My first flint point and a mystery.

CrazySlasher

Hero Member
Jul 6, 2010
734
96
SS of MA.
🥇 Banner finds
1
Detector(s) used
Minelab CTX 3030, Minelab E-Trac w/Sunray probe and 15' WoTcoil.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Sadly, both are broken. I believe the larger one is an Adena. Pretty rare where I'm from! The smaller one, I'm not sure about. I don't know if it's flint and what typology it is. Any help would appreciated.
 

Attachments

  • DSCF0058.JPG
    DSCF0058.JPG
    80.7 KB · Views: 120
  • DSCF0059.JPG
    DSCF0059.JPG
    76.3 KB · Views: 115
  • DSCF0060.JPG
    DSCF0060.JPG
    76 KB · Views: 120
Upvote 0
GTP, from regional archaeologist Curtis Hoffman's 1991 "A Handbook of Indian Artifacts from Southern New England", published by the Massachusetts Archaeological Society(MAS), p. 16: "Brewerton Eared Triangle, Late Archaic-Transitional Archaic. Basal tangs are similar to Brewerton Eared-Notched, but without the notches. More common in interior than coastal/riverine sites, and more common in New England than in adjacent New York State. It intergrades with Squibnocket Triangles; ASYMMETRICAL ONE-EARED FORMS ARE NOT UNUSUAL"(Charl-my emphasis). So, you see, it is hardly a NEW variant.
 

Last edited:
GTP, here is the description from Boudreau's 2008 guide, also put out by the MAS. BTW, I consider it the best guide specific to the 6 state New England region, especially southern New England, NOT the entire Northeast, I never said the entire Northeast. From p. 23. "Brewerton Eared Triangles have triangular or lanceolate blades. Basal tangs or 'ears' are similar to Brewerton Eared-Notched, but much less pronounced. This is due to the retention of the lowest portion of the blade edge which is widely removed in the Eared-Notched form. In some cases the ears are barely discernable. ONE EARED FORMS ARE NOT UNUSUAL(again, my emphasis). The ears may be ground. These points are always widest at the base." I cannot reproduce Jeff Boudreau's page here. Jeff earns money from the sales and I don't want to violate his copyright. One reason I consider it the best guide for my region is his high res photos can even be studied under a loupe to study the lithic matetial closer. As for my own points I posted, typology can be tough and as much an art as a science, IMHO, so feel free to call them Levannas or Madisons. But I should tell you the 3 people I consider the most experienced prehistoric archys working in RI have seen them and called them Late Archaic Brewerton Eared Triangles, single-ear form. I have collected in RI and Ma for more then 50 years. Does not make me an authority at all, but every experienced collector I have known has been familiar with this variant and found examples. Bottom line: the variant exists and has been recognized for decades, it's hardly NEW. If you cannot find any reference for these one-eared forms, I can at least provide these 2 for you. If I understand Hoffman correctly, they may not be a common variant outside southern New England, but they are certainly common enough here in my experience and that of the many collectors I have known. BTW, great frame, thanks for sharing.
 

Last edited:
GTP, I was able to find a published illustration of the single ear form. This page is taken from the late New York State Archaeologist William Ritchie's seminal 1971 publication "New York Projectile Points. A Typology and Nomenclature." Example #6 is a good one. Other examples illustrate just how barely discernable the ears can be, as in CrazySlasher's example. From this page, click "typology and nomenclature....", click Brewerton Eared Triangle, then click "view examples...."



Hmm. Direct link won't work. So try this from this page and click the links in this order: Research links-Lithics-Typology and Nomenclature for New York Projectile Points-Brewerton Eared Triangle-View examples.

http://www.connarchaeology.org/

OK, this link works and will take you to the illustration. It's the long way, but will get you there:icon_thumleft: IMO, worth seeing.
 

Last edited:
Charl, I appreciate your referencing. It shows me that with all books a person studying should pull from all to get the best from it. I have studied and met Herbert Kraft. He is the Archy who did the digs along the Delaware River and the Tocks Island Report. He has a detailed list of points from this region all carbon dated from his finds. It leads me to believe due to glacial recession that the occupation level north might have carried that point typology there. According to our area down here in PA and NJ they date from early to late. So I wonder if this has something to do with the glacial recession and the northward migration for new hunting grounds. Now this is JMHO but it seems logical in all ways with the contradicting material posted by the archys of your state and mine. Brewerton Eared are very common in my home state of NJ. That is why with all things in scientific books there is no "definite" conclusion unless there is absolute concrete fact that there is no physical way to refute the evidence. Thanks Charl for the referencing material. Very insightful.:icon_thumleft:...................................GTP(Chris)
 

Charl, I appreciate your referencing. It shows me that with all books a person studying should pull from all to get the best from it. I have studied and met Herbert Kraft. He is the Archy who did the digs along the Delaware River and the Tocks Island Report. He has a detailed list of points from this region all carbon dated from his finds. It leads me to believe due to glacial recession that the occupation level north might have carried that point typology there. According to our area down here in PA and NJ they date from early to late. So I wonder if this has something to do with the glacial recession and the northward migration for new hunting grounds. Now this is JMHO but it seems logical in all ways with the contradicting material posted by the archys of your state and mine. Brewerton Eared are very common in my home state of NJ. That is why with all things in scientific books there is no "definite" conclusion unless there is absolute concrete fact that there is no physical way to refute the evidence. Thanks Charl for the referencing material. Very insightful.:icon_thumleft:...................................GTP(Chris)

Your welcome, Chris. You made me do my homework with this conversation:icon_thumleft: What you say makes sense as well. It was enjoyable discussing this with you:unhappysmiley: Charlie
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top