THE ONE THAT GOT AWAY - A Besant Story

The One That Got Away

A Besant Story

by John Bradford Branney

 

Figure 1 - 2.1-inch-long Besant atlatl dart point or knife form found by the author in  
Goshen County, Wyoming, in the summer of 1972. The raw material is a cream-
colored jasper, most likely sourced from the Hartville Uplift. One might call
this point a Pelican Lake or Besant 'tweener'. More on 'tweeners' later.   

Fast Track

There was not a cloud in the powder-blue sky. At ground level, it was a different story. Blowing sand and snow pelted the landscape. In the distance, a man walked toward the morning sun along a wind-swept ridge. His back was to an intense, gale-force wind out of the northwest. Ten paces or so behind him, another man followed, and behind that man by a few paces was a third man. Below the ridge and running parallel to the men was a small river meandering across a wide floodplain. At that time of year, the river was small, but when the snowmelt arrived in the spring, the river would carry muddy water from one side of the floodplain to the other. A millennium and a half later, white settlers would name that river the Powder. Behind the men, snow-capped mountains in the distance reached for heaven. A millennium or so later, those blue mountains would be called the Bighorns.

Up on the ridge, the furious wind flung dirt and snow high into the air, creating ground blizzards and whiteouts. The men were hunting for bison, but they would settle for deer, elk, pronghorn, or practically anything that moved. The hunters were not starving; their tribe stockpiled enough food to last through much of the winter. But as winter plodded along, the hunters became restless just lying around their dwellings. You can only make so many projectile points and atlatl dart shafts before you become frightfully bored. The hunters craved physical activity to stave off the tedium. They just picked the wrong day.

The bitter cold found it difficult to penetrate the hunters’ garb. Over their inner clothes, the hunters wore buffalo robes fashioned into ankle-length coats. Elk hide was used to make their leggings. Sock-like boots with fur against the skin covered their moccasin-laden feet. Fur-lined caps rested on the hunters’ noggins. The leader’s long gray hair blew across his face as the wind pushed him across the ridge. His cap was made from the facial skin and fur of a badger. Empty animal eye sockets aimed forward and moved in unison with the leader's turning of the head.

The leader’s complexion was weathered and dark, and his face long and drawn. Deep wrinkles lined around his mouth and eyes. The leader’s nose was large and hooked, and a long pinkish-red scar ran diagonally across his right cheek. He squinted against the bright winter sun and the harsh wind. The rims of his eyes were red from an ice and sand assault. He was considered old, surviving that harsh environment for over forty winters. He was a survivor who had so far met any challenge nature threw at him. 

Several winters prior, the leader and his people left their village near a big river to the northeast. White settlers would someday call that big river the Missouri. The leader's tribe, which an archaeologist would name Besant, traveled southwest, following smaller river tributaries, sometimes by boat, while most of the time on foot. His people still traded with the kinfolk who remained camped along the big river. In fact, the brown semitranslucent rock used to make most of their projectile points came from trading with the people to the northeast.

The leader stopped at the edge of the ridge and braced himself against the gusty wind. He liked living along that small river; there was enough food to feed the village, and the water from the river was mostly good. Out of the corner of his eye, the leader spotted a broken atlatl shaft lying on the ground. At its tip was a corner-notched projectile point with two sharp barbs near its base. It belonged to a different people who spoke a strange tongue. Those people once camped along the river, but the leader and his people took the land away from them and pushed those strangers west into the mountains. Archaeologists would call those displaced people Pelican Lake.

The leader’s attention was on the river valley below. The ridge partially shielded the river valley from the wind. If there were any prey animals to find on that blustery day, they would be hunkered down in the valley below. The old man threaded his way down the steep slope of the ridge through a field of granite boulders. The other two men followed behind. The hunters’ spear throwers were ready, with spearshafts resting on their shoulders just in case they spooked out a beast or two from amongst the rocks. They would need to act quickly if they expected to make a kill.

They arrived at a place in the river valley where massive granite boulders formed a natural amphitheater. Between the granite boulders, the tribe had constructed a fence using cottonwood tree posts and rails. They then draped old bison hides over the rails. The corral's opening was to the north. Painted bison skulls adorned the tops of several fence posts. The leader stopped and peered into the corral. Bison bones littered the ground, many with patches of fur and stained blood still on them. The tribe successfully utilized that bison trap twice over the last two autumns.

After briefly reminiscing over past bison hunts, the three hunters turned and walked away. Suddenly, a jackrabbit jumped out from behind a bush and hightailed it across the floodplain. With tail tucked and ears pinned back, the rabbit flat-out skedaddled. The leader launched a dart from his spear thrower high into the air. A second hunter followed suit and flung an atlatl dart into the air. The darts met the nasty crosswind and fluttered off course, crashing into the ground a good distance away from the intended target. The jackrabbit never looked back.

The hunters had a good laugh over that. That was the stringy jackrabbit that got away. With that, they searched for their atlatl darts. Both darts needed repair. The hunters would have the rest of the monotonous winter to repair those darts. The three hunters headed upriver. By the end of the day, the hunters wished they had not missed the only game animal they spotted on that miserable day.

Figure 2 - The North Butte of Pumpkin Buttes near where my story took place.
Photo Courtesy of Wyoming Catholic Cowboys.  

Besant – People of the North      

A mile or so away from where my story took place lies a well-documented prehistoric bison kill known as the Ruby Site, located near Pumpkin Buttes south of Gillette, Wyoming (Figure 2). Frison (1991: 200-208) reported that the site was a sophisticated bison trap or pound with a primitive corral, drive lane, and ceremonial structure. The construction of the bison trap took advantage of the surrounding topography, and according to Frison, designing and building the various components of the trap took an elevated level of knowledge and resourcefulness from the Besant people who built it.

Frison reported that people from the Besant Complex migrated onto the northwestern plains around A.D. 100, and then sometime around A.D. 280, they built and utilized that bison pound. Frison believed that the Besant people introduced one of the most sophisticated bison procurement strategies known on the northern plains in pre-horse times. The Besant people expended a large amount of effort digging the postholes and constructing the corral fence and drive lane at the Ruby Site. They accomplished those tasks without the aid of modern digging tools, using instead wooden sticks and bison bones as picks and shovels to dig the postholes. Frison estimated that it would have taken a hunting party of twenty males between ten days and two weeks to construct the bison pound. Frison noted that the corral was built with enough skill and care to probably meet today’s ruggedness standards for bison enclosures.

Frison (2004: 100) reported the unpredictable and dangerous nature of bison. He reminded us that bison, unlike cattle, were undomesticated beasts and could quickly turn from placid to aggressive on a moment’s notice. By observing modern-day bison behavior, Frison noted that animals along a fenceline will push back against the animals crowding them. He stated that even a half-full corral of bison could break off fence posts, even in a well-constructed corral. The investigators found evidence at the Ruby site that the Besant people rebuilt the corral fence at least once on the downslope side. Herding the massive beasts on foot added more personal risk for the prehistoric hunters at Ruby. 

Patricia Lee (N.D.: 13) wrote about her bison ranching experience, “Bison are born with the instinct to charge…Open space is always the direction they will choose. Do not get between them and open space. When they feel trapped, they will try to find a way out…Their head is a fighting instrument. Any movement at the head and it is like pointing a gun in a duel. They will take up the challenge…Bison can “sense” or “smell” fear.”

Now, imagine what it was like for prehistoric hunters to round up and corral wild-eyed bison on foot with nothing to protect themselves except a primitive fence, atlatl darts, and thrusting spears. When the Besant people built the drive lane for funneling the bison into the corral at the Ruby Site, they took advantage of the surrounding topography by bending the drive lane so that the corral remained hidden from the bison for as long as possible. The hunters understood how the bison would react upon sensing or seeing the closed space of the corral. The Besant people understood bison behavior.

At the Ruby Site, investigators found projectile points along the drive lane where the corral became visible to the herd. To keep the herd moving, the Besant hunters launched atlatl dart points at the rearmost animals. The harassment by the hunters at the rear of the herd shoved the beasts at the front of the herd into the waiting pen. A few of the projectile points found along the drive lane at Ruby were large enough for use as thrusting spears, perhaps meaning that the prehistoric hunters were close enough to jab the rearmost beasts with long spears. 

The typology of the projectile points found at Ruby was an odd assortment, ranging from classically made Besant points to barbed corner-notched Pelican Lake points to even a point that looked like a Middle Archaic Oxbow (Frison 1971: 82). Did the Besant people salvage those other projectile point types and reuse them, or was the bison pound used by two separate cultures: Pelican Lake and Besant, or was there a cultural connection or communal hunting operation going on between the Besant and Pelican Lake people? The answers to those questions remain unanswered. 

At Ruby, investigators discovered an alleged ceremonial structure, or spirit lodge, twenty feet east of the pound and six feet away from the drive lane (Frison 1971: 85). The structure was ovoid in shape, thirty-nine feet long by fifteen feet wide, with a lengthwise orientation close to true north. Bison skulls and vertebrae were strategically buried or placed on the surface of the ground on the south end of the structure. There was no evidence of fire or workshop areas, which most likely ruled out its use as a habitation structure. The only human-made artifact found in the spirit lodge was a single end scraper.

Schlesier (1987: 144-149) credited shamanism as the reason for the construction of the spirit lodge at Ruby. Schlesier speculated that Eastern Besant people held both “game calling” and “sending off’ ceremonies at that spirit lodge. He claimed that the Eastern Besant people who built and used the bison pound were the ancestors of the Cheyenne Indians, a tribe well known from the Indian Wars of the 1800s. Schlesier speculated as to what might have happened at that spirit lodge after a successful bison hunt: “After the herd had been brought in, killed and butchered, and a portion of the meat taken to the camp on the stripped hides, the sending-off ceremonies would formally be held in the spirit lodge.” 

Around one hundred miles south of the Ruby site, investigators found another Besant bison kill site called Muddy Creek (Frison 1991: 208). Just like the Ruby site, there was a bison pound that took advantage of the surrounding rolling hills. The corral was built in a natural depression, which shielded the trap from the herd's view until the very last moment. The Besant people constructed the corral on sloping ground in an area where lodgepole and limber pine were available. The investigators speculated that a drive lane fence once existed, but they found no remains of it. Figure 3 shows examples of Besant projectile points found at Ruby and Muddy Creek (Frison 1991: 106). 

Figure 3 - Besant points from the Ruby and 
Muddy Creek bison kill sites (Frison 1991: 106). 

 At both sites, investigators found superb examples of Besant projectile points that the people made from excellent raw material. The Besant flintknappers placed side notches on the projectile points for attaching to the dart or spear shafts, and most of the projectile point bases were heavily ground or polished. The tips and edges of the projectile points were sharp, and the hafted ends were stout enough to withstand high-velocity impacts. 

The Besant projectile point was first documented and named by Wettlaufer (1955: 39) at the Mortlach Site in the Besant Valley of south-central Saskatchewan. Wettlaufer (1960: 108) later confirmed Besant at the Long Creek Site, also in Saskatchewan. Figure 4 shows sketches of the Besant projectile points found at the Mortlach and Long Creek Sites (Dyck 1983: 116). Note that the projectile point labeled "b" strongly resembled a Pelican Lake point with corner-notching and barbs. 

Figure 4 - Besant points (and a Pelican
Lake point?) Dyck 1983: 116 

Vickers (1994: 9) described the typical Besant projectile point as lanceolate in shape, with notches twice as wide as they were deep and placed close to the basal edges. In some cases, Vickers noted, the notches were so close to the projectile point base that the notches removed a portion of the base, giving the projectile point a corner-notched appearance. Vickers stated that the projectile point bases were often ground or polished. He described the range of workmanship on Besant projectile points from crude to well-controlled.

At the Walter Felt Site in Saskatchewan, Kehoe (1974) defined several varieties of Samantha projectile points stratigraphically above the Besant stratigraphic layer. He stated that while the Samantha projectile point type was part of the Besant Phase, Samantha projectile points were the bow-and-arrow version of the larger Besant atlatl points. Kehoe suggested that Besant atlatl points existed in the earlier part of the phase from about the time of Christ to around A.D. 400, and then transitioned to Samantha arrow points once the bow-and-arrow was introduced to the northwestern plains. Then, around A.D. 700, Kehoe declared that Samantha arrow points transitioned to Prairie Side-Notched arrow points.

Greiser (1994: 37) noted that Besant sites existed along most of the major drainages on the northwestern plains, including the Missouri and Milk Rivers in northern Montana and the headwaters in Saskatchewan. She stated that Besant sites were not common along the upper Yellowstone River in western Montana but occurred more frequently in eastern Montana and Wyoming along the Middle Missouri, Bell Fourche, and Powder Rivers. Surface finds of Besant projectile points have also shown up in collections around the Black Hills of South Dakota. Vickers (1994: 13) added that the western extent of Besant generally coincided with the Rocky Mountain Front Range, with a few Besant projectile points found associated with Pelican Lake points in the mountains.

Peck (2011: 282) added that investigators have also found Besant sites in southern Alberta, southwestern Manitoba, and southern Saskatchewan. He noted that a few investigators suggested that much of the Besant material in the Dakotas and Manitoba might be from a different culture that archaeologists call the Sonata Complex. I will not discuss the Sonata Complex for this article. 

Author’s note: I have personally found what I cataloged as classically made Besant and Samantha projectile points while surface hunting for artifacts in north, central, and southeast Wyoming, the panhandle of Nebraska, and northeast Colorado, including along the Rocky Mountain Front Range. I have noted that when I find Besant projectile points, I also find Pelican Lake projectile points. Since I discovered those projectile points outside the original archaeological context, I do not know whether there was any relationship between the peoples who made the Pelican Lake and Besant points. What I do know is that Pelican Lake and Besant oftentimes frequented the same sites. Figure 5 is a photograph of projectile point bases that I surface recovered from the area mentioned above. 

Figure 5 - Besant projectile point bases surface found by the author in Colorado and Wyoming.
The raw material comes from geographically wide sources, from the Alibates rock quarries 
in Texas to the Flattop Butte rock quarries in Colorado, and further north to the 
Hartville Uplift and Spanish Diggings rock quarries in east central Wyoming.
     

Reeves (1983: 141) proposed two theories for the origin of the Besant Phase and outlined the pros and cons of each theory. The first theory was that Besant was a sequent phase within his Tunaxa Cultural Tradition and that Besant evolved from the older Pelican Lake Phase or one of the Pelican Lake regional subphases. Reeves’ second theory was that the Besant Phase was unrelated to his Tunaxa Cultural Tradition and either originated from a separate Indigenous plains tradition or from an intrusive cultural tradition coming from another region. Reeves favored intrusive cultural tradition for Besant. He noted that Besant sites along the eastern fringe of the northern plains shared similarities with Woodland cultures in the Midwest of North America. Those similarities included Woodland-like pottery, burial mounds and practices, and examples of permanent habitation structures. Reeves contended that the Besant Phase was part of a cultural tradition that he called Napikwan, and it originated somewhere east and north of the northern plains. 

In disputing a cultural relationship between Besant and Pelican Lake, Reeves (1983: 96) suggested that the Besant and Pelican Lake Phases utilized different lithic sources. He stated that while the Besant Phase favored Knife River Flint out of North Dakota, the Pelican Lake Phase preferred obsidian from the Yellowstone Park area. As an example of Besant's bias toward Knife River Flint, Reeves pointed out that at the Richards and Muhlbach Besant Sites in Canada, the artifacts were mostly made from Knife River Flint, in fact, 96 percent and 84 percent, respectively. Both sites were far away from the Knife River quarries in North Dakota, which further highlighted the Besant people's inclination to transport and use that rock type. 

Author’s Note: Reeves must have been referring to his experience with Canadian sites for the assertion that Besant and Pelican Lake used different lithic sources. I have recovered Besant and Pelican Lake projectile points made from Knife River Flint in both Wyoming and Colorado. Pelican Lake people also liked Knife River Flint and either visited the quarries in North Dakota or traded for the material. We know Pelican Lake people frequented the Dakotas because we find their projectile points there, made from a wide variety of materials, including Knife River Flint. 

Of the hundreds of Pelican Lake and Besant projectile points I have found in Wyoming and Colorado, I have not noticed any obvious raw material preferences for Pelican Lake or Besant. I have examples of both projectile point types made from every available material possible. Based on my experience, both phases used locally sourced material much of the time. 

Not everyone agreed with Reeves and others regarding an Eastern Woodlands origin for Besant. Schlesier (1994: 318-320) advocated for the Mackenzie and Keewatin districts in the Northwest Territories as the origin for Besant. He claimed that there were no antecedents of Besant east in the Woodlands or northeast in the Boreal Forest. Greiser (1994: 36-37) countered that by stating that most researchers believed that Besant originated in the Eastern or Northern Woodlands.

If the Besant Phase originated to the east or north of the northern plains, did the Besant projectile point technology originate there as well? Reeves

Figure Six - Sandy Creek
projectile points. 
Dyck (1983: 108).  

(1983: 14) proposed a theory suggesting that Sandy Creek, a projectile point technology characterized by small, side-notched points, might be the missing link between Middle Archaic Oxbow projectile point technology and Besant projectile point technology. He based that theory on three common Sandy Creek attributes: squat forms, shallow side-notching, and offset V-shaped bases (Figure 6). Reeves reported that Sandy Creek projectile points persisted alongside the Pelican Lake Phase and emerged around the time of Christ as Besant projectile points. 

Author’s Note: I clearly see the similarity between Sandy Creek projectile points and Besant projectile points. I did not understand Reeves' reasoning behind attempting to connect Oxbow projectile point technology to Besant projectile point technology through Sandy Creek technology. If the Besant Phase originated in the Eastern or Northern Woodlands as Reeves proposed, it would seem more logical to connect Besant and Sandy Creek projectile point technology to the Eastern or Northern Woodlands, perhaps through the Middle Archaic Matanzas or Logan Creek projectile points. 

Since Sandy Creek projectile points could easily be mistaken for Besant projectile points, and the Sandy Creek Phase coexisted with the Pelican Lake Phase, it is assumed that Sandy Creek was pre-Besant. The relationship between Pelican Lake and Sandy Creek should be questioned and studied.   

What happened to Besant? It is reasonable to assume that the people of the Besant Phase evolved their weaponry and culture throughout time. Kehoe (1974: 104) suggested that Besant atlatl points existed in the earlier part of the phase, around the time of Christ to A.D. 400. When the bow-and-arrow became available, Besant atlatl points shrank in size and became what Kehoe called Samantha arrow points. Then, sometime around A.D. 700, the Samantha arrow points evolved into what we call Prairie Side-Notched arrow points. 

Schlesier (1994: 318-320) was an advocate for the Northwest Territories for the origin of the Besant Phase, noting that there were no direct antecedents of Besant in the Eastern Woodlands or to the northeast in the Boreal Forest. Based on linguistic research, Schlesier proclaimed that the Besant Phase had two subphases, one in the east and one in the west. Schlesier proposed that the western subphase of Besant became the Blackfoot Indian Tribe in later years, while the eastern subphase of Besant eventually ended up as the Cheyenne Indian Tribe. Schlesier backed that theory up with the linguistic differences between the Algonquian languages of the Blackfoot and Cheyenne tribes, which suggested different origins and histories for each tribe. As expected, that theory met with resistance, but Schlesier pointed out that no one came up with any data that contradicted his theory.

Figure 7 - Northern plains Besant projectile points from the author's collection. 
Raw materials include Knife River Flint, jasper, and Spanish Diggings (?) quartzite. 

Discussion and Conclusions

Reeves (1983: 76; 135) believed there were two distinct cultural traditions called Tunaxa and Napikwan, represented by the Pelican Lake Phase and the Besant Phase, respectively. According to Reeves, those two cultural traditions competed with each other for land and resources which left an impression to the reader that the relationship between the two phases was more contentious than cooperative. Reeves proposed that the Besant Phase entered the northern plains from either the northeast or east around the time of Christ. At that time, the Pelican Lake Phase was already occupying the northern plains for over a millennium. Reeves then proposed that over the next few centuries, the Besant Phase was powerful enough to displace and drive the Pelican Lake Phase westward into the mountains, and beyond (Reeves 1983: 189). 

A good archaeologist or researcher is like a modern-day Sherlock Holmes. They collect obscure and incomplete clues from scattered archaeological sites, connect the dots between the sites, and then create a narrative about what happened during that period in the past. Brian Reeves was one of the best. Without all the answers, archaeologists must fill in the blanks and a good story might become a part of the narrative. In my opinion, that is where the story with the Besant Phase stalled and is now waiting for more discovery to fill in the blanks. Even with the large number of archaeological site investigations from Alberta to Wyoming involving the Besant Phase, there remains a number of questions about Besant's cultural relationship to other phases, specifically Pelican Lake and Sandy Creek. What makes it more difficult is that Besant, Pelican Lake, and Sandy Creek's lifestyles were remarkably similar. The only things to differentiate the Besant Phase from the Pelican Lake Phase or the Sandy Creek Phase were age and projectile point typology. 

I found it interesting in my study of Besant that the Ruby bison trap projectile point assemblage contained not only classically made Besant atlatl points, but also projectile points that were identical to Pelican Lake (Frison 1971: Figure Four). The assemblage even contained what appeared to be a Middle Archaic Oxbow projectile point. When I saw the projectile point assemblage from Ruby, I could not help but wonder why Frison did not address or at least draw attention to that inconsistency. Did the Besant people salvage Pelican Lake projectile points on the ground and reuse them at Ruby? Was the bison trapping at Ruby a communal operation between the Besant and Pelican Lake people? Did the people who made Pelican Lake projectile points have an ancestral or cultural relationship with the people who made Besant projectile points? We also saw a classic Pelican Lake projectile point show up in a Besant level in the well defined stratigraphy at the Mortlach site. Wettlaufer (1955: 44; 96; Figure 4 above) claimed that the most likely scenario was that a Besant person picked up the Pelican Lake projectile point off the ground and reused it, and that was how that projectile point ended up in the Besant level. Perhaps, that was the same scenario at the Ruby Site, or perhaps there was more to it. The narrative would probably change if Besant projectile points were found in an older Pelican Lake assemblage.    

Based on anecdotal evidence from surface hunting fifty-plus surface sites in southeastern Wyoming and northeastern Colorado, Reeves' narrative about Pelican Lake and Besant did not convince me, not that it needed to. Questioning Reeves' narrative about the relationship between Pelican Lake and Besant is not an easy thing to do based on the fact that Reeves' entire career, starting with his Ph.D. dissertation, was researching prehistoric cultural changes on the northern plains. But I have to wonder how anyone could determine the cultural relationship between Pelican Lake and Besant without more information. What evidence excluded Pelican Lake and Besant from having a sequent or direct lineage relationship? 

Whenever I find Pelican Lake projectile points on the fifty-plus sites that I mentioned above, I nearly always find Besant projectile points. Of course, that does not prove anything except that the people who made Besant points frequented the same sites as the people who made Pelican Lake points. Or is that a hint of something more between them? I also find projectile point type 'tweeners' on those same sites. What is a 'tweener'? A tweener is a transitional projectile point or an intermediate form between two projectile point types. For example, a tweener could be a Pelican Lake projectile point with Besant features, such as side notching or basal grinding, or a tweener could be a Besant projectile point with Pelican Lake features, such as corner notching and shortened barbs. I have found enough of those Pelican Lake/Besant tweeners to at least imagine a technological step between the two projectile point types. Could that be the result of a relationship between the two phases, a coincidence, or a case of copycatting? While that does not prove any kind of cultural relationship it might indicate a level of cooperation (Figure 8).  

Figure 8 - A few 'tweeners' from my collection.
Besant points with Pelican Lake features.  

The thoughts in the previous paragraph were based on my artifact finds outside of their original archaeological or stratigraphical context. However, picking up two projectile point types at the same sites, time after time, at least proved that allegedly contentious populations visited and camped at the same sites. The Besant and Pelican Lake Phases also had very similar geographical ranges. Did the Besant people merely follow in the footsteps of Pelican Lake, or was it a coincidence, or was there more of a substantive relationship? 

There is still much to learn and debate about Pelican Lake and Besant. Currently, Reeves' widely cited and well-researched theories remain the go-to standard for the Pelican Lake and Besant Phases. His theories have so far held their own based on no new information. I will end my article with a positive quote about the Besant Phase from George Frison based on the work done at the Ruby and Muddy Creek bison kill sites. 

 “Besant represented a cultural peak—particularly regarding bison hunting—

that was never achieved again on the Northwestern Plains.”

                                                                 - George C. Frison (1978: 223).

That we can agree with... 

References Cited

Dyck, Ian

1983  “The Prehistory of Southern Saskatchewan” in Tracking Ancient Hunters: Prehistoric Archaeology in Saskatchewan, edited by Henry T. Epp and Ian Dyck, pp. 63-139. Saskatchewan Archaeological Society. Saskatoon.

Frison, George C.

1971 “The Buffalo Pound in Northwestern Plains Prehistory: Site 48 CA 302, Wyoming,” in American Antiquity, Vol. 36, No. 1, January 1971.

 

1978  Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains. Academic Press, Inc., New York.

 

1991  Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains. Second Edition. Academic Press, Inc., New York.

2004  Survival by Hunting. University of California Press. Berkeley.

Greiser, Sally T.

1994 “Late Prehistoric Cultures on the Montana Plains,” in Plains Indians, A.D. 500-1500, edited by Karl H. Schlesier. University of Oklahoma Press. Norman.

 

Kehoe, Thomas F.

1974  “The Large Corner-notched Point System of the Northern Plains and Adjacent Woodlands,” in Aspects of Upper Great Lakes Anthropology, Papers in Honor of Lloyd A. Wilford, edited by E. Johnson. Minnesota Historical Society. St. Paul.

 

Lee, Patricia Lee

N.D. “Warnings and Challenges” in Buffalo!

 

Peck, Trevor R.

2011 Light from Ancient Campfires. AU Press. Edmonton. 

 

Reeves, Brian O.K.

1983 Culture Change in the Northern Plains – 1000 B.C. – A.D. 1000, Occasional Paper No. 20. Archaeological Survey of Alberta.   

 

Schlesier, Karl H.

1987  The Wolves of Heaven. University of Oklahoma Press. Norman.

 

1994  Plains Indians, A.D. 500-1500. University of Oklahoma Press. Norman.

 

Vickers, J. Roderick

1994  “Cultures of the northwestern Plains: from the Boreal Forest Edge to Milk River,” in Plains Indians, A.D. 500-1500, edited by Karl H. Schlesier. University of Oklahoma Press. Norman.

 

Wettlaufer, Boyd

1955  The Mortlach Site. Anthropological Series No. 1. Department of Natural Resources. Regina.

 

1960  The Long Creek Site, edited by William J. Mayer-Oakes. Anthropological Series No. 2. Saskatchewan Museum of Natural History. Regina.

 

About the Author

John Bradford Branney was born and raised in Wyoming and became interested in Prehistoric America through his grandfather's artifact collection. From the time he could walk, Branney went hog wild collecting and documenting prehistoric artifacts and sites along the High Plains. 

Branney has written fourteen books and approximately one hundred articles on archaeology and geology. He holds a B.S. degree in geology from the University of Wyoming and an M.B.A. in finance from the University of Colorado. He lives in the Colorado mountains with his family.

Who Dun It? - Part V - The Rocking Chair Knife

 

Figure One - 2.7-inches-long "Rocking Chair" knife form, surface found in
Carbon County, Wyoming, and made from root-beer-colored chalcedony. 

Many of the articles I have written focus on prehistoric projectile point typology along the High Plains of North America. I have previously written about the differences between Folsom and Clovis points, how to distinguish between Goshen and Midland points, the evolution of projectile points from Clovis to Scottsbluff, Middle Archaic projectile point types, and dozens of other articles. I also wrote a series called Who Dun It where I evaluate enigmatic and unusual prehistoric artifacts from my collection. Those "odd-looking ducks" do not fall within any known category or type of stone tools or projectile points. What I try to do is unravel some of the unknowns around those artifacts. 

Click GHOSTS of the HEART 

This specific article is my fifth installment of the Who Dun It series and the beautiful knife form I will be evaluating is photographed in Figure One. This side-notched knife form is 2.7 inches long and was surface recovered on private land in Carbon County, Wyoming. I call it the Rocking Chair knife form. I refer to this artifact as a knife form even though I cannot be sure what function it served in prehistoric America. I am guessing it was not used as a spear point and it was much too large for a projectile point. The only thing sure about the functionality of that artifact is that I am not sure.   

The artifact material is a nice piece of root-beer-colored chalcedony. I am guessing the source of the material was southwestern Wyoming where finding root-beer-colored chalcedony artifacts is not unusual.  

When I first saw the Rocking Chair knife form, I thought it was an odd-looking duck. 

And you know what? I was right; that artifact is an odd-looking duck in more ways than one. Of the thousands of artifacts I have found or seen, I cannot ever recall seeing one made quite like this one. I call it the "Rocking Chair" knife form because of its rounded base which reminds me of a rocker rail on a rocking chair. I am sure there are other Rocking Chair knife forms out there, I just have not seen one. As far as categorizing it into knife form or projectile point typology for the High Plains, the Rocking Chair knife form is a legitimate headscratcher. 

Figure Two - Side A of 2.7-inch-long "Rocking Chair" knife form.
The alleged flute is circled in red and labeled "F".  Striking
platform for removing the alleged fluting flake
is marked "P".       

Is it Fluted or is it Basally Thinned? 

Let me step right into the more controversial and debatable issue about this knife form and that is whether or not it is fluted. Yes, I just wrote fluting in regards to this side-notched knife form. You might respond to my comment with something like, "On the High Plains, we only know fluting on Clovis and Folsom points," and I could not agree with you more. But, let's take our blinders off for a moment and objectively look at both sides of the knife form in figures two and three. Go ahead. I will wait until you have enough time to study the photographs before giving you my opinion.  

Figure Two is Side A of the knife form and I have circled in red the extent of the flute and labeled it with an "F". Tell me that does not look like a flute. Based on a single striking point or platform labeled "P", it appears that the prehistoric flintknapper removed that one large flake with one striking blow in the center of the artifact's base. You can tell by the artifact's translucency where the thinnest part of the body is and it is at that striking platform. 

Some of you might argue, and rightly so, that it is not a flute, it is a thinning flake. In my experience, thinning flakes were usually removed with multiple strikes and seldom extended into the body of the artifact as much as this one. I have seen Clovis points with smaller flutes than the point in Figure Two. 

Figure Three - Side B of 2.7-inch-long "Rocking Chair" knife form.
The "alleged flute" is circled in red and labeled "F".  Striking
platform for removing the alleged fluting flake
is marked "P".      

You might have convinced me that the "alleged flute" in Figure Two happened as an accident or knapping error if the same thing did not happen on Side B (Figure Three). The Side B "alleged flute" is definitely not as grandiose as the Side A "alleged flute", but it is still quite visible. Whether both were created as a flute or a thinning flake we will never know for sure, but I am calling them flutes. 

The first thing I thought of when I saw the "alleged flutes" on this knife form was that maybe a later prehistoric culture picked up an earlier culture's fluted projectile point or knife form and reworked it into its current form as the Rocking Chair. Logically, I just could not make sense of that theory. For one thing, evidence of a striking platform is quite evident on the base of the Rocking Chair. That indicates to me that the flintknapper who made the Rocking Chair was the same person who struck off the flutes or thinning flakes. I have seen older projectile points salvaged and reworked by younger prehistoric cultures. We will never know for sure how much salvaging and reworking of older artifacts actually occurred. I imagine most of the distinguishing characteristics of the older projectile point were wiped out with the new flintknapping. I once found a Middle Archaic dart point with what appeared to be Folsom flutes running down the middle of the point on both sides. That particular Middle Archaic flintknapper refurbished a broken Folsom point into the type of projectile point that his culture used. 

Figure Four - The possible process that led to the 
Rocking Chair knife form. Blue marks the
notching on the original biface.  

So, how did the Rocking Chair knife form come about? 

After thoroughly studying the Rocking Chair knife form, I propose that it started out as a large biface, much like the caramel-colored one on the left in Figure Four. The proximal end or base of that biface was rounded and the Rocking Chair flintknapper only needed to add two side notches (blue outlines) to attach the biface/knife form to a handle. When the knife blade dulled, the owner resharpened it several times until the blade edges were skinnier than the knife form's hafted base and notching areas, much like the Rocking Chair looks.    

Figure Five shows where I laid the Rocking Chair knife form on top of the caramel-colored biface. My purpose in doing this "before and after view" was to theorize what the Rocking Chair knife form looked like when it was originally made (caramel-colored biface). Then, as resharpening occurred on the knife form, the blade edges of the original biface were reduced in width, and we ended up with the Rocking Chair.   

    

Figure Five - The caramel-colored biface underneath
is how I envision the Rocking Chair started out. 

As far as the age and prehistoric culture of the Rocking Chair knife form, that is a tough one to say. As far as I know, the characteristics of the Rocking Chair knife form do not fit within any known projectile point type or archaeological complex on the High Plains. I am fairly confident that the Rocking Chair knife form was not made by Paleoindians even though it possesses those "alleged flutes", and I am reasonably confident it was not made by Early Archaic people, although side notching did show up on the High Plains during the Early Archaic in the form of the Lookingbill projectile point type. The Rocking Chair knife form does not resemble the typical Middle Archaic artifact, either. 

If I were a betting man, I would place my money on the Rocking Chair knife form coming from either the Late Archaic or the Late Prehistoric cultures, sometime between 3,000 years ago and before the Europeans showed up on the High Plains. I could easily lose that bet but then again, we will never know for sure.  

 What is your opinion?

    

About the Author 

The historical fiction novels written by John Bradford Branney are well-known for their impeccable research and biting realism. In his latest blockbuster saga titled Beyond the Campfire, Branney catapults readers back into Prehistoric America where they reunite with a few familiar characters 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. Branney lives in the northern Colorado mountains with his family. Beyond the Campfire is his eleventh published book.

A High Plains Paleoindian Projectile Point Journey

A High Plains Paleoindian Projectile Point Journey

by John Bradford Branney

Figure 1 - 4.3-inch-long Agate Basin lance point from Holt County, Nebraska

and made from jasper around twelve thousand years ago. 

 

In this article, I often refer to an artifact as a 'point'. My use of the term 'point' does not reflect the artifact's past functionality as a tool, knife, or projectile point, but only a generic description for an artifact with a 'point'.    

When artifact hunters and collectors get together, the discussions often lead to stories about artifacts and artifact hunts, and artifacts from the Paleoindian Period are often the subject of those show-and-tells. Paleoindian artifacts are the oldest and rarest, and their workmanship is often unsurpassed. I believe that most artifact collectors consider the Paleoindian Period the high mark in prehistoric flintknapping. Figure 1 is a prime example of the kind of workmanship we see from the Paleoindian Period. The flintknapper made that point straight and symmetrical. A few Paleoindian points that I have observed are literally works of art, produced by the 'best of the best' flintknappers back in those long-ago days.  

Over the next few pages, I will present a pictorial journey of Paleoindian points and convey to the reader my thoughts on how and why projectile point types evolved. I have divided the analysis and artifacts into three Paleoindian Periods: Early, Middle, and Late. Figure 2 below shows the classic arrangement of High Plains Paleoindian projectile point types from approximately 13,000 to 10,000 years ago, left to right. That is the chronological order for projectile points that I remembered from childhood. It has generally not changed much from my childhood, although it is not as serial or sequential as I once thought: more on that later. In general, the overall evolution began with fluted or basally thinned points, then shifted to long, slender points. From there shoulders developed, and eventually the points became stemmed with squarish bases.         

Figure 2 - Three thousand years of Paleoindian projectile point evolution on the high 

plains. From left to right: Clovis (MT), Goshen (CO), Folsom (CO), Agate 

Basin (NE), Hell Gap (CO), and Scottsbluff (CO). 

For scale, the Scottsbluff point is 3.95 inches long. 

Early Paleoindian Period

Clovis is the most famous Paleoindian culture in the archaeological record across North America. The Clovis people were once thought to be the first Americans to explore the continent, but several archaeological sites have now challenged the longstanding Clovis First Theory (Branney 2019). The Clovis Complex still remains one of the oldest and most widespread settlement patterns across the continent, and the Clovis point is one of the most sought-after artifacts to find. The Clovis Complex ranged from Canada to Central America, and from the Pacific to the Atlantic Oceans. The point in Figure 3 is a classically-made Clovis point surface recovered in northern New Mexico.  

Figure 3 - 3.85-inch-long Clovis spear/knife form from Colfax County, New Mexico. Pedogenic carbonate conceals the original raw material on both sides of the artifact.      

While Clovis points might not be as aesthetically pleasing or as delicately made as other Paleoindian projectile point types, such as Folsom or Cody Complex, they are highly coveted for both their rarity and reputation. I call Clovis the 'blue collar points' of the Early Paleoindian period. Flintknappers made them for the sole purpose of wounding or killing large megafauna. From a technological perspective, Clovis flintknappers were best known for their bifacial reduction processes, using mostly percussion flaking and limited their use of pressure flaking. 

 Percussion flaking used a physical strike or blow from a hammerstone or similar tool to detach large flakes from the raw material or artifact while pressure flaking applied a direct, concentrated force from a sharpened antler or bone to detach small, finer flakes from the artifact. In general, percussion was used for coarser work and shaping the artifact, while pressure was reserved for refining and sharpening the artifact. 

Figure 4 - Clovis hunters driving a wounded mammoth
into a dead-end arroyo some 13,000 years ago. 
Painting by Roy Anderson for National Geographic. 

Figure 4 is an artist's rendition of what archaeologists believed happened at the Colby Clovis site in northern Wyoming approximately 13,000 years ago. Clovis hunters herded wounded mammoths into a dead-end arroyo where they most likely waited for the beasts to bleed out and die. Whether Clovis points were lethal enough to kill a mammoth or mastodon outright is still actively debated (Bower 2022). The Clovis hunters were armed with spears with sharp stone points, making it easier to penetrate tough animal hides. The blade edges on the stone points were wide enough to cut a large enough hole in the hide to allow the weapon's foreshaft to enter the wound. The flintknappers polished the proximal margins of the point to prevent cutting the sinew used to attach the point to the weapon's foreshaft, preventing a catastrophic weapon failure during the hunt. The basal thinning and/or fluting streamlined the point with a split foreshaft. Clovis flintknappers made Clovis points stout enough to withstand the mechanical stresses of hunting large, dangerous megafauna. 

Figure 5 -A Late Stage A Clovis preform* from the author's collection,
surface found in southeastern Colorado. Note the long, wide
percussion flakes typically used in Clovis biface reduction. 
*(Waters and Jennings 2015: 35). 

If Clovis points were the model of effectiveness and 

efficiency, why did they disappear?

One possible explanation for the disappearance of Clovis points was a dramatic shift in the Late Pleistocene ecosystem and megafauna. Clovis people hunted or scavenged anything and everything that moved, from eleven-ton mammoths to jackrabbits. The monster-sized beasts, such as mammoths and mastodons, disappeared from the archaeological record around the same time that Clovis points disappeared. After that, the most popular prey for Paleoindians became the mighty bison. Adapt or die was a human trait 13,000 years ago and remains so even today. A change in prey might have motivated the Paleoindians to change their weapon components, specifically the projectile point design. Folsom, Goshen, and Midland projectile points appeared in the archaeological record near the tail end of the Clovis occupation. Certain Clovis features, such as concave bases, fluting or basal thinning, and polishing the blade edges in the hafting area, were retained. However, the projectile points became thinner and more delicate, with much more pressure flaking used. Figure 6 is a photograph of the three post-Clovis projectile point types that remained in use for nearly a millennium in Early Paleoindian times.

Figure 6 - After Clovis. From left to right: 
Goshen (ND), Folsom (KS), and Midland (WY). 

Figure 7 below is what I identified as a Folsom preform surface found in Mecosta County, Michigan and made from Norwood Chert. Although the preform was not a High Plains find, it was a perfect example for demonstrating the technological features required to flute a Folsom point. The first feature to notice was the broad and thin, well-spaced percussion flakes slightly arcing from both margins to form a ridge in the middle of the biface. Even with the ridge, the preform was thin with the thickest point in the middle measuring only 5.2 millimeters thick. The preform was also free of humps and dips that might cause a fluting failure.  

On the proximal end of the biface, the Paleoindian flintknapper created a platform or fluting nipple (between the two red arrows). The nipple was created by removing two guide flakes on either side of it (red arrows). The guide flakes not only isolated the fluting platform at the base of the preform, but would have directed the channel flake along the middle ridge. The nipple was smoothed and bevelled on the reverse side. The flintknapper's ultimate goal was for the rock fracture to follow the middle of the ridge all the way to the tip while avoiding splitting, overshooting, or other damage to the preform. 

During the fluting process, the preform would most likely be placed vertically on a stone anvil with the tip resting against the anvil's surface. The flintknapper blunted and polished the preform's tip (red arrow on the left), enhancing the tip's mechanical properties and mitigating any damage to the distal end when the flintknapper initiated the flute channel flake with an antler baton.         

Figure 7 - Folsom preform ready to flute. 

We will never know why the flintknapper abandoned this preform.

 

Middle Paleoindian Period

Between 12,600 and 11,300 years ago, a major paradigm shift occurred with High Plains projectile point types. Frank Roberts (1943) was the first to formally document an Agate Basin point at a site by the same name in northeastern Wyoming. The Agate Basin projectile point type was a transformative change from the concave-based projectile points that preceded it in the Early Paleoindian Period. While Folsom, Goshen, and Midland points were thin and incorporated concave bases with either fluting or basal thinning, Agate Basin points were long and slender with lenticular cross sections and straight or slightly convex bases. Figure 8 illustrates the radical change in form and technology from Folsom to Agate Basin.

Figure 8 - Fluted Folsom point from central Wyoming (top), 
and an elongated Agate Basin point from northern Colorado. 
For scale, the Agate Basin point is 2.45 inches long.  

 

The changing of the guard from Folsom to Agate Basin did not happen sequentially. Goshen, Folsom, Agate Basin, and Hell Gap radiocarbon dates overlapped, and most investigators recognize that Paleoindians were making Folsom and Goshen points around the same time as Agate Basin points (Sellet 2001: 58; Branney 2015, 2022). 

Where did the Agate Basin design come from? Why did Paleoindians pursue a different design? Did a High Plains Paleoindian wake up one morning with an idea for a new projectile point design? How did the Agate Basin design spread so far and wide from its point of origin? Did the technology originate within the existing population, or was it imported or traded onto the High Plains? There is much we still do not know about any of the Paleoindian projectile point types. 

Archaeologist and flintknapper Bruce Bradley (2011: 485) wrote this about Agate Basin:

"It is my opinion that Agate Basin technology was not derived from Folsom technology on the Northwestern Plains and Rocky Mountains. This material [Agate Basin] could represent the first expression of northeast Asian technology, coming out of the northern Great Basin."

Perhaps Bradley was referring to the Haskett point from the Great Basin as the source for the Agate Basin design. Both point types were shoulderless, lanceolate-shaped, and from the Paleoindian period, but their manufacturing processes differed. While Haskett and Agate Basin were similarly shaped, Haskett points were generally larger, heavier, and had less workmanship done than a typical Agate Basin point.

The Agate Basin point remained in step with the High Plains Paleoindian tradition of high quality and artistry. Paleoindians obviously considered stone projectile points a critical component of their weapon system. It seemed projectile points meant much more than just a pointy rock at the end of a stick. Otherwise, Paleoindians would not have invested the time and effort to create projectile points that went far beyond what was required to kill the beasts of their time.  

Agate Basin points were simple-looking technology, but took considerable effort to make. They were flat along their lengths with straight, smooth and symmetrical margins. The lower lateral and basal edges were often ground and polished to avoid cutting the wrapped sinew hafting. Agate Basin points were an efficient design that could be easily reworked, even when broken into segments. The Agate Basin point began a new trend and direction in High Plains projectile point technology that lasted over a millennium.

Figure 9- Two Hell Gap points mixed in
with Agate Basin points at the type site.
(Frison and Stanford 1982: 100-101). 

At the original Agate Basin type site in northeastern Wyoming, archaeologists received a glimpse of the 'shape of things to come'. Note the two points marked O and P in Figure 9. The Agate Basin points were mixed in with the 'next in line', a projectile point type archaeologists ultimately named Hell Gap. That provided more evidence that Paleoindian point types overlapped in both time and space. Hell Gap points were a continuation of Agate Basin technology, except that Hell Gap flintknappers terminated the production process earlier and added basal shoulders to improve anchoring the points onto foreshafts.   

George Agogino (1961) first documented the Hell Gap projectile point type at the Hell Gap site in eastern Wyoming. Hell Gap projectile points were medium to large lanceolate-shaped points that were similar to Agate Basin points, except that the Hell Gap projectile points bore shoulders. Hell Gap stems were long and contracting. The blade edges from tip to base were either straight-to-concave or convex-to-straight-to-concave. The basal edges of the points were often ground and polished, which gave investigators an indication as to how far up the projectile point was hafted. The basal corners ranged from sharp to polished smooth. A classically made Hell Gap point surface collected in Goshen County, Wyoming, is second from the left in Figure 10.

Figure 10 - Middle Paleoindian projectile point evolution or revolution.
From left to right: Agate Basin (CO), Hell Gap (WY),
Alberta (CO) and Scottsbluff (CO).

Then along came the Cody Complex!

 

G. L. Jepsen (1951) first coined the term Cody Complex to describe the coexistence of Scottsbluff and Eden points with Cody Knives at the Horner site near the town of Cody in northwestern Wyoming. An archaeological complex is a grouping of sites, structures, or artifacts demonstrating distinct cultural traits, shared time periods, or specific geographical ranges. The presence of a recurring assemblage of stone tools or manufacturing debitage at archaeological sites is thought to represent the technological traditions of a human group and is called a lithic complex. Figure 11 is a photograph of Cody Complex artifacts from the author's collection showing the five main artifact types.

Figure 11 - Five Cody Complex artifact types. From left to right: Alberta (NE), 
Scottsbluff (CO), Eden (WY), Firstview (CO), and Cody Knife (WY).   

The Cody Complex shared a common feature in their projectile points and knife forms that distinguished them from most other Paleoindian points: stems. While the earlier projectile point technology called Hell Gap possessed shoulders, Cody Complex flintknappers took the design a step further by squaring off the bases and creating a distinctive stem by intentionally removing thin pressure flakes along the lateral margins.

In her classic book Ancient Man in North America, Marie Wormington (1957) formally documented the Cody Complex and proposed the Cody Knife as the index type or marker for the Cody Complex, even in the absence of projectile points. Cody Complex projectile points and knife forms are some of the most distinctive and sought-after artifacts from Paleoindian America. Knell and Muniz (2013: 13) reported that Alberta/Cody, Alberta, Eden, Scottsbluff, and Firstview represented a temporal continuity for approximately 2,815 years, from 11,600 to 8,785 years ago. The authors added that the Cody Complex's wide geographic expanse was on par with the Clovis Complex, making it one of the most expansive complexes in prehistoric North America. Cody Complex artifacts have been found from the Great Basin in the west to the St. Lawrence River in the east, and from the Canadian plains in the north to the Texas Gulf Coast in the south (Knell and Muniz 2013: 13-14).

Figure 12 is a photograph courtesy of The Horner Site - The Type Site of the Cody Cultural Complex by George C. Frison and Lawrence C. Todd (1987). The image first appeared in Rocky Mountain Empire Magazine in 1949. Seventy-five years ago, scientists had a lot to 

Figure 12 - The Cody Complex Caveman.
How some people imagined Paleoindians. 

learn about the Cody Complex, and we still do. In 1949, some people were still lumping most Paleoindian projectile point types into a broad, catchall category from the Dust Bowl days called Yuma. The depiction of the 'caveman' on the magazine cover is particularly amusing. That muscle-bound, cartoonish character looked more like a cast member from the movie Planet of the Apes than a North American Paleoindian. 

Based on their work at the Hell Gap site in Wyoming, Irwin-Williams et al. (1973: 47-49) proposed a projectile point development continuum from Agate Basin to Hell Gap to Alberta, and then to the rest of the Cody Complex point types. Huckell (1978: 188) argued that a projectile point development continuum should be based on both stylistic and technological factors. Huckell's hesitation for that particular development continuum was based on the technological changes occurring between the projectile point types. He observed that while Agate Basin flintknappers finished points with pressure flaking, Hell Gap and Alberta flintknappers finished points predominantly with percussion flaking. Technology switched again when flintknappers returned to pressure flaking for other Cody Complex types, such as Scottsbluff, Eden, and Cody knives. Huckell did admit that Hell Gap and Alberta flintknappers were not completely adverse to pressure flaking; they used the process for stem manufacturing, edge straightening, sharpening, and retipping. 

Was there a projectile point  development continuum 

from Agate Basin to Cody Complex? 

Late Paleoindian to Early Archaic Periods

Figure 13 - High Plains Jimmy Allen points
from the author's collection. Note the presence
of parallel oblique flaking scars on most. 
  

Around 10,000 years ago, an abundance of projectile point types appeared in the archaeological record from the plains, foothills, and mountains of the Rocky Mountain region. The new lanceolate-styled projectile point types with parallel-oblique flaking were a stark contrast from the Cody Complex's stemmed projectile points with transverse pressure flaking. 

Archaeologist and master flintknapper Bruce Bradley (Larson et al. 2009: 271) opined on the projectile point diversity that came during and after the Cody Complex in the Late Paleoindian and Early Archaic Periods. He noted that the new wave of flintknapping styles incorporated a similar bifacial percussion reduction and pressure thinning from the Cody Complex, but the finished products looked quite different. He observed that several of those projectile point types often exhibited parallel oblique flaking. Bradley grouped the following projectile point types into a lithic complex that Holder and Wike (1949) originally named the Frontier Complex. The Frontier Complex included the point types of Jimmy Allen, Frederick, Lusk, Brown's Valley, and Angostura. Even though those five projectile point types had different shapes, Bradley (2010: 495) believed they shared a common technological technique called serial pressure flaking, which produced the parallel-oblique flake scars mentioned above.        

One of those new projectile point types was reported in the late 1940s when an avocational archaeologist named Jimmy Allen discovered a Paleoindian bison kill site in the Laramie Basin of Wyoming. In 1959, University of Wyoming anthropologist William Mulloy and his crew excavated the site and named it the James Allen site. The archaeological crew recovered thirty fragmentary projectile points from the site, all of which exhibited similar flintknapping characteristics. The projectile points were unnotched and lanceolate-shaped with concave (indented) bases and rounded basal corners. Several points from the site exhibited parallel oblique pressure flaking. Mulloy christened the new projectile point Jimmy Allen after the discoverer of the site (Figure 13). 

Why did Paleoindians adopt a new style of projectile point with a concave (indented) base design like the Jimmy Allen point? We have to assume that concave bases worked best with their preferred hafting method at the time. Perhaps the concave base design worked as "snug as a bug in a rug"; otherwise, the Paleoindians would not have made the change. There was always the possibility that the change was merely a response to human preference, and after all, that was not the first time for concave bases. It worked pretty well in the Early Paleoindian Period for Clovis, Goshen, Folsom, and Midland flintknappers. 

Frison (1991: 67) reported evidence supporting a dichotomy in Paleoindian subsistence strategies between the open plains and the foothill-mountain ecosystems around 10,000 BP, or a range of 11,695 to 11,336 in calibrated calendar years. The long-enduring Cody Complex inhabited the open plains and focused its subsistence around bison procurement. In contrast, several deeply stratified rockshelters and open sites in the high country of Wyoming and Montana, such as Mummy Cave, Medicine Lodge Creek, Lookingbill, and Bighorn Canyon, indicated the presence of what archaeologists named the Foothill/Mountain Tradition. The Foothill/Mountain tradition had a different subsistence model that focused more on bighorn sheep, deer, elk, and plant gathering. They also used different projectile point types than the Cody Complex (Kornfeld 2013: 51). Figure 14 is a photograph of a few projectile point types from my collection used by the Foothill/Mountain Tradition. However, all of those projectile points were found on the open prairie, and not the foothills or the mountains. 

Archaeologists have defined a dichotomy between the subsistence models of the Foothill-Mountain Tradition and the Cody Complex, and that appeared to be the case based on several archaeological investigations (see above). However, that did not exclude Cody Complex people from exploring the mountains or Foothill-Mountain Tradition people from heading to the prairies. My father found several Cody Complex artifacts while trout fishing in the high mountains of northern Wyoming, and I have found numerous Foothill-Mountain Tradition projectile point types out on the far-flung, dusty prairies of Wyoming and Colorado. In my opinion, there wasn't a clear geographic or ecosystem delineation for the Foothill-Mountain Tradition and the Cody Complex, only different people using different projectile point types at the same time while roaming the great outdoors and surviving the best they could.     

Figure 14 - Late Paleoindian/Early Archaic points. 
From left to right: Pryor Stemmed (CO), Fishtail (WY), 
Lookingbill (ND), Mount Albion (CO), and Angostura (WY).    

Closing Thoughts

As an artifact hunter who has spent a good portion of my childhood and adulthood hunting, documenting, and writing about prehistoric people and their artifacts, I appreciate the progress and heavy lifting archaeologists have done to tie specific Paleoindian projectile point types into the archaeological record. I can walk a rancher's pasture and save a projectile point from being run over by a vehicle or crunched by a horse's or cow's hoof, and know what timeframe it came from just by looking at it. That's a far cry from the days when most Paleoindian projectile points were lumped into a singular category called Yuma. 

It amazes me that Paleoindians throughout prehistory stuck to tried and true designs by making similar projectile points over long periods of time. For example, the people who made Clovis points used the same biface reduction and projectile point finishing for approximately three centuries (Waters et al. 2020). That was enough time for those ancient Americans to spread their projectile point technology across forty-eight states, Mexico, and Canada. Clovis points can be fat, skinny, long, and short, but they all possess similar technological features. Most other Paleoindian complexes conformed to a standard as well. The million-dollar question is what drove that consistency and discipline in projectile point design? Did the points fit in a certain hafting methodology, thus establishing a need for consistency? Was there a spiritual or ritualistic element involved? Were there specialists making the projectile points, and thus more of a cookie-cutter approach? Or was flintknapping so ingrained as a technological standard that Paleoindians copycatted the latest process and the design? 

One must wonder why Paleoindians invested so much time and effort in creating projectile points that went well beyond a minimal level of functionality. After all, the main purpose of the projectile point was to be sharp enough to pierce the hide of the prey animal. Many Paleoindian points went beyond the workmanship and quality to achieve that fundamental purpose. I believe that excess workmanship had diminishing returns, but that was obviously not how Paleoindians felt about it. Perhaps flintknapping to an extreme was a winter hobby for Paleoindians as they sat around their dwellings waiting for the snow to stop. Or maybe there was symbolism or ritualism tied to the weapon systems. Or perhaps it was a competitiveness and pride thing: who can be the best? Competitiveness is part of the human spirit.  

I grew up reading books by Wormington (1957), Steege and Welsh (1968) and Russell (1974), who all made it sound like Paleoindian projectile point typology was a serial process, one-by-one projectile point type at a time. However, with overlapping radiocarbon dates and reexamining the stratigraphy at sites, the sequential process does not pass muster. Sellet (2001: 57-60) wrote one of the better arguments against serial or unilinear evolution for Paleoindian projectile point types, and he also provided evidence that Paleoindian point types overlapped in both space and time. Sellet also cautioned against connecting Paleoindian cultural diversity with projectile point typology, quoting: 

“Point types provide a measure of time but not cultural relationships.”

While I mostly agree with Sellet, we cannot completely disconnect culture from the selection of a certain projectile point style. The best evidence of that connection is the numerous single-event kill sites where Paleoindians utilized a single projectile point type. Whether those hunters chose that style of projectile point because of its efficiency, technological consistency, or their targeted prey does not matter. When those people used that specific projectile point type at a single event, it became part of the archaeological record and the tool-making culture for that group. We have come a long way toward understanding High Plains archaeology from the days of Yuma points, E.B. Renaud, and Marie Wormington, but we still do not have a clear understanding as to why Paleoindians chose and then abandoned the projectile point types that they did.   

References Cited

Agogino, George A. 

1961     "A New Point Type from Hell Gap Valley, Eastern Wyoming." American Antiquity 26: 558-560, Salt Lake City.  

Bower, Bruce

2022     "Clovis Hunters' Reputation as Mammoth Killers Takes a Hit" in Science News.  

Bradley, Bruce A.

2010  "Paleoindian Flaked Stone Technology on the Plains and in the Rockies" in Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers of the High Plains and Rockies. Third Edition. Edited by Marcel Kornfeld, George C. Frison, and Mary Lou Larson. Left Coast Press. Walnut Creek.   

Branney, John Bradford 

2015    "From Clovis to Hell Gap - Overlapping Technologies" in Academia. 

2019    "Clovis First? Second? Third? Fourth?" in Academia. 

2022    "Unwinding a Twister - Goshen/Plainview-Midland" in Academia. 

Frison, George C.
1991    Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains. Second Edition. Academic Press. San Diego.

Frison, George C., and Dennis J. Stanford. 

1982    The Agate Basin Site. Academic Press. New York.

Frison, George C., and Lawrence C. Todd
1987     The Horner Site - The Type Site of the Cody Cultural Complex. Academic Press. Orlando.

Irwin-Williams, Cynthia, Henry Irwin, George Agogino, and C. Vance Haynes, Jr. 

1973    "Hell Gap: Paleo-Indian Occupation on the High Plains." Plains Anthropologist. Vol. 18, No. 59, pp. 40-53. 

 

Holder, P., and J. Wike

1949   "The Frontier Cultural Complex: A Preliminary Report on a Prehistoric Hunters' Camp in Southwestern Nebraska" in American Antiquity 14(4):260-265.   

Huckell, Bruce

1978   "Hudson-Meng Chipped Stone" in The Hudson-Meng Site: An Alberta Bison Kill in the Nebraska High Plains by Larry D. Agenbroad. Northern Arizona University.   

Jepsen, G. L.

1951   Ancient Buffalo Hunters of Wyoming. Newsletter, Archaeological Society of New Jersey, 24: 22-24

Knell, Edward J., and Mark P. Muniz
2013     Paleoindian Lifeways of the Cody Complex. University of Utah Press. Salt Lake.

Kornfeld, Marcel

2013   The First Rocky Mountaineers - Coloradans Before Colorado. University of Utah Press. Salt Lake City. 

Roberts, Frank H. H.

1943     "A New Site" in Notes and News, American Antiquity, Vol. VIII, No. 3, p. 300.    

Russell, Virgil Y.

1974    Indian Artifacts. Johnson Publishing Co. Boulder. 

Sellet, Frédéric. 

2001.    "A Changing Perspective on Paleoindian Chronology and Typology:

A View from the Northwestern Plains" in Arctic Anthropology 38:48-63.

Steege, Louis C. and Warren W. Welsh

1968   Stone Artifacts from the Northwestern Plains. Northwestern Plains Publishing Company. Colorado Springs. 

 

Waters, Michael R. and Thomas A. Jennings 

2015   The Hogeye Clovis Cache. Texas A & M University Press. College Station.  

Waters, Michael R., Thomas W. Stafford Jr., and David L. Carlson

2020    "The Age of Clovis - 13,050 to 12,750 cal yr B.P.", in Science Advances, 21 October 2020. 

 

Wormington, H. M.

1957     Ancient Man in North America. Denver Museum of Natural History, Popular Series No. 4. Denver.      

About the Author

John Bradford Branney has been hunting and documenting artifacts since he was a wee little boy. His grandfather's artifact collection drove a passion in him that has never waned. While growing up, his family took many weekend outings to hunt for artifacts and fossils on the prairies of Wyoming. 

Branney holds a B.S. in geology from the University of Wyoming and an M.B.A. in finance from the University of  Colorado. He has written fourteen books and over one hundred articles on archaeology and geology.