Clovis-point #2

[Jbenson]

This point is from TX. I’m posting it for a friend. I’ve been told this is a Clovis. It’s been reworked a few times. My question, is this a Clovis knife, point that was reworked or something else? Base and hafting region is ground. Heavy patina.

Any idea or thoughts?

Thanks

 

[Relicgrubber]

Definitely a Texas Clovis. It could have been picked up by a different culture and worked from a broke into a knife form.

 

[Jbenson]

Thx. I hear TX Clovis point are common. Is that correct?

 

[joshuaream]

Relicgrubber is on to something there.

My guess is that someone (I agree, likely a later group) might have savaged a broken/impact factured point. That’s some interesting workmanship along the heavily reworked side.

 

[joshuaream]

Thx. I hear TX Clovis point are common. Is that correct?

Big state, resource rich (in paleo times and today), combined with erosion in the west and a favorable collector conditions means that lots more have been found there than in Maine for example. But the densest Clovis concentration of Clovis sites are in other areas.

 

[newnan man]

I saw a pic once of a "notched" Clovis. A later culture had found it and notched it to haft it the way they were used to.

 

[dognose]

Interestingly enough, there is a column in the Central States Archaeological Societies journal Jan 2019 issue about a notched clovis.
A Rare Notched Base Clovis of Knife River Flint by Steven W. Vaughn

 

[Jbenson]

Can I ask the Texas folks-I’ve read that some perendales points are often exhausted into what looks like I’ve posted. Are there any things to look for between a pere and Clovis in terms of basal treatment?

 

[Jbenson]

I’ve been told that this is a Folsom. What do you think?

 

[Charl]

I’ve been told that this is a Folsom. What do you think?

I'm not an authority on the type, but Folsom points tend to be super thin, compared to Clovis.