A STUDY OF THE OKLAHOMA ECCENTRIC FLINTS
By H. HOLMES ELLIS*
Since March, 1936, when they were first called to the at-
tention of the general public,7?? the Oklahoma eccentric flints have
presented a puzzling archaeological phenomenon. Dr. Forrest E.
Clements,1 collaborating with Mr. Alfred Reed, Jr., wrote the
only satisfactory account of the find and the circumstances sur-
rounding it, but due to lack of time and facilities he was unable
to carry out a detailed analysis of the specimens themselves. In
June, 1939, the Lithic Laboratory for the Eastern United States at
the Museum of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical
Society, at the request of Dr. Clements, began this analysis, the
results of which are embodied in the present paper.
Before these results are presented, the history of the find
itself should be reviewed briefly. In the summer of 1921, Mack
Tussinger, a half-breed Indian, is said to have uncovered a cache
of some 3,500 perfect and a number of broken, very intricately
notched flint specimens. The cache was in a mound in the
northern part of Delaware County, Oklahoma, on the north side
of the Elk River about six miles above its junction with the
Grand River. Tussinger claims to have sorted the specimens
according to size and re-buried them in his yard. During the next
few years about 800 of the smaller ones were sold to Dr. W. C.
Barnard, a collector in Seneca, Missouri. Some were also sold by
Tussinger to Tom Fleetwood of Wyandotte, Oklahoma. In
1931, Tussinger, seeking a wider market for his material, began
to dispose of his remaining specimens through J. A. Robertson
who operates a gasoline station and roadside stand near Baxter
Springs, Kansas. After Robertson's appearance on the scene the
* The author is deeply indebted to H. C. Shetrone and R. G. Morgan for the
assistance which they rendered during the course of this study.
?? The arabic numerals refer to corresponding numerals in the bibliography
appended.
(121)
122 OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND
HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
points, which were sold originally for
as little as twenty-five cents
apiece, jumped decidedly in price; some
were reported to have
brought as much as fifty dollars.
Evidence seems to indicate that the
first specimens sold were
small, relatively simple, and all made
from local material from the
Peoria, Oklahoma, quarries. As has been
mentioned the first
points also sold for a low price. The
later points were larger,
more complex, of a wide variety of
flint, and much higher in
price.
In the fall of 1936 the Oklahoma State
Archaeological So-
ciety became interested in the supposed
find and members were
taken to the site by Tussinger and
Robertson. At this time a
partial re-examination of the mound was
undertaken and several
eccentric points were found, but it
could not be definitely ascer-
tained that the artifacts were in
situ. In 1937 the site was com-
pletely excavated by the University of
Oklahoma, Department of
Anthropology, and six additional
eccentrics were found. Projec-
tile points and scrapers of recent
Plains type were also present in
the mound and "while the disturbed
nature of the site made a
definite conclusion impossible, it
seemed likely that the Plains
material underlaid the original level of
the eccentrics."1
It is interesting and somewhat confusing
to note that a single
eccentric point of fine workmanship and
striking similarity to
those from the Tussinger cache was found by the
University of
Oklahoma field party while screening a
pot-hunter's dump at the
Spiro Mound on the Arkansas River in Le Flore County, Okla-
homa, 150 miles south of the Delaware
County find. To add to
the confusion a collector from Fort
Smith, Arkansas, claims to
have found eleven such eccentrics
accompanying a double burial
in the Spiro Mound prior to the complete
excavation by the
University of Oklahoma. Two ear-spools
and a stone pipe were
also said to have been with the burials.
While it is difficult to
imagine how these twelve points arrived
at Spiro, it is more diffi-
cult to imagine that only twelve were
buried in the great Temple
Mound while 3,500 or more were
apparently buried intrusively in
an almost imperceptible mound far to the
north.
With this recounting of the
circumstances connected with
ELLIS: OKLAHOMA ECCENTRIC FLINTS 123
the discovery of the eccentric cache,
attention is turned to the
Laboratory investigation of the actual
specimens. Through Dr.
Clements over two hundred of the
eccentrics from the large col-
lection of Alfred Reed, Jr., were placed
at the disposal of the
Laboratory. In addition the collections
of Fred Ulrich of Galena,
Kansas, and others were superficially
examined. Over a thousand
eccentrics were handled and an
additional fifteen hundred scruti-
nized by means of photographs.
The two hundred representative specimens
selected from the
Reed collection were subjected to a
detailed analysis, mega-
scopically, microscopically, and
chemically. In the study the fol-
lowing factors were taken into consideration:
the typological rela-
tionship of the specimens to known
aboriginal patterns; their
similarity in flaking to a comparative
series of artifacts of estab-
lished antiquity; and the evidence of
patination or discoloration
attributable to age.
The Oklahoma flints do not conform to
any known pattern
within the area of their occurrence. In
fact, the only suggestion
of an analogy inheres in the eccentric
flint and obsidian objects
from Central America reported by Thomas
W. F. Gann,3 T. A.
Joyce,5 J. Alden Mason,6
and others.4 The
Central American
specimens have been found in large
quantities in the southern part
of the Maya lowland region on sites of
the Old Empire. They
usually occur in pottery vessels buried
beneath stele, altars, and
the floors of temples. Through the
courtesy of the University
Museum, Philadelphia, the Laboratory was
afforded the oppor-
tunity of examining a number of flint
eccentrics from Piedras
Negras, Guatemala. Most of the
Guatamalan flints were very
heavily patinated with a crust of
tripolite covering the entire
specimen. The shape varies greatly and
does not seem to follow
any set pattern and, on the average,
they appear to be larger than
the Oklahoma eccentrics. As to pattern,
the Oklahoma flints
(Plate II.), with some exceptions,
represent modifications of the
typical pointed-oval and lanceolate
blades and projectile points,
the majority being bilaterally
symmetrical. The Oklahoma speci-
mens which do not conform to the general
type may represent
124
OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
those accidentally broken in the process
of manufacture, thus
necessitating a modification of the form
originally intended.
On the whole, on the basis of conformity
to pattern, the
Oklahoma specimens suggest present-day
ingenuity rather than
primitive conception and execution. It
must be obvious to all who
are interested in archaeological frauds
that, aside from actual
copying, the perpetrator usually betrays
himself by exaggeration
and by failure to grasp the simplicity
and restraint of the primi-
tive artisan.
The second consideration was the
similarity in flaking of the
Oklahoma eccentrics to a comparative
series of known aboriginal
artifacts. Aside from the intricate
notching, the chipping ap-
proximates in quality that of the
average artifact of established
antiquity. While the craftsman was
skilled in removing minute
chips from very thin edges without
breaking the specimens, he
was not faced with the necessity of
removing long regular flakes
across the face of the points. By the
use of aboriginal blades,
the difficult task of preliminary
thinning and shaping also was
avoided.
Minute scale-like flakes loosely
adhering to the surface were
observed on 96.9% of the artifacts
examined. These scales of
flint are typical of freshly chipped
blades, but ordinary handling,
use or cache burial removes most or all
of these tiny fragments.
As a check, a comparison was made with
several documented
caches of typical Ohio flint blades.
This study showed that while
such scale-like flakes were present on
the Ohio artifacts the fre-
quency of their occurrence was extremely
small. This fact tends
to indicate that the Oklahoma eccentric
points are of recent man-
ufacture.
The evidence also shows that the
Oklahoma flints were re-
chipped from aboriginal blades.
94.8% of the specimens ex-
amined showed an old blade surface
(Plate II, Figs. 12-13.); the
remaining 5.2% had been completely
re-chipped so that it was im-
possible to tell with certainty that
they were made from old blades.
The fact that Tussinger, who is not an
archaeological collector, has
ELLIS: OKLAHOMA ECCENTRIC
FLINTS 125
been purchasing aboriginal flint blades
in Illinois and Arkansas,??
makes the presence of old blade surfaces
particularly significant.9
The third consideration is the evidence
of patination or dis-
coloration attributable to age. There
are several factors to be
considered in this category which
furnish damaging evidence to
the supposition that the specimens are
prehistoric. Most signifi-
cant, perhaps, is the fact that in most
instances extreme edges or
margins, where evidences of recent
chipping would be most ob-
vious, have been treated with a dark
substance utterly distinct
from
anything pertaining to accredited specimens. (Plate II,
Figs. 14-15.). The rapid loss of color
with the application of a
Bunsen flame and the partial dissolution
in an acetone solvent leads
to the conclusion that the material is
organic, probably a glue,
resin, or similar substance. Owing to
the relatively small quanti-
ties of this substance, precise chemical
determinations are beyond
the means of the Laboratory at the
present time. In view of the
admitted skill of the fabricators it is
surprising that so obvious a
blunder should have been made.
In direct contrast to the discoloration
mentioned above is
the fact that there is an utter absence
of the natural stain or dis-
coloration within the minute fractures
and beneath the flake stubs
resulting from the re-chipping. Such
stain or discoloration, its
intensity depending on the type of soil
in which the specimens
have reposed, is characteristic of all
old flint specimens. There
are no patinated areas on the Oklahoma
artifacts except on the
previously mentioned old blade surfaces.
During the course of this study an
attempt was made to
check up on the total number of
eccentric points in the possession
of collectors with the idea of comparing
this figure with the num-
ber supposed to have been found in the
original cache. Approxi-
mately three thousand points were
located, distributed in private
collections from Concord, California, to
Newark, New Jersey.
This figure does not include those
points which still may be in
Tussinger's hands. Since eccentric points have been sold to
tourists for the past nine or more years
it is reasonable to as-
sume that several hundred are in the
hands of small collectors
?? Notes in possession of the Lithic
Laboratory.
126 OHIO ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL
QUARTERLY
and dealers. With
these facts in mind the opinion might be
ventured that further
search would reveal more specimens in the
hands of collectors
than were reported for the original cache.
In this connection it
may be noted that certain dealers in Kansas
have been making
eccentrics and Mr. Robertson took occasion
to show the author
two "faked" eccentrics which he claimed to
have purchased from a
dealer in Arkansas. Robertson, at this
time, pointed out
that the so-called "fakes" showed fresh chip-
ping along the edges
and did not have the dark stain "from age"
along the margins of
the points. However, it is not likely that
any great numbers are
being derived from other sources and
it is difficult to
believe that the intricate notching of the Tussinger
specimens could be
readily duplicated by other fabricators.
In summary the
evidence brought out in this paper may be
briefly reviewed: The
eccentric points do not conform to any
known pattern; the
flaking, aside from the intricate notching, is
not exceptional; and
loosely adhering flakes as well as the absence
of stain ordinarily
found under flake stubs indicate a recent origin.
In view of the
evidence presented and the very questionable cir-
cumstances
surrounding the find, the Lithic Laboratory con-
cludes that the
so-called "eccentric flints" of Oklahoma are of
modern manufacture,
re-chipped from blades of aboriginal origin,
and intentionally
discolored with some substance to give the
edges an appearance
of antiquity.
Bibliography
1 Clements, Forrest
E., and Reed, Alfred, "'Eccentric' Flints of Okla-
homa." American
Antiquity (Menasha, Wis., 1935- ), V (1939), 27-30,
1 plate.
2 Davis, Watson, ed.,
"Maya-like Relics Have Been Found in Okla-
homa
Mounds." Science News Letter (Washington,
1921- ), XXXIV
(1938), 243-4.
3 Gann, Thomas W. F.,
"The Maya Indians of Southern Yucatan and
Northern British
Honduras." U. S. Bureau of
American Ethnology,
Bulletin (Washington, 1887- ),
no. 64 (1918), 99-103, plate 15, figs. 38,
40-50.
4 Heye, George G.,
"Eccentric Chipped Objects from British Hon-
duras." Museum
of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, Indian Notes
(New York, 1924- ), II (1925), 99-102.
ELLIS: OKLAHOMA ECCENTRIC FLINTS 127
5 Joyce, T. A., "The 'Eccentric
Flints' of Central America." Royal
Anthropological Institute of Great
Britain and Ireland, Journal (London,
1871-
), LXII (1932), xvii-xxvi, 8 plates.
6 Mason, J. Alden, "Preserving
Ancient America's Finest Sculptures."
National Geographic Magazine (Washington, 1889-
), LXVIII (1935),
542.
7 Reeder, Pearl, ed., "Delicate
Flint Implements." Hobbies; the Maga-
zine for Collectors (Chicago, 1931-
), XLI, no. 1 (1936), 102.
8 Reeder, Pearl, ed., "Oklahoma
Notes." Hobbies; the Magazine
for
Collectors, XLI, no. 11 (1937), 99.
9 Reeder, Pearl, ed., "Fancy Spears
May Be Fakes." Hobbies; the
Magazine for Collectors, XLI, no. 12 (1937), 101.
A STUDY OF THE OKLAHOMA ECCENTRIC FLINTS
By H. HOLMES ELLIS*
Since March, 1936, when they were first called to the at-
tention of the general public,7?? the Oklahoma eccentric flints have
presented a puzzling archaeological phenomenon. Dr. Forrest E.
Clements,1 collaborating with Mr. Alfred Reed, Jr., wrote the
only satisfactory account of the find and the circumstances sur-
rounding it, but due to lack of time and facilities he was unable
to carry out a detailed analysis of the specimens themselves. In
June, 1939, the Lithic Laboratory for the Eastern United States at
the Museum of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical
Society, at the request of Dr. Clements, began this analysis, the
results of which are embodied in the present paper.
Before these results are presented, the history of the find
itself should be reviewed briefly. In the summer of 1921, Mack
Tussinger, a half-breed Indian, is said to have uncovered a cache
of some 3,500 perfect and a number of broken, very intricately
notched flint specimens. The cache was in a mound in the
northern part of Delaware County, Oklahoma, on the north side
of the Elk River about six miles above its junction with the
Grand River. Tussinger claims to have sorted the specimens
according to size and re-buried them in his yard. During the next
few years about 800 of the smaller ones were sold to Dr. W. C.
Barnard, a collector in Seneca, Missouri. Some were also sold by
Tussinger to Tom Fleetwood of Wyandotte, Oklahoma. In
1931, Tussinger, seeking a wider market for his material, began
to dispose of his remaining specimens through J. A. Robertson
who operates a gasoline station and roadside stand near Baxter
Springs, Kansas. After Robertson's appearance on the scene the
* The author is deeply indebted to H. C. Shetrone and R. G. Morgan for the
assistance which they rendered during the course of this study.
?? The arabic numerals refer to corresponding numerals in the bibliography
appended.
(121)