artifact collecting -

Seldom-Found Projectile Point from North Carolina’s Piedmont

Two Fountain Creek projectile points from Chatham County, North Carolina, shown above a centimeter and inch scale.

by Peter G. Murphy and Alice J. Murphy, St. Johns, Michigan

More than a hundred years of archaeological research and information garnered from well documented amateur collections have made it possible to identify and date many of the more distinctive projectile points found in North America. Over a thousand types have been described in journals and reference books. But other points, especially the less common types and those with transitional characteristics, present classification challenges even to the professional archaeologist. The two points in Fig. 1 present such a challenge. Of the 1,279 identifiable projectile points we surface-collected over a three-year period from 83 cultivated-field sites in six counties of North Carolina’s Piedmont, only two (Fig. 1) appeared to be of the Fountain Creek type first described in 1978 by Floyd Painter in The Chesopiean. He described the point as rare and estimated that fewer than 75 were known to have been found, mainly in southeastern Virginia and northeastern North Carolina.

Painter (1978) provided dimensional data for 24 examples of his proposed Fountain Creek type and illustrations of six points, but the illustrations are somewhat stylized drawings rather than photographs of actual points. Based largely on form, he believed Fountain Creek is related to, or a variant of, the Early Archaic Palmer type first described by Coe (1964) in North Carolina. In his guide to projectile points of Virginia and the Carolinas, Peck (1993) does not make reference to Fountain Creek points, but one of the three Palmer points he illustrates clearly resembles Painter’s Fountain Creek type. The same is true for one or two of the 21 Palmer points pictured in Barnard’s (1988) guide to Southeastern points.

Both of the points in Fig. 1 have Fountain Creek characteristics, but the point on the left, with the deep serrations, is most similar to Painter’s illustrations. Further, the two points in Fig. 1 are similar to six of the ten examples pictured in Overstreet (2011). Interestingly, Overstreet did not include Fountain Creek points in his 1st edition (1989), but by the 3rd edition (1993) four examples were pictured. Substantive information on the point is very limited and only a few other publications make any mention at all, among them Dragoo (1993) and Hranicky (2011). In the comprehensive survey of 30,164 identifiable North Carolina points reviewed by McReynolds (2005), Fountain Creek is not among the 35 recognized types.

The characteristics that define Fountain Creek points include 2–7 deep serrations or notches on each blade margin, a ground and slightly curved (convex) base, and length of 27–55 mm (Painter 1978). The width-to-length ratio of Fountain Creek points shown in Overstreet (2011) averages 1:2.3; our two examples average 1:2.4. The similarities between the two points in Fig. 1, found at a site in Chatham County, are somewhat subtle. Both have ground, rounded bases (unlike the straight or slightly concave bases of most Palmer points), blades with relatively straight, serrated edges, and both are made of the same type of metavolcanic stone with similar patination. The serrations are largely worn down on the smaller point.

Figure 1. Two Fountain Creek points from a site in Chatham County of the North Carolina Piedmont. The point on left is 45 mm long.

Although Painter perceived a connection between Fountain Creek and Palmer, Overstreet (2011) suggests a similarity with Kirk Stemmed points. As discussed in Murphy and Murphy (2012), Palmer and Kirk are sometimes considered to be elements of an Early Archaic complex of point types, rather than distinct entities, although Palmer is considered the earlier of the two types. The site from which we collected the points in Fig. 1 yielded a wide variety of Archaic Period points, including Palmer and Kirk. If Fountain Creek points are indeed of the Early Archaic Period, they would fall within the age range of approximately 10,000–7,000 B.P. But we have seen no record of them being found in controlled excavations with actual evidence of age or relationships to other point types. Coe (1964) shows one point with Fountain Creek traits among a group of excavated Palmers, but he represents it as just another Palmer. His Palmer points tend to fall into two basic categories; those that are fairly broad relative to their length (width-to-length ratio 1:1.3) and those that are more slender (width-to-length ratio 1:2.3). Relative to Palmer, the 24 Fountain Creek points described by Painter (1978) tend to be intermediate (1:1.8) in width-to-length ratio.

Until good examples of Fountain Creek points are found in controlled excavations of stratified sites, their age and relationship to other points, such as Palmer or Kirk, will remain speculative. Painter’s (1978) suggestion of a relationship with Palmer appears entirely valid. The points share characteristics that can make it difficult to distinguish between the two and they occur in the same region. However, until further evidence is acquired it may be most reasonable to consider Fountain Creek points as components of a Palmer-Kirk complex. It remains to be seen whether they deserve to be recognized as a separate type rather than a variant of a more established type. Whatever the case, points of the form shown in Fig. 1 are uncommon even in their apparent main region of occurrence, Virginia and North Carolina. They present engaging questions concerning their proper classification relative to other points of the Southeast.

References

Barnard, Frank K.
1988. How to Find and Identify Arrowheads and Other Indian Artifacts (Southeastern United States). F.K. Barnard, Rt. 6, Box 511, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 53 pgs.

Coe, Joffre L.
1964. The Formative Cultures of the Carolina Piedmont. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society New Series 54(5). 130 pgs.

Dragoo, Don W.
1993. Projectile Points of the Archaic Period, Eastern North America. Institute for Human History, Gloucester, Virginia. 36 pgs.

Hranicky, Wm Jack
2011. Prehistoric Projectile Points Found Along the Atlantic Coastal Plain. Universal Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida. 282 pgs.

McReynolds, Theresa E.
2005. Spatial and Temporal Patterning in the Distribution of North Carolina Projectile Points. North Carolina Archaeology 54:1-33.

Murphy Peter G. and Alice J. Murphy
2012. Palmer Points Reflect On-Going Change in the Early Archaic Southeast and Demonstrate the Complexities Inherent in Point Classification. Central States Archaeological Journal 59(3):149-151.

Overstreet, Robert M.
2011. Official Overstreet Identification and Price Guide to Indian Arrowheads. House of Collectibles. 1264 pgs.

Painter, Floyd
1978. The Fountain Creek Projectile Point. The Chesopiean 16(1-3):32-33.

Peck, Rodney M.
1993. Indian Projectile Point Types from Virginia and the Carolinas. Piedmont Archaeological Society of N.C. and S.C., Inc., 2121 Quail Drive, Harrisburg, North Carolina. 43 pgs.

The Largest Known Finished Concave Bannerstone

by C. J. O’Neill, Monroe, North Carolina

Concave humped bannerstone found near Bass Lake in Starke County, Indiana

The concave humped bannerstone found by Carl Vergin near Bass Lake in Starke County, Indiana, in 1884.

The year was 1884, and Carl Vergin was working the family gravel pit near Bass Lake in Starke County, Indiana, when he found another Indian relic. While he had gathered a good many from the pit and the surrounding area (Bass Lake, being a large, natural lake, had attracted a good many Indians over the centuries), Vergin had never seen anything like this. The smooth, green slate stone was nearly as long as his hand and was highly polished. It had a deep concavity running its length parallel to the hole that ran through it for more than six inches. There was a ridge running the length of the concavity, between the flutes.

Vergin put it with the other Indian relics, examining it from time to time but assigning it no particular worth over the other relics. Much later, when his young nephew would come over, Carl would let the boy, Karl “Bud” Master of nearby Monterey, play with it and the other relics. The boy showed a fascination for the piece.

Perhaps because of Bud Master’s interest, or perhaps for other reasons, when Vergin was invited to show his relics at the county fair in the 1930s, he put the piece back and brought over the rest the night before the fair opened. During the night, the collection was stolen. It was never recovered.

When Vergin died, his nine year old nephew inherited the bannerstone. He stored it in a box in a bedroom closet for 60 years, keeping quiet about what he calls the “family heirloom.”

Then, several months ago, he brought it to an Indian relic show and was astounded by the attention it brought. There were offers to buy, of course, but Master declined them. Finally, after months of thought, he decided to part with the piece to provide some security for his wife, Rose when he passes.

When someone sent me a picture of the piece, I realized the Masters had probably the largest, finished concave humped bannerstone known of the variety that shows parallel flutes the length of its base. Byron Knoblock, in his seminal work, “Banner-Stones of the North American Indian,” shows an unfinished example that is five and one half inches in length. Knoblock writes of his example (p. 244, No. 5) “this is the largest type specimen observed by the author.” Knoblock states that more than 50 percent of the specimens then known (his book was published in 1939) showed incomplete drilling. “These objects are exceedingly rare,” he wrote.

David Lutz, in his book “The Archaic Bannerstone,” shows examples made of limestone from Spencer County, Indiana. The largest is five inches.

The day after receiving pictures of the banner, I drove the more than 800 miles from my home in North Carolina to Monterey to purchase the piece. I’d like to express my thanks to Bud and Rose Master for allowing me to add this exemplary piece to my bannerstone collection.

Photos — Steven R. Cooper

Three views of a 6 1/4-inch concave humped bannerstone from Starke County, Indiana

BUY THIS JOURNAL

jOIN NOW WITH PAYPAL!

Membership Application
Officers and Societies
Calendar of Events

The Mississippian Spade

by Jeffery Steiner, Plymouth, Wisconsin

Large Mississippian Mill Creek chert spade from the Wickliffe Mounds cache in Ballard County, Kentucky, showing finely flaked workmanship.

Spade found in a cache near Wickliffe Mounds, in Ballard County, Kentucky. It is one of eleven found buried together, and was never utilized, as it shows no polish. It is made from Mill Creek chert and measures a fraction more than 12 inches in length. Collection of the author.

Mississippian spades are very interesting, large stone tools crafted by Mississippian artisans mainly for the purpose of digging and loosening soil for farming of corn and other crops of the time period. Hoes and spades increased productivity, allowing for the planting of extensive fields of crops such as corn. This in turn, led to more available food for those living in Mississippian villages. Certainly other uses would have been the digging of cache pits, storage pits, graves, or grubbing for roots. The spade was also a tool to soften the earth and soil for filling baskets of dirt for the mound building process.

The crops were generally tended by women of the society. The fields of the Mississippian Indians looked quite different from those we see today; beans, corn, squash, and other crops grew alongside each other. This was an efficient use of land because the corn stalks would provide shade for the lower crops and acted as supports or stakes for the beans to wind around.

Spades were made out of a variety of cherts such as Burlington, Kaolin, Crescent, and La Moine. Chert and limestone are found in the Cahokia area. In southern Illinois, Mounds and Dongola chert were used. On the outlying area of the Mississippian occupation, less desirable material like sandstone, limestone, and certain igneous and metamorphic materials were used. Note that all of these materials combined only accounted for about three percent of all known hoes and spades.

The two cherts that were most commonly used are 1. Dover chert, which is found near Stewart County, Tennessee, and 2. Mill Creek chert, the quarry being located in Union County, Illinois. More spades were made from Mill Creek chert than any other material. It is a tabular chert and one of the toughest cherts around, precisely why Mississippian agriculturists prized it. A weak chert would chip when used in the soil. Heat treated chert would chip easily, so raw Mill Creek, which was found in thinner, flatter nodules, was preferred. This raw material was so desired that some of the open pits were dug to a depth of 10-20 feet and a width from 12-40 feet. Mill Creek is found in slabs from two to five inches thick and up to two feet long and one foot wide. This made it ideal for use in the manufacturing of larger flint items. It is well known that Mississippian sites are near the present surface, so the cultivation and plowing of modern farm fields brought these large chert implements to the surface.

Spades and hoes were found in large numbers in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Their large size and shiny bits made them easy to find in fields where the early collectors and curious farmers picked them up.

Spades were found over a large area covering 200,000 square miles. Most spades were recovered in the Illinois and Missouri counties nearest to Cahokia. They have also been found as far north as the Aztalan area of southern Wisconsin. Some have been found in eastern Ohio and west to eastern Oklahoma. Spades have been found usually one at a time, rarely in a cache or large group. There are many documented caches, with the largest containing 50 notched hoes and 25 spades. The type of spades found would have a highly polished bit from use as though a coating of clear nail polish has been applied.

The polished surface is caused from the cutting of plants that form a buildup of a material called Opal Phytolith. Certain other spades show no use at all. The corn and other crops produced with these tools fed many thousands of people for well over two hundred years. One should never underestimate the ingenuity of ancient man for the invention of these unique and fascinating artifacts, because they helped immensely with the livelihood of their culture.

Flared-bit Mississippian spade made from colorful Mill Creek chert, found near Dyersburg in Crittenden County, Kentucky, with use polish along the cutting edge.

Above: A flair-Bit style spade made from a highly colorful Mill Creek chert. It was found by Mark Harris near the town of Dyersburg in Crittenden County, Kentucky. It has a high polish that extends just along the edge of the bit. It measures 9 1/4 inches in length.

Below: An extremely large Mill Creek chert spade measuring 13 3/4 inches in length, found in Livingston County, Kentucky, by Raleigh Johnson

Extremely large Mississippian spade made from Mill Creek chert, measuring 13¾ inches long and found in Livingston County, Kentucky, by Raleigh Johnson.

Chocolate Dover chert Mississippian spade (left) and gray Dover chert Mississippian spade (right), both large prehistoric agricultural tools from Tennessee.

Dover Spades – Above left: A “paddle” style spade made from a chocolate Dover chert. It exhibits a near glass-like high polish over nearly half of its surface, which measures 8 inches in length. It was found on the Ledbetter Site in Livingston County, Kentucky. Above right: A V-shaped spade of grey Dover chert found in Montgomery County, Tennessee. It too has high bit polish and also measures 8 inches in length.

Large Mississippian spade made from Mill Creek chert, recovered from the Wickliffe Mounds cache in Ballard County, Kentucky. The 11⅞-inch spade shows no evidence of use polish.

Dr. Michael Gramly wrote the definitive work on the Dover quarry, Prehistoric Lithic Industry at Dover, Tennessee, published in 1992. The back of the book featured a large spade found in the archaeological excavations at the site. In the picture above, the actual quarry site is behind the group that Dr. Gramly is speaking to. As one walks the site, large pieces of flint are everywhere. Some of the nodules are incredibly large, which would have been necessary in spade manufacturing. The Mississippians rolled the nodules quite a distance down the valley to sites where stone knappers lived and manufactured a wide variety of tools. It was obviously a large scale operation, since the ground was covered with debitage more than four feet deep in places.

A second spade from the cache found near Wickliffe Mounds, in Ballard County, Kentucky. It too shows no use polish, is made from Mill Creek chert and measures 11 7/8 inches in length.

References

Central States Archaeological Journal, 2004, Volume 51.4, pages 142-144.

Central States Archaeological Journal, 2001, Volume 58.4, page 218.

Lithic Casting Lab.

Megalithics / Flintknapper.

Join now with paypal!

Buy the Journal

Membership Application
Officers and Societies
Calendar of Events

A UNIQUE VARIETY OF “OLD COPPER” SPEAR POINT

E. J. Neiburger, Curator Emeritus
Lake County Museum, Waukegan, Illinois

Abstract

A unique form of “Old Copper” culture spear point has been identified. The “step” socketed spears are rare and identified by a significant right angle step at the junction of the spear and the tang. These artifacts show a quantum advance in metallurgical technology used by ancient North Americans.

THE OLD COPPER CULTURES

One of the rarest examples of Native American artifacts is the ones made out of copper. In the northern Midwest (Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Ontario, Canada, etc.) vast deposits of native copper, 99.9% pure, were left by retreating glaciers. Native Americans mined and collected this soft metal as early as 5000 BC. Those native groups, through time, who used this metal are lumped together as the Old Copper Culture and industry. (ref. 1,2)

Figure 1. Portion of the Hamilton “Old Copper” collection at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, showing numerous spear points.

“Drawing of Old Copper Culture copper point types, including conical, socketed, and rat-tail forms.”

Figure 2. Illustration of typical point styles of manufacture used by Native Americans.

Illustration of Old Copper Culture spear point manufacturing showing copper hammering, blade shaping, notching, annealing, and socket formation for hafting onto a wooden shaft.

Figure 3. Illustration showing the simple method of copper spear manufacture: pounding, shaping and folding.

The natives used the copper to fabricate tools and weapons (ref. 2). Though dwarfed numerically by the millions of stone artifacts made and used by prehistoric Americans, tens of thousands of copper artifacts have been found. One of the most useful products of this Old Copper industry was spear points.

The weight and impact generated by tossing a large stone spear generally cracked or shattered a stone point after one or two throws aimed at a hard object. Throwing a stone-tipped spear was destructive, thus very inefficient. The use of metal helped solve the breakage problem and was one of the primary uses for native copper. Native copper was used in the manufacture of strong, heavy, copper spear points. Thousands have been found.

There were many designs in spear point manufacture (Figure 2). These included: pencil-shaped spikes, flat leaf-shaped blades (notched or not), rat-tail blades (a leaf-shaped blade with a long, round rat-tail shaped tang), cones (like a pointed ice cream cone) and socketed spear heads (a flat blade with some type of hollow socket in the tang which received the wooden shaft). The blades differed in size, shape, weight and cross-sectional dimensions (flat, triangular, etc.).

The focus of this paper is on one particular form of socketed spear point: The Step-Socketed Point, a form of spear point (Figures 3–6).

The typical manufacturing technique for making a simple socketed spear point involves the hammering of a copper nugget, annealing (a heating technique to soften the metal and avoid cracking), and continued pounding until a flat, leaf-shaped blade is formed. Triangular notches are cut out of the opposing edges of the blade, and the sides are folded over to form a socket (tang) which surrounds approximately three-quarters of the wooden shaft. The tang connects the blade to the shaft. The blade was then ground and sharpened (Figure 3).

Most socketed spear points had their tangs on the same plane as the blade. This form, as described above, was easy to manufacture and resisted gross bending upon impact. Still there…

Enjoying this article? The best is yet to come.

Continue reading by purchasing the July 2000 issue of the Central States Archaeological Journal. This issue contains this complete article along with many other fascinating stories, research, and artifact studies from across North America.

Get Your Copy here: July 2000

Join Now with Paypal !

When you join the Central States Archaeological Society, you’ll receive four quarterly issues of the Central States Archaeological Journal each year. Every issue is packed with original articles on archaeological discoveries, artifact identification, Clovis and Paleoindian research, ancient technologies, and remarkable finds from across North America.

Become a member today and enjoy a full year of fascinating archaeology delivered right to your mailbox. Your membership also helps preserve and share our archaeological heritage for future generations.

Membership Application
Officers and Societies
Calendar of Events

A CLOVIS CAMP AT THE MARTENS SITE

Julie Morrow, Ph.D.Arkansas Archaeological Survey, Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, Arkansas

Clovis stone tools, projectile points, blades, and flint manufacturing flakes from the Martens Site in Chesterfield, Missouri, representing a Paleoindian encampment dating to approximately 13,500 years ago. — Artifacts from the Martens Site in Chesterfield, Missouri. These artifacts represent a Clovis encampment dating to approximately 13,500 years before present. They were surface collected by Richard Martens in a plowed field. Today this site is a housing development. Photos provided through the courtesy of Richard Martens.

I first learned of the Martens site in the early 1990s while researching Clovis sites in the Midwest. Rumor had it that the site had yielded fluted point manufacturing rejects and other tools suggestive of a substantial Clovis occupation. Thanks to Alan Banks, I was able to make contact with Richard Martens, who had surface collected the site since the 1960s. Toby Morrow and I spent several enjoyable weekends at Dick’s house, illustrating and measuring fluted points, end scrapers, and other tools from the Martens site.

The information recorded from the surface-collected Martens artifacts, along with those from other collections, provided many insights into Clovis stone technology (Morrow and Morrow 1999). We can learn a lot about the peopling of the New World by studying Clovis and other Early Paleoindian artifact assemblages on a continent-wide basis.

In May 1996, I attempted to contact the owner of the Martens site to get permission to conduct a test excavation. Surrounded by housing developments, the site was situated within one of the few remaining cultivated fields in suburban Chesterfield, Missouri. Unfortunately, the landowner, Mary Plant Faust, had recently passed away, and the land within which the Martens site lay was soon to be developed.

I wrote a proposal to the land development company explaining why, where, when, and how we wanted to excavate at the Martens site. The Nooning Tree Partnership graciously allowed us to excavate the site for five weeks. To prepare for the excavation, I put a call out for volunteers in the Missouri Archaeological Society Newsletter. We received an overwhelming number of phone calls and letters from people wanting to help out.

We were fortunate that Richard Martens had made a map of where he had found various Clovis and other artifacts at the Martens site. This information allowed us to focus on a two-acre area within a field of more than 80 acres. Farmer Buddy Burkhardt set aside this area for us and even came out and mowed the corn stubble when we were ready to excavate.

Within this area we excavated numerous one-by-one-meter squares. In one area of the site, corresponding to where Dick had found a number of Clovis artifacts, we recovered many artifacts far below the plow zone and at much greater depths than expected. We concentrated our efforts on this location by excavating 96 contiguous one-by-one-meter squares that we called “The Big Block.”

Although several artifacts from later time periods were found, many Clovis tools, flaking debris, and preforms were recovered. I believe the “Big Block” represented what was once a Clovis campsite. A total of 139 square meters was excavated by a crew of more than 100 volunteers. The crew included members of the Central States Archaeological Societies, Inc., the Missouri Archaeological Society, the St. Louis Singles Club, Girl Scouts, students from East Central College, and many local residents who stopped by to see what we were uncovering in the corn stubble.

Funding for the Martens site project came from many different sources. At first, it was entirely out of our own pockets. We designed a poster to help…

Enjoying this article? The best is yet to come.

Continue reading by purchasing the April 2000 issue of the Central States Archaeological Journal. This issue contains this complete article along with many other fascinating stories, research, and artifact studies from across North America.

Get your copy here: April 2000

Join Now with Paypal!

Membership Application
Officers and Societies
Calendar of Events

A Reassessment of a Significant New England Artifact

by William Moody, West Tisbury, Massachusetts

Volume 70, Number 1, January 2023

Projectile point typology has never been an exact science, nor was it ever intended to be so. Essentially, typology has been established by archaeologists to provide basic definitions and create a classification system for the purpose of separating different types of points, including the Neville projectile point, into categories that would then assist in understanding the prehistoric cultures and time-frames in which these artifacts were manufactured. It is not uncommon for both professional and avocational archaeologists to look at the various attributes of one particular projectile point and arrive at different conclusions about which typological category it should be placed in. It is truly amazing, and more than coincidental, that so many point styles often transcended many centuries without any drawings or written instructions to guide their manufacture. We have yet to understand fully how this technology was passed down from generation to generation and over such large geographic areas. Yet we use the final lithic products of their indigenous makers to suggest that this guidance did indeed take place. A reassessment os a Significant …

Figure 1. Atlantic knives from Massachusetts. Note robust straight-sided stems. Point at left is 3 ½” long (personally found).
Collection of the author.

The following information, based on current published typologies, biface morphology and careful observations, is provided in an effort to shed new light on a significant New England artifact in regards to its possible typology. Some three decades ago, the author recovered a large and very thin, stemmed biface in a farm field in Bridgewater, Massachusetts. This was, in fact, the largest intact blade the author had ever discovered.

The small section of the field where the discovery was made was situated on level ground bordering a major brook and just below a fairly high glacial esker that had been mined for gravel in earlier years. Evidence of the mining operation was apparent by the large amounts of loose gravel dispersed in the top few inches of this adjoining field. The large blade was recovered almost at the very base of the esker. It was sticking straight down into the soil with only about 1/4 of an inch of its stem corner visible above the surface, and it seems highly possible that the blade may have been pulled down from the top of the hill during the gravel removal.

Three Neville projectile points from New England, including a large stemmed Neville biface flanked by two smaller stone points. — Figure 2. The large 5 1/16” long Bridgewater biface (center) with two smaller Neville points found at same site. Note the tapered stems. All three points exhibit unifacial thinning at base of stem on reverse (personally found).
Collection of the author.

The discovery of this biface was reported in some detail in Indian Artifact Magazine (2000), and was later also pictured in Prehistoric American (2021), as well as being featured in an article for this very Journal (2022). The 5 1/16” blade was described in all three of these publications as an Atlantic implement blade, although its extreme thinness and expert craftsmanship could well argue against its use as a strictly utilitarian tool. This large knife surely would have been a prized possession of its original owner and may have even served in a ceremonial function. It was surmised that the finely crafted, pristine blade could possibly have been buried at some depth at the top of the esker and somehow, almost miraculously, managed to find its way to the bottom of the hill unbroken.

One of the final, and perhaps most important, observations that Trotta put forward, after discussing the many recoveries that he and the author both had made over the years at the Bridgewater site, was that not a single other Atlantic blade had ever been found on that site by either of them. Instead, they had in their joint collections upwards of 20 Neville points and also knew of a number of other such artifacts recovered by another collector at this site. Over a period of several decades, the author and Trotta have surface collected at a number of locations in southeastern New England. This particular Bridgewater site not only yielded a substantial number of the characteristic Neville points but also many other stone tools associated with this same Early Archaic culture. Other sites that they have had experience with over the years which included clear examples of Atlantic points revealed a different suite of tool forms that can be distinguished from the typical Neville tool kit. All this lends further credence to the identification of the large Bridgewater biface as a possible Neville artifact rather than an Atlantic implement blade. A reassessment os a Significant …

So, again, the main component at the Bridgewater site is clearly Early Archaic period, while Atlantic points are certainly Late Archaic bifaces. Corrected to actual calendar years, Atlantic blades can be temporally placed going back to around 4500 years BP and Neville points to approximately 9500 years BP. If this new assessment for the Bridgewater artifact is indeed correct, that would make a difference of some 5,000 years between its actual use by early native peoples and its modern day discovery. It would also place this artifact in the class of being one of the largest intact Neville knives yet to be recovered in New England. A reassessment os a Significant …

Point typology has long been a subject that can readily be open to debate, especially when considering one individual artifact. Yet, having previously published an article in this Journal, as well as other publications which included the earlier assumption about the named type of the Bridgewater biface, the author felt it was important now to offer this new assessment for a possible reconsideration and reclassification. A reassessment os a Significant …

References

Boudreau, Jeff
2016 A New England Typology of Native American Projectile Points. Alpha Graphics. MA.

Dincauze, Dena
1972 “The Atlantic Phase: A Late Archaic Culture in Massachusetts.” Man in the Northeast, Vol. 4:40–61.
1976 The Neville Site: 8,000 years at Amoskeag. Peabody Museum Monographs. Cambridge, MA.

Moody, William
2000 “Four Hours in the Field—Nothing, and Then….” Indian Artifact Magazine, April–June, Vol. 10:2, p. 29.
2021 Prehistoric American, Vol. LV:1, p. 27.
2022 “The Atlantic Broad Point Tradition.” Central States Archaeological Journal 69 (2): 88–90. A reassessment os a Significant …

Buy this journal

join now

From Zero to Six

Central States Archaeological Journal January 2012
by John Ray Troy, Missouri

Cahokia serrated triple notched point in situ and later in hand April 1 2010 Missouri — The Cahokia serrated triple-notched in situ on April 1, 2010.

I have been hunting Indian artifacts for over 25 years in Lincoln County Missouri. I had always heard that there was a Cahokia population here, but never had any proof of my own until last year.

I started off early in 2010 hunting a new site. One of my first finds was a small tri-notch point with the tip damaged. I just thought it to be a fluke, no big deal. As I continued to hunt the site that year, I was finding a lot of Woodland points that were in near perfect shape.

On April 1st 2010 I went out to the site, and found a broken serrated Cahokia base. Then I walked about 10 feet and surprisingly found another serrated Cahokia. As I looked down at it, I saw all the signs of it being broken too. Imagine my surprise when it turned out to be in perfect shape and super fine. I had truly found a rare G10 point!

Cahokia triplenotched projectile point found in situ April 8 2010 Lincoln County Missouri — On my hunt of April 8, 2010, I discovered a Cahokia Triplenotched. It is shown here in-situ.

I hunted the site throughout the entire year and ended up finding six Cahokia points. There were two double-notched, two different types of five-notched, one triplenotched, and a serrated triple-notched. Along with these, I found many un-notched Madison points. I think that these points are right in line with some that were found in Mound 72, at Cahokia mounds.

six Cahokia projectile points including serrated and five notched types Lincoln County Missouri — Pictured together are the six Cahokia Points found on the same site in Lincoln County, Missouri. The serrated triple-notched point is 1 ½ inches long x 5/8 of an inch wide at the base. It was found in March of 2010. The five-notched is 1 ¼ inches long and 5/8 of an inch wide. All of these points were found at a single site in East Central Missouri, about 90 miles from Cahokia Mounds.

Twenty five years of hunting and I went from zero to six! It just goes to show what can be found some 90 miles away from the mounds and further.

Join today!

buy this journal

Membership Application
Officers and Societies
Calendar of Events

Eastern Colorado: The Garden of Eden(s)

Figure 1. The 3.75-inch long Eden found by Shane Skulvik in Logan County, Colorado. It is made of Flattop Chalcedony.

by Tom Westfall, Sterling, Colorado

Central States Archaeological Journal January 2011

The Eden point is Paleoindian in origin and dates to around 9500–7600 BP. The type site is the Finley site, located in Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Other Eden sites have been discovered on the High Plains, but they are few and far between.

Eden points are considered some of the most beautiful and highly valued projectile points on the High Plains. In their unresharpened form, they are usually long and quite narrow, often made from the finest lithic materials available. These points exhibit very fine flaking to a medial ridge and have a diamond-shaped cross section.

This past year has witnessed the recovery of several nice Eden points. The first point (Figure 1) is a 3.75-inch-long Eden made of Flattop Chalcedony. This point was found by Shane Skulvik in Logan County, Colorado. There is a bit more “base” on this particular point, and several have suggested that it may be a particularly well-made Scottsbluff point similar to several found at the Finley site where both Scottsbluff and Eden points were discovered together.

Figure 2. The 2.25-inch long Eden found by Grayson Westfall in Logan County, Colorado. It is made from Knife River Flint.

My son, Grayson, found a Knife River Flint Eden point (Figure 2) in Logan County, Colorado. Knife River Flint, a lithic fairly scarce in Colorado, seems to have been favored by the aboriginal peoples for making these points. This example shows a lot of reworking and is 2.25 inches in length in its present condition. This point was found on a gravel bar on our farm along with a Scottsbluff point, two Alberta points, and a Cody ultra-thin knife.

Figure 3. The 4.25-inch long Eden found by Steve Juranek in Sedgwick County, Colorado. It is made from Knife River Flint.

Another Knife River Flint Eden point (Figure 3) was found in July 2010 by Steve Juranek in Sedgwick County, Colorado. It is 4.25 inches in length.

Generally speaking, the base/stem of an Eden point has been “ground in” and may be barely discernible. There is some speculation that very narrow Eden points have been reworked from wider points, though Job Taylor disputes this assumption. Based on his observations and examinations, Eden points appear to have only been resharpened on their tips.

Having examined a fair number of Eden points myself, I would agree with Taylor’s assertion. Furthermore, I believe that the diamond-shaped cross section made for a sturdy point that did not experience significant breakage when impacting bone or other hard substances. Most impact fractures on Eden points which I have seen have allowed for relatively easy “re-tipping.” In some cases, the tips were broken, but by removing just a few small flakes on either side of the fracture, the knapper created a serviceable point again.

Figure 4. A grouping of Eden points in the author’s collection. Materials include Niobrara Jasper (far left and far right), agatized wood, Knife River Flint, and agatized wood. The large point at the bottom is made of translucent agatized wood. The largest point is 3.5 inches long, and the smallest is 1.75 inches. Some examples (left side) may be described as “Eden-flaked” Scottsbluff points.

It is my suspicion that Scottsbluff, Alberta, Eden, and Firstview points were used somewhat interchangeably by ancient peoples. Differences may reflect personal preference, or further research may lead to a clearer understanding of how each style was most effectively used.

out of stock

join now

Membership Application
Officers and Societies
Calendar of Events

A Drilled Greenstone Southern Spatulate

by Bob Reeves Knoxville, Tennessee
Central States Archaeological Societies, October 2010 Journal

Drilled greenstone Southern spatulate found along the French Broad River in Jefferson County, Tennessee. Shown in front, reverse, and profile views, the artifact features a tapered drilled hole and refined shaping typical of rare Mississippian ceremonial pieces associated with the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex.

Way back in November of 1966, I was surface hunting along the banks of the French Broad River in Jefferson County, Tennessee when I found what I then called a ceremonial celt. It was a tremendous find, the best artifact I had ever found at the time, and still is one of my best. It is made of greenstone and is 7” long, 3 1/2” at the widest point, 1 1/8” wide across the slightly rounded poll end, and 5/8” thick. It has an 11/16” diameter hole which tapers to 5/16” where it penetrates, and is 2 7/16” across the face at the center of the hole, and the top of the hole is 3” down from the top of the poll. It is complete and with only one very small modern ding on the poll, but the prehistoric craftsman did not quite finish polishing out all the peck marks, a few of which still remain. Regardless, this is truly a rare artifact and the slight imperfections are easily overlooked.

It was not until many years later that I learned that it is one of a group of artifacts referred to as a Drilled Greenstone Southern Spatulate and is thought to be associated with the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex (SECC, also known as the Southern Cult) dating from 1200 AD on into the early contact phase of the late Mississippian period in the southeastern United States. This particular artifact is impressive for two reasons. The first is that this type artifact is rare under any circumstances, and the second is that the area from which it was found has never produced many Mississippian artifacts.

I found this in a pile of dirt next to a hole that had been dug to make a duck blind. I did look around for more artifacts, but found none. Since this is not the normal Archaic or Woodland artifact found in this area, I should have dug around some to see if it had come from a later Mississippian burial or other feature, but did not realize what I had at the time. Near where this spatulate was found, about two hundred yards from the river’s edge, a mound once stood. The bottom land around the mound had been cultivated for about one hundred years and the mound had been slowly reduced to just a low rise above the surrounding level flood plain. Then in the mid 1940’s, the Tennessee Valley Authority built the Douglas Dam and flooded the site. During low levels of the lake back in the fifties and on until the late sixties, the mound could still be seen as the highest point in the silted flood plain, maybe eighteen inches higher than the surrounding area, but by the early seventies, all vestiges of it was gone and was soon forgotten. Few people today are even aware that it once existed.

During my research of this type artifact, I happened to come across an old archaeological site survey which sheds some light on my find. In February of 1972, Dr. Major C. R. McCollough, research assistant professor for the Department of Anthropology at the University of Tennessee, conducted an archaeological survey of the area for the Tennessee Valley Authority who had proposed building a steam plant on the higher elevations above the site where the mound stood. Dr. McCollough noted mainly Woodland sites in the adjacent area of the proposed steam plant site, but there was one brief mention of some Mississippian cultural material. In his report he wrote “A ‘substructure’ (presumably Mississippian) mound (site 17Je9) and a stray find of a raptorial bird pendant were reported in the downstream end of the site.” He also mentioned “Cherokee types [of pottery shards] from the lower end of the site from an earlier site survey found by local collectors.”

That may explain this artifact being where I found it, but even with this explanation, I am left with several questions. I have talked to several local collectors who have hunted this area for years and few of them have any Mississippian artifacts other than a few pottery shards and a handful of small triangular points that might even be late Woodland types. Could that mound have actually been a Woodland structure and was misidentified? Why so few Mississippian culture artifacts from this area if the mound was indeed of Mississippian origin? Is it possible that the few artifacts that have been found were all left behind by one group of Mississippian Indians passing through the area? Possibly all of the artifacts were from one grave or cache that had been plowed out and scattered during the many years of cultivation prior to the lake being formed.

I’ll never know the answer to these questions, but the mysteries surrounding such finds is so intriguing that it will keep me hunting and collecting Indian artifacts as long as I am able to walk the fields and riverbanks.

Join Now!

Membership Application
Officers and Societies
Calendar of Events

Found a Long Time Ago

by Mike Wayland San Jose, Illinois
Central States Archaeological Journal* July 2010*

quadriconcave gorget banded slate adena artifact drilled both sides prehistoric gorget — Figure 1: The Quadriconcave Gorget of banded slate. It is drilled from both sides and measures 3 3/16 inches long by 2 1/8 inches wide.

We all have a collecting story. I’d like to share several of mine.

I have collected artifacts since grade school. As of this writing, that was more than seventy years ago. It all started on a nighttime fishing outing with my father. We went fishing for catfish on the East Fork of the Lamoine River. We would fish a bend in the river and were always lucky. I carried a miner’s carbide lamp to light the way as we returned home around 10 PM. As we were walking, I spotted a small white object in the dark soil and picked it up – my first arrowhead!

The point was in a washout. The next morning I returned to the same spot and searched for more. In all, I found 16 notched bird points. I was hooked. I later took them all to school, only to have them stolen. But that didn’t stop me and throughout my life I have searched, collected, traded and acquired all sorts of artifacts. Many of these were from my friends and neighbors.

bi concave gorget banded slate adena artifact drilled one side prehistoric gorget trapezoidal slate pendant two tone adena artifact drilled stone pendant prehistoric — Figure 2: The Trapezoidal Pendant of slate showing two shades of color. It is 3¾ inches in length and 1 ¾ inches wide.
Figure 3: The Bi-concave gorget of banded slate with the holes drilled from one side. It is 3 7/8 inches long and 2 ¾ inches wide. It’s holes are almost one inch apart.

As a younger man I loved to play baseball. It was always hot and humid in Illinois during the summer, especially where I lived in the town of Sheldon Grove. So I went to the local corner store to buy a coke. They were only a nickel then. I noticed while paying that in the cabinet at the register was a neat black stone artifact. It had thirty-five cents written on it. I had to have it right there and then. Ilearned later that it was a small adz. In 1978, I was walking the Zeke Schmidt farm. Looking down I noticed a dark form in the dirt. Bending over, I picked up an undamaged adz, and a fine one at that! Then ten years later, on the Crabtree Farm in the same county I found another fine adz, a large one made of a speckled granite.

In 1979 Douglas Wayland and Fred Aveny were hunting fields in McDonough County, Illinois. As the two of them walked across a field, Douglas picked up a fine Quadriconcave gorget. This Adena period artifact was made from a beautiful banded slate with a lighter colored area that meanders like a river on the bottom. This area is sided by a translucent brown colored material. Fred coaxed the gorget from Douglas, and I acquired it from him shortly after.

One day, Frey Aveny invited Marion Dixon,whose brother Don Dixon was the owner of Dickson Mounds, to come hunt the same site where earlier the Quadriconcave gorget had been found. It had been nearly a year since they found the gorget. Shortly after entering the field, Marion found a beautiful Bi-concave gorget. I begged him over and over to let me have it, and he finally relented. I now had two artifacts from the same site!

Ed Black farmed the land adjacent to the Mc-Donough Site, near present day Tennessee, Illinois. His neighbors often talked about his encounter with a timber rattlesnake in his farmhouse yard. One lucky day in 1980 he found a very fine and undamaged Trapezoidal Pendant. Since my father and Ed were High School friends, he allowed me to have it soon after he found it.

prehistoric stone adzes illinois tazewell county schuyler county ground stone woodworking tools — Bottom Image Group (Adzes) Upper Left: Adz from the Walt Crabtree Farm, Tazewell County, Illinois. Found in 1988. Reverse round, obverse flat, slightly longer than 6 ½ inches. Upper Right: Similar adz from Zeke Schmidt farm, Tazewell County, Illinois. Found in 1978. Reverse side round, obverse flat. 4 ¼ inches long. Lower Right: Adz from Sheldon Grove, Illinois, Schuyler County, Illinois. Acquired 1951. 3 5/8 inches long, by 2 ¼ inches wide. Reverse side round, obverse side slightly cupped. Photo Credit: Mike Karr

Every time I look at an artifact in my collection, the memory of how I acquired it comes to mind. I’m sure that’s true of every collector.

Join Now!

Membership Application
Officers and Societies
Calendar of Events

References

References

Abstract

THE OLD COPPER CULTURES

References

by Bob Reeves Knoxville, TennesseeCentral States Archaeological Societies, October 2010 Journal

by Mike Wayland San Jose, IllinoisCentral States Archaeological Journal July 2010

by Bob Reeves Knoxville, Tennessee
Central States Archaeological Societies, October 2010 Journal

by Mike Wayland San Jose, Illinois
Central States Archaeological Journal* July 2010*