I want to see some paleo points

Here are some Ohio and Indiana paleo. Everything has a ding or is a broken piece, but I appreciate them.


A3CA4577-1C28-410B-A2A6-842FA49FA451.jpeg

This broken Flintridge base would be one of the finest if complete.

8EDE25E4-CFAD-4AE2-A5D7-498EE232BF74.jpeg

66B344BC-0B5C-40E0-ACDC-2038D89204E5.jpeg

Some Stemmed Lance and Ohio Agate Basin points. (There are a couple of non-paleo in this frame.)

D3B33D3E-A158-4A2D-B349-5FED87117B6D.jpeg

A2A935A1-C3F7-48FA-BE87-197DE8881234.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • 8E098A01-C631-4AC4-82A9-68F498D87D40.jpeg
    8E098A01-C631-4AC4-82A9-68F498D87D40.jpeg
    1.5 MB · Views: 67
Sorry for the delay. Brain dead (almost). Anyway:

DSCN0437.JPG Left to right, HIGHLY resharpened fluted (both sides) QUARTZ clovis I found in 1984, "hornstone" clovis from 2016, Palmer in Delaware River Black Flint found in 1984, Hardaway Dalton, same time frame and please tell me, big Sandy?

DSCN0441.JPG Clovis, Hardaway Dalton and Cumberland.

DSCN0442.JPG Clovis, Clovis and please let me know.

Thanks for looking. The "tan" material is the "Vera Cruz" jasper from Pennsylvania. There is a little park there, and I went with a guide a couple times to collect on private property within a few miles of the park.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN0440.JPG
    DSCN0440.JPG
    1.4 MB · Views: 67
What's the age on the Beaver Lake's and Cumberland's? We rarely get paleo around here. I have found a few early archaic also. I used to know all this stuff but my brain lost it.
 

Not to rain on anybody's parade, but it's well to note that arrowhead collectors & Dr. Gramly (who literally "wrote the book on them") (Bifaces of the Cumberland Tradition, 2012. 109 pages) diverge. He illustrates several Cumberlands in this that were just, for some reason, never fluted, or have only vestigial flutes, well short of the "1/3rd length" that the link author sets up as an earmark necessity.

Without wanting to cast further aspersions on the linked site, IMHO, it also illustrates several points as "Beaver Lakes" that aren't.

Cumberland points are thick ; Beaver Lakes are thin. Take it from there and you're on solid ground, again IMHO.

FWIW
 

Not to rain on anybody's parade, but it's well to note that arrowhead collectors & Dr. Gramly (who literally "wrote the book on them") (Bifaces of the Cumberland Tradition, 2012. 109 pages) diverge. He illustrates several Cumberlands in this that were just, for some reason, never fluted, or have only vestigial flutes, well short of the "1/3rd length" that the link author sets up as an earmark necessity.

Without wanting to cast further aspersions on the linked site, IMHO, it also illustrates several points as "Beaver Lakes" that aren't.

Cumberland points are thick ; Beaver Lakes are thin. Take it from there and you're on solid ground, again IMHO.

FWIW

Uniface all the cumberlands I have seen from here (never found one but seen one found) and around the cumberland Plateau were fluted 1/3 to almost the tip.Never saw one not fluted. Question as a joke was what came first the flute or the knapping beside the flute. I often see people call Copena articulate beaver lakes. I guess because of the base and wear.
 

FYI and for what it matters, the black point I have shown has several small basal flutes on each side, exhibits basal grinding and is thin. I used to have all this stuff memorized, really!

BTW I have I think one more to post and my late paleo to early archaic hand ax or chopper, but tomorrow.
 

Last edited:
It is now officially tomorrow. Here's the other one. I had to figure out where I put it. DSCN0447.JPG Fluted both sides, Flint Ridge, Ohio material.
 

Tn : I can't copy images from the book, but they exist, & are genuine -- like "unfluted Clovis" points do.

FWIW

 

Last edited:
I have an overstreet 9th edition that says beaver lakes are 11250 years old. Not saying they are right or wrong but thats what it says.
 

LAKE MOHAVE - PALEO TO Early Archaic 11,200 - 8500 B.P. This rough basalt point was found on a hearth / fire pit N. California
 

Attachments

  • P8242348.JPG
    P8242348.JPG
    865.6 KB · Views: 68

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Back
Top