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 in [pl. 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.