There are no photos in the record of a Indian from the 1800's using the kind of billet I used. We can only surmise that from the kind of flake scars and platform remnants that wood was used. There is some evidence of a few possible wooden billets found in a few archeological digs. It was wood and the most under rated lithic material Joel called "some kind of leaverite" is argillite.
The secret is "There is no Secret".
Well, there might be wooden, and antler, billets. But, it is a bonafide historical fact that there were also tools used by HISTORICAL Indians, called "pitching tools", that were used to flake stone. This was documented over a span of close to a hundred years, starting with Catlin's observations from the 1830's-1840's, spanning to Sapiro's linguistic translations, in California, in the 1920's.
So, let me ask, before a person decides that an artifact is a "billet", what criteria does he need to know to make sure that it is not a "pitching tool"? Exactly what are the differences between the hypothesized "batons" introduced in Europe, in the 1930's, and the American "pitching tools", known from at least the 1830's? It is a simple question: How do flintknappers differentiate A from B?
I believe that Dr. Harry Shafer published over 100, or maybe 150, archaeological publications, over the course of his career. In his seasons of research at Colha, he uncovered tools that he labeled "billets". These tools are basal sections of antler that appear to have been used as flakers. But, Dr. Shafer was puzzled by the ends of the "billets". The ends are flattish, with a fine bevel around the shoulder. Not being content with the tentative interpretation of "billet", he went back and conducted a microscopic examination of the ends of the tool. The use wear patterns did not conform to that of a flintknapping billet (by the way, he was friends with Don Crabtree, and took him to Colha). Eventually, he concluded that the best explanation for the use wear patterns was some form of indirect percussion. So, he had to issue a redaction of his publication.
Regarding those antler tools that he found, should we *believe* that they are billets, or that they are no different than the "pitching tools" that Native American knappers were still using during the historic era? And, how does one differentiate "billet" from "pitching tool"?
