Clovis-need help

[Jbenson]

This was part of the “Charles Elgin” collection. Not sure who he is ( any ideas)?
Anyways a buddy of mine wants to buy it. Before he does, do you see any issues with it. Supposedly from Ohio or Ky. One thing to point out, there are no copper reminants on the base which is often a clue to a forgery. Also, the edges are dull which does not appear to be freshly knapped. There are several thick deposits (crusty layer) which from what I am told could be faked but are often stains, not thick encrustations and they are hard to remove. Appears to be oxide deposits. These are on several areas of the point. Also looks to have patina?Anyways, do you see any issues and who do you recommend to have it authenticated?
Thanks

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Jbenson]

Few more pics of same point

 

[ANTIQUARIAN]

First off, welcome to Treasure Net!

You might want to consider posting your Clovis in the artifacts forum as well... http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/north-american-indian-artifacts/

Happy Holidays to you and yours,

Dave

 

[Jbenson]

My bad-sorry about that. I’ll do that.
Thanks

 

[ToddsPoint]

I don't trust any of those "certificate of authenticity" peddlers. Find someone that has a stereo microscope and take a look. It will be pretty obvious if it is real. Real points have many different specks and stains that are absent on newly made points and can only be seen under high magnification. Gary

 

[Jbenson]

Thanks Todd. I have a 50x magnifier and there are several deposits. Some under the hinges. How long does it take for these to appear on a point? This one had several all over....

 

[A2coins]

Cool piece hope its real

 

[A2coins]

Welcome to tnet also Tommy

 

[jewelerguy]

there's so much fake everything any more, it's hard for me to trust any point as being authentic unless I found it myself

 

[Hawks88]

Welcome to tnet from Niagara Falls.

 

[Tony in SC]

I'm thinking that it may be the real, but it is knapped so coarse and crude that it would not be worth as much as a fine piece. Seek more opinions.

 

[Professor of Engineering]

Nice piece, hope its authentic!

Welcome to the forum!

 

[Reanm8er]

Welcome J, interesting issue!

Depending solely on the quality of the photos, the shaping of the item looks authentic. The knapping was well done but often artifacts of this medium come from the ground with some parts of the edge still sharp enough to cut you, even the ones found in creek beds. Also, it's fairly common to have at least a few smooth and shiny surfaces on parts of the item. It is indeed highly mineralized as if it might have been recovered from a cavern or other underground location that mineralized water could have dripped or splashed on it.

If you have it authenticated the necessary price increase might make it undesirable. If you have documentation that traces it to the Elgin Collection and some info on the collector, let it stand for itself or sell it as is.

I have to relate this story in example. My Grandfather, was an antique dealer, and found bought and sold a lot of Native artifacts. He had another dealer sell him something that wasn't authentic and wouldn't take the item back. Grandfather got himself some quartzite medium and knapped out about a coffee can of large points. He had a spring house fed from a nearby cavern and left the points in the spring box for six months. He turned them over a few times and when he fished them out they looked like they'd been in the ground for centuries. He made up some story about they're recovery and offered them in trade to the other dealer for an item he knew to be genuine. A couple of years later my Dad went with him to visit the guy's shop. He had the fake points proudly displayed in an old spool cabinet with some other artifacts. He and my Dad had a good laugh on the way home. The conclusion is, that even the knowledgeable can sometimes be duped!

Best wishes and good luck!

 

[MidMoTreasure]

This one gives me some pause. The flaking does not look like Clovis flaking. On one side, the percussion flake scars are short and the pressure flake scars are large without the fine sharpening. On the other side, there are three good, long percussion flake scars that are Clovis-like. Pressure scars are large without the fine sharpening. The base also looks odd, like it has been re-knapped recently. On some of your photos, the flake ridges look crisp and sharp - definitely not something that a 10,000 year old point would exhibit. Particularly on the side with the "pink" ear facing up, there appears to be a fresh hinge fracture in the middle of the flute channel scar.

All that said, there is a lot going right with this point. Other than the basal area, the patina is great and the flake scars are worn down like you would expect to see on a genuine point. The material is high-quality chert and it is not heat treated. The "stack" of stubborn material in the middle-bottom of the point could account for the lack of long, fine percussion flake scars in that area of the point. It also looks to have been used a bit, which can account for the lack of fine pressure flakes on the blade edges (maybe lost/tossed before it was resharpened).

I recommend using a stereoscopic microscope and inspecting that base. See if the lighter area is recent chipping or if it is something else like hafting polish. Use a dark room and a black light to reveal of the base has been chipped more recently than the rest of the point. Look for basal grinding. In my opinion, you have an authentic point, but I just cannot tell "over the interwebs" whether it has been altered.

 

[Jbenson]

Thanks MidMo! For the black light, what should I look for? What are the signs of recent chipping under a black light?

 

[MidMoTreasure]

The recently-chipped area will "glow" whereas the original ancient surface will appear dull. UV light can also reveal restored points (some talented people can take a broken point and restore it to where it looks all original). Here is a link to an excellent primer on using UV lights in artifact authentication:

(link deleted, can not post links to other treasure sites that have a forum)

​

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

The recently-chipped area will "glow" whereas the original ancient surface will appear dull. UV light can also reveal restored points (some talented people can take a broken point and restore it to where it looks all original). Here is a link to an excellent primer on using UV lights in artifact authentication:

(link deleted, can not post links to other treasure sites that have a forum)

Here is hard copy..

Detecting modern re-chipping with a UV light source....
Benefits of viewing artifacts with UV light
John F. Berner / EIC
Originally published in the Central States Archaeological Journal, Vol.52, No.3, pg.126


May I treat this subject as an introductory matter? The reason is there have been some inaccuracies written about the use of these beneficial tools. Ultraviolet light, UV or "blacklight" as it is generally called is not new to the collector fraternity. However, it has more recently been introduced to artifact collectors. For more than 50 years, Museum curators, art dealers (especially those who specialize in fine art painting and ceramics) have used these tools extensively.

Basically, there are two types of UV lights; hard wired appliances which require an AC source of power, and more recently DC, battery operated. I have used both types extensively and find them to be convenient. The major difference is the size of the bulbs which are available up to 24" in length with AC power cords which produce more light than typical DC battery types which are normally limited to 8 inch to 12 inch in length.

I have learned much from the treatise on black light and its application entitled "The black light book", updated 4th edition by author Mark Chervenka. This book is a standard recognized by those who specialize in antique and similar collectibles. Mark is the editor of "Antique and Collectors Reproduction news". In his book, he discusses the merits of long wave and short wave UV light. He is quick to state that using short wave light should be avoided because it will give false readings and dangerous.

Short wave is potentially dangerous as it can cause skin and eye problems from exposure. Persons who promote the use of both should be advised of such hazards. I assume this false information came from the application by professional gemologists who use both to determine the authenticity of precious stones such as emeralds and diamonds.

Long wave UV light can assist in determining a number of possible artifact problems that otherwise might be undetected by the human eye. First of all, it can be very effective in showing restoration which has become increasingly unnoticeable by today's expert restorationists. Keep in mind that all UV examinations are best conducted in total or nearly total darkness because the illumination of the black light is minimal at best. And whenever possible, the subject of your examination should be displayed upon dark black cloth which has no reflective qualities.

The use of "black light" illumination is also very effective in revealing the differences between ancient surfaces, especially on flint and chert items where modern damage or rechipping might occur.

Depending upon the type of toolstone, the modern surfaces will either fluoresce as dark or light. And in some instances, the new or modern knapped areas may fluoresce different colors from patinated areas of thousands of years of chemical and physical changes. One toolstone in particular which gives instant readings is old and new Knife River flint, sometimes called "Coffee Agate" by Westerners. This highly attractive material is found in North Dakota and elsewhere and is highly translucent. Another easily discernable material is the popular Hornstones of the midwestern states. This material will show darkly where a fresh flake has been removed from the ancient surface. The white flint of Missouri and Illinois called Burlington chert shows a similar effect as new areas also show darker than the surrounding areas which have been anciently aged. This ancient age sometimes is removed by accidental damage, other times for the purpose of rebasing or repointing slightly damaged artifacts.

Please understand that no black light examination will reveal whether an artifact in question is ancient or reproduction!

Flint is determined by archaeologists as silica rock which is translucent, and chert is that silica material which is opaque. Most chert like materials including Jaspers will present an obvious difference between old areas and new areas. However the fine chalcedonies, agates and semi-precious gem materials will seldom give up the same type of answers regarding alterations with the use of Ultraviolet light sources.

Not trying to sing an old song but it is a good time to let our readers know that the use of the "black light" has been a primary tool of many authenticators whose job is to advise collector owners whether not an artifact in question has been tampered with, restored, glued or obviously reworked by modern man. Restoration is usually not the major problem and in some instances may be overlooked or missed by the purveyor of the artifact.

I like to think of minor tampering as the originally harmless attempt of farmer finders to correct ancient or cultivation mistakes on artifacts. My mentor of artifacts in the 1940's did not see any harm in correcting the non-symmetrical area of his finds. After all, he was a full blooded Cherokee and considered the changes his right!

Modern rechipping, resharpening or rebasing of ancient flints is something else! It is fraud and deception of the highest form. It is no different than the counterfeiting of money. Yet, there are those who condone the action of the deceitful.

One midwestern dealer had the audacity to brag that he has enjoyed more than a million dollars in profits from fraudulent work such as rechipped flint and ground stone reproductions. It is fact that several skilled flint chippers who can skillfully rework ancient points from base to tip and back were engaged. The new work is artificially aged and the item is ready for market!

This is where a "black light" can shine brightly as it may reveal this insidious attempt of work for all to see and you to know! Thank you for listening.

​

 

[MidMoTreasure]

Sorry about that. I use that site for the reference materials; didn't even know they had a forum. At any rate, I am glad you were able to reproduce the article.

 

[Reanm8er]

Thanks Bryan for the "Voice in the Wilderness"!

And you Thunter for the hard copy. Great info!

 

[ANTIQUARIAN]

This one gives me some pause. The flaking does not look like Clovis flaking. On one side, the percussion flake scars are short and the pressure flake scars are large without the fine sharpening. On the other side, there are three good, long percussion flake scars that are Clovis-like. Pressure scars are large without the fine sharpening. The base also looks odd, like it has been re-knapped recently. On some of your photos, the flake ridges look crisp and sharp - definitely not something that a 10,000 year old point would exhibit. Particularly on the side with the "pink" ear facing up, there appears to be a fresh hinge fracture in the middle of the flute channel scar.

All that said, there is a lot going right with this point. Other than the basal area, the patina is great and the flake scars are worn down like you would expect to see on a genuine point. The material is high-quality chert and it is not heat treated. The "stack" of stubborn material in the middle-bottom of the point could account for the lack of long, fine percussion flake scars in that area of the point. It also looks to have been used a bit, which can account for the lack of fine pressure flakes on the blade edges (maybe lost/tossed before it was resharpened).

I recommend using a stereoscopic microscope and inspecting that base. See if the lighter area is recent chipping or if it is something else like hafting polish. Use a dark room and a black light to reveal of the base has been chipped more recently than the rest of the point. Look for basal grinding. In my opinion, you have an authentic point, but I just cannot tell "over the interwebs" whether it has been altered.

Wow! Really amazing advice Bryan!
Dave