In our era of rapid communication among the masses of amateur archaeologists, collectors, and prehistorians, it is a privilege to discover a new type of artifact, describe it, and assign a name. The odds of discovering an unnamed type are unfavorable, particularly in regard to bifaces (projectile points, knives, drills, etc.), as scholars tend to focus on this artifact class. Scores of published “type guides”—many still in print after several editions—leave one wondering if there is still anything “new under the sun”.As so often happens, a seemingly new type of biface turns out to be already known. Thorough questioning of experienced collectors or a lengthy library search usually reveals: 1) a pre-existing name for the specimen in question, 2) an idea about its area of distribution, and 3) guesses or solid information about its age. Anyone who has spent hours poring over type guides will appreciate the significance of the radiocarbon dating “revolution”. There are bifaces that resemble one another closely; yet radiocarbon dates show that bifaces appearing to be the same type (at first glance!) may differ significantly in age and may be culturally distant or not closely related. A good typologist learns to observe minutely, paying close attention to details like the presence (or absence) of edge grinding. In the end, small details often prove critical to recognizing a new type.Upon occasion, a rich, productive archaeological site—one that was utilized by many people over a long period—will yield candidates for new types of bifaces. Interviews of knowledgeable collectors and work with reference books initially might be encouraging. Upon closer examination, however, the new “types” are seen to be only resharpened and salvaged versions of well-documented pristine forms. Some might be “sports”—aberrant bifaces, not true to type, that were made by a flintknapper from marginal, poor quality or poorly-shaped raw material. The works of ancient novice flintknappers also would fall within this category. In these cases, creation of new types is unwarranted and inadvisable. They would do nothing but confuse our understanding of prehistory, making it even more murky and problematic. Should a suspected new biface type, on the other hand, exist in a wide range of sizes, even when allowances are to understand their evolution undoubtedly lie buried under thick blankets of sediment at riverine sites. However, our extensive excavations throughout 17 years on the banks of the Mississippi River at Olive Branch, which is perhaps the largest and most productive site of its antiquity in northern North America, have furnished a few insights. For the moment I tend to believe that side-notched points developed directly from an early lanceolate form, such as the Rice Lanceolate (see O’Brien and Wood 1998:86-89 for a good discussion of the type), with the simple addition of a pair of diminutive, angled side-notches. The pronounced grinding on the lower edges of lanceolate points was retained, although it was eliminated forward of the notches towards the tip. The method of hafting was more secure than the simple binding and wedging used for early lanceolate projectile points, and it resulted in a greater length of cutting edge in relation to the haft. Where raw material was in short supply or occurred in nature as small-sized pieces (true for Olive Branch and its immediate environs!), this combination technique of notching and grinding the lower edges was advantageous.At the risk of being over assertive, I feel that the technique of side-notching likely developed at the Olive Branch site and perhaps elsewhere in the immediate region where flintknappers had to travel equally long distances in order to obtain supplies of large-sized raw material suited to everyday needs. In this part of the Mississippi River Valley, Burlington chert best satisfied a flaked toolmaker’s demands; however, its nearest outcrops to Olive Branch lay several days of traveling upriver. The local raw materials (for example, Bailey chert), although of fine quality, occurred in smaller masses. Seldom could bifaces longer than 4-5 inches be made from them. 

  Below I define a new type of Very Early Archaic biface on the basis of two sizes unearthed at the Olive Branch site and a third size discovered elsewhere in southern Illinois. These three sizes of biface likely were used for different purposes and are not merely resharpened versions of the same parent form; therefore, definition of a new type is warranted. Paradoxically, all bifaces are made of Burlington chert, which imposed no limits of size upon them and yet they are side-notched. According to my line of reasoning, these particular bifaces are not the earliest examples of their type. The type would already have been developed by some innovative flintknapper who had to cope with a lesser grade of stone than Burlington chert.Whether or not readers accept my explanation for the origin of side-notched points, I hope all will agree that the need for a new type is justified. Nearly 20 years ago Gregory Perino, in discussing the Cache River type in his Selected Preforms, Points and Knives of the North American Indians (Vol. 1, 1985) observed that there was an “unnamed variant in Illinois . . . similar but the lower portion of the sides constricts more sharply towards the base and the basal corners are rounded”. How perceptive! Perino’s power of observation, time has told, is unexcelled.Although future archaeological excavations at the Olive Branch site are certain to swell the number of examples of Thebes Gap points and cement our appreciation of this new type in North American culture-history, we will remain indebted to Greg Perino for showing us the way.The Thebes Gap TypeNamed for a two-mile stretch of the Mississippi River Valley, well-known to river pilots since the 19th Century because of its navigational hazards (see Mark Twain’s Life on the Mississippi, 1917, p. 211), Thebes Gap points are presently known only for Illinois. Their occurrence in Missouri seems likely, as many outcrops of Burlington chert, from which all known examples are made, occur in that state (as well as Illinois and Iowa).

Thebes Gap points occur in three sizes, namely:1) SMALL (one example) perhaps functioned as a projectile point, estimated length when complete = 3.5 - 4.0 inches, maximum width = 1 inch, maximum thickness = .225 inches (5.3 mm);2) MEDIUM (six examples) perhaps functioned as knives, range of length = 4.75 - 5.3 inches (121 - 143 mm), range of maximum width = 2.3 - 2.75 inches (59 - 69.5 mm), range of maximum thickness = .40 - .47 inches (10.3 - 12.04 mm);3) VERY LARGE (two examples) perhaps fulfilled a ceremonial role, representing ancestors (?); lengths = 11.02 inches (280 mm) and 11.10 inches (281 mm); maximum widths = 4.45 inches (113 mm) and 3.85 inches (98 mm); maximum thicknesses = .67 inches (17 mm) and .57 inches (13.4 mm).The very large Thebes Gap points are heavy artifacts, weighing from 437 - 528 grams or roughly a pound; while the medium-sized knives weigh only 15% - 20% as much. The weight of the small Thebes Gap projectile point is estimated to be only 10 - 15 grams—hardly 2% of the weight of its “big brothers”!Small and medium Thebes Gap points are moderately to heavily ground all around their bases below the notches. The notches themselves are unground—a trait serving to separate them from Late Archaic side-notched points such as the Otter Creek type, which are always heavily ground within the notches. Basal grinding on Thebes Gap points surely was an aid to hafting; however, it is a remarkable fact that the pair of very large Thebes Gap points have edge grinding for only a short distance to either side of their center lines. Edge grinding at such a position suggests that the bifaces were not affixed to handles or shafts but rather may have been lashed with a looped cord for suspension and handling. Such a cord would have reduced the chances of accidental breakage if the bifaces’ owner danced with 8them or walked in ceremonial processions before an assembled company.The delicate notches of Thebes Gap points are highly characteristic of the type. They are “boot-shaped” or “dog-legged” with the toe of the boot or dog’s paw pointing upward towards the tip of the point. What tool was used to artfully notch the points is unknown; however, it must have come to a sharp point. It was also thin and perhaps fragile. Before applying the notching tool, the maker of very large Thebes Gap points found it necessary to remove substantial, ear-shaped flakes with a billet—thinning the biface radically along both edges in areas where the notches would be. The upward curving notches recall similarly shaped, although usually larger or more open, notches of the Thebes type. Thebes Gap and Thebes points are close in age, both belonging to the 10th millennium before present (radiocarbon) and likely representing sequential phases of the same archaeological tradition.The rounded haft of Thebes Gap points is also a hallmark of the type. It is quite unlike the more squared bases of Cache River points or the deeply basally concave Graham Cave points, which often feature bases that are barbed. A thoughtful typologist should have no trouble in distinguishing among these bifacial forms.The Olive Branch site has yielded examples of Graham Cave, Thebes, and Cache River points in addition to the Thebes Gap type. Of the four, the site’s ancient cemetery or “ceremonial quarter” (Gramly 2002) is known to have produced only caches or groups of Thebes Gap and Cache River points. Interestingly, caches of both these types were associated with red ochre; while nearby caches of Dalton artifacts—as witnessed by the author—had none.The pattern of flaking on both Thebes Gap and medium-large Cache River points from the Olive Branch cemetery is masterful percussion work running approximately at right angles to the blade edge that was followed by parallel or sub-parallel pressure flaking—again at right angles to the edge. Removals by pressure flaking were intended to eliminate arrises left over from percussion work and to regularize the cutting edges. The basic pattern of flaking may be observed on other types of Very Early Archaic and Early Archaic implements and is a rough-and-ready indicator of great antiquity.A word should also be said about the width-to-thickness ratio of the Thebes Gap type. For projectile points it is 4:1; for knives 5.5:1; and for the very large, “ceremonial” blades it is at least 7:1. This regular progression substantiates the reality of a tri-partite division of the Thebes Gap type. The ancient makers of this type must have had concrete ideas about biface thickness and for what purpose's a biface of specific dimensions was best suited.

  Perhaps we are not “stretching” our imaginations too much when we argue that other types of points/blades, having width-to-thickness ratios close to those of (the three sizes of) Thebes Gap points, functioned similarly in ancient times? Therefore, I would argue that a large (7.75 inches in length) and thin STANFIELD BLADE, made of Burlington chert and found in Montgomery County, Missouri, is more likely a ceremonial piece than a knife (see illustration in Prehistoric American XXVIII(2):29). Being unnotched, however, it is impossible to assign this particular biface with confidence to the Very Early Archaic period.ImplicationsElsewhere I have argued (Gramly 2004) that the Olive Branch site, because of the sheer number of artifacts deposited there and evidence of systematic disposal of refuse and human waste, had a year-round resident population during the 10th millennium before present. To be sure, the number of its inhabitants may have fluctuated with the seasons and the availability of fish, plant foods and game; yet, it is highly likely someone always remained at the encampment to nurse the aged and unwell as well as to represent the claimants to this desirable spot on the river—a unique ford and fishing spot. The use of large versions of everyday flaked tools in rituals, perhaps even serving as embodiments of ancestors who first came to the site, is analogous to the curious practice of Highland New Guinea food producers of the modern day who venerate stone blades (Hampton 1999). The New Guinea Highlanders, with their strong ties to land and forebears, have a social structure that may be no more complex than what existed in southern Illinois 10,000 years ago.The Thebes Gap type, which I like to think is the earliest form of notched point in North America, was preceded by and developed out of the Lanceolate Point Tradition. During the 600-year prehistory of this cultural tradition the peripatetic hunting way of life was forsaken by some for a more settled existence along major rivers. The upper valley of the Mississippi River was obviously one of the foci of early hunter-gatherers and fi sher folk. By the time of Dalton culture and the makers of side-notched points who interacted with it, the history of living on the river was already old. A need—perhaps more psychological than economic—was felt to propitiate ancestors. Such rites and the care of ritual paraphernalia would have been in the hands of older men and women whose days as active food-getters had ended. It was they, perhaps, who resided year-round at the Olive Branch site and curated the very large Thebes Gap points buried there for safe-keeping. How could they know that one day these special creations would pass into the hands of members of an alien, yet sympathetic, culture?