologists have in the subject, there is been confined to Europe and to countries that
surprisingly little archaeological evidence for were in contact with Europeans in the last four of
firemaking techiques. five hundred years. The examinations of the eth
nological collections of firemaking implements in
the Smithsonian Institution discussed below
IDENTIFYING TENDERFLINTS IN THE suggests that the flint and steel method was
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD introduced by Europeans to many parts of the
world in the last few centuries. The diffusion of
It is noteworthy that the oldest undisputed the European percussion method is also shown
examples of firemaking equipment are wooden
by the similarity of form of metal-strike-a-lights
fire drills from Archaic dry caves offrom thedifferent
desertcultures of European strike-a-lights
United States and Mexico (ca. 9000 B.P.; Dalley
(F. Stevens 1935; O'Dea 1964). The 19th century
1970:170; Flannery 1986:163-164). The limited European strike-a-lights, which is shaped like a
sample can nevertheless be used to argue that the re-curved bow with curled ends (Figure 1A) was
method of firemaking with a wooden drill is at the model for strike-a-lights found in non-Euro
least as old as the percussion method. pean tinderboxes (fire-making kits that include
steel, flint and tinder). Non-European tinder
Possible tinderflints and pyrite strike-a-lights boxes often have tinderflints made from English
have been described from prehistoric Europe or French flint produced by European
(Perles 1977: 33-34) where the "strike-a-lights" flintknapping techniques. Many travelers, and no
Eire pyrites with grooves or striated surfaces ere doubt some ethnographers, mistook these intro

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Runnels - Tinderflints and Flremaking In the Historical Period

duced tinderboxes for the products of native standardized sizes (as is still done by Cypriot
firemaking traditions. Why were percussion tech threshing sledge flintknappers; Pearlman 1984).
niques introduced into cultures where simpler Each flake was truncated and backed by direct
and more reliable methods using friction had retouch using the same hammer and stake tech
been employed? I cannot answer this question, nique employed at Brandon (figure 2, G; Smith
but my chief concern here is the limited distribu 1960, 1961).
tion of percussion firemaking techniques when
compared with the greater distribution of the fire A third technique is exhibited by the
drill or one of its derivatives. It is probable that the tinderflints and gunfiints made by Arthur Evans'
fire drill may be the older method of firemaking, Ioannina informant. The Ioannina flintknapper
and, while the percussion method may have been bifacially retouched simple flakes with a small
used in prehistoric Europe, it was not widely iron hammer with a narrow square nose (peen).
employed until late in the historical period. This bifacial technique was in common use in the
eastern Mediterranean, particularly in countries
The evidence for tinderflints from historical that were once part of the Ottoman Empire (Wyatt
sites is little better than that for the prehistoric
1870:587; A. Evans, 1887; Kent 1983: 23-33).
The "Ottoman," or bifacial technique, can be seen
period. The few tinderflints that have been recog
nized have not been described in detail (Ford et aL
on the specimens from Ioannina collected by
1984: 167). Ancient references (e.g., Aeneid I, Evans in 1887 and the author in 1986 (Figure 3,
174-175) and the discovery of possible strike-a C-D). Evans' example was collected before use,
lights in Roman legionary camps (e.g. Grunewald while the specimen published here illustrates
1981: 28), attest to the use of tinderflints in tinderflint use-wear, which appears as splinter
Roman times. In conclusion, it should be noted ing, crushing, and flaking on one concave edge.
that the pyrites and associated flints on Euro
pean sites, even if they are shown to be part of All three techniques are to be seen among
firemaking kits, need not be earlier in date than gunflints that were traded In Europe in the 19th
the Neolithic. centuiy, and may be found together in inventories
of gunflints as far away as the New World (Kent
1983).
THE MANUFACTURE OF
HISTORICAL FLINTS
USE-WEAR ON HISTORICAL
The difficulty with the identification of TINDERFLINTS
tinderflints in the archaeological record can per
haps be partially overcome by first establishing Despite the different techniques of man
the characteristics of tinderflints by means of the ture, it is possible that the pattern of use-
examination of historical tinderflints for which known historical tinderflints is similar. One bar
the function is not in question. The techniquesrier to the study of the development of tinderflints
used for the production of tinderflints are notinwell
the archaeological record, however, is the lack
known. The most common techniques wereof thecriteria for distinguishing tinderflints from
same as those employed in making gunflints, other
and kinds of stone tools. To take one example,
there are at least three major techniques in although flints and pyrites found together on
Europe in historical times. English tinderflints prehistoric European sites have been identified
(Table 1; e.g. Figure 2, A) were manufactured atas firemaking kits (Perles 1977:31-34), thisjudge
Brandon (Wyatt 1870; Skertchly 1879; Runnels ment is based on common sense, often derived
1982:370, nos. 27-28). At Brandon the process from the excavator's familiarity with the flint
was to first strike off large flakes or blades from a and-steel method, and is not based on any
core with an iron hammer, and then to snap the particular feature of the lithic implement. Use
blades into segments that were retouched to a wear on the pvrite strike-a-light is sometimes
specific form using a stake and an anvil, and cited as evidence of their use as part of a fire
employing a special knapping hammer with a making kit, but abrasive wear on pyrites or other
round iron head. Tinderflints produced in France, hard minerals could result from their use in
on the other hand, were made on simple flakes making pigments.
that were struck from a core in more or less

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 10 LITHIC TECHNOLOGY, vol. 19, no. 1

The first attempt to unworkable

tions to be largely identify (Hayden 1980). Astin
wear patterns was noted above,made by
the similarity of John E
some historical
He drew attention to the occurrence in Roman tinderflints to pieces esquillees raises the possi
contexts and in Medieval Saxon, Merovingian, bility that they may be tinderflints (Runnels 1985:
and Frankish graves of flints which were de 374, n. 27; 380-381).
scribed typologically as scrapers (J.Evans 1872:
254-257). He believed these scrapers to be The most recent reference to the use-wear that
tinderflints on the basis of their wear patterns.results from firemaking is found in studies of
Some of them, henoted, have an"... edge battered historical gunflints. Kent, for instance, reports
and bruised to such an extent that it can hardly that edgewear visible on small flat flint flakes from
have been the result of scraping, in the ordinaryhistorical contexts in North America is "typical" of
senseofword"(J.Evans 1872:281). Heattributed the wear produced by use as a tinderflint (Kent
this "battering and bruising" to the striking1983:36,
of fig. 2a-c).
these flints against iron pyrites to produce sparks.
He based this conclusion partly on the resem Apart from the studies already mentioned,
blance of modern F rench tinderflints to preh istoric there are today few indisputable tinderflints from
scapers and partly on his own experiments:" I archaeological contexts available to identify spe
find, moreover, that by working such a flint and cific forms of use-wear. The use-wear described
steel or briquet [French for "steel strike-a-light"] by Evans, Skertchly, Rutot, and Kent, however,
together, much the same bruising of the edge is appears to be similar, and it is possible that
produced as that apparent on some of the old tinderflint use-wear can be identified in the ar
'scrapers'" (J. Evans 1872:282-283, italics in chaeological record. A complete study of possible
original). Traces of pyrite or iron staining on the archaeological examples of tinderflints would re
edges of flints were also taken to be signs of quire microscopic inspection of ancient speci
tinderfint use (J. Evans 1872: 248). He concluded mens, chemical analysis of used edges for resi
by pointing to the probable existence of greatdues from strike-a-lights used to strike sparks,
numbers of tinderflints in the archaeological and a coherent program of experimental replica
record. tion. The author freely admits that such a program
of research lies in the future.
Sydney Skertchly (1879:36-37, 75-78) also
traced the origin of the gunflint industry at Bran It is necessary, however, to make a start in
don to the supposed prehistoric, Saxon, and such studies, and there are many examples of
Medieval production of flint strike-a-lights orhistorical tinderflints available in tinderboxes in
tinderflints. He compared the form of the Mediethnological collections that remain to be stud
eval tinderflint to Neolithic scrapers and, like ied. Historical tinderflints that were used in a
Evans, he identified the scrapers as tinderflints.variety of cultures are a good source of data on
His conclusions, however, were based on the tinderflint use-wear patterns. What experiments
resemblance of the earliest gunflint shape of1 that
have conducted over the years with students
of tinder-flints in use in his own day. He did notthat flint or obsidian flakes acquire the form
show
examine the prehistoric scrapers for tracesof ofpieces esquillees when struck against an iron
use-wear.
strike-a-light (Runnels 1985:374, n. 27). The
experimenter, however, may unconsciously at
Another attempt to identify tinderflints
tempt to createin the
such wear patterns.
archaeological record was made by A. Rutot in
1909. He suggested that the pieceTheesquiLlee,
tinderflints a tool
found in historical tinder
that usually has the form of a square piece of flint
boxes, on the other hand, were not made by
with splintered, battered, and crushed edges,
archaeologists and theywas
preserve the use-wear
a tinderflint (Brezillon 1971:288). Rutot
patterns presum
that result from firemaking. It is reason
ably based his conclusions on able
theto similarity
suppose that theof
use-wear patterns on
pieces esquillees to tinderflints that were still in
historical tinderflints may serve as a starting
use in France. Pieces esquillees, which make their point for the recognition of prehistoric tinderflints.
appearance in the Upper Paleolithic, have been
interpreted in the literature as cores or wedges, In 1985, 78 tinderflints (40 of them had little
but experiments have shown these interpreta or no use-wear) were examined in the collections

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Runnels - Tinderflints and Flremaking in the Historical Period 11

of the Smithsonian Institution. Table 1. Historical

Another eight"Tinderflints (all specimens are flint
tinderflints from tinderboxes collected in Greece, unless otherwise noted; measurements in mm.)
Cyprus, and India give a total for this study of 43
used tinderflints (Table 1). Large areas of bifacial
and invasive flaking with scattered splintering ID number** 1 th
w
Origin Notes
and crushing were noted on the edges of the
specimens. In the illustrations, one should note 376,825 33 24 10 England
particularly the overlapping and scaled appear 60,1334 15 13 6 Pennsylv.
ance of the flake scars (i.e. splintering), which is 376,815 24 22 8 England
typically found on opposed edges of the tool.The 376,799 24 21 8 England
retouched edges have steep to oblique angles. The 376,818 23 17 7 England
129,694 50 37 8 England
crushing is severe and destroys the flake scars
129,903 30 31 8 Massachusetts
nearest the edge. In morphological terms, a few of 23 17 7
"

the historical tinderflints can be classified as "

23 30 9
scrapers (Fig. 1, B), truncated pieces (Fig. 1,C), or 25 17 14
"

atypical (Fig. 2, C-F), but the majority of the

376,276 33 29 10 Scandinavia
specimens can be classified as pieces esquillees 29 25 6
(Fig. 1, D-I; 2, A-B). The dimensions of tinderflints
"
34 30 7
are variable (Table 1) ranging from 15 mm to 50
"
30 27 9
31 27
mm in length. Unused examples from France in 8
"
41 64 12
the Smithsonian Institution (cat. no. 248,000)
39
"
41 9
that were in their original wrapping paper dated 37 27 18
to 1844 range from 47 to 60 mm in length. 24 17 7
"

Tinderflints may be rectangular (Fig. 2, G), oval 30 24 5 agate

(Fig. 3, A) , or round (Fig. 3, B), but it should247,007
be 31 23 10 French
noted that the majority of the used specimens Pyrenees
have a rectilinear outline. The mean dimensions 376,807 27 25 6 France

(Table 1) show that the average tinderflint is 57,776 35 25 9 Massachusetts

24 25 10
"

square. The reason for this was noted in the

376,874 32 30 10 France
student experiments referred to above. Because
376,316 24 22 10 France
tinderflints are used to strike sparks from iron
213,755 21 19 Manila
strike-a-lights and ferrous minerals, a relatively 221,868 26 25 "Malay"
straight edge wih an acute angle is necessary to 235,145 28 27 "Malay"
effectively draw sparks from the strike-a-light (F. 25 20
Stevens 1935), and the experiments, along with 22 19 porcelain
my observations of Greek informants using flint sherd
and steel for firemaking, indicate that the user 395,631 32 21 Africa

continuously turns the flint from side-to-side and 407,696 31 22 Africa

175,354 31 31
from one face to another to find the edge most
22 24
..

suitable to use. The use-wear that results is thus

no number 24 20 10 lonnina,
bifacial, and is typically found on more than one Greece
edge, and the frequent turning from edge to edge 27 25 45
"

results in a rectilinear outline. no number 34 29 27 Nemea, Greece

no number 41 58 13 Cyprus
The presence of splintering, crushing and
M
34 31 12

macroscopic flaking on multiple edges may serve 35

"
36 10
53
"

to characterize tinderflints as a functional class. 41 12

no number 29 23 11 Nabaland, India
Additional criteria for recognizing tinderflints must
be identified. John Evans (1872) noted the pres
ence of iron particles or iron streaks from* the
The tinderboxes date to the 18th and 19th centuries.
strike-a-light on the used edges of tinderflints,
** Numbers are catalogue numbers for specimens in the
and streaks of iron remaining on the edges of of Domestic Life, the Museum of American His
Division

tinderflints, but this identification has not yet and the Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian
tory.
Institution, Washington, D.C.
been attempted.

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
12 LITHIC TECHNOLOGY, vol. 19, no. 1

Figure 1. Steel strike-a-llght (A) from Ioannlna,

centuries. All from the Smithsonian Inst
376,276; (E) 376,276; (F) 376,807); (G) 57,7

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Runnels - Ttnderfllnts and Firemaking in the Historical Period 13

Figure 2: Tinderflints (A-G) of the 18th - 20th centuries. All from the Smithsonian Institu
(A) 129,903; (B) 376,316; (C) 376,276; (D) 248,080; (E) 601,334; (F) 129,694; (G) 248,080.

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 14 LITHIC TECHNOLOGY, vol. 19, no. 1

Figure 3. Tlnderfllnts (A-B) of the 18th - 20

(A) 376,276; (B) 376,276. Nineteenth centu
A. Evans 1887; D, in author's collection).

CONCLUSIONS Neolithic period. Despite decades of research, the

Egyptian fire drills and the Archaic fire drills of
the western U.S. and Mexico remain the earliest
The replication of tinderflints and experiments
with striking sparks from ferrous minerals is a evidence for firemaking tools that
undisputable
useful next step, and future researchwe must
have, be
apart from the evidence for the use of fire
in the archaeologcial record.
directed towards the study of possible prehistoric
tinderflints and the study of minerals as strike-a
lights. For now, however, we are left with The demonstrated antiquity of wooden fire
tantalizing possibilities. In the absence
drills
of addi
may also be evidence that the fire drill
tional evidence, there is little that can be known precedes the percussion method in time. This is
for certain about the prehistory of firemaking. It a somewhat surprising conclusion, when we con
is still uncertain when the percussion method of sider that the percussion technique forfiremaking
firemaking was first practiced, and the percus with a flint and hard stone was easily discovered
sion method may be much more recent than by early humans (Hough 1892, 1916; Perles
commonly thought, perhaps no earlier than the 1977:34). Sparks are produced by chance in

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Runnels - Tlnderflints and Firemaking in the Historical Period 15

flintknapping, and this may have suggested to

REFERENCES
careful observers that there was fire in flint. The
widespread occurrence and variety of frictionBrain, C.K. and A. Slllen
1988 Evidence from the Swartkrans Cave for the
methods for firemaking, however, must be weighed
Earliest Use of Fire. Nature 336, 464-66.
against the hypothesis of the early use of percus
Brezillon, M.
sion methods {Hough 1916:259). The limitation
1971 La Denomination des Objets de Pierre
to Europe of the flint and pyrite firemaking tech Taillee. IVe supplement a Gallia Prehistoire.
nique to late prehistoric and early historic times Paris.
is evidence for a later development and limited Clarke, D.V., T.G. Cowte, and A. Foxon
diffusion of this method, and it is likely that the1985 Symbols of Power at the Time of
flint and stone method was diffused by Europe Stonehenge. H.M.S.O., Edinburgh.
Clark, J.D., and J.W. Harris
ans to many parts of the world only in the last five
centuries. 1985 Fire and Its Role in early Hominid Lifeways.
The African Archaeological Review 3, 3
27.
The evaluation of firemaking techniques in the
Dalley, G.F.
archaeological record requires careful attention
1970 "Artifacts of Wood". In Hogup Cave, C. M.
to the collection and examination of lithic and Aikens, editor, Anthropological Papers 93,
wooden artifacts that may be components of 153-186. Salt Lake City, Utah.
Evans, A.J.
firemaking tools. The discovery of carbonized
wood from fuel or the presence of hearths is1887
notOn the Flintknapper's Art in Albania. Jour
sufficient for the fire production as opposed to fire nal of the Anthropological Institute of
Great Britain and Ireland 16, 65-68.
collection and manipulation. Only the discovery
Evans, J.
of firemaking tools will allow the identification of
1872 The ancient Stone Implements, Weapons,
the place and time when firemaking was incorpo and Ornaments of Great Britain. Apple ton,
rated into our technological repertoire, and one New York.
beginning move is to learn to distinguishFlannery,
the K.V. (editor)
1986 Guild Naquitz. Archaic Foraging and early
tinderflint from myriads of other stone tools that
demand our attention. Agriculture in Oaxaca, Mexico. Academic
Press, Orlando, Florida.
Ford, S., R. Bradley, J. Hawkes, and P. Fisher
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
1984 Flint Working in the Metal Age. Oxford Jour
nal of Archaeology 3, 157-73.
Gowlett, J.A.J., J.W.K. Harris, D. Walton, and
I would like to thank the staff at the Smithsonian B.A Wood
Institution, especially Dr. Rodris Roth, and Mr. 1981 Early Archaeological Sites, Hominid Remains
JimRubenstein fortheir help in finding tinderflints and Traces of Fire from Chesowanja, Kenya.
in their cavernous storage areas. I believe I am the Nature 294, 125-29.
only person to have wanted to see these flints andGrunewald, M.
it was not easy to find them. I thank them for 1981 Die Kleinfunde des Legionslager von
Carnuntum. Wlen.
believing me when 1 said it was important to do so.
Hamilton, T.M. and K.O. Emeiy
Priscilla Murray, David Pearlman, and William 1988 Eighteenth- Century Gurflintsfrom Fort
Alexander provided specimens of tinderflints. I Michilimackinac and other Colonial Sites.
would also like to thank anonymous reviewers Archaeological Completion Report Series, 13.
who drew my attention to better ways to write this Mackinac Island State Park Commission,
paper after seeing early drafts, and 1 especially Mackinac Island, Michigan.
wish to thank Catherine Perles for her perceptiveHarrison, H.S.
criticisms, and the many undergraduate stu 1954 "Fire-making, Fuel and Lighting". In A His
dents in my class on prehistoric technology and tory of Technology, edited by C. Singer, E.J.
Holmyard, and A.R.Hall, vol 1, 216-37. Ox
culture who helped with experiments. ford University Press, Oxford.
Hayden, B.
1980 Confusion in the Bipolar World: Bashed
Pebbles and Splintered Pieces. Lithic Tech
nology 9, 2-7.

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 16 LITHIC TECHNOLOGY, vol. 19, no. 1

Hough,W. 1987 La naissance du Feu. L'Histoire 105, 28 -

1892 The Methods of Fire Making. Report of the 33.
National Museumjbr 1890,395-409. Wash Runnels, C.
ington, D.C. 1982 Flaked-Stone Artifacts In Greece during the
1916 The Distribution of Man in Relation to the Historical Period. Journal of Field Archae
Invention of Fire-making Methods. Ameri ology 9, 363-373.
can Anthrolpol ogist 18, 257-263. 1985 The Bronze-Age Flaked-Stone Industries from
Issac, G. Lerna: a Preliminary Report. Hesperia 54,
1982 Early Hominlds and Fire at Chesowanja, 357-91.
Kenya. Nature 296, 870. Skertchly, S.B.J.
James, S.R. 1879 On the Manufacture ofGunflints, the Meth
1989 Homlnid Use of Fire in the Lower and Middle ods of Excavating for Flint, the Age of
Pleistocene: a Review of the Evidence. Cur Paleolithic Man and the Connection be
rent Anthropology 30, 1-26. tween Neolithic Art and the Gur\flint
Kent, B.C. Trade. London.
1983 More on Gunilints. Historical Archaeology Smith, C.S.
17,27-40. 1960 Two 18th Century Reports on the Manufac
Lanpo, Jia ture of Gunflints in France. The Missouri
1989 On Problems of the Bejing-Man site: a Cri Archaeologist 22, 40-69.
tique of New Interpretations. Current 1961 Identification of French Gun Flints. Year
Anthropology 30, 200-205. Book of the American Philosophical Soci
Oakley, K.P. ety 1961, 419-23.
1956 Fire as a Paleolithic Tool and Weapon. Pro Stevens, E.T.
ceedings of the Prehistoric Society 21, 1870 Flint Chips, A Guide to Prehistoric Ar
36-48. chaeology. Bell and Daldy, London.
O'Dea, W.T. Stevens, F.
1964 Making Fire. London 1935 Primitive Fire Making. Antiquity9,479-481.
Pearlman, David Wyatt, J.
1984 Cypriot Threshing Sledge Flintknappers. 1870 "Manufacture ofGun Flints." In Flint Chips,
Perles, C. edited by E.T. Stevens, 578-90. London.
1977 Prehistoire du Feu. Paris

This content downloaded from 193.198.212.4 on Sat, 04 May 2019 09:19:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms