Fluted Humbolt ?

[Trask]

One of my favorite places to "study" types is on Tony Hardie's BC Artifacts
http://www.bcartifacts.com/bcartifacts.html .....makes my wife nervous But he has a great Far West selection, premium photos, and an inventory that is forever changing.

This one surprised me. A Humbolt with a flute on one side...Is this a transitional piece? Never seen one like this..How is it different from a Black Rock Concave?

[PacificNorthWest-Relics]

Tony's dart looks like a Humboldt to me. I cannot account for the flute like channels, which could be a flute or the remains from the original spall.

I have handled a few Black Rock Concaves (not a lot mind you) and do not recall any of them being fluted - rather the concave base typically features a series of small thinning flakes. Some of my local crew and I have had heated discussions... is it an an early "Humboldt" or a BRC.

This point (now on Tony's site) is one of those tweener points. It has lightly ground lateral margins and thinning strikes along the concave base - but it has early Humboldt features. Therefore, I could see someone making the argument either way. Tony has it listed as a BRC. Steve Allely believed it was an early Humboldt.

Justice indicates there is some uncertainty as to the temporal range of BRCs - noting that points resembling BRCs were found in association with early Humboldt at the Danger Cave site. Like many of the GB early types, there is still a lot of work to be done.

David

[Trask]

David
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who has difficulty with the BRC/ Humbolt Cluster morphology..I see so much overlap in terms of character. I am a relative newbie but it deeply interests me to see devil in the details..the deeper i get into it the more confused and perplexed I become.

[KEVINSMITH]

Hey Trask! Its been awhile since I have posted anything. My summer has been crazy with work and a new house that I completly gutted by myself. I have been checking in but never seem to have time to right anything.
My life has slowed down a little and hopefully I can become a decent member on this board again. lol

This is the only BRCC I have ever handled, but from everyone who I have spoke with they have concluded BRCC. If fits the discriptions I have read to a "T". Obligue flaking, basal grinding, very thin and micro-retouch. It has thinning flakes on both faces, but is not fluted. This point has had a few heavy resharpenings. It measures 2 5/8 in length x 1 1/2 in thickness. I thought it might help a bit. I believe Mojave is a good person to help shed some light on this subject.

This is the only point I have pictures of on my work computer and have not posted in so long I just had to add somthing.

[Trask]

Kevin your Back!!!

Where did you come across that point..it's a beauty!!

I'm hoping one day Mojave will just move back to Basin Territory so he can focus on the good stuff again He has a good deal of knowledge in the area.

[TEXAS DIGGER]

dude, that piece has some sweet fluting!

[Mojave]

My two cents...
The Humboldt "problem" in the west is just like the Angostura "problem" in Texas and elsewhere. Too many variations of general concave base and/or lanceolate shaped points made for too many thousands of years that are lumped together. Personally, I think there is no connection between BR and Humboldt. I doubt one evolved from another. Some Humboldts have too many similarities with Angostura which I think is much more likely to be what Humboldt came from. BR are earlier. It is a true paleo form most similar to Goshen/Belen. I never thought of BR as being obliquely flaked like someone suggested. The pressure flakes, especially in the bottom half come perpendicular to the long axis but are kind of random in the distal half. That may be due to resharpening on the ones I've seen. There is a very rare third type we've discussed before that is thin, ground, with tapering sides but I don't see any of those here.
The first one posted by Trask is a Pinto/Humboldt with a little basal thinning. The big serrations give that away.
Based on pictures David's point could be BRCB. The flaking doesn't look typical though. Here is how you tell. Measure the max width and thickness with calipers. If the width divided by the thickness is greater than about 4.0-4.5 it means two things. 1) it does NOT conform with a vast majority of Humboldts, and 2) it DOES conform with a vast majority of BRCBs. That gets to the basic difference of how the two cultures manufactured points.
Kevin's point is a BR. How about giving us a W/T on that one?
If I get the time later I'll post some pics to show the differences.
JMHO and I could be completely wrong...

[Mojave]

This is a BRCB, W/T = 4.2

[arrow719]

.....................

[Mojave]

Here are a few concave base points that are commonly referred to as Humboldt.
1st are Pinto points...
The last is a Buchanan Eared.