The Goshen-Plainview Dilemma

Figure One - A Plainview point on the left was surface recovered in Deaf Smith County, Texas.
A Goshen point on the right was surface recovered in Weld County, Colorado.
John Bradford Branney Collection. 

Can you tell the difference between the two prehistoric projectile points in figure one? Quite frankly, I cannot see much of a difference besides the different materials used by the Paleoindians who made them. That is about it! Technologically and morphologically those two projectile points are identical. 

The projectile point on the left side in figure one was surface rescued from private land in Deaf Smith County, Texas. Its Paleoindian flintknapper used Alibates agatized dolomite from the Panhandle of Texas to make that point. I call that projectile point type: Plainview. 

The 2.3-inch-long projectile point on the right side in figure one was a surface recovery from private land in Weld County, Colorado. Its Paleoindian flintknapper used a grayish orange petrified wood to make that projectile point. I call that projectile point type: Goshen.

Hmm...Same style and technology for those two projectile points...Why do two identical projectile points carry different projectile point type names?

Let me explain the backstory behind those two projectile point types, and then I will explain what is happening to sort out the Goshen-Plainview dilemma.  

Figure Two - CLICK for Book INFORMATION

During the summer of 1941, two young cousins named Val Keene Whitacre and Bill Weaks dug into a soft caliche embankment along Running Water Draw near Plainview, Texas. What the two boys discovered advanced our understanding of human prehistory in North America. Whitacre made the critical discovery, finding a long, stone spear point with one end still embedded in thick, fossilized bone. When the boy picked up the bone and artifact, the bone crumbled apart. 

In 1944, two geologists Glen L. Evans and Grayson E. Meade dug into that same caliche bank and found an incredible discovery — a bone bed filled with skeletons and partial skeletons of approximately 100 extinct bison. The two geologists also found stone projectile points, knives, and scrapers associated with the bone bed.

Texas Memorial Museum and the University of Texas's Bureau of Economic Geology continued excavations at the site from June to October 1945 and in November 1949.

Figure Three - Known geographical distribution for Goshen,
Goshen-Plainview, and Folsom points. 

Even though collectors were finding similar styled projectile points of that distinctive type from Canada to Mexico (figure three), the discovery at Plainview, Texas marked the first time anyone found that projectile point type in direct association with fossilized remains of extinct animals. Archaeologists named that point type Plainview after the nearby town. Archaeological and geologic evidence determined that the Plainview projectile point was younger than another famous projectile point type recently discovered in New Mexico called Folsom. Archaeologists originally dated Plainview projectile points at around 10,000 years old.

Figure Four - Montana's Mill Iron Site Goshen projectile points,
practically indistinguishable from Texas's Plainview projectile points,
but over a thousand years older.   

In mid-August of 1966 at the Hell Gap site in Goshen County, Wyoming, archaeologists were ready to conclude their investigation when they discovered a cultural zone below the Folsom level, indicating that the new cultural zone was older than Folsom. A sterile layer of dirt separated the two cultural zones. At first, the archaeologists declared that the first complete projectile point in that new cultural zone was an atypical Folsom projectile point. The archaeologists then proposed that the new projectile point could be a Clovis projectile point but they quickly dismissed that idea. In his study of that projectile point, principal archaeologist Henry Irwin noted the similarities between the newly discovered projectile point at Hell Gap and the Plainview points previously found in Texas. However, Irwin and his associates encountered a dilemma in naming the newly discovered projectile point after the Plainview points in Texas. 

What was the dilemma?   

Plainview points in Texas were found above Folsom points in the geologic column at the Plainview site. Using the geological law of superposition meant Plainview projectile points were younger than Folsom projectile points. However, at the Hell Gap site in Wyoming, that new Plainview lookalike projectile point was discovered below Folsom projectile points making the Plainview lookalike projectile point older than Folsom projectile points. 

In a nutshell, the geological law of superposition states that in any sequence of sedimentary strata not overturned, the youngest stratum is at the top and the oldest stratum is at the base, in other words, each bed is younger than the one beneath it.      

The dilemma was that the projectile points from the Plainview and Hell Gap Sites were morphologically and technologically the same type, but the Plainview projectile points in Texas were younger than Folsom projectile points while at the Hell Gap Site, the Plainview lookalike point was older than Folsom. Therefore, based on that "age discrepancy", Henry Irwin reluctantly proposed a new projectile point type called Goshen, after the county where the Hell Gap site was located.  

Investigators confirmed the time gap between Goshen on the northern High Plains and Plainview along the Panhandle of Texas in the 1980s at the Mill Iron Site in Montana (Figure Four). George Frison (1996) realized there was not much difference between the points they discovered at Mill Iron and the Plainview points in Texas, except of course their ages. He addressed the situation by integrating the two projectile point types into one projectile point technology called Goshen-Plainview.  

How is that discrepancy in age explained? My gut feeling is that Goshen-Plainview technology overlapped with Folsom technology both temporally and geographically. The data at Hell Gap and the Plainview sites reflected two separate incidents for the presence of Goshen-Plainview, one incident in which it was older than the  Folsom occupation (Hell Gap) and one incident in which it was younger than the Folsom occupation (Plainview), but in both incidents, the occupants used Goshen-Plainview technology.  



CLICK for INFO on John BRADFORD Branney Books 


Postscript 

Since I originally wrote that article many years ago, much work has occurred to unravel the age discrepancies between Goshen and Plainview. Waters and Stafford (2014) redated the Goshen strata at the Mill Iron site in Montana and compared it to strata at other high plains Goshen sites such as Jim Pitts and Upper Twin Mountain. They found that Mill Iron showed the oldest age for Goshen while Jim Pitts showed the youngest age. They concluded from the data that Goshen's age range was approximately 12,500 cal BP to 11,800 cal BP. Based on that evidence, Waters and Stafford suggested that Goshen technology emerged sometime after the introduction of Folsom technology and continued into post-Folsom times. That was a big revelation at the time since most people believed that Goshen was older than Folsom based on the stratigraphic evidence from the Hell Gap site and the original dating at the Mill Iron sites.    

Dating the original Plainview site in Texas was always problematic. Buchanan, Collard, and O'Brien (2017) reported that archaeologists sampled four other Plainview sites in Texas: Bonfire Shelter, Lubbock Lake, Lake Theo, and Williamson-Plainview. The archaeologists came up with a minimum age range of between 12,100 cal BP and 11,300 cal BP for Plainview. Based on that data, it appeared that Goshen technology was older to the north, and spread to the south where it became what we call Plainview. Based on those two studies, it seemed that Goshen and Plainview overlapped in the north and south for approximately three hundred years and that Plainview carried on in the south after Goshen disappeared in the north.       

Goshen and Plainview were now in similar time horizons with the technology spreading geographically from north to south. Since investigators recognized the Plainview projectile point type first, perhaps we should abandon the Goshen projectile point type and roll those projectile points and Goshen sites under the Plainview umbrella. 

2017      Buchanan, Briggs; Collard, Mark; and O'Brien, Michael J., 

              "Geometric Morphometric Analyses Support Incorporating the Goshen Point 

             Type into Plainview" in Plainview, edited by Holliday, Johnson, and Knudson.                       History Faculty Publications. 27. 

1996      Frison, George C. 

              The Mill Iron Site. University of New Mexico Press. Albuquerque.           

2014    Waters, Michael R., and Thomas W. Stafford Jr. 

            "Redating the Mill Iron Site in Montana: A Reexamination of Goshen Complex                    Chronology" in American Antiquity 79 (3), pages 541-548. 

The historical fiction novels written by John Bradford Branney are known for their impeccable research and biting realism. In his latest blockbuster novel Beyond the Campfire, Branney catapults his readers back into Prehistoric America where they reunite with some familiar faces from Branney’s best-selling prehistoric adventure series the Shadows on the Trail Pentalogy.

John Bradford Branney holds a geology degree from the University of Wyoming and an MBA from the University of Colorado. John lives in the Colorado mountains with his wife, Theresa. Beyond the Campfire is the eleventh published book by Branney.

 

            

In the Groove with a Midland Projectile Point

Figure One - Side A of 1.8-inch-long Midland dart or spear point showing the remnant of an
impact fracture that put the projectile point out of service until the user hastily repaired the tip.  

Ronny Walker surface rescued the 1.8-inch-long Midland dart or spear point in Figure One from a cotton field in Lynn County, Texas. I acquired this Midland point not for its beauty, even though I think it is beauty, but for its character. This projectile point saw a lot of action in its time, and if it could talk, I imagine it would have a pretty interesting story. Side A of the projectile point in Figure One clearly shows part of the impact fracture that damaged the projectile point's tip. The Paleoindian then repaired the projectile point and did a pretty sloppy job with the new tip.      

Midland projectile points exhibit wide, relatively flat flake scars that produce very flat cross sections. In outline, Midland projectile points resemble Folsom projectile points but are missing the flutes. Collectors and archaeologists often find Midland projectile points associated with Folsom projectile points leading some investigators to call Midland projectile points, unfluted Folsom projectile points. There are a few investigators who believe Midland projectile points and associated artifacts deserve their own cultural designation. Midland projectile points fall within the age range of the Folsom Complex, at around 12,900 to 12,200 years old. In my opinion, the same people made Folsom and Midland projectile points.    

Before this projectile point ended up in my collection, it belonged to Ronny Walker, Tim Elkins, Ed Rowe, Ron Van Heukelom, and Rodney Michel. Dwain Rogers, Bill Jackson, and Rodney Michel certified this projectile point as an authentic Midland projectile point.    

Now, I am going to take you on a quick journey back in time to get you in the groove for further analysis of the Midland projectile point. I am setting the dial on my time machine to 10,600 B.C. We will be going on a High Plains elk hunt with a Paleoindian named Chayton. This hunting excerpt is from the first book in my prehistoric saga titled SHADOWS on the TRAIL.         

Two majestic elk, a young bull and a cow, walked out from behind the trees, heading straight at Chayton. The bull led the way while the cow followed behind. The elk held their heads high and sniffed at the air, smelling for any danger that would set them off running. The elk, upwind from Chayton, did not pick up his scent and kept walking towards him.

Chayton’s left throwing arm was cocked and ready to throw the first spear, but the bull was still walking straight at him. Chayton did not like his chances for a kill with this throw. The bull had no vital organs exposed to Chayton’s line of fire and unless Chayton threw perfectly and severed an artery, the elk would not go down. The last thing Chayton wanted to do was track a wounded elk in this rugged country.

Figure Two - Reconstruction of the SHADOWS on the TRAIL scenario
with Chayton armed with a spear thrower and spear. However, this 
particular drawing is of two caribou bulls and not a bull and cow elk.

Chayton needed the elk to turn and expose its side to his spear. Chayton thought about moving, but one sound and he would send the elk crashing through the trees in the opposite direction. The elk continued to walk straight toward Chayton. Any closer and they would pick up Chayton’s scent.

Chayton searched the ground with his right hand and found a small rock. While his left arm kept his spear ready to throw, he hurled the rock to his right where it ricocheted off a tree. The bull reared back and ran away from the sound, exposing the left side to Chayton's spear. Chayton hurled the spear and the sharp fluted spear point popped when it penetrated the bull’s rib cage. The bull continued to run to the left while Chayton readied another spear. The confused cow ran away from Chayton, crashing through the trees that led back up the bluff. Chayton grabbed the rest of his spears and followed the blood spoor left by the bull.

Figure Three -  CLICK for SHADOWS on the TRAIL

When Chayton's spear smashed into the rib cage of the bull elk, the stone tip of the thin projectile point was most likely damaged and fractured, much like the Midland projectile point that I photographed in Figure One and in later figures in the article. 

Most prehistoric projectile points that I discover on the surface of the ground in the field are damaged in one way or another. On most of the prehistoric projectile points that I find, the damage appears to come from modern-day sources such as cows, plows, or earth-moving equipment. Most of the time the modern-day damage is obvious because of fresh breaks or fractures on the projectile point. However, there are a few projectile points where it is obvious that the damage happened in prehistoric times. The Midland projectile point is one of the latter.  

I seldom find pristine, undamaged stone projectile points. In my earlier artifact hunting days, I used to calculate in my head the ratio of "ninety percent or better complete" projectile points to total projectile point pieces found. I estimated that on average that ratio was somewhere between five and ten percent. That meant for every twenty projectile points, only one or two were "ninety percent or better complete". With each passing year, I am finding fewer total artifacts, and undamaged projectile points are even rarer than they were before. It was much easier to find prehistoric artifacts forty years ago than it is today. As I often remind myself when I am hunting, "Prehistoric artifacts are not a renewable resource."  

Fortunately, I am as interested in broken projectile points as I am in complete projectile points. I love doing what I call "autopsies" on damaged stone projectile points and speculating on how that projectile point ended up in the condition I found it. Please do not get me wrong, I would much rather find unblemished, perfect projectile points, but in today's world, damaged projectile points are the rule and not the exception. A person has to deal with the cards they were dealt.  

The root-beer-colored, semi-translucent Midland point in the figures is quite thin, and the Paleoindian who made the projectile point ground and polished the edges halfway up to the repaired tip (the red dots in Figure Four indicate where the projectile point was ground or polished). The repaired tip is not as noticeable on Side B in Figure Four as it is on Side A in Figure One, but the repaired tip still looks asymmetrical and hastily done and does not meet the same workmanship standards as the rest of the projectile point. 

Figure Four - Side B of the Midland dart showing much of
the original flaking. The repaired tip is evident, but the 
impact fracture is on the other face.     

Most Paleoindian flintknappers ground or polished the edges of their projectile points to ensure the razor-sharp rock did not slice through and damage the animal sinew they used to bind the projectile point onto a spear or dart foreshaft. In studying hundreds of projectile points, it is my experience that when Paleoindians ground or polished the basal edges, they did so for at least one-third to one-quarter of the total length of a freshly made projectile point. When those Paleoindians resharpened their projectile points, the ground or polished edge length increased as a percentage of the total projectile point length. Based on that, I am guessing that the original, undamaged Midland projectile point in Figures One and Four was quite a bit longer prior to the tip damage that occurred.  

This Midland projectile point from Texas saw some action, hunting or otherwise. Something happened to damage the distal end or tip of the projectile point. Perhaps, the projectile point slammed into a bison bone or a rock or something hard enough to shatter the original tip and one edge. The Paleoindian then hastily repaired the tip of the projectile point. Figure Five shows another view of the impact fracture at the tip. Based on the direction of the compression rings, the red arrow indicates the direction that the impact came from. The collision fractured the tip of the projectile point and the fissure advanced through the projectile point like a wave moving through water. Compression rings radiate away from the direction of impact much like ripples on a calm lake after a rock splashes in the water. The fissure began at the tip of the projectile point and traveled through the rock until its energy was dissipated or escaped out of the sides of the rock.  

Figure Five - Side A showing the impact fracture at the tip and the direction
that the force came from that damaged the tip.   

Impact with something hard caused the compression rings and ripples on the damaged tip. Oftentimes, the greater the impact or disturbance, the more severe the ripples and undulations are. Choppy ripples on a Folsom flute or even on an impact fracture indicate erratic bending forces in the rock at the time the fracture was initiated. The amplitude and frequency of the ripples are a rough measure of the amount of energy at the time of fracturing. Of course, flaws or inconsistencies in the raw material can also enhance ripples, but in the case of our Midland point, the ripples came from a front-end collision with a tough material.  

Figure Six - "B" marks the transverse break along the edge.  

The Midland projectile point has more damage from the collision than just the impact fracture. In Figure Six, I labeled a section along the projectile point edge with a "B". That "B" represents a transverse break or burin-like feature that I am convinced was the result of the projectile point's collision.  What is a burin and burination? 

Burination is a process used by prehistoric people to intentionally remove a small, relatively thick flake from another flake, blade, or biface using a snapped termination or a previous burination scar as the striking platform. Burin flakes or spalls run along an edge, rather than on the surface of the artifact's face. The scar left by the removal of the edge often intersects the artifact's face at a right angle, leaving a strong, but sharp edge for scraping or grooving hard materials. 

In the case of the Midland projectile point, I believe the burin-like feature along the edge was a transverse break caused by the same collision that created the impact fracture. Caution is always necessary when differentiating between an impact fracture, a transverse break, or an intentionally-crafted burin. However, on this Midland projectile point, the burin-like feature was not intentional, in my opinion, it was accidental.   

       

The historical fiction novels written by John Bradford Branney are known for their impeccable research and biting realism. In his latest blockbuster novel Beyond the Campfire, Branney catapults his readers back into Prehistoric America where they reunite with some familiar faces from Branney’s best-selling prehistoric adventure series the Shadows on the Trail Pentalogy.

John Bradford Branney holds a geology degree from the University of Wyoming and an MBA from the University of Colorado. John lives in the Colorado mountains with his wife, Theresa. Beyond the Campfire is the eleventh published book by Branney.

Folsom v. Clovis Technology - SHADOWS ON THE TRAIL



Figure One - Wide range of High Plains Folsom Points from Texas, Colorado, Wyoming, and South Dakota. The longest point is 1.9 inches long. John Bradford Branney Collection.  

Did you identify the above projectile points as Folsom?  

My five-book adventure series about North America and Paleoindians titled the SHADOWS on the TRAIL Pentalogy began in what is called Texas and Colorado today. Ultimately, the latest book in the series, BEYOND the CAMPFIRE, ended up in the Black Hill of South Dakota and Wyoming. 

The books were written about a mysterious group of people we now call Folsom who lived on the Great Plains around twelve thousand six hundred or so years ago. There is no archaeological evidence that the Folsom Paleoindians used any kind of written language. Hence, they probably handed down their customs, processes, rituals, and folklore from generation to generation through word of mouth. One of the distinguishing characteristics of the Folsom Paleoindian culture was a beautifully-crafted fluted projectile point that is arguably the finest projectile point type ever made in North America. One of the processes that the Folsom People passed on from generation to generation was the making of these fabulous fluted projectile points. Figure one is a photo of a few examples of Folsom points from my personal collection. Even with the variation in shape, size, material, and quality, most people familiar with artifacts would identify them as Folsom projectile points. 



Figure Two - The third book in the SHADOWS on the TRAIL Pentalogy.
CLICK for JOHN BRADFORD BRANNEY BOOKS 

In the third book of the SHADOWS on the TRAIL Pentalogy titled WINDS of EDEN, I wrote about how I thought the Folsom People passed along their flint knapping processes  In the passage below, a tribal elder teaches children how to make these wonderful fluted projectile points. School is now in session!

The old man picked up a square of tatanka – bison hide. He placed it on top of his left thigh. He then picked up the flat rock and placed it on top of the bison hide. He then placed another square of bison hide over the top of the flat rock. The old man picked up an unfinished spear point and the antler punch. The three boys watched, never taking their eyes off the old man’s skilled hands. The old man then adjusted the flat rock so it was on the inside of his left thigh. He pushed the tip of the unfinished spear point against the flat rock and lined up the antler punch against the tiny knob on the base of the spear point. When the old man was satisfied with the positioning of the spear point, he placed the other end of the antler punch against his right thigh.

Since the elder was teaching the children a relatively complex process (rarely duplicated with success even today), we would expect to find errors and variations in the children's final product. Twelve thousand years later, you or I might find one of the children's Folsom points and wonder why all Folsom points weren't created equal. In general, Folsom projectile points exhibit three critical characteristics; 1). fluting, 2). thinness, and 3). micro pressure retouch along the edges. You can see these characteristics in all of the Folsom points in figure one. 

Figure Three - More Folsom points from my collection. 

I am switching gears now, to an earlier group of Paleoindians before Folsom. These Paleoindians were associated with what we call the Clovis Complex.

Ever since the discovery of the famous Folsom, Clovis, and Plainview sites in the early part of the twentieth century, there has been an ongoing effort to identify and categorize all Paleoindian projectile points into specific projectile point type buckets. Before the discovery of the above sites, archaeologists and collectors lumped most finely-made western Paleoindian projectile points into a broad category called Yuma, named after the town in Colorado where collectors were finding these artifacts in sand blowouts during the Dust Bowl years of the 1930s. 

One Paleoindian projectile point type with a broad geographical range in North America was named Clovis after the insitu discovery near the town by the same name in New Mexico. Today, collectors and archaeologists find Clovis-styled points in forty-eight states, Canada, and Mexico. Clovis projectile points are normally fluted, just like Folsom, but the flutes on Clovis are shorter and angled outward from the base (see figure four which demonstrates typical fluting angle differences - "a" in the diagram is Folsom and "b" is Clovis). In addition, Clovis projectile points exhibit less intricate pressure flaking and retouch than the average Folsom projectile point. Just like Folsom, Clovis projectile points show a broad range in dimensions, form, and material.

Figure Four - One way to differentiate 

between Folsom and Clovis. Folsom fluting 

is parallel to the biface plane (flat) while 

Clovis is diagonal to the biface plan (angled). 

Credit unknown.    

There are several plausible explanations for the variation in Clovis projectile points. First of all, Clovis flint knappers did not work from blueprints like modern-day manufacturing workers do. Clovis projectile points did not have written specifications, and all Clovis flint knappers were not created equal. For that matter, no Paleoindian flint knapper had exactly the same skills and experience as their peers! People with different levels of skill, experience, and creativity created Clovis projectile points! Last but not least, Clovis and other Paleoindian flint knappers dealt with a wide range of raw materials with different mechanical properties and quality. For example, chalcedony knaps differently than silicified sandstone which knaps differently than obsidian. Some raw material was just better for flint knapping than other materials, resulting in a wide range of quality and form between different projectile points. 

We can and should expect variation in quality, dimensions, and sizes for Clovis and Folsom projectile points!

  

We see variations in Clovis-styled fluted projectile points across the different regions in North America. The variation in size, shape, manufacturing process and material has led to many debates about whether or not these regional variants of Clovis-styled fluted projectile are actually Clovis points and fit under the umbrella of the Clovis Paleoindian culture that swept across North America. Some analysts argue that these regional Clovis-styled fluted projectile points prove by their chronological and morphological differences that they did not come from a single Clovis culture while others argue that these Clovis-styled fluted projectile points are just regional variations of a common Clovis theme at a slightly different time and place.

If these Clovis-styled fluted projectile points did come from one common Clovis culture, the variation might be explained by a process called 'drift". Drift occurs when we see the changing of a standard through time within groups of people who share the same cultural ancestry. Drift can occur in any given culture and can happen for a variety of reasons such as isolation of a population or innovation within a specific population or the evolving needs in a changing environment. As an example of the last item; when mammoths and mastodons became scarce or were absent, Clovis people might have adapted their weaponry to hunt different animals. We should expect a change in their projectile point style going from hunting mammoths as a mainstay to hunting bison or smaller mammals. In figure five below I show three different Clovis-styled variants from the eastern United States. Did these precede or follow Clovis? These three eastern types carry a bunch of Clovis characteristics. 

Figure Five - Clovis-style regional variants from eastern U.S. (Haynes 2002) Were these made by the same Clovis culture discovered in the west or different cultures that copied the fluting technology?   

Figure six represents a few Clovis projectile points from my high plains Clovis collection. You can see by the photo that even though these Clovis points were surface finds from the same region, they have quite a bit of variation. Even with the differences in form, fluting length, and flaking patterns, they are still Clovis points. In the caption below figure six, I identified the variants from other regions of North America that my high plains points resemble. As an example, the first point in my photograph is a Clovis projectile point that was surface found in northern New Mexico. It resembles the Gainey projectile point from the Great Lakes region in figure five. 

The photo in figure seven shows Clovis-styled fluted projectile points from the east coast of the United States and Canada. These Clovis-styled fluted projectile points are not typed as Clovis, even though they have similar characteristics to my Colorado Clovis point in figure six, second from the right.   

Figure Six - High Plains Clovis points demonstrate the wide range of variability. From left to right; New Mexico Clovis, Gainey variety; Nebraska Clovis, Colby variety, Montana Clovis, western variety; Colorado Clovis, Hazel Variety, Colorado Clovis, eastern variety; Colorado Clovis, Barnes Variety. The longest point is 3.8 inches long.
John Bradford Branney Collection.       

The bottom line is that there are a variety of reasons that a single point type such as Clovis shows variation between different projectile points within the type. That does not mean that these regional variants were not part of the Clovis Paleoindian culture that overtook North America for a few hundred years around 13,000 years ago.  

Figure Seven - Clovis-style points from Nova Scotia, New York, and Main.
(Haynes 2002) Boy, they sure look like my Colorado Clovis
above (fifth point).   

I am going to say goodbye for now and return to WINDS OF EDEN to see what happened between the elder and the children. School is back in session.      

The old man motioned for his two young grandchildren to sit down in front of him, close enough to see, but far enough away to avoid flying pieces of sharp rock. The old man readjusted the flat rock with the tip of the spear point. He then carefully positioned the groove in the antler punch with the tiny knob at the base of the spear point. When everything was to his liking, the old man picked up the heavy antler hammer and took a couple of practice swings in the air. The old man then held the antler hammer above the antler punch and swung down with enough force to transfer energy from the antler punch through the rock. The rock popped loudly and when the old man lifted up the spear point for the children to see, a flute or groove ran longitudinally up the entire length of the spear point. The children laughed as if it they had just witnessed great magic. Their eyes were as big as the moon as they looked around at each other. The old man gazed around at the children, smiling. The old man was proud of the flute in the spear point and relieved that he could still do it. However, what made him the happiest was passing down the fluting tradition to the next generation of the tribe.

2002    Haynes, Gary. The Early Settlement of North America - The Clovis Era. University             Press. Cambridge.  

The historical fiction novels written by John Bradford Branney are known for their impeccable research and biting realism. In his latest blockbuster novel BEYOND the CAMPFIRE  Branney places his readers smack dab into the middle of the late Pleistocene along the high plains of North America. BEYOND the CAMPFIRE is Branney's eleventh book.  

John Bradford Branney holds a geology degree from the University of Wyoming and an MBA from the University of Colorado.