FLEA Market FIND.

I  went to the  flea market today, and purchased this dovetail, it  looks  like a  good  piece.

I  paid  $100 dollars  for it. THE  guy said it  was  from  Indiana.

What does the other side look like?

thats one heck of a flea market find.you did get your moneys worth,that would fetch ALOT more than a 100 dollars.i dont want to be raining on your parade but when a piece like that is getting sold for a hundred bucks i get a little skeptical,i hope it is as authentic as it is nice to look at.

It is real nice . It looks like it is ding up pretty good on the edges, making it worth not as much . I would be careful at the flea markets . True you can get good deals if they find it theirself's and are not familiar with the trade market. Did he give you the county were the point was found? Did he find it himself? If he is a collector, he more than likely selling stuff he does not want to keep for his collection. Just some things I think about when I am purchasing points. Oh and being "papered" in my opinion does not make an artifact more valuable to me. It is just someone else's opinion on paper. Could we some some better pics by chance? You could try looking at it through a maginfying glass to get a better look at it.

It is real nice . It looks like it is ding up pretty good on the edges, making it worth not as much . I would be careful at the flea markets . True you can get good deals if they find it theirself's and are not familiar with the trade market. Did he give you the county were the point was found? Did he find it himself? If he is a collector, he more than likely selling stuff he does not want to keep for his collection. Just some things I think about when I am purchasing points. Oh and being "papered" in my opinion does not make an artifact more valuable to me. It is just someone else's opinion on paper. Could we some some better pics by chance? You could try looking at it through a maginfying glass to get a better look at it.

those dings are very minor and are probably ancient if the piece is ancient,that piece would grade a g-9 without a doubt.a g-9 dove made of killer material like that one and im guessing around 4 inches long would easily go for a grand or more not a hundred dollars.i agree with you that it may have been sold by someone unfamiliar with its value.and when it comes to papered points,well those get faked too.

Looks pretty good to me. btw: what dings?

The only thing that bothers me about the piece is the pristine condition and perfect notches, they look too good to be true. I could be totally wrong and would have to examine it in hand to give an honest opinion. If authentic with no modern retouch you did well, doves of that size, material and quality go for several times more than what you have in it.

Looks pretty good to me. btw: what dings?

looks pretty good to me too,i didnt notice any dings until smurufett said something and then i had to look real hard to see any, maybe what you may call the slightest of dings on the upper part of the blade but that is splittin hairs.looks like a freakn perfect piece to me.nothing stuck out to me about the piece other than how much was paid for it.its like someone sellin a brand new 50,000 sportscar for 10,000.just made me somewhat skeptical.maybe the seller didnt know its true value??

Nice point. I would still have it authenticated.
Flea markets in NC are full of arrows but, not one authentic. They look good but, one can tell..

Molly.

Just my observations in life, and has nothing to do with the post.

Never buy any point from a Gun Show or Flea Market.

Never seen a real one yet.

Would still like to see the other side, I see very little if any patina on this side, but that doesn't always mean a lot till it is looked at under a microsope, they can fake patina with acid.

Just  a word of caution, be very careful buying from flea markets unless you know the seller or he will give you a guarantee that if it fails authentication you get your money back, if he want I would stear clear, there are thousands of recently knapped points out there being sold as real artifacts. I have seen a lot of fakes at flea markets.....

I put  on some new pictures of the dovetail.

Sorry choo, they are too out of focus to see anything, one just like first picture you originally posted only the opposite side would be nice enough.

This is JUST MY OPINION (and I do not know how much luck you would have) but, i would ask for my money back next weekend.  It has a "washed on" patina that is commonly seen in fakes.

I've been wrong many times before, but if I had a chance to get my money back I would...  Aside from the tail, Ohio/Indiana/Northern Kentucky Dovetails have some unique design charateristics that set them apart as their own cluster, and that piece just looks like it's missing those traits.

To be a bit more specific, I don't like the notches and the way it was resharpened, but the flaking is the big red flag for me.  Look at some of the recent posts about dovetails here, specifically the doves pictured in the Flint Ridge Blades post and another post from last month called Awesome Dovertail, and you'll see really good pictures of classic eastern big Dovetail flaking.  The ancient knappers took heavier flakes that are usually wider and deeper than the flaking on later points, and fakes often have shallow more random flaking that ends up looking like a snyder point with a dovetail base.

Doves from Illinois/Missouri often have that heavy flaking, but not always.  That said, their resharpening method results in a different blade shape than that guy...

I would have the point authenticated.  It is very difficult to authenticate many points from a photo, and this is such an occasion.

I am not seeing in the photos any iron stains or deposits.  While not all genuine artifacts have them, localized iron strains and deposits are reassuring (albeit not absolutely conclusive).

artorius

I've been wrong many times before, but if I had a chance to get my money back I would...  Aside from the tail, Ohio/Indiana/Northern Kentucky Dovetails have some unique design charateristics that set them apart as their own cluster, and that piece just looks like it's missing those traits.

To be a bit more specific, I don't like the notches and the way it was resharpened, but the flaking is the big red flag for me.  Look at some of the recent posts about dovetails here, specifically the doves pictured in the Flint Ridge Blades post and another post from last month called Awesome Dovertail, and you'll see really good pictures of classic eastern big Dovetail flaking.  The ancient knappers took heavier flakes that are usually wider and deeper than the flaking on later points, and fakes often have shallow more random flaking that ends up looking like a snyder point with a dovetail base.

Doves from Illinois/Missouri often have that heavy flaking, but not always.  That said, their resharpening method results in a different blade shape than that guy...

first, due to the pic and color of the material you really cant see the flaking or resharpening on this piece atleast not on my screen,and just because it wasnt resharpened doesnt mean it isnt authentic.as far as the notches go, yea sure they are very pristine,but there is no way you can tell if they are fake unless you have a microscope and can really see  if the hinge fractures are ancient.and i didnt really want to go here but i will.the awesome dovetail post,well to be quite frank i question the featured piece in that post more than i do the dove in this one.there is absolutely nothing about that dove that looks like a dove other than the shape of the base.the flaking is NOT a typical dove flaking and the fine edge work that is typical for a classic eastern dove is not present and i have picked up more ancient ridge than most and i know ridge patina when i see it,and well there isnt any on it..and i do respectfully disagree with you on the flaking style of doves.they are not deep heavy flakes,but much more precise parrallell flaking and fine edge work.the flaking on the dove in the awesome dovetail post resembles more of what you would find on a snyders than a dove.figure that out??and since we are talking doves, you did mention blade shape, a common trait in doves is an eliptical blade and  i am having trouble finding  that shape in the awesome dovetail post.sorry that i called out your dove trevmma,i could very well be wrong. i am basing my opinion on what i have seen,found or studied and your dove  just doesnt look like an authentic one.with that said i will say (IMO) it is very difficult if not impossible to authenticate an artifact based on a not so great pic on someones computer screen.goodluck hunting.

If I spent $100 on a piece, I would have it authenticated. The papers will only add to the value of the piece, and if it fails authentication you are better off knowing now, rather then admiring as real, and displaying to ones friends what turns out to be fake.......

I bought a couple pieces from an antique store 15 years ago that turned out to be fake. I sent them in to have them authenticated, and they failed. Turned out they were authentic pieces that had been reworked recently and half of the blades were new. 

Now I will only buy from dealers that give a lifetime guarantee of authenticity.

I quit buying because of all the fakes.

One of the good things about these forums is that there is plenty of room for opinions/discussions, the bad thing is I can't pick up a piece, point at something and say this is what I'm talking about.

It's sounds like we can easily agree on a couple of things, first, patina is hard to judge from a photo and really needs to be seen in the hand.  Second, I also grew up finding mostly ridge in my fields, so we can probably agree that it is the best flint in the nation for color, quality, variety, etc.

Since we can't see the patina in the pictures, and don't even know what the material is, the only thing to go on is the story (flea market) and then looking at the way the piece was made.  I certainly can't say the piece is good or bad from the pictures, only that if I had the opportunity to get my money back I would.  I've been wrong before, but when I'm wrong it is usually a case of where I pass on a good piece vs buying a bad piece.

I have a philosophy on relics, and that is that 90% of authentic relics are made correctly, and 90% of fake relics are made incorrectly.  This gives room on both ends for odd ball ancient knappers, or technologically proficient modern knappers.  I figure combining an understanding how authentic artifacts were made (the right flaking, grinding, notching, materials, etc.), with high magnification use wear/polish analysis, and magnification of patina deposits is about the best way for me to buy relics.  

Specifically about the beautiful St. Charles/Dovetail cluster...  personally, I've never seen an authentic parallel flaked dovetail before, period.  I've seen/held a lot of high end, authentic dovetails from many collections and have owned several over the years.  Parallel flaking is typically what you find on Cody Complex pieces, Angosturas, some Plainviews, etc., it's really quite different than what you commonly see on authentic dovetails.  Elliptical shape...  The only place I've ever seen that term used was in Overstreets.  I'm not sure if they were trying to come up with a better word for excurvate when talking about shape, or if they meant to comment about lenticular cross section.  First stage doves will often be nice, wide pieces, but we've all seen many authentic narrow pieces, the shape of the blade is the first thing to go.

Most early points were made following surprisingly well defined, and well adhered to patterns, and Dovetails are classic examples of that.   Aside from the flaking that I mentioned earlier; the lenticular cross section, the notching method, as well as the reduction/resharpening patterns are generally standard.  Analysts have gone even further and done boring statistical studies of the width ratios of the neck, the base, cross section thickness of the base, etc. and those ratios are very consistent on authentic pieces (and factors not often changed by resharpening over the years.)  Seeing these traits doesn't mean a point is authentic, but when you don't see them it should be a red flag.  For example, if you do a low magnification review of the notches of several authentic dovetails, you quickly see that the notching is different than that of many other later notched pieces.  Not just the angle, or width, but the way the notch was made.  Dovetails were probably notched with an indirect punch, which made much of the notch with one or two blows, and then it was finished with very minimal retouch, and then a decent amount of grinding.  Seeing over worked notches, with 50 little steep hinge pressure flakes on both sides of the notch is a red flag.  Seeing oblique transverse flaking, or to me parallel flaking would also be a red flag.  Large Dovetails are fairly thick pieces,  I've seen some good looking thin examples, but overall seeing a piece that is too thin is a red flag.  There are many other traits, but those are just some of my observations and some of the things I look at when I buy a Dovetail.

first, due to the pic and color of the material you really cant see the flaking or resharpening on this piece atleast not on my screen,and just because it wasnt resharpened doesnt mean it isnt authentic.as far as the notches go, yea sure they are very pristine,but there is no way you can tell if they are fake unless you have a microscope and can really see  if the hinge fractures are ancient.and i didnt really want to go here but i will.the awesome dovetail post,well to be quite frank i question the featured piece in that post more than i do the dove in this one.there is absolutely nothing about that dove that looks like a dove other than the shape of the base.the flaking is NOT a typical dove flaking and the fine edge work that is typical for a classic eastern dove is not present and i have picked up more ancient ridge than most and i know ridge patina when i see it,and well there isnt any on it..and i do respectfully disagree with you on the flaking style of doves.they are not deep heavy flakes,but much more precise parrallell flaking and fine edge work.the flaking on the dove in the awesome dovetail post resembles more of what you would find on a snyders than a dove.figure that out??and since we are talking doves, you did mention blade shape, a common trait in doves is an eliptical blade and  i am having trouble finding  that shape in the awesome dovetail post.sorry that i called out your dove trevmma,i could very well be wrong. i am basing my opinion on what i have seen,found or studied and your dove  just doesnt look like an authentic one.with that said i will say (IMO) it is very difficult if not impossible to authenticate an artifact based on a not so great pic on someones computer screen.goodluck hunting.
[/quote]

Nice reply joshuaream.  I'm not really an expert, but I've been hunting, collecting, and studying points since 1986... for what it's worth. I was just going to say I would not buy it based on the pics shown.  Closer, clearer shots may change my mind, but to put it simply, that point has the wrong look.  I hope it's real for you.  I rarely see real points at flea markets.  It's a pretty one nonetheless.

Intereting Thread!!!!!!!  Hits on just about every issue in collecting prehistoric artifacts. 
Choo-  I would seriously take a long look at that piece.  I don't like the form and overall shape(particularly the base), can't ID the material, feel it is too thin for size, and don't like the flaking patterns.  I hope it works out for you, and the piece is old.  I wouldn't send it to an authenticator.  I could write a book on the scam that is authentication.  If you want to find out, drive up to Columbus on November 15th, and walk around the Ohio Arch Show.  Show it to 5 people.  You will know quickly, make some friends who can help you in the future, see some great rocks, and maybe enter an artifact in the field find competition.  They won't charge you $25 + 2 ways shipping.....
Joshua- You might be too much of a politician, but thanks for the great stuff.  I wanted to make a similar post, but knew I would come off like a know-it-all jerk.  They way you did it, they might learn something, and not just curse your name.
Trevmma-  Your awesome dove is just that.  Made with all the classic Ohio big dove characteristics.  Proper in all ways, and a great buy.
Honkeyflintman-  Were you talking about the parallel pressure flaking seen on resharpened doves along the bevel?  I would have to disagree with you on Trevmma's piece.  We should sit down at the Ohio Arch meeting and talk rocks.  I'm sure we can all learn something.  Do you attend the meetings?
Regards,
Jon Dickinson.

Yes... very interesting post. This is how we learn, little by little. I would go back to the Flea market, and browse around and see if this guy has another artifact that he puts out when his other one sells! I knew a person that bought a watch at a flea market, and was told that it was very rare, but the guy had a box of them, and he would just get another out after it sold! plus he may be in cahoots with another dealer on the other side of the market, and they just switch back and forth everytime one sells, so as not to make anyone suspicious. i hope it turns out authentic Choo. 

Jackson Galleries or Davis Artifacts are two of the top authenticators, their reputations speak for themselves. Both are about $25 plus shipping per piece.

The Ohio show is also a way to have some one look at it, although you will not get it papered for free. I have attended shows in KS, MO, and IL and learned a lot.....

here is a dove that has classic dove flaking

now this is gettin good.too many quotes to put in here.joshuaream,when i said parallell flaking i meant on resharpened ones,along the blade edges,my mistake i should have been more clear.now i am not sure exactly what you call the flaking style of a dove,it isnt random and it isnt oblique transverse,atleast we agree on that.horizontal transverse would be what i am trying to say i guess?i do agree with most of what you had to say.but i dont agree on trevmma dove,and that is what sparked my response in the first place.something about that piece just isnt right imo.doves almost always have real good flaking,imo that one doesnt.as far as the "eliptical blade" term i did get that from overstreet lol,i couldnt find a better term to describe the blade shape of a dove,well what i think a classic dove blade looks like.i just reread your response and you said parallell flaking is like oblique transverse to you?when i think parallell flaking i think going from blade edge to blade edge horizontally with the flakes parallell to each other.oblique transverse flaking is parallell but goes at an angle from blade edge to blade edge.are we on the same page?that type of flaking is not what i was refering to.i guess it is sometimes difficult to describe in words what we are looking at when we are looking at it.good discussion and appreciate the response,very informative.this is why i like this place.

pointdr,no need to bring politics into this discussion.lol.i appreciate all opinoins,isnt that why we are here?we are all know it all jerks when we are on the internet.just joking but you know what i mean.i guess we will agree to disagree on trevs dove,and yes i was refering to the pressure flaking on a beveled edge.i should have been more clear.i will be at the aso show sunday if you want to talk rocks.i am always up for that.send me a pm and tell me where to find you.my huntin buddy pickaway knows you i think,maybe he will be goin.

I will be brining that dove up there during the show, yeah up close my dove hasvery little pressure flaking if any, but has maqny miniral deposits in the notches and the loose hinge fractures show a very good patina with debree underneth. my test i try my best to scratch of mineral deposits with my wifes finger nails, alos i always clean my points off but there is allways that dirt you cant get off no matter how much you wash it.If you buy a point with dirt on it and it comes off no problem then its fake in my book, cause we all wash are new points off with water when we first find them. thats not your case, i know, thats just how i tell before i buy a point. you would be amazed what you find with a little bit of saliva on you finger

Here's a question for the dovetail experts...If Cobbs blades are preforms for early archaic types(dovetail, thebes, lost lake) Why do you see some of these points unbeveled? It's always sort of bothered me because some people call them a first stage dove, and that doesn't make sense because it had bevels even before it had notches.

i cant see them being pre forms but maybe they could be post forms from the bases breaking and so they just fininshed off with the base. maybe thats why most are beveled also

Thirty7 : If you're letting Dovetail NON experts weigh in, here goes :

It seems fairly well established that the makers of Plevna Cluster points controlled the choicest lithic sources, cranking out huge numbers of them for trade, while the contemporary Kirk Cluster makers made do with whatever else was available elsewhere. (Not too many Flintridge Kirk Points. Or Stillwells, &c.).

With this in mind, I've long suspected (assumed) that what they traded was not finished points, but preforms ready for whatever notching configuration the end user wanted to work into them. (Dovetails alone come in six or seven varieties, plus Thebes points [another several], McCorkles, et al.).

Assuming this, Cobbs Knives of Flintridge, Burlington &c. would have been preforms used "as is" rather than modified for hafting (which, given how common "fracture bases" are, was a risky strategy for penny-pinchers). Unhafted knives were in use long before, and continued long afterward anyways -- nothing fundamentally new or unusual in them aside from shape and beveling.

My two cents' worth  

Uniface, that is a very solid/comprehensive answer, and a lot more concise than I can be...  And it's an answer that also draws out a very neat distinction between Kirk cluster and St. Charles/Plevena cluster points (I'm going back to saying Dovetail because it's easier to type.)

Kirk sites are common in the Midwest from Ontario on down, but especially common in the Ohio River valley.  Some of them like Swans Landing, and the Cesaer's Casino in Indiana site near Louisville have produced hundreds and hundreds of kirk points all made with very local materials, as well as animal bones, tools, lithic workshops, tube bannerstones, etc. even some burials.  The animal bones show that Kirk peoples ate a lot of rabbit, racoon, turtles, fish, with far lesser numbers of what we think of as traditional game animals like deer, elk, bear.  They probably didn't hunt over huge areas, and utilized local resources.  Dovetails are found over a similar area, but to date very few dovetail sites have been found and none even remotely as 'rich' in information as even a minor kirk rockshelter.  It's really not clear who the Dovetail people were, but as Uniface pointed out, we know that during the early archaic period they controlled several main quarries (Flintridge, Harrison/Wyandotte County hornstone, some of the Coshocton and other black flint quarries in Ohio, etc.)  All of which lends credence to the idea that Dovetails were an imported/traded commodity, while Kirks were made locally with local materials.  Note, there are some dovetails made with local materials, which could have been transference of technology, but most were probably made at centralized locations.  As you get to Illinois/Missouri they might have been made on a more local level, explaining the greater variety of St. Charles/Dovetail blades found in those states.

Back to the idea of Cobbs being preforms for archaic points...  Personally, I think too many knives are called Cobbs blades.  I think there were true preforms (either thinned quarry blanks, or large core bifaces that were tools which were reduced clovis style down to another tool, and late stage bifaces that were going to be made into a specific point) and then there are a series of hand held, unnotched knives that include the Cobbs that were finished tools.  Cobbs have some unique traits and in my opinion were a hand held knife that was resharped and reused to the point of getting down to a drill like form and then discarded.  Their distribution is heavier south of the classic range of doves, and nearly absent in the northern part of the range.  Kirk sites produce a lot of smaller Cobb like preforms, but so have some sites that produce Lost Lake and Thebes points as well.  They haven't been found on Dovetail sites, but then again there are only two or three small dovetails sites so the sample is probably too small for conculsions.

If any of you get a chance to see Bob Converse's collection, or pictures/pieces from Stan Copeland's collection, there are un-notched dovetails (big flint ridge bifaces built like dovetails) but I don't think they are related to the Cobbs type.  I think most classic ohio-style Dovetails were notched when made, and then progressively resharped after trading.  (Heck, look at all the examples of 5, 6 and the few 7 inch finished dovetails with very little resharpening.)  Even two of the pieces posted in this thread are large pieces with heavy percussion flaking, and very little retouch.  I don't think ancient peoples would use Cobbs blade as a hand held knife, resharpen and reuse it; then decide to reflake the entire surface with percussion flaking, and finally notch it to get a finished Dovetail.

Thanks for the informative explanations guys. Not trying to derail the thead here.

Here's a question for the dovetail experts...If Cobbs blades are preforms for early archaic types(dovetail, thebes, lost lake) Why do you see some of these points unbeveled? It's always sort of bothered me because some people call them a first stage dove, and that doesn't make sense because it had bevels even before it had notches.

LMAO!!!!Experts??This has been a great post and it all started at the flea market.lol.joshuaream,I got a few questions for you.What is your definition of a dovetail site??Have you ever found a Dovetail?Dovetail people,please explain that?And these "Dovetail people" controlled flint quarries??Where did you get this information?

Imo a Cobbs blade is an unnotched preform and not a handheld knife. Two notches and you've got a dovetail, or lost lake.

i agree 37,cobbs caches have been found associated w dovetails.not that this means anything but i have found cobbs and doves at a site i hunt.but what do i know.

I think you're right, Josh. I hadn't thought it through well enough. Doves are thicker in relation to size, for one thing. Cobbs' couldn't be Dove preforms.

I think you're right, Josh. I hadn't thought it through well enough. Doves are thicker in relation to size, for one thing. Cobbs' couldn't be Dove preforms.

I've got thin Cobbs and thick ones, same with dovetails. From Overstreet guide 10th edition " These are un-notched preforms for early archaic beveled types such as Decatur, Dovetail, Lost Lake, etc. Has been found with St. Charles points in a cache at the Olive Branch site and dated to 9300-9400 carbon years before present."

The fact they have been found in caches with dovetail points is proof enough for me.

  Um here in Tennessee dove season is very short and you can only take eleven a day. I like at least 6 at a sitting wrapped in bacon. I am lobbying to make it 12 a day so my meals are complete.
 Hope its a good one looks like you got some very knowledgable opinions from all the spectrums.
Happy Huntin !

I found one broken dove on a site and no other doves have turned up, but maybe some day.  I did just find a monster 3 5/8 inch dove at an antique shop for 250 dollars.  I told the man who found it about this site and this thread.  I wish I had 250 extra to buy that thing as I am sure one could get more out of it. The one this gentleman was selling was surrounded by many other field grade artifacts.  This particular dove looked much different in the flaking than the one that started this thread.
Jake

Stanfield/Cobbs blades are very likely to be finished pieces rather than preforms.  The width to lenght ratio is much less on a Stanfield/Cobbs blade compared to a dove.  If a culture were to make a dove from a Stanfield/Cobbs it would look like a lot of the grey ghosts floating around.  The base would be much too wide.  There are only a few examples of doves where the width to length ratio would be similar and that's on first stage, button base doves (i.e. Reinhart dove or Hooks dove.)

Moreover, most Stanfield/Cobbs blades show extensive resharpening and beveling suggesting they were either used as is or hafted with just the round base.  Most likely both cases are true becasue some of them do have ground bases.

When looking at Stanfields/Cobbs, the basal flaking is usually much different than a dove.  The flakes continue from one side to the other and they are rarely flaked from the base up.  Usually there is only a light pressure retouch.  Dove preforms were likely to be made into doves.

Most cultures used some form of round based knife and the biggest distinguising difference is the knapping style and bevelling often found on early archaic flint types.  Also, most of the knapping on Stanfield/Cobbs blades is very similar to all early archaic types including hardins, thebes, and doves.  All of those point types I've found on the same sites in Illinois and they were likely used by the same people for various differing reasons.

Hippy

Stanfield/Cobbs blades are very likely to be finished pieces rather than preforms.  The width to lenght ratio is much less on a Stanfield/Cobbs blade compared to a dove.  If a culture were to make a dove from a Stanfield/Cobbs it would look like a lot of the grey ghosts floating around.  The base would be much too wide.  There are only a few examples of doves where the width to length ratio would be similar and that's on first stage, button base doves (i.e. Reinhart dove or Hooks dove.)

Moreover, most Stanfield/Cobbs blades show extensive resharpening and beveling suggesting they were either used as is or hafted with just the round base.  Most likely both cases are true becasue some of them do have ground bases.

When looking at Stanfields/Cobbs, the basal flaking is usually much different than a dove.  The flakes continue from one side to the other and they are rarely flaked from the base up.  Usually there is only a light pressure retouch.  Dove preforms were likely to be made into doves.

Most cultures used some form of round based knife and the biggest distinguising difference is the knapping style and bevelling often found on early archaic flint types.  Also, most of the knapping on Stanfield/Cobbs blades is very similar to all early archaic types including hardins, thebes, and doves.  All of those point types I've found on the same sites in Illinois and they were likely used by the same people for various differing reasons.

Hippy

you lost me when you lumped Stanfield and Cobbs together, different culture and time period not to mention style of workmanship.

yea 37 i am in the same lost boat.We have gone from a questionable flea market find to "dovetail people" controlling the flint quarries in ohio to stanfields and cobbs blades being compared.makes for some entertaining reading.could be a fun night here on tnet

LMAO!!!!Experts??This has been a great post and it all started at the flea market.lol.joshuaream,I got a few questions for you.What is your definition of a dovetail site??Have you ever found a Dovetail?Dovetail people,please explain that?And these "Dovetail people" controlled flint quarries??Where did you get this information?
[/quote]

Honkey,

Sorry for the delay, I was away on business and wanted to respond when I could post a picture or two..  The first two pictures are front and back of my best personal flint find.  5 3/4 inches of flintridge dovetail found along the eel river in Whitley County Indiana when I was about 9 or so. (Sorry for the sarcasm, but in case you don't don't see enough parallel flaking for your liking and doubt the authenticity, it's been pictured in GIRS and a few other places), can we see your best dove?  I sold it when I was in high school, but plan on buying it again if it comes up for sale...

The questions in order-
Definition of a Dovetail site-  That's the problem, there aren't any significant sites.  Take any other significant point type from the Archaic and you can find multiple sites.  (Dalton, Lecroy, Kirk, Lost Lake, etc.)  Heck, there are more Cumberland sites out there than Dovetail sites and there are probably a 1000 authentic dovetails for every cumberland.  Just to cover all the bases, as an example, a Kirk site is a site where Kirk/palmer points are found in a dateable context, with other artifacts, fire pits, etc.  In the plow zone, where most of us hunt, earlier and later sites can/do get mixed up.

Have I found any dovetails-  Aside from this one, I've been lucky enough to find several other doves between whole and brokes in Whitley and Allen Counties in Indiana and Van Wert, Ohio.

Dovetail people-  People who originally made dovetails.  Again, we know a lot about the people that made Kirk cluster artifacts, we know what they ate, how they hunted, how they buried their dead, what other tools they used, etc.  We know the same about a lot of the Dalton Cluster, about the Cody Cluster, Lecroy people, etc.  I think it's fascinating that we know very little about the people who made dovetails and related points (e-notch and thebes.)  

Dovetail people controlling quarries-  As Uniface put it, you don't see very many Kirks made from Flintridge and you don't see too many Dovetails in ohio made from crappy material.  During the period when dovetails were made in Ohio, you rarely see other artifacts made from Flintridge, and it isn't until you get to the Adena and Woodland times that you see the same gem quality Flintridge quarries being used as frequently and spread over such a wide area.

Where did I get this-  Not from reading Overstreets...  Much of it comes from early work by Morgan and Prufer, and conversations with Noel Justice when I was in college.  There is a great book call Archaic Societies, it's probably in your local library.  Bob Cook at OSU did some of his earlier work on the Paleo to Archaic transition in the midwest, etc.  There is a lot of material out there, it just takes reading through some occasionally very dry journals/books.  

As far as caches, I've heard about the dovetail finds at the Olive Branch site, but haven't seen them.  The Olive Branch site is so rich, that it's almost impossible to consider it a normal site (the quality and quantity of caches, and the size of the artifacts that have been found over the years is amazing.)  In Ohio/Indiana, to my knowledge, there has never been a cache of dovetails mixed with Cobbs blades.  As I mentioned before, there are un-notched dovetails out there, but they are built like dovetails not Cobbs blades.  Attached is also a picture of a well used Cobbs blade, how would that have been notched to make a Dovetail? (Note, not my piece, the seller is imbus401 off eBay.  I've bought from him before and he's a good seller.)

Enjoying the discussion,

Joshua

The business about the Dovetail makers controlling the best quarries/outcrops, and the division between them and the Kirk cluster people is taken from an overview of the Archaic era in (as I recall) Indiana written by an archaeologist maybe 20 or 30 years ago that I ran into googling around.

You could probably find a reference to it in another paper yourself in 15 minutes, tops.

Stanfield/Cobbs blades are very likely to be finished pieces rather than preforms.  The width to lenght ratio is much less on a Stanfield/Cobbs blade compared to a dove.  If a culture were to make a dove from a Stanfield/Cobbs it would look like a lot of the grey ghosts floating around.  The base would be much too wide.  There are only a few examples of doves where the width to length ratio would be similar and that's on first stage, button base doves (i.e. Reinhart dove or Hooks dove.)

Moreover, most Stanfield/Cobbs blades show extensive resharpening and beveling suggesting they were either used as is or hafted with just the round base.  Most likely both cases are true becasue some of them do have ground bases.

When looking at Stanfields/Cobbs, the basal flaking is usually much different than a dove.  The flakes continue from one side to the other and they are rarely flaked from the base up.  Usually there is only a light pressure retouch.  Dove preforms were likely to be made into doves.

Most cultures used some form of round based knife and the biggest distinguising difference is the knapping style and bevelling often found on early archaic flint types.  Also, most of the knapping on Stanfield/Cobbs blades is very similar to all early archaic types including hardins, thebes, and doves.  All of those point types I've found on the same sites in Illinois and they were likely used by the same people for various differing reasons.

Hippy

you lost me when you lumped Stanfield and Cobbs together, different culture and time period not to mention style of workmanship.

Stanfield and Cobbs blades are quite similar and many times I hear the names interchanged and used for both.  Stanfield blades are early archaic as well and show a lot of the classic early archaic knapping traits seen on cobbs and points of the time.

Here's a link with a picture of a classic stanfield.

http://www.arrowheads.com/stores/detail.php?pid=NTgyMA%3D%3D

Hippy

Joshuaream, Thats a monster dove.Very nice find.I, like you sold my only two complete doves. I sold my whole collection at that time 15 years ago,i regret that to this day but i really needed the money.I wish i had had the judgement to take a few pics.I do have many broken doves that i can take some pics of,i can assure you that 70% are relatively thin & well made,not thick and heavy with choppy flaking.I will get the pics up when i have a little more time.i have been hunting for 30 years in ohio/more specifically central ohio and have never bought a relic. I tend to base my opinions on my own experience & the experience of others that I have hunted with in the field.I do like reading and digesting differing theories and speculation,thats one of the things that makes our hobby so interesting and enjoyable,its always funner to disagree than to agree.lol.First,to speak about what started this post. I am always skeptical when it comes to store bought flint.Fakes have been being made for over a hundred years,i cant imagine how many fakes are in circulation.Fakes that not me,you or the best authenticator can call one way or the other.Doves are suppose to be a rare type but there seems to be alot of them being bought. I am willing to bet over 50 % of those in collections are fakes.jmo.
      First the flint quarries.Example FlintRidge- The flint ridge quarries were not controlled by any specific culture or people it was nuetral ground thats what the experts say and i have to agree with them from what i have found in that area.Recent research by Ohio State University(1987,1988)and the Ohio Historical Society(1997,2003) archeaologist suggest that Archaic indians came to flint ridge to replace thier used and broken artifacts,not to produce large quanities of tools for trade.During recent excavations it was found that over half of the projectile points discarded at the ridge were made of other types of chert not ridge.No substantial Archaic settlements have ever been found on the ridge and it does not appear that any archaic group lived on the ridge and kept other groups from using the flint.I can back this up myself in a way,I have many different point types from the Early Archaic thru the Woodland period that are made of ridge and most were found within ten miles of the ridge.I will make a seperate post and show you the point type variety asap.
      Dovetail people,Are you saying that these people only made doves?They would have to be to be classified as dovetail people.I can see different groups making a certain type to distinguish themselves from other groups but i really dont think they limited themselves to the point where we can class them as dove people.Thats my spin on it anyways imo I dont think ancient man would have limited himself to one tool/projectile type.I think they would have made whatever tool needed for the task at hand.I can kind of explain it this way,As a youth an individual may have made a dove for use as a knife and later in life that same individual made have prefered a thebes blade technology over the dove.Food for thought I guess.Maybe this is why there are not many dove specific sites on record??
             I have to admit that I have limited myself to a degree to ancient ohio history but something stuck out to me that you commented on(burials).At least here in ohio no Early Archaic burials have ever been found because Early Archaic people did not bury the dead,the practice of cremation was much as it was for the paleoindian people.I will have to expand my reading I guess.
          This has been a great thread.Goodluck hunting everyone.