Is Bigger Better?

[undertaker]

I did some book research to try and find some new looking areas in my state. I went out last weekend with my brother and sure enough we found four fields that were sites all a mile or two of each other. Two of these very large fields were interconnected and had unbelieveable amounts of stone chips in a variety of materials. This had to be the biggest site Ive ever seen. We looked this site for about three hours and I never found a worked piece although my brother found a complete head, and a broken tip but no other worked pieces. There was evidence that this field had been search by more than one person before we arrived. These fields were turn up but not planted and were in a deep rough till state. My question is why isnt there more worked pieces? This confuses me when I find more worked pieces on small 1 arce site that has 1/4 the chips. My only conclusion is that the sites being bigger attract more people and have been walked more. I cant think of any other reason. You would think with such a massive quanity of chips their would be more worked peices overlooked.

 

[Atlantis0077]

Hey Undertaker,

This may sound a bit of a simplistic approach to your question, but you will find this to be the case....Every site is different. Like people they all have individual characteristics that will set them apart. Here for example I find sites with nothing but bird points...some that has tons of pottery and chips but no points....some with points and no pottery.....some sites have a variety of time periods.

In a large field such as you describe, sometimes there is not a concentration of artifacts because the site is spread out to begin with, and farming has shifted artifacts over a larger area still...also easy pickings such as fields are always the first hit. Many areas have artifacts covering vast areas, but are covered with trees and other overburden so you never know they are there.

There is a poster in here that has a field that produces many axes....that is a rare site indeed, but you just never know what you will find till you spend a good deal of time there. Normally you cant do a site justice by just one walk through or even looking one year. As conditions change from year to year, what you find tends to do the same.

And yes, 4 out of 5 diggers say bigger is defiantly better..... I would much rather have an 8" Dalton than a 4" one, but workmanship and stone quality also plays a part...lol

Happy Hunting,

Atlantis

 

[TreasureTales]

Bigger is not always better. Like Atlantis said, each site is different. Around where I hunt for artifacts, I can go for a hundred acres and not find a thing. Then I can go to a site about 2 miles away and find something (usually broken) almost every 20 feet or so. Don't know if the cattle have pushed the points deep in the mud with their heavy hooves or if the sage brush has covered stuff or if its been picked over previously. I do know that the best hunting was about 40-50 years ago. (Drat, always a few decades late and a 100 points short.) Which reminds me, another thing that may not be better when bigger is a mortar and pestle. I have a small set that I was told was used for mixing paint. There is no residue in the bottom, so I can't verify this, but it sure is too small for grinding acorns.

Don't give up, go back after the field has been plowed or a heavy rain and see what you can find. Good luck.

 

[jbl04410]

Undertaker, here in maine,alot has to do with the type of site it is.Some are seasonal and some are more permanent.The longer the occupation the better the chances for success.The larger villages would seem to have more artifacts being manufactured,But once farming and plows come into the picture everything beomes askew.We are currently digging a site which we have no idea of its size.So far it has produced 25 whole points.The dig area is about 20 by 20 and 2 feet deep.It originally looked as if it was a fishing camp as it was so close to water.But these were all large points for hunting.Why there were so many points found there we dont know.There have been hardly no broken pieces and it seems that most of the points were found mainly on one side of the dig.Anyway my conclusion is if they were there all the time they had more time to make stuff and loose it.........................Looker Jay

 

[steve71]

i know people that pick up every piece of flint they see.so other people wont think that ploace is a good site.keep looking.here you just got to beat the crowd.earlybird as they say.go right after it rains hard.