Oldest knife you own?

[Bob W]

Mine is about 8000 years old. Heat treated chert. Traded for it in grade school a long time ago and hung onto it over the decades. Sits quietly in my corner curio cabinet.

I can't guess the age of that, not without knowing in what area it was found and no longer having access to the written reference library. So without knowing more, I'd call it an archaic projectile point. The Archaic period lasted from, as best we know, from 8000 BC to 1000 AD. Having archaeological references from the specific region where that tool was found could narrow the date further.

So your 8000 year old tool might only be 3000 years old.

It's certainly not an "arrowhead" though. Bows and arrows didn't exist back then, and it's way too large. I wouldn't call it a knife either, since it was designed for thrusting or throwing and not cutting.

The material is correct, chert. It might be possible to specify it as a particular type of chert; some cherts can be traced to specific areas or even specific outcrops.

---------

There are many older stone tools found in North America, namely tools from the Paleolithic period. In fact not far from here is the famous Folsom site, and the namesake Clovis site is a couple hundred miles south of here. Although difficult to establish exactly when the first Paleo people appeared in North America, it's generally accepted to have been 10,000 - 20,000 years ago, and there is plenty of evidence to support that range. The difficulty is the hype and glory given to each subsequent "oldest" discovery, but not much hard data to back up specific claims. It'd be nearly impossible, for example, to say that Site A in Utah is 500 years older than Site C in Texas.

Less common are the tools from the transition period between the Paleolithic and Archaic periods. The Dalton point type is perhaps the most well-known example.

 

[FearAgent]

Lol these make my grandfathers cattaraugus from WWII look down right new

 

[Bob W]

Over 2.25 inches long and 1.25 inches wide. Just a mundane tool from the Early Archaic period.

Just read this followup post of yours. Given the size, I wouldn't argue with an archaeologist who dated that point as "Early Archaic."

 

[leghog]

It is not possible to date stone. If a stone artifact is found with other dateable items, people infer an age.

It is possible to date range stone tools by design.

 

[leghog]

I can't guess the age of that, not without knowing in what area it was found and no longer having access to the written reference library. So without knowing more, I'd call it an archaic projectile point. The Archaic period lasted from, as best we know, from 8000 BC to 1000 AD. Having archaeological references from the specific region where that tool was found could narrow the date further.

I've been consistently told by apparent experts from 3 universities and 2 others sites it is Early Archaic.

 

[brownshoe]

"It is possible to date range stone tools by design." No it is not. Anybody who looks at a stone artifact and proclaims age or even provenance is making an assumption. You cannot date stone. You cannot tell where it came from by looking at it. Stone was traded throughout the Americas. Ever go to a modern Knap-in? The craftsmen there can reproduce the designs with original tools and fool university experts. There have been some notorious confidence schemes based upon this.

 

[Bob W]

I've been consistently told by apparent experts from 3 universities and 2 others sites it is Early Archaic.

Very good. :thumbup:

Just read this followup post of yours. Given the size, I wouldn't argue with an archaeologist who dated that point as "Early Archaic."
I was a lab supervisor at an archaeological company for several years - did all of the artifact analysis, with the help of a small library of reference materials.

Even if you don't know the exact provenience or point type, it is possible to generalize the time period. Projectile points over time became smaller as their technology advanced. Yours may have even once been longer than it is now, as it appears to have been re-worked and re-sharpened (notice how the sides flair out to the shoulders).

 

[Bob W]

"It is possible to date range stone tools by design." No it is not. Anybody who looks at a stone artifact and proclaims age or even provenance is making an assumption. You cannot date stone.

Largely it's a system of dating artifacts by association. There are thousands of excavated sites that are datable by other methods. Certain point types are found at sites of certain ages but not at sites of older or more recent ages. It's this vast catalog of shared and published data that gives us artifact age ranges.

The best sites have layered deposits of datable materials. Artifacts are associated with certain layers and not others, creating a timeline of technological and cultural changes.

Interestingly, I was on an excavation in which older deposits were atop more recent artifacts. Relatively recent pit houses were dug into the ground, and occasionally abandoned and burned. Insect infestations were one explanation. Then the people tossed dirt on the burning structures. The surrounding dirt naturally contained older archaic artifacts. So these abandoned pithouses ended up with recent pottery and stone tools on the floors, and much older archaic artifacts on the roof.

You cannot tell where it came from by looking at it. Stone was traded throughout the Americas.

How to scientists know stone was traded throughout the Americas (the world, actually)? It's because many types of stone can be traced to very specific sources. If you know where a particular stone is from and where it ended up, only then is it possible to present a pattern of evidence for trade.

Ever go to a modern Knap-in? The craftsmen there can reproduce the designs with original tools and fool university experts. There have been some notorious confidence schemes based upon this.

Of course there are many, many fakers and scammers out there, but also many hobbiests who knap for their own use and have no deceptive motivation. It takes a trained and practiced flintknapper about twenty minutes to complete a point. Although I doubt many scammers would spend much time recreating early archaic points, as those have little value and are often too crude to be "pretty" to buyers.

 

[brownshoe]

"Largely it's a system of dating artifacts by association. "

Exactly, a stone piece can be dated upon excavation by its association with the other artifacts. There is no other way to get a reliable date or cultural association.

There have been large and small scams run using modern made pieces. Some have been purely to increase the reputation of the researcher, not to make money by selling the piece. The knappers I've spent time with are honest, one of the neatest pieces I saw was made from Wold Trade Center glass. However, the good ones can create a piece, using traditional materials, that will fool an "expert." That's part of their game.

 

[utah_fish]

Looking forward to seeing some pics of some steel/bone/leather knives from 1800's or later. Not so interested in the stone ones fron millenia ago. Mine is a Remington R32 that's probably from the 1930's (guess.)

 

[Charlie_K]

The bayonet of a Mosin Nagant from 1942.

 

[PaulTR]

Echoing Charlie_K above, I have a Type 99 Arisaka bayonet, probably from the early 1940s. It's dull as a butter knife, but otherwise in excellent condition.

As for folding knives, I have a 1939 Chicag World's Fair folder. Razor sharp and never used.

 

[saltaire]

Man alive, I'm really sorry I missed out on this conversation. I've been an amateur archeo-treasure hunter for about 60 years now. MY specialty is Indian artifacts. I love this stuff. I won't beat a dead horse, but I'm going to have to go with Bob W on this one. He seems to have the better knowledge in this area. The point is definitely considered to be a projectile point, by every intelligent paper I've ever read. They just aren't called knives unless you are talking about a specific type of tool like a Harahay knife, for example. It definitely is not an arrow point. Bow and arrows had not been discovered on this continent when this tool was made. If I were going to classify this tool I would call it a "Stilman" type, corner notched projectile point. The dates would be 6000 to 7000 BC. That would make it 8000 to 9000 years old. Was it ever used as a knife? It could have been used for that purpose at some point when need required, but it was created to be used on the end of a thrusting spear.

Great looking piece. Looks like it was hit by a plow and glued back together, or possibly dropped and broken then glued. One notch ear is partially missing. It was probably bigger when initially made, then retouched over time by the owner.

That was fun.

Thanks,
Jim

 

[saltaire]

For the brown flint/chert piece in the palm of the hand. I would call this a "Harahay" knife.

Jim