Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lost Lake on Onondaga Chert

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lost Lake on Onondaga Chert

    Does anyone have any information regarding Lost Lake projectile points (early Archaic, Thebes cluster, 8000 - 6000 B.C.) on Onondaga chert?

    A friend has a beautiful stage 1 example of a Lost Lake on Onondaga chert. It may be an Ontario Lost Lake. If that were the case it would be a rarity.

    Photos of said artifact are forthcoming.

    Thank you.



  • #2
    Sorry I can't help ya Hi-Lo but I'll be watching to see what you post and to read the reply's.
    Pickett/Fentress County, Tn - Any day on this side of the grass is a good day. -Chuck-

    Comment


    • #3
      This is the Lost Lake on Onondaga chert.
      Click image for larger version

Name:	Lost Lake 1.jpeg
Views:	1
Size:	73.4 KB
ID:	280496
      Click image for larger version

Name:	Lost Lake 2.jpeg
Views:	1
Size:	69.9 KB
ID:	280497

      Comment


      • #4
        That would be rare but probable. If made in typical region of origin it would just have to travel a bit north and cross Lake Erie. Way cool find!

        From Projectile Points .net, image in Justice's book pretty much identical.
        Click image for larger version

Name:	Lost Lake.GIF
Views:	1
Size:	16.1 KB
ID:	280503
        Searching the fields of Northwest Indiana and Southwestern Michigan

        Comment


        • #5
          I agree Greg. Thanks.

          Comment


          • Hi-Lo
            Hi-Lo commented
            Editing a comment
            Across Lake St. Clair and up the Thames River.

          • gregszybala
            gregszybala commented
            Editing a comment
            That route would be a bit easier!

        • #6
          What a beautiful knife! Congrats to your friend!

          My first thoughts are that it seems a bit far North for Lost Lake. I've seen large type Kirk CN look like that, with no beveling but just something to think about? ... The way I understood was the Lost Lake gives way to the contemporaneous Thebes type as one moves towards Canada. I should do some more studying on the subject myself but its a beautiful point regardless.
          Josh (Ky/Tn collector)

          Comment


          • CMD
            CMD commented
            Editing a comment
            Because of the material and find location, my first thought as well was maybe it's a Kirk CN.....

        • #7
          It's a dandy point you have there, for sure. Without having it in hand I'm having trouble distinguishing the type as to a stage 1 Lost Lake or a Kirk CN. Is the base ground real smooth? Kirks can be ground smooth or not at all. The LLs I've handled are nearly always ground smooth like Dovetail/St.Charles/Plevna. Being found on the fringes of normal distribution certainly does not disqualify it as being a LL. Since you have it in hand I defer to your judgment.

          Comment


          • #8
            Finally, something from my area! First off, on projectilepoints.net, they outline the home range where certain point types will be dominant. There's variables to this, and any point type referenced can be found quite a ways from it's normal home range. I have handled quite a few lost Lakes from the Lake Ontario area, as well as random finds across NY, and into Pa. There are two types of the same point that can be found. The " classic " form, and a variety of the classic due to resharpening. The Lost Lake type does occur out of it's area, but is rare. The point posted is no doubt Onondaga chert, but I would put that in the Kirk Corner notch type. It's much wider at the shoulders, and has a broader triangle shape than Lost Lakes. Lost lakes normally have a more constricted basal area, with notches that go straighter up into the base, and sometimes called " keyhole " notches. And are very small and finely retouched. And they normally have slight to heavier beveled opposite edges, and are also longer and narrower. The photo I'm posting shows a classic Lost lake ( found by Sam Noll, 1933), a Kirk Corner notch ( Sam Noll, 1929), and a Thebes ( L. Breninger, Lebanon Co.), all Pa., and Pa. jasper . Also, on projectilepoints.net , all the actual photos shown, I would call half of those Kirk CN. These forms aren't as rare in their home range, but as hunters traveled and migrated, the points are used and lost, and will be found in out of the area places. Only IMO, the collector makes the final choice. Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07516.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	93.9 KB
ID:	280568
            Paul RS Frey Visit my artifacts pagehttp://www.ravensrelics.com/ravens-relics-shop.html

            Comment


            • Cmcramer
              Cmcramer commented
              Editing a comment
              This is an excellent post, Paul. The side by side comparison, with description, is just perfect.

          • #9
            Had I been fortunate enough to have found this (I wish), I would not have identified it as a Lost Lake. I'm no expert but I've studied about them a lot since they are one of my favorite types. The only one I own is heavily beveled on one edge. I see Kirk CN here and it's a beauty! Hard to judge actual size with it in your hand.
            Child of the tides

            Comment


            • #10
              Here we go again, splitting hairs on a photo of a point. Kirks and Lost Lakes can be darn near next to impossible to differentiate but we all know how to do that from a two dimensional photo.
              Searching the fields of Northwest Indiana and Southwestern Michigan

              Comment


              • CMD
                CMD commented
                Editing a comment
                You're no doubt right, I just thought a Kirk would be less unusual to find that far north, so I guess I was just going with odds. I'm not too familiar from experience with either type, but Kirks can be found here in RI.....

            • #11
              Nah I don't think its splitting hairs Greg. I think the poster wanted good information about that knife and they got it. Sure were talking two types maybe contemporary in age and overlapping distribution but there are some pretty definable differences between those two types. Both are about equals on the top of my faves list, and I get into the subtler nuances of how these two types are similar yet different. Its really these types of things that keep me interested in the hobby.

              There is no beveling on this point from the looks of it, that coupled with several other factors including size (much too small for a early stage Lost Lake btw), notch legnth/angle , basal form and find location all equate to less likely a Lost Lake but more likely a Kirk corner notch imo, and a few others.

              That's the kind of information that I think David and his friend were seeking regardless of if they may have been mistaken on the first call they suggested. So why not provide them with it if we are able and willing? I think if it were my find I would want understand it as accurately as our current knowledge base and understanding would allow as opposed to a erroneous interpretation that stems from lump em all together and be done with it approach or by going off shape alone. That's fine and all if thats the way collectors choose for themselves to handle it, I got no problem with it, but its just not the way I enjoy this hobby and imo devalues the hard work of many discriminating collectors and proffessionals who came before us.

              Lol not trying to turn this into a Lumper vs Splitter conversation though. Just want to explain/justify why several folks have gave opinions that differed from the original typology suggested in the title of this thread.
              Last edited by Kyflintguy; 01-12-2018, 08:32 PM.
              Josh (Ky/Tn collector)

              Comment


              • pkfrey
                pkfrey commented
                Editing a comment
                Very well said and understood Josh. The differences may be subtle, but enough to indicate a different type point than suggested.

              • gregszybala
                gregszybala commented
                Editing a comment
                okay

              • sailorjoe
                sailorjoe commented
                Editing a comment
                Well said, Josh. You express my sentiments quite well. Also, your analysis of the points and differentiating criteria is spot on. And you mentioned something that I overlooked on my initial exam of the pic: the size of the point. I agree that this point is a bit small for the normally seen stage one LL. But there are exceptions to that general situation. I had a small one probably only about 1.5 to less than 2 inches in length that had every appearance of being used as a dart point instead of the more typical use as a knife or spear point. But the point being displayed here is most certainly a knife point and therefore adds evidence to this point being a KCN.
                Last edited by sailorjoe; 01-15-2018, 12:35 PM.

            • #12
              Thanks everyone. As always, I appreciate your informed opinions.

              Comment


              • #13
                I stumbled upon this projectile point at my favourite antique store in St. Thomas, Ontario two weeks ago.

                My research suggests it is a Lost Lake (early Archaic, Thebes cluster, 8000 - 6000 B.C.) on Burlington chert.

                It is 3.5 inches in length. It is beveled, ground, and serrated.

                I have no way of knowing if this is a southwestern Ontario projectile point as there is no provenance.

                Again, any insight would be greatly appreciated.

                Click image for larger version

Name:	Lost Lake 3.jpeg
Views:	2
Size:	67.5 KB
ID:	281014

                Click image for larger version

Name:	Lost Lake 4.jpeg
Views:	2
Size:	52.7 KB
ID:	281015









                Comment


                • #14
                  Hi Hi-Lo This last point looks more like a Lost Lake than the one first shown on this thread. HST, perhaps this point deserves a thread of its own.

                  Comment


                  • #15
                    Thanks all.

                    Interestingly sailorjoe, as I was typing and uploading I was thinking the same.

                    Let me see what I can do.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X