 |
| Figure One - Folsom points from the author's collection showing variation in material, form, color, and workmanship. The three critical factors identifying Folsom points; flutes, thinness, and edge retouch. John Bradford Branney photograph. There are two opposing factions or "camps" when it comes to prehistoric projectile point typology: there are those who lump and there are those who split. |
One thing I have noticed when it comes to the artifact group discussions on social media is that when there is an interesting artifact or even an artifake posted, there are always several different opinions on what the projectile point type is or the material it is made from. Everyone has an opinion. Some people might accuse the artifact of being modern or fake while others defend its authenticity. Some people might call it a Dalton or a Plainview or a Clovis or whatever. Experienced and novice keyboard warriors alike pontificate and opine on everything about that artifact. Some even post their own artifacts as a comparison or to boast that they are just not observers, they have 'skin in the game'. It is something to behold and can be quite educational. That leads me to my main topic on projectile point typology: the lumpers vs. the splitters.
When it comes to projectile point typology what is a lumper and what is a splitter? Let me start off with the lumpers. Lumpers are individuals who embrace the philosophy that current projectile point typology is broad enough to capture a wide range of variations within finished projectile points or knife forms. To a lumper, the fewer projectile point types there are, the better. A lumper focuses on the similarities between different projectile points and tries to categorize projectile points into existing projectile point types. Lumpers recognize that Paleoindians and other prehistoric people did not have blueprints with specifications when they made projectile points and that a wide variation in projectile points occurred because of different levels of knapper skill and experience, the material used, the use of the artifact, and/or meeting a specific hafting requirement. A lumper first looks at existing projectile point types when classifying a point or knife form even if that means evaluating other regions to find a match!
 |
| CLICK for the PENTALOGY |
As an example of the variation between different projectile points within a defined projectile point type, figure one shows a few Folsom dart points from my collection. A lumper focuses on the common attributes between the different Folsom points and sees the differences as only variations around a common theme. By contrast, a "splitter" is an individual who follows the philosophy that current projectile point typology is well-defined and that when a group of projectile points or knife forms falls outside of a well-defined description or specification, a new projectile point type is in order. A splitter focuses on the differences between these Folsom points and might suggest that they be broken up into subtypes or maybe a different projectile point type altogether.
 |
| Figure Two - High Plains Midland points showing a variation in form, size, and materials. John Bradford Branney photograph and collection. |
Figure two is a photograph of what I call Midland points from around 12,000 years old. I define Midland points by their wide and relatively shallow flaking with flat and thin cross-sections. Midland points are known for their continuous marginal retouch along the edges which eliminated the negative bulbs produced from percussion flaking. Some people might see enough variation within this group of points that they call one or two Milnesand or Goshen or Cody Complex or something else altogether. My tendency to lump only sees Midland points.
We have come a long way from the days when archaeologist E. B. Renaud lumped most Paleoindian point types under a broad and generic category called "Yuma" after the county in Colorado where they were found during the Dust Bowl years. Sometimes I wonder if Dr. Renaud wasn't on to something. It seems we have gone a bit too far with the splitting. The "splitting philosophy" follows the mantra of the more the merrier when it comes to new projectile point types. Splitters avoid knocking a square peg into a round hole when it comes to projectile point typology.
Paleoindians passed down their projectile point-making from generation to generation verbally. Even with good verbal instruction, there had to be several opportunities for variation. If you doubt me, just look at modern flintknappers who try to replicate the prehistoric technology and critical dimensions of ancient projectile points. Modern flintknappers are all over the map. I can assume the same thing for ancient flintknappers. They dealt with geographic separation between bands and differences in raw material, knapping skills, workmanship standards, and attention to detail.
Figure three shows the variation that exists in form and material in just one high plains projectile point type called Jimmy Allen.
 |
| Figure Three - Variation within the Jimmy Allen projectile point description. |
To summarize, lumpers classify projectile points with some latitude in variation when it comes to placing a particular projectile point into an existing projectile point type. Splitters see the need for new projectile point types when faced with a certain amount of variation within a group of projectile points. My personal philosophy is to lump. This is neither the right answer nor the wrong answer. I believe there should be plenty of room for variation in any projectile point type to accommodate differences in knapping skills and experience, material types, workmanship, and style. In my opinion, “splitters” have carved the meat off the turkey too thin for my tastes and we ended up with far too many projectile point types. That is just my opinion.
Are you a lumper or are you a splitter?
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 smack dab in 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.
