Bailey, Amy (Glenn A. Black Laboratory of Archaeology, Indiana University,
Bloomington)
AN ANALYSIS OF TRIANGULAR PROJECTILE POINTS FROM THE
CLAMPITT SITE
Triangular projectile points have traditionally been lumped together as a single
entity, ignoring stylistic variation- -variation with potential value for temporal
and spatial comparisons among sites. Triangular points from the Clampitt site
(12 Lr 329) were classified according to styilistic variation to see how this
assemblage compared with assemblages from Fort Ancient sites.
The typology selected for this study was derived by Jimmy Railey (Chapter XI:
Chipped Stone Artifacts. In Cultural Continuity and Change: Fort Ancient Cultural
Dynamics in Northeastern Kentucky, edited by Gwynn Henderson, 1990, Kentucky Anthropological
Research Facility, University of Kentucky, 1990) using point samples from five
Kentucky Fort Ancient sites with carbon 14-dated components. Because his points
came from dated sites, Railey's study offered an advantage in that stylistic types
can be compared with an independent chronology. If his typology is correctly applied
to the points from Clampitt, the distribution of styles should imply a time frame
for site occupation that would correspond with other dating techniques, including
ceramic seriation and radiocarbon dating.
Sixty-one points recovered from the Clampitt site were
calalogued as triangular points, and fifty-five of these were
complete enough to be further classified using Railey's typology.
Following the methods of Railey, the poiints were qualitatively
assigned to one of eight types according to morphology (relative
thickness, basal shape, shape of edges, and presence or absence
of serration). The eight types were descrdibed by Railey as
follows:
Type 1. Tri-Incurvate: small, with incurvate sides and
concave bases.
Type 2. Flared Base: incurvate sides, convex or
straight bases.
Type 3. Coarsely Serrated: Coarse serration, straight
sides, straight or convex bases.
Type 4. Short, Excurvate: short (less than 25 mm in
length), excurvate sides, straight or convex
bases.
Type 5. Straight Sides: straight sides, straight or
convex bases.
Type 6. Concave Base: excurvate or straight sides,
concave base.
Type 7. Thick, Wide Base: thick cross-sections, similar
to Crude Points, but with retouch.
Crude Points: Thick cross-sections, often asymmetrical, no retouch.
Railey's typology does not provide for points exhibiting excurvate sides with
straight or convex bases (attributes of Type 4) that are greater than 25 mm in
length. To correct this, points from Clampitt which were shorter that 25 mm were
designated Type 4a, and those of greater length were classified as Type 4b. Type
7 and Crude points were not used in this study, because they were not used by
Railey in his comparisons among sites nor in his seriation of styles.
No examples of Type 1 or Type 3 points were recovered from Clampitt. The most
common types were Type 5 and Type 2. Of the Type 4 specimens, there was an almost
equal distribution between the 4a and 4b varieties. Type 6 points were few.
That no Type 1 points were recovered is not suprising since this type occurs so
infrequently in Fort Ancient components. This type does occur outside of the Fort
Ancient area, and therefore, it cannot be considered diagnostic of either Fort
Ancient or related components. What is surprising is the lack of any serrated
(Type 3) points, which have traditionally been called "Fort Ancient" points. Type
3 points were also lacking from site collections in the East Fork White River
Valley which were examined as part of a 1990 survey by Brian Redmond.
The high percentage of Type 5 and Type 2 style points that were recovered from
Clampitt indicates a Middle Fort Ancient affiliation. This is in agreement with
ceramic analysis and the radiocarbon dates from the site. The Clampitt site is
quite similar to other Middle Fort Ancient sites in the region; a similar distribution
of point styles was recovered from the Snag Creek site (see Figure
1). There were, however Type 3 and Type 1 points in the sample from Snag Creek,
and there were no Type 4b points.
Railey suspected that Type 4 points are simply resharpened Type 5 points, which
would account for their shortness. However, the presence of longer Type 4 points
from Clampitt implies that Type 4 is indeed a point style in itself; Type 4a is
perhaps a resharpened variety of Type 4b.
Although this study was successful in supporting the Middle Fort Ancient affiliation
of the Clampitt site, and in providing some comparison with other Fort Ancient
sites of the region, it is only a preliminary analysis of the triangular points.
Further study involving the metric attributes of the points should yield additional
information regarding the relationships between Oliver phase and Fort Ancient
sites.
[return to 1991 abstracts menu]
[continue to next]