Projectile point identification

[Lobo69ss]

  I don`t know it this is the best place to post this, but if it`s not a mod is welcome to move it to the correct spot.
  I`ve found a site that has a nice feature where you can find point & projectile info.  You can find by area found,
shape, or regional types.  My typology isn`t the greatest & this site`s been a lot of help to me in learning what I
can expect to find around my area, maybe it`ll help others as well.
  http://www.projectilepoints.net/ProjectilePointSearch.html.    Hope this helps someone out there.
   
                            Tim/Lobo

[Jaeger]

Thanks for the site  evidently the point type is called a stanly that I found the most of here where I live in Ky.

[cowboy]

Theirs also some good books out there. The one I have is Overstreet ID and price guide. Their are others out there but I haven't looked at em.

[Newbow]

Good site.  Thanks.  Pair Projectilepoints.net with a book like Overstreet and you can zero down on a probable point name in a hurry.  Overstreet provides dates and numerous examples and Projectilepoints.net provides a way to rapidly narrow down the possibilities.  Handy!

[StevenT]

Great sight!  I do have a question maybe someone can answer.  I noticed on a lot of the types, the silhouette shows a shape but the examples that are provided (pic of actual points) don't look anything like the silhouette and it isn't just because a piece is missing or chipped. They just don't match up. What I am wondering is if the examples can look different because a point is given a name based on where it is found such as a specific location or place and not necessarily because of the shape.

[Bill Skinner]

The drawing is the ideal or perfect example.  When looking at the points, you are looking at points with wear, regional differences, different types of stone in the points, different tools used to make the points, different skill levels of the knappers and a whole bunch of different factors.  Bill

[arappaho]

That's a tuff question to answer, Steve, but let me make a stab at it.
I would say there is a "classic" form for most "types", but then you have individual
factors that come into play such as the ability of the knapper and types of material
used that can cause alterations to the "classic" form. Different lithic material can go
hand in hand with different geographical areas and the use of local raw materials.

Charles C. Jones Jr. wrote in "Antiquities of the Southern Indians", 1873,
" It is hardly proper, however, to pursue this attempt at classification any further.
Were we to note all the varieties which suggest themselves, we would be led into a
multiplicity of illustrations which would do little more than represent the individual
skill and fancies of the respective workmen, the various casualties to which these
implements have been subjected during the process of manufacture and subsequent use,
and the modifications of form consequent thereupon."

Geographical names may represent a "core area" of distribution, but does not necessarily
mean that is where the first of that type was found. When Joffre Coe first used the name
"Guilford" it was for the whole Archaic and Paleo periods and all the different point types
therein. His name for the Woodland period and its' point types was "Badin". It wasn't until
after digging at Doerschuk, 1949, and discovering the sediment layered stratigraphy of
occupations, that a definition of point types was able to be attempted. And then came the
names like Morrow Mtn, Guilford, and Savannah River.

I like the above mentioned Projectile Point ID site for showing the "range" of different types,
but prefer Art Gumbus site for identification;  http://www.lithicsnet.com/

And the Coe Foundation for Archaeological Research, ( CFAR ), has recently added an
Artfacts Identification area to their website;  http://www.coe-foundation.org/
which is probably the best for the Southeastern US.

Sorry about ramblin'on but I hope this helps some.
Like I said, Steve, that's a tuff question to answer but there's two cents worth.
Joe

[StevenT]

Thanks Joe. Sounds like you know your stuff. For me, new to knapping and trying to learn what I can, the naming of different types has been a bit confusing. You and Bills explanations make a lot of sense and it does help. I will check out the sites you mentioned. Thanks for listing them as I am sure they will be a help to others as well. As always, there is a ton of knowledge on PA and that is what makes it so great. Thanks for sharing.

[Lobo69ss]

   Joe... you ARE the man when it came to your thoughts on the link that I found.  Thanks for giving me those
other sites to check out, I didn`t find those while I was crawlin` the web looking for help in idantifying the points
that I`ve recovered.
  I haven`t found a lot of points/blades, but those that I have seem to come from a wide time frame & it`s helpful
to learn the names that correspond to the era the lithics come from.  I`ve seen that some types from different areas
appear to have different names associated with them.   Can you perhaps dig into your (much deeper than my)
knowelege base & help me figure out some reason for that?  It gets confusing to see the same type of point refered
to by different names.

[arappaho]

Well, Lobo, the confused about that one make up a very large club. 
I think that's one of the main questions we are all trying to figure out. How did these similar
point type cultures relate or interact with each other?

I know there are alot of guys on this board that know a heck-of-a-lot more about this stuff
than I do, but since I don't contribute much to the flintknapping discussions, except for the
occaisional "drooling" comment, I'll ramble on here a minute.

At first the, "Same Point, Different State, Different Name" issue is confusing to the point of frustration.
Gradually tho I think you notice more and more consistent subtle differences. Whether it is because
of a difference in raw material, some technological treatment, or a subtle difference in form. Each
geographical area seems to have it's own paticular peculiarities. Now are those differences enough
to warrant another name? That probably all depends on who you talk to ie; which state they're from.

Alot of archaeologists these days don't use names for points and instead just describe their attributes.
That's a corner-notched point, or a side-notched, etc.  That is what the silhouette represents on the
Projectile ID site, ( I guess in theory anyway).
One of the hardest things for people to adjust to is the "Time-Frame-Reference" of artifacts. Was it
 1000 years ago, 5000 years ago, or 10,000 years ago. Big difference there too. The nice thing about
these different attributes is that they have a "typical" time period of occurence. Corner-notched points
would be Early Archaic. Bifurcated bases, Early to Middle Archaic, Contracting stems, Late Archaic, etc.
Ofcourse, the only thing that is always true about point identification is you can never say "always".

Learning to ID the typology in your own area is, ofcourse, the best place to start. Then you have to break
the rest of the country down into geographic areas, and I have found that if you just throw out Texas
and Florida to begin with, it's alot easier.

Joe

[Hardawaypoints]

I'll agree on the different region/ different name for similar shaped point styles.  Who really knows how far the ancient people traveled and passed on point making techniques?  It is impressive how long some point style traditions were manufactured and how short some of the intrusions into different areas were.

Every now & then you find something made from non-native material that helps prove how vast the trading network was in the ancient world. A friend in the Virginia mountains had many black obsidian points found in the field right across the road from him, yet the nearest source for that material was at least a thousand miles away. Joe & I saw a point found locally that was made from some Nellie Blue from Flint Ridge in Ohio. I think the point was found nearby in Warren County, N.C. (IIRC)

Here is a decent I.D. source from the Coe Foundation for the point types from around here with photographs of actual artifacts as examples;
http://www.coe-foundation.org/content/cspp_home.html

Hope this helps do something besides confuse things.

Jim

P.S.  I just realized that Joe posted this link way ahead of me. OOOPS!  Not my first screw up...J.C.