Arrowheadology.com: Arrowheads, Indian Artifacts and Early Man

A Paleo Mystery from Illinois

Posted on 01. Nov, 2011 by Shannon Graham in Archeological Excavations, Artifact Finds, Flint Artifacts, Miscellaneous, Paleo, Projectile Techonolgoy, Uncategorized

We thank John Garrett, frequent Arrowheadology contributor for authoring and submitting this article for your enjoyment and comment.

A Paleo Mystery from Illinois
John Garrett, July 1, 2011

The subject of this report is an artifact that shares attributes with many late Paleo-Indian projectile points including lateral edge grinding and generally horizontal flake scars. As it is not obviously a representative example of any well-recognized point type, this artifact illustrates not only the difficulty in type-identification of early American projectile points; it also highlights the inevitable controversies among the collecting community who rely on commercial experts, or authenticators, for point identification.

The Point
Apparently found by Lena Scruby in Green County Illinois in the early 20th Century, this blade (shown in Figures 1-2) appears to be made from Burlington Chert. It is laterally ground roughly half way up from the proximal end as indicated by the arrows. Measurements are as follows:
L = 93.5 mm (3.68”)
W = 25.9 mm (1.02”)
Tmax = 8.4 mm (0.33”)

Figure 1 Both Faces of the Point

Figure 2 Proximal and Distal End Views

The Authenticator Assessments
Ben Stermer Artifact Authentication Certificate #6002:
Description: “A medium-size lanceolate point or knife with convex blade edges and a contracting base. Basal corners are pointed and the base is concave. Lateral edges are ground. Cross-section is bi-convex and flaking is by pressure. Re-sharpenings have reduced the original size of the blade.”
Type: Plainview

Jeb Taylor Certificate of Authenticity # 838:
Evaluation: Authentic
Comments: “This point does not fit into any know (sic) type; it is most similar to Beaver Lake”
Age: Late Paleo or early archaic

Dwain Rogers Relic Certificate:
“Authentic First Stage Dalton”

Discussion
This point is a very thick and slender form that shows no evidence of beveling. In terms of its width-to-thickness ratio it has a value of 3.09. This stout and lenticular cross section likely reflects a technology based to a large extent on percussion flaking. Although there is some pressure retouch, Stermer’s description of “flaking is by pressure” does not appear to be accurate. His assertion this is a Plainview is inconsistent with the descriptions of Plainview points as being made from fairly thin flake blanks struck from prepared polyhedral cores (Knudson, 1983) and that pressure flaking was the dominant method of manufacture of Plainview points with thinning from the side to produce a uniform flattened biconvex and plano-convex cross sections. (Justice 2002, p76)

Jeb Taylor’s reference to Beaver Lake points seems inconsistent with that type being characterized by its original investigators as a small thin point with bases wider than the blade. (DeJarnette, 1962)

Rogers’ assessment of a “First Stage Dalton” appears at odds with Stermer’s conclusion that “Re-sharpenings have reduced the original size of the blade.” Indeed, the apparent resharpenings of this point indicate it is not an early stage of anything. As Dalton points typically exhibit right-hand beveling and serrations as the method of resharpening (Morse, 1971) it appears very unlikely this is a Dalton.

Another Possibility
Similar points have been reported from early contexts the area defined by west central Illinois and east central Missouri including Greene County, IL called Rice Lanceolates (O’Brien and Wood, 1998). These points originally typed from the Rice Site in Missouri (Bray, 1956) have also been referred to as Searcy points in the literature (Ray et al, 2009); although the Searcy category appears to contain other variations. According to O’Brien and Wood these points are typically identified as Agate Basin points and have actually been termed “Agate Basin look-alikes (p 117). Comparing the subject artifact to the Agate Basin style, similarities are apparent.

Agate Basin Comparison
From the 171 points documented from the type site by Frison and Stanford in The Agate Basin Site: A Record of the Paleoindian Occupation of the Northwestern High Plains 1982, Agate Basin points have the following attributes: Initial shaping was Percussion flaking on 170 of 171 points (p195), flaking was done at 90 degrees to the long axis on 169 of 171 points (p195,) and with only a single exception there is no beveling or “twist” to the blade (p81.) As shown by the yellow lines in Figures 3-5, the artifact in question statistically conforms very well with the 143 Agate Basin Type site points that are complete enough to provide measurements for maximum width and thickness.

Figure 3 Agate Basin Width Distribution

Figure 4 Agate Basin Thickness Distribution

Figure 5 Agate Basin W/T Distribution

The obvious difference between this point and the Agate Basin points from the type site is the fact it has a concave base. As other Agate Basin points have been repeatedly observed to be concavely rebased, and even fluted at the Moss Agate Arroyo, Hell Gap, and Blackwater Draw sites, as well as an example excavated by Dr. H. M. Wormington in northern Colorado, (Agogino, 1969) it is clearly possible that is the case here. This also supports the theory that Agate Basin points among other thick-bodied lanceolates were rebased, or refurbished with concave bases. (Baker, 2004) As shown in Figure 6, a digitally recreated convex proximal end lends support, at least visually; to the possibility this (and Rice Lanceolates and others) are indeed Agate Basin points from the Midwest.

Figure 6 Digital Retouch to the Proximal End

Summary and Conclusions
Disagreements on Paleo-Indian projectile point typologies continue to confuse collectors and hobbyists in the US. This is particularly the case for the wide variety of general lanceolate point forms found across the landscape. Conflicting evaluations from multiple recognized authorities within the collector community potentially have the effect of polluting general knowledge among private collectors who are forced to interpret the varied opinions. These authenticators, who charge fees in exchange for “Certificates of Authenticity” or COAs which include point type identification, propagate the never-ending “lumper vs. splitter” debates that dominate the passionate world of “arrowhead collecting.” While this serves to promote public awareness of American prehistory and technologies, it also unfortunately places these authenticators in positions where their opinions are taken as ultimate and infallible truths. Recognizing the inherent flaws in this approach (out of context and commercially driven) to projectile point identification is useful to any interested party seeking knowledge on point form identification.

Agogino, George
1969 Purposeful Fluting of Agate Basin Points. Occasional Papers of New Mexico Academy of Science 1970), 13-15. presented by Calvin Smith to the New Mexico Academy of Science, October 3, 1970 at Hobbs, New Mexico.

Baker, Tony
2004 “Clovis First / Pre-Clovis Problem Revisited” http://www.ele.net/art_folsom/pre-clovis_2004/preclovis2004.htm

Bray, Robert T.
1956 The Culture-Complexes and Sequences at the Rice Site (23SN200), Stone County, Missouri. Missouri Archaeologist 18(1 & 2):47-132.

DeJarnette, David L.; Edward Kurjack, James W. Cambron
1962 “Stanfield-Worley Bluff Shelter Excavations” Journal of Alabama Archaeology 8 (1-2).

Frison, George and Dennis Stanford
1982 The Agate Basin Site: A Record of the Paleoindian Occupation of the Northwestern High Plains. Academic Press, New York

Justice, Noel D
2002 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of the Southwestern United States. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press. P 76

Knudson, Ruthann
1983 Organizational Variability in Late Paleo-Indian Assemblages. Washington State University Laboratory of Anthropology Report of Investigations No. 60

Morse, Dan F.
1971 The Hawkins Cache: A Significant Dalton Find in Northeast Arkansas. Arkansas Archaeologist 12(1):9-20

O’Brien, Michael J. and Wood, W. Raymond.
1998 The Prehistory of Missouri. University of Missouri Press.

Ray, Jack H., Neal H. Lopinot, and Edwin R. Hajic.
2009 Archaic Prehistory of the Western Ozarks of Southwest Missouri. In Archaic Societies: Diversity and Complexity Across the Midcontinent, edited by Thomas E. Emerson, Dale L. McElrath, and Andrew C. Fortier, pp. 155-198. State University of New York Press, Albany.

Related Posts

1. An Agate Basin Point from Texas
2. An Early Multi-Purpose Tool from the Great Basin
3. Possibly the Most Prolific Paleo Site; Cibilo Creek