Mogi's Dade County Pair

[mogi]

These two were wanting their picture together tonight. Fossilized Smith and Beaver Lake from Dade County Missouri! Heavy minerals and patina. Beaver Lake was retrieved from a cave. B.T.W. the Smith is pushing 4 1/2 so that Beaver Lake ain't no baby!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[The Grim Reaper]

XXXX

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[mogi]

OK Experts - I will let YOU TELL ME what i have. All of the material that is shown in these pictures are from within 20 miles of each other. AND YES, it is from Missouri. All of the pieces you see were collected from my girl and i in 2 visits. I myself do not believe they heat treated that far back in accordance to the Beaver Lake, but i wasn't there. What i do know is that if you look at the wide range of material,tips,bases,pieces and whole pieces we pulled out of there you will see material that was found in plowed fields that are almost the exact color and material as the points. However i will leave it up to you - THE EXPERTS! Please, let me know what you think as i would like to know as well. I also zoomed in a little on the Beaver Lake to show some of the heaviest patina and NO BRAINER evidence that i can provide that it is DEF real. I dont care how good of a knapper and fake patina applier you are - YOU ARE NOT GOING TO MIMICK THAT!

 

[mogi]

Some of us enjoy what he posts....

Thank you my friend.

 

[mogi]

The smaller blade does look like cooked Burlington. Very nice points. FIY, Indians also cooked their rock they just did it under a fire and not in a turkey roaster like I do or a kiln.

Although if there had been a Walmart around the corner I sure they would have bartered for a roaster as it isn't as much work!!



On a side note about rock and the types of rock. I found some rock at a source spot out west that is spot on for Flintridge. Took it to the knap in at Flintridge and every one I showed it to said it was Flintridge material so I think there are rock formations across the US that produce the same rock only it goes by a regional name instead of the same name. JMHO

Thank you sir.

 

[mogi]

Very nice Mogi !

Thank you sir.

 

[mogi]

Nice ones! Great size too!

Thank you buddy!

 

[Ohio_Doug]

Mogi, I have until now refrained from commenting on your threads. I'm 46 and have been an artifact "hunter" for almost 20 years. I'm an amateur to many on this forum as some have been hunting before I was even born. That being said, you post museum quality after museum quality etc etc etc and yet you can't understand why your credibility is being questioned? Do I think the majority of the museum quality artifacts you have posted on here are genuine artifacts? No I don't, does my opinion declare your "artifacts" fake? Not at all. I'm not an expert by a long shot. But when one floods a forum with "artifacts" such as yours to many respectable hunters with decades of experience and is questioned on pieces such as yours...I think it should be expected.

 

[T.C.]

I enjoy what he posts as well. My point is, if his feelings are hurt, why continue?

He wants to gain acceptance for his finds here on TNET. I've been hunting for almost 40 years....never have bought or made any type of artifact. I've had some of my nicest pieces questioned, therefore I hardly post any of them.

 

[Backwoodsbob]

I just hope all of you guys do it legally. Most people want to show the best of their collection. And im one who likes to see them.I don't see anyone posting their worst finds. I got jars of them.lol

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[Bow Only]

That's all I asked Mogi, if it was heat treated. I never said anything about its authenticity. I'd be going back to that field every week if I had found those two points on consecutive trips. That's one heck of a field. I've had access to over 75 different sites over the years and none of them would produce what you found in that field in those two trips. Congrats on getting access to a good one.

I've seen a heat treated Simpson so odd things can happen. I've seen heavily ground Woodland points, Archaic points in sites that had no Archaic component, and even a Bolen made during Woodland times. If you've been around artifacts long enough, you'll see some anomalies.

Jon Stewart, it is common knowledge that the ability to heat treat artifacts wasn't developed until towards the end of the early Archaic period. It can be evidenced by the fact that some Sumters are heat treated and others are not.

 

[dognose]

I've had some of my nicest pieces questioned, therefore I hardly post any of them.

I can appreciate this. I too have experienced this and have refrained from posting very much.

 

[Jon Stewart]

Bow Only: for those of us that does have that, "common Knowledge" that you and others have would you cite a reference so I can read and study a bit more. I am sure others on here would like to learn more as well.

To me that is what this site is about, view, study and learn.

 

[monsterrack]

I will have to say this on the heat treating of stone. As a norm. you want find heat treated Beaver Lakes, but try this just for a thought, a NA is sitting around their fire that has been in the same spot for a few days and the heat from the fire pops open a rock, then later on they see this color stone and pick it up and knapp it. This could happen and I would say it did, but just not a lot at all. The stone in question does have a heated look, but it also could be the iron content in the stone that gives it that look. The only way a person would know for sure would be to take a piece of the raw stone and heat it to around 500-600 deg. and then compare it. All stone acts different when it is stressed in one way or another.

Mogi I'm not trying to start a argument but on your comment that there is no way anyone can apply that much patina you are wrong on that. If I can get the time I will do a reproduction with applied patina and show all the stages of the point along with some microscope photo's just to prove this, but I will do it on another post and at a later date. This is one thing that may help your posting of artifacts and most of the folks on here go by this. When you post an item most folks put all the info on that item in the post that they have like when, where(like state and county), who found it and a photo of the find when you found it is great and goes a long way. JMO

 

[Jon Stewart]

I agree monsterack. If it happened just once then one can not say it never happened.

I hope that Bow man cites his source so that it can be read and studied.

 

[Bow Only]

Bow Only: for those of us that does have that, "common Knowledge" that you and others have would you cite a reference so I can read and study a bit more. I am sure others on here would like to learn more as well.

To me that is what this site is about, view, study and learn.

I've been studying artifacts for over 35 years and have a nice library on artifacts and Native American pre-Columbian culture. I don't think I can tell you which book is best. I like Cemochechobee : Archaeology of a Mississippian Ceremonial Center on the Chattahoochee River, The Kolomoki Papers Final Report, Archaeology of the Funeral Mound, Ocmulgee, and The Lake Jackson Papers to name a few. For the topic of archaeology in general, Archaeology of Precolumbian Florida by Milanich is a good read. I could kill myself for losing the unfinished report on Waddell Mill Pond 8Ja65. I have hand written papers from Calvin Jones who literally "wrote the book" on FL ceramic typology. But you can only go so far reading about things, you need to be in the field learning. That takes time and experience.

 

[BobGuy]

OK Experts - I will let YOU TELL ME what i have. All of the material that is shown in these pictures are from within 20 miles of each other. AND YES, it is from Missouri. All of the pieces you see were collected from my girl and i in 2 visits. I myself do not believe they heat treated that far back in accordance to the Beaver Lake, but i wasn't there. What i do know is that if you look at the wide range of material,tips,bases,pieces and whole pieces we pulled out of there you will see material that was found in plowed fields that are almost the exact color and material as the points. However i will leave it up to you - THE EXPERTS! Please, let me know what you think as i would like to know as well. I also zoomed in a little on the Beaver Lake to show some of the heaviest patina and NO BRAINER evidence that i can provide that it is DEF real. I dont care how good of a knapper and fake patina applier you are - YOU ARE NOT GOING TO MIMICK THAT!View attachment 1398617View attachment 1398618View attachment 1398619View attachment 1398620View attachment 1398621View attachment 1398622View attachment 1398623View attachment 1398624View attachment 1398624View attachment 1398625

Just curious, does anyone have any comments on the additional context that Mogi provided? I don't know enough about anything to argue one way or the other but curious to know if this impacted anyone's opinion. He said it was found in a cave and then he found similar looking material in fields near by. Again, I am 100% neutral but no one has commented specifically on the similar material and, from a learning perspective, I am curious to hear what people have to say..

Thanks!

 

[Mrdigz]

Awesome!! I would be living at the site you found these at.