Possiable Clovis tool & Clovis point base?

[texasriverdigger]

Possiable Clovis tool & Clovis point base?

Hi, I am new here and I hike and dig on the rivers and coast of Texas.. I have found numerous sites that I have been digging on, and I have found some really nice pieces.. I am showing one of my latest finds, I have found a couple of real nice old points.. a 2.25 Dalton and a 3.75 Long Scottsbluff Knife, I have also found all types of tools.. But this is one of the most intresting pieces I have found I think? It looks to be a Clovis type tool (chopper, scrapper)possibly salvaged from a broken attempt at making a point? what do you all think? I thank you for any time..

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Neanderthal]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

I'm sure alot of you hate my opinions by now..but..since you ask! LOL.

Unless you find that in direct association, it's hard to tell what it truely is. It's common for folks to think that anything with an overzealous thinning strike is a "flute"...or that cruder means older. Not so...at all. The majority of artifacts we find are either used to exhaustion, or discarded in lieu of something more useful. The majority of what people call "cache blades", are nothing more than preforms...often discarded for one reason or an other. When a knapper goes out to collect flint, the majority of it is crapola. A knapper must take a few whacks at some pieces to determine if the material is a suitable candidate for spalling out further. Sometimes when you start thinning a piece you will notice certain flaws that cannot be fixed...so the piece is just tossed. Often this is what we find..rejects. Look at alot of the "preforms" you find and close examination will show hidden flaws (reasons why the knapper didn't continue). This is common, especially on a "quarry site". When spalling, it doesn't take a whole awful lot to make a piece not quite so desirable: Hidden fractures, vugs, quartz inclusions, healed seams that you can't blow past..etc..etc..etc. Check ANY Knappers debris pile and you will find alot of broken or unworthy preforms that had one problem or other....modern and aboriginal alike. Usually when a collector finds one of those discards they will call it a crude tool, scraper, paleo elephant poker or something else! Sometimes they do use them as crude tools (look for use wear)...but the majority of time they are nothing more than discards.

OOOPS! Didn't mean to type this much...wow..got on another rant.

 

[texasriverdigger]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

I thank you for your oppionion.. I live on the coast and there is no known quarry or stone supply anywhere close to here, any stone or rock they would have used would have had to be brought in or found washed up on the beach. I have already explained that this piece was found in context with other points and tools. This site is a old one and this site was a big one, I have found debitage scatter and piles, what I believe to be stone stock, and or possible hearth stones. I have found evidence of a central hearth with burnt and scorched stone and bone. and 60ft away I have found game balls(marbles) beads and pendants. and at another distance I have found a number of petrified bone and teeth possible Horse or camel and some that I have not been able to ID.. I have found some very unusual pieces that are easy to tell they were made but for what purpose I don't know, but there is alot we dont know..there is recorded evidence from other dig sites regarding the Geo-facts being found with other tools and points, if a stone was found that could have been used for a tool or possible point they probably would have picked it up even if it was never actually used or worked.. the possible Clovis piece above has evidence of use and wear, I have already had it looked at by a few very respected men of the field and they concur that it is possibly genuine. I plan on getting it authenticated with other pieces in the future. I am only a amatuer... Thanks again...

 

[Neanderthal]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

Nooo, don't get me wrong on this one digger. I'm NOT saying this one is a geofact, it clearly is not. It is a tool, preform or discarded attempt at something, but you can definately see the flaking reduction scars on it. I really don't see the need in you having it authenticated, as you found it yourself and there seems to be no question as to authenticity. If you're planning on having it authenticated in hopes of someone being able to identify it in a cultural affiliation..well, good luck. Anyone that can tell you with any degree of certainty that it was associated with any specific culture is blowing smoke up your wazzoo (to put it politely). My point was only to point out that we cannot always ascertain what exactly an artifact is. Not only that, for accuracy reasons we shouldn't always try...shoving them into a niche were they don't belong is doing an injustice to the archaeological record.

Where are you at in TX? You mention finding Scottie and Dalton at the same site (both early archaic by the way). The only place I know where that would even be a remote possibility in TX would be Northeast. Dalton's simply aren't known real well for TX, except for a few eastern locales. There are alot of forms that are commonly mistaken for them though (Golondrina for one).

As far as geofacts being found with artifacts...well..that's a given. I'm pretty sure they didn't clean out ALL of the rocks from their encampments. Just because something was found in a village, doesn't mean it was used by them. However, some they DID use...you have to look for the tell-tale signs of modification or usage by the aboriginals.

 

[bean man]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

Hi TRD,
If found at a paleo site, then it could be paleo. I'm kind of new to all this and don't know much, but I believe that what Matt said is right on. In fact, I'm starting to wonder if, the less good material an area has, the more unworthy perform discards there will be.
bm

 

[texasriverdigger]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

I live in Freeport TX, if you look on the map you will see that it is just west of Galveston island by 30miles.. I have worked this area for many years and I have other sites that I will be showing in time.. The one I am showing now is on the San Bernard river , it is a eroding and wheather exposed place now but that is how I was able to find these things,that has lead me to digging. I have been able to trace and research only the maps that still survive of this area when it was under french and Spanish control 200 years ago and the accuracy is in question.. It was in a prime location for them times I don't know any earlier than that. I know there is no known Clovis site in TX, but as I dig I have found it is getting older than was first thought, but at this time it is only theory.. I will be adding a bunch of nice Jasper pieces that I believe is tied to the poverty point culture, they are well ground and made from another site I am working to, but have found some nice Jasper pieces at my river site aswell, I am hoping to tie them together in time? Thanks...

 

[newnan man]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

I know there is no known Clovis site in TX,

There are in fact several Clovis sites in Texas and the one in the links is changing the way archeologist /scientists are veiwing the Clovis life style. Sounds like you have some great places to collect and please keep the pics coming in.
http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/gault/clovis.html
http://www.athenapub.com/10gault.htm

 

[texasriverdigger]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

I thank you for your impute, I to am very intrested in the Pre-Clovis and Clovis people & theory?? I hope with the computer linking our finds that at some point there will be no dought to the theory.. There is still so much to learn and figure out and it is done with a piece at a time...But I have found it difficult to find any older pros who will give any serious thought or consideration to that theory.. I think that as time goes we will find conclusive evidence that others were here before the Clovis people? We just need to keep digging for the truth.. Thanks....

 

[Neanderthal]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

We have a discussion Clovis / pre-Clovis going on in the Rock board right now. It's a very interesting topic, one that can often get heated. I think now that just about everyone would have to subscribe to the pre-clovis theory. Putting Clovis first is...well...pretty far out there. Having a pre-clovis site for archaeologists now seems to be the "in" thing, but I don't follow some of them. I'm still not convinced on the Topper or Burnham sites, but there are others that I find very plausible (Meadowcroft, Monte Verde, etc).

 

[newnan man]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool?

I agree with you Matt R. That Clovis 1st. is about washed up. A lot of finds point to stuff older than Clovis, some like Monte Verde are thousands of miles from the Bering straight. Still I don't think getting heated up helps either. Keep it fun, your posts always are interesting and on the mark. I like everyones attitude on this site as there are beginners and obvious serious collectors. No one putting anyone down.

 

[texasriverdigger]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool & Clovis point base?

WooooHoooo,I am adding this piece I found this morning on the river site... I believe it is a Clovis point base, it looks to be a reworked piece that was a better defined Clovis at one time maybe the next one will be a good one.... (finally )..... Thanks... Mike

 

[steve71]

Re: Possiable Clovis tool & Clovis point base?

i'm not to sure on clovis base but i know you can find paleo all over the tx coast this is from rockport area.i'v found 2 clovis bases 2 folsoms wish they were whole.i love them ground points