Author Topic: Looking For Identification  (Read 6267 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Looking For Identification
« on: October 21, 2013, 09:23:40 pm »
I found a point in Washington County Missouri, about a mile off Indian Creek. 
It is a little over 3.25 inches long, and 1.5 wide at the widest.  It is wider in the middle, and tapers towards the base and the tip.  It is not knapped to a center line that you can tell, some of the trenches extend from edge to edge, and the knapping is from whatever angle was needed, with no pattern attempted that can be seen.   The base is pretty crude, and if there is grinding done, it is not readily apparent.  It seems like the base is still rough on one side, and that may be grinding, but it doesn't appear to be.  There is no grinding on the edges seen at all.  One edge is straight, and the other has a pretty good curve to it.  There is some twist near the base, but the actual base is formed to align with the tip edges. 
I have tried to link pictures several times, but all that did was make my entire post go away each time.  I will include the photobucket addresses, and I can take more pictures if needed. 
The closest matches online seem to be some of the Agate Basin type points.  I would appreciate it if anyone could give me more information.  I contacted the university, and I supplied information and pictures to the person I was directed to, but have not heard anything back.  I tried joining one of the sites dedicated to arrowhead hunting, but they don't seem to want any new members.   I have read several hundred pages on the subject online, but that is just confusing the issue even more. 
Anyway, thanks in advance for any assistance offered, and here are the photobucket addresses of a picture of each side. 

http://s429.photobucket.com/user/ahnlaashock/media/lancepoint003.jpg.html
http://s429.photobucket.com/user/ahnlaashock/media/lancepoint002.jpg.html

Offline Dalton Knapper

  • Member
  • Posts: 339
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2013, 09:31:05 pm »
Looks like a preform to me and a heck of a lot like a Clovis preform.

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2013, 10:02:47 pm »
I live at the head of the valley where the Mastodon historic site is located, near St. Louis Missouri.   They have many Clovis type artifacts, and what I have does not even resemble those, but my knowledge is not enough to say more.   This one is from about 60 miles from that site, and was scooped from a creek and used as gravel on a farm road, where I found it. 
After you said Clovis preform, I examined it again.  The base is not in line with the tip either.  Is it possible this is a partially formed reject?  Rejected because of the curve in the one edge and the twist at the base? 
I took pictures of the two edges and the base and will include the addresses here.

http://s429.photobucket.com/user/ahnlaashock/media/ed3fbf1b-91c6-4c44-8c6b-93009a70afff.jpg.html
http://s429.photobucket.com/user/ahnlaashock/media/03b65a70-f7c9-411f-8aad-25e922273538.jpg.html
http://s429.photobucket.com/user/ahnlaashock/media/lancethree008.jpg.html

Offline Dalton Knapper

  • Member
  • Posts: 339
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2013, 11:11:46 pm »
I am no expert. Take it over to http://paleoplanet69529.yuku.com/forums/10 and see what folks have to say. You could also contact Dr. Juliet Morrow at the Jonesboro station of the Arkansas Archeological Survey for an opinion. Just google Arkansas Archeological Survey and look for the station archeologists. She is at Arkansas State University in Jonesboro and quite the lithics expert, especially paleo points.

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2013, 11:38:37 pm »
Thanks for the help! 
I tried to join the Arrowheadology site, but that was a bust for a week now, and all that has happened is that my password no longer works to even check if I was accepted or not.  Hopefully the site you gave me will be better! 

Offline Lobo69ss

  • Member
  • Posts: 139
  • Born 200 years too late
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #5 on: October 22, 2013, 12:25:12 am »
You`ll find quite a few people over there on the "planet" who`ll be willing to help you identify your find if possible.   I`ve met many of them in person in the past few years &  continue to be impressed with the knowledge I`ve found in them for the asking.
  You might also try looking at  http://www.projectilepoints.net   for comparison purposes.
The man who sees the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #6 on: October 22, 2013, 12:33:06 am »
I had already been all through that site, and found nothing to really hang an ID on.  One of the listed attributes of the Agate Basin in most descriptions is the lack of twist, which this one has at the base for sure. 
I made inquiries on the site recommended.  The Doctor Morrow recommendation was followed up on, and the email was returned because no such address was found.  I got the address off the Doctor's own website. 

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2013, 08:02:14 am »
Dalton Knapper, I looked at a bunch of images of Clovis material, and you are correct that it could very well be one of the points identified as Clovis.  I considered your words about it being a preform, and looked at it trying to decide if that was the case.  The knapping for the shape was completed, and it was sharpened on the edges and tip I believe.  Flakes were definitely removed to form the base. 
I believe it was completed after examining it again. 
Some of the Clovis points are very close, at least what you can tell from the images. 
I just spent a couple of hours looking at images, and I keep coming back to  the Agate Basin selections.  The shape is correct, the material is a dead ringer for many Agate Basin type points.  What seem most compelling to me, is the knapping and how it was done.  The Agate Basin stuff is the closest I have seen, but I am not even a good beginner, so it could be several of the options found here in Missouri. 

Offline mullet

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 22,889
  • Eddie Parker
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2013, 08:23:31 am »
It looks like an unfinished preform to me. The uneven edges is because of platforms that have been set up and not hit. The best way to tell a type of point and the age is by what kind of base it has. Since the base on this one has not been knotched or fluted it could be the start of anything. Fluted points being quiet old and knotched points starting around 3000BC, with small projectile(arrowhead) points the Woodland period.
Lakeland, Florida
 If you have to pull the trigger, is it really archery?

Offline Dalton Knapper

  • Member
  • Posts: 339
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2013, 10:54:07 am »
That's a good point Mullet. Really, without an archeological context or some distinguishing feature, real ID may be pretty limited. I wonder if there are associated artifacts in the area or if it was found in a creek bed or garden with no other diagnostic materials. Since you are so close to the museum, I'd drop by there and ask for contact information for their archeologist. At least they would be familiar with your area. Good luck.

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2013, 07:22:20 pm »
The two pros both said they believe it is a preform, but that it could have been used as it is.   
That is four for four saying preform. 
The base is worked to a sharp edge in the center, and is only thick at the edges and further into the piece.   
The only thing the pros said was that the work is early type. 
Oddly, under 10X magnification, the small flat area on the point appears to be deliberate.  There is an obviously worked trench forming it on one side, and it is still pretty sharp.  It looks to date from about the same time as the rest of the work.  Did any group use a small chisel tip instead of a pointy tip? 

The one side has three wide trenches that run from low on the right hand edge, at about a 45 degree angle, all the way to the other edge, higher on that side.  Then three more trenches were done lower on the left hand side, and terminate into the first of the right hand trenches.   Those six lines form at least 80 percent of that side, and the only other work on that side is at the tip and the base, which is sharp edged in the middle, but thick at each side.   I was hoping that knapping pattern would help identify the source.   The work on the other side is very much like the drawings of the knapping on some Clovis types, and does not run across the piece from edge to edge like it does on the other side.  Under magnification, there are what appear to be the remains of central percussion platforms on each side.   One of the shorter left edge trenches was obviously done by percussion, and took several attempts to finish.  The rest are pretty smooth. 
I will get back in the creek and see if I can find more evidence of any kind.   The site is near the confluence of a creek and Indian Creek, and I was out there Sunday with three women.  They did not want to get in the creek because of the stick tights and burrs this time of year.   While we were walking, I picked up a piece of very fine grained chert of a silvery gray color that looks to be as fine a knapping material as I have ever seen, short of obsidian.   One of the women with me is Anishinaabe, and she was impressed enough that she took it home with her. 
There is the confluence of two streams, abundant woodlands game, and material to make points, altho this point is not made of that material.  I believe the rest of the question lies in whether or not I do the work to find more, and if my old eyes can spot the things that are there.   
My wife says she thinks I am OCD!  I spent several hours watching video's of creek finds in place, just to try and get my eyes to begin to pick up what they are looking for!   The one pro says if I find anything else to contact her again.   The creek is short enough that I may actually be able to find the source of the nice chert, and hopefully some bigger pieces of it.   
I am a lapidary.  I can go to my workshop and produce stunning very sharp points if I choose, but I know very little about the actual practice of knapping beyond some small instruction at gem and mineral shows.   I know very little at all about knapping using primitive methods.  What little I have done was done using a heavy stick that had a metal point, and a protective hand pad.  To be able to produce the work on this piece with a hammer stone would be a remarkable talent. 
Thank you for all the help!  I assume that I will be dragging back in to ask again! 

The point was scooped from the creek in a tractor bucket of gravel, and I found it where the gravel was used to repair a wash in a farm road that crosses my property.  I am not even sure where the gravel was actually taken from the creek. 
Again, thank you for the assistance!

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2013, 07:39:11 pm »
The museum does not have an Archeologist now.  Just workers that can't tell you anything beyond prepared scripts. 

Offline JackCrafty

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 5,621
  • Sorry Officer, I was just gathering "materials".
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #12 on: October 23, 2013, 03:32:21 pm »
Dang. I missed this one.

I don't know if I can add too much to what has already been said... but I can't resist, so hear goes:  ;D

Artifacts like this are very difficult to classify even when they are found in context with finished points.  There are several reasons for this: (1) This may have been obtained in trade.  Bifaces were transported and traded over thousands of miles in permanently unfinished states.  They are called "trade blanks".  It might not have been meant to fashioned into a point at all... it would loose its trade value! (2) Most ancient preforms are much larger than the intended finished piece.  These days, with modern production methods and tools, we are accustomed to seeing preforms that are very close in size to the finished pieces.  If this is a preform, we must first determine what "stage" of the process this one comes from.  With primitive tools, a lot of mass is lost during the reduction process.  If it is a "stage 1" preform (very early shaping), the intended point may only be 15% of the mass of this piece.  Or, it may be very close to being finished.  If we don't know the stage, we really don't have any idea of the size of the intended piece.  (3)  The age is always in question with artifacts like this.  Rough bifaces were often buried, sometimes relatively deep, causing confusion and uncertainty if age is being determined by depth.  Surface finds, like this one are, impossible to date... which makes it almost impossible to classify. (4) There are many unknown uses for bifaces.  We still don't know if they were used for games, for example.  (5) And, lastly, you will rarely find two or more experts who will agree on the age or identity of rough bifaces when asked separately.  That is, if you can find any experts.

Oh yes, there is no such thing as "early" flaking or "late" flaking or whatever.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2013, 07:24:13 pm by jackcrafty »
Any critter tastes good with enough butter on it.

Patrick Blank
Midland, Texas
Youtube: JackCrafty, Allergic Hobbit, Patrick Blank

Where's Rock? Public Waterways, Road Cuts, Landscape Supply, Knap-Ins.
How to Cook It?  200° for 24hrs then 275° to 500° for 4hrs (depending on type), Cool for 12hr

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #13 on: October 24, 2013, 02:32:34 pm »
Please do not think I am arguing with you.  I don't have the knowledge to do that, and I value your input very much. 

I am not sure it was not used exactly as it is.  It is not fluted, but the base is worked to thin it to a knife edge in the center for hafting. 
The work on the tip is even more confusing, since the flat on the tip appears to be deliberate.   Hopefully I can find more artifacts in the creek that will provide more clues. 
I suspect you are right about the trade part, because of the stone used.  I have a celt that is made from stone from Central America, but was recovered in Ohio. 
The no early type is confusing, since two archeologists just told me the work is early type.  I will not pretend to know much of anything myself, because I don't.  I actually wondered if it was a discard because of the curve in the one edge and the twist in the base that makes it look so thick in the pictures. 
I have done very little knapping, but this one appears would require about half the material removed to fix the curve and the twist, if everything went perfect.  I am a lapidary, so I am very familiar with working stone, and how much goes to waste.  Turing ten carat pieces into 3 carat finished stones is normal to me.
I have looked at a few thousand heads, and own a 1300 piece collection that was left to me.  I have dozens of trade blanks, and this is nothing even remotely like them.   This piece is fully worked over the entire surface, and I am not sure how they managed the wide even troughs all  the way from edge to edge like they did.  The obvious percussion marks in the smaller troughs I do not believe could have been made by a hammer stone at all, and would almost have required indirect percussion techniques, and I found absolutely no examples of that on any of the blanks I have examined or seen online. 
In the end, it doesn't matter anyway, because I treasure it as it is. 
Makes me want to get some of my material out and try to learn to properly knap tools of my own! 
Last time I did that, I took a nodule of rainbow obsidian, and just to be safe, i used a leather welding glove.  When I struck the piece to try and drive off a workable spaul, it shattered in my hand, and completely destroyed the glove, luckily only cutting me a little bit through it in three places.  I figured if I was going to learn, I was going to need someone else as a teacher, and abandoned it for the time.  This piece has brought my interest back, and I have been watching videos for two days! 

Thank you very much for sharing your knowledge with me! 

Ahnlaashock

  • Guest
Re: Looking For Identification
« Reply #14 on: October 24, 2013, 03:12:20 pm »
These are trade blanks. 

http://s429.photobucket.com/user/ahnlaashock/media/tradeblanks002.jpg.html

The three at the left are worked on one side and then driven off the core afterwards.  I originally said bottom, but I used the wrong picture for that to be correct.  Apologies for the brain fart!
If what I found is a trade blank, it is nothing at all like the other trade blanks I have in the collection, or any of the unfinished pieces really.  That does not really mean anything, but this explains why I am resistant to saying the one I found is a blank. 
Again, discussing, not arguing! 
« Last Edit: October 24, 2013, 04:06:19 pm by Ahnlaashock »