Need advice on chisel sharpening

[Benchwayze]

It's honing guides like the Eclipse that cause the deepest hollows! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Carl P]

I read an article some time ago about a furniture restorer (possibly), he used a medieval floor tile for very fine honing - I'm sure the idea would have occurred to our forbears aswell, and any possible archeaological remains might not be very obvious.

Tara a bit,

Carl

 

[bridger]

The earliest man-made stones are also prehistoric - made from fired clay and commonly known as bricks. tiles etc.
It would be inevitable that an earlier sharpener would have a go with an early brick at some point.

Hello,

The first bricks predated The Bronze Age by about 4500 years, so I don't think there was anything to sharpen in the sense we mean. Stone Age tools were chipped against bigger rocks, so again, not sharpened, but broken into shards. It is true than man made abrasives have done wondered for getting steel sharp, but I don't think there is any point harking back to the past for a president any more than it would be to compare digital radio with something prehistoric. All this has happened within a recent blink of an eye and it is all better than before. Even beloved India oilstones are newfangled modern man made composites, no less than synthetic Japanese waterstones, or scary sharp, ceramic stones or whatever. Why some are looked on as modern fads over others baffles me, we are all using them in one form or another. I've tried them all and can get them all to work, along with many natural stones. Trust me, the man made is better, so if scary sharp is the way you want to go, then go for it, it is no more faddish than any other way and can give exceptional results.

Mike

stone age sharpening included abrasion (honing) as well as flaking (chipping). tools made from material that flakes readily such as obsidian and flint were sharpened by flaking. in skilled hands flaking quickly produces an incredibly sharp edge. tools such as axes are better made from tougher stone such as basalt or jade. these require abrasion. abrasion of tough materials represents a considerably higher investment of energy than flaking and so was reserved for higher end tools- the lie nielsen version of stone tools.

neolithic peoples were well aware of the properties of the stones they used so prominently in their primary technologies. it is reasonable to surmise that in areas where stone suitable for abrasion was available they would have sought out the same, and considerable evidence exists of extensive trade routes spanning thousands of miles transporting both stone and man made materials such as pottery. one example I recall was jade from south america found in burial mounds in the eastern united states. another was high grade obsidian being traded over great distances. less durable materials like foodstuffs were doubtless involved also and likely some evidence for that exists in trash dumps, etc.

I don't know of any man made hones in the prehistoric record. on the other hand, I am not an archaeologist. I'm certain that stone age craftsmen and women would have had a much better grasp of the use and value of stone for their purposes than I. I do think it fair to surmise that in an area where good stone for honing was in short supply they would have sought some in trade, and if that were not an option they might have attempted to make some. however, it is also fair to surmise that in areas where hones were not available they would have simply not sharpened by honing. I see several problems with the idea of making a hone in the field. first, as far as I know high fired ceramics are a pretty modern thing, as in requiring temperatures as high or higher than those for smelting and alloying copper (bronze age). second, soft hones such as japanese type waterstones (and which might be made at low temperatures by skilled potters) are suitable for honing metal tools. harder stone tools would not be a good match for soft hones.