spear or knife?

[nose2ground]

this should be a good one for Arrapaho - the notch appears to be single on this piece - either a misformed spear point or a knife?





(sorry, did not get a chance to clean it first - we are still under a drought here)

[arappaho]

Glad to see you've been out walking some. There's no better
exercise in my book.
I'd have to say this looks like it was made to be used as a knife,
but it would probably work as a spear if you needed it to. The
hafting area is prepared to take a lot of stress from the side for
use as a knife. I'd lump it into the Sav. River period, 4000 BP,
but it could be a Morrow Mtn. 1 type, 6000 BP.

Here's one for your amusement, and maybe to illustrate a point.
( pun intended). And I want you to start finding some like this!



This is the only one I have in my collection that I haven't a clue
about, but I'm 99.9% sure it's modern made. The wife bought it
for me as a surprise, but when I told her I didn't think it was
authentic, I think she was the one more surprised. And I don't
think she will ever be buying me another one.
Most people I show it to agree that it is probably not authentic,
but a few people believe it is. For that reason I don't know what
else to do with it but keep it. And it is the only one I have made
from that type material which is a fossil bearing chert from
Kentucky or Tenn.
Anyway it is a good example of a spearpoint. The hafting area
is so small it wouldn't hold up long being used as a knife.
Now you know what you're looking for.

[nose2ground]

much appreciated - and will keep looking!

as for your mystery point - look up Stillwell (9000 - 7000 bp) and Warito (5500 - 4500) - it comes awful close to those 2 types. Don't suppose any of your archaeologist friends have examined it?

[arappaho]

Well, n2g, I can't find anything about the Stillwell or Warito types.
Where are they supposed to be from? The type site I use, Lithics.Net, is down.
It was on AOL Homepage and that seems to be out of business now.
I don't use the Overstreet guide to go by because I could make a point,
give it a name, and, most importantly, a PRICE$$$, and Wha-Lah, instant archaeology.

[Chigoe]

Definitely a knife..

[nose2ground]

thanks Chigoe!

as for you Joe - those 2 points are in the Overstreet guide, in the Eastern Central section. I always found it to be comprehensive as for region and point types - I never thought about counterfeiting as an issue! Very good point - guess I shall try to locate an alternate ID source.

[arappaho]

Well, East Central area fits for the material so I've been doing alittle more searching. Found the Stilwell point listed on a site that advertises in Overstreet. penbrandt.com.
And they say the type is from the kentucky area, which fits. I have not been able to find any references yet in an archaeological report, and nothing on the Warito yet.

But trying to identify a point from either of the above two mentioned sites is laughable. I have developed such a resentment toward Overstreet and such sights over the years I threw my copy of it away years ago. They have nothing to do with archaeology, infact they are a detriment in that they cause more confusion than clarity. They only want to sell you artifacts!
Is it a Kirk or a Pine Tree? A McKorkle or a LeCroy? A Morrow Mountain or a Contracting Stem Adena? And certifacates of authenticity, COA's, are just one persons opinion. Many times they get it right, and just as many times they get it wrong. Type styles can change slightly and subtlety from area to area and from material to material. These sites offer nothing but halfassed guesses on authenticity and types and have nothing at all to do with archaeology!
Please excuse my rant. And ofcourse this is just my opinion just as the above mentioned sites are offering theirs. And I am sure many of you will disagree with me. But this is why I do not buy or sell artifacts and only collect those that I have found. I know they are authentic and exactly where they come from, which are the most valuable aspects of an artifact, not how much money are they worth. I can't stand it when someone finds an artfact and the first question they ask is,"How much do think this is worth?"
These sites perpetuate this mentality and are useless for reseach or the encouragement there of. Archaeology, to me, is fascinating, and these sites reduce it to something akin to a walk thru Wal-Mart.

Absolutely nothing personal n2g. Infact thanks for the opportunity to get this off my chest.
Joe

[nose2ground]

No offense taken, and you are welcome. I myself have never been fond of "marketing" artifacts - if nothing else, it promotes looting and vandalism. I guess like most out there I had considered them to be a knowledgeable source for identifying what one had found - thanks for sharing all that info, gave me a lot to think about.

[arappaho]

Thank you again, n2g. You understood the purpose of my rant perfectly. This issue is a difficult one to define.
For the amatuer, archaeology is truly a Catch-22. There are pitifully few sites where he/she can find the answers to their questions. It is alot of work. And, unfortunately, sometimes there are no answers to be found. I have hounded the pros till they hate to see me coming and have spent years volunteering for lab work and excavations just for the opportunity to learn. Also, it has been my experience, that if you get three archaeologist in a room together, you will not get a consensus.

The other side of the coin is I do not object to the buying and selling of artifacts. I will want to start selling some of my collection one of these days. It's just when the amatuer, looking for answers, first finds Overstreets' catalog, they see and learn to put a monetary value on their artfacts and the true value is many times lost to them.

The ranting Madman will now get off his soapbox.
Thanks for understanding, Joe.