Continuing on from the second post… The stone point found between bison ribs at the Folsom Site didn’t just establish a new timeline for man’s presence on the North American continent. It presented a new technology to be studied.

The typical Folsom point is between two and three inches, much smaller and lighter than the more familiar Clovis point. The Clovis people primarily used their points for mammoth hunting. These large, slow animals could be closely approached and the large point thrust into them. The bison roaming what became the Great Plains were faster and much harder to get close to. The lighter, thinner points could be launched using the atlatl throwing sticks from a safe distance with enough force to penetrate deep into the wooly animal.

Reproduction Folsom points slung with an atlatl have been tested on beef carcasses and can accurately strike deep into the target from a distance of 50 yards or more, even if hitting a rib. Most of the damage incurred by the weapon happens at the point which can be reshaped at least twice before being discarded.

The skill and precision of the Folsom point makers are greatly admired by modern flintknappers, especially their ability in “fluting” the points. The exact benefits of the “flute” are in dispute. Some believe it helped to make the point even lighter and easier to retrieve from the animal. Others contend that tests do not show the feature increases the effectiveness of the points, so must have some cultural importance that we do not understand.

To “flute” the point, the knapper creates a channel of sorts behind the point running to the end of the stone with one single, exacting strike. The slightest mistake and the entire point is shattered and worthless. This style of point was used for a thousand years in North America, mostly through the central plains from Texas to Canada. Most of the flint and cert used is identified as originating from the Texas Panhandle.

As you can guess the stone knappers of the Folsom people had to be skilled craftsmen important to the survival of their group. There are some who have developed a high level of skill in this modern time, but not many. The best I know is near Guymon in the Oklahoma Panhandle. I have included a picture of a reproduced Folsom point to show how they were attached to the small shaft propelled from the atlatl. The point in the picture is just over two inches long and just less than one inch across. Few are larger than this.

In later centuries, those native tribes living on the Great Plains who were gifted the horse by the newly arrived Europeans (not by intent) were able to hunt the smaller version of bison with an arrow that is similar. The buffalo arrow used by Plains Indians were short with a narrow attached point that would penetrate deep into the body, past the ribs. These points were mostly made of some sort of metal because it was available either through trade or plunder now. But like the Folsom point, it would glance off ribs and continue into the body until it was a direct, center hit.

The Folsom Site yielded 32 bison antiquus skeletons. For the most part, the heads were piled together since they seemingly had little use to the Folsom people except their lower jaws were missing, indicating that the tongues were taken. The skeletons were all either cows or calves. It is estimated that the killing took place in the fall because of the size of the calves and assuming that these bison’s breeding patterns were the same as seen in today’s bison.

The tailbones are missing from the skeletons which should tell any familiar with later practices of the Plains Indians that the animals were skinned with the tail on and the bone still intact to provide a steady handle by which to drag a raw hide carrying a load of butchered meat.

The speculation is that the meat was cut up pretty well where the animals fell (a thousand-pound carcass makes for heavy moving without the benefit of wheels, horses, or forklifts).  A slight dose of common sense (which these or any other people in survival mode have or they don’t make it) would speculate that the organ meats were eaten first, they spoil more quickly and are nutrient-dense. The muscle meats were probably what was butchered and prepared for drying.

One question might be: where did they go from Wild Horse Arroyo?

There is no evidence of a large camp of any type near the site. At the Mountaineer site in Colorado there has been found what appears to be a Folsom campsite with some permanence. Cone-shaped structures of logs were used with stones stacked for a foundation of sorts and there seems to have been at least a year’s worth of artifacts. Some researchers speculate that these hunters at Wild Horse Arroyo migrated to the mountains for the winter. For some (me included) this is highly unlikely. Sub-zero mountains make for bad camping conditions.

The more sensible theory would be both the people and bison followed pretty closely to the migration patterns displayed by the bison of the 18^th and 19^th centuries. This would mean the animals had just drifted off the grassy mesa tops before a severe weather change. They then would probably follow the Cimarron eastward where there are canyons for protection, grass, live water in almost all the canyons, and the steady drop in elevation making for warmer weather. From there the expanse of the Great Plains is available.

As far as the people themselves are concerned, the question might be: if you have a few thousand pounds of meat to carry without the benefit of animals of burden or the wheel, would you rather carry it uphill or down??

I vote downhill.

And another friend of mine suggested that the river itself could be a vehicle for transporting the meat. A year ago he and another friend of mine constructed a primitive “bull boat” for a reality show and museum. These were constructed from green limbs and buffalo hide and known to be used for centuries even before the Ice Age. One could be pulled along from the bank, making the transport that much easier. There is no physical proof of this at present but it makes some sense.

One point of contention is also how the animals came to be concentrated at the kill site. Dr. David Meltzer of SMU conducted the last excavation at the Folsom Site and favors the notion that the bison were driven into what then was more of a box canyon for an ambush.

If one uses the behavior of the bison today and a couple of centuries prior, the ability to kill several after the first kill is often not unusual. That was a great factor in the success of the 19^th century “hide hunters” who almost shot them out of existence. In a herd, bison tend to “bunch up” if a threat presents itself. They are short-tempered critters and especially the bulls can be aggressive. But if a prominent member of the herd is downed, they tend to circle around the animal. They will often hook or push on the downed one to try and get them up. As they “mill,” a hunter with a rifle can sometimes get a “stand” and kill a lot of them. Some of the hunters of the 1870s would carry water to pour over the barrels of their guns when they got too hot from the continual shooting.

They have a great smell (sometimes in more ways than one) but their eyes don’t rate as high. The poorer eyesight is one reason for their short temper but makes for a chance to get within range if the wind is right.

I think it is possible for a group of hunters to have gotten a “stand” if they were able to ambush a small herd, especially if they were setting up the attack in an area when the animals would come seasonally because of the mineral content of the grass or soil. That is the theory held by my friend and to me is more likely than a buffalo “drive.”

Those who have handled buffalo will tell you that you can drive them anywhere they were going anyway. Otherwise, good luck. They are sometimes used by cutting horse trainers for much the same reason. They don’t “sour” like cattle will. They don’t quit trying to beat you and get through you. But that short temper is sometimes hard on the horse!

There are, of course, varied opinions but I believe that massive kills of these bison before the horse culture were rare. They could happen and a few did. My feeling is that the kill at Wild Horse Arroyo was one of those chances that come several years apart.

The largest known death site for bison antiquus is the Hudson-Meng site a few miles from Crawford, NE, where about 500 skeletons have been unearthed. I refer to it as a “death” site because I simply don’t believe that primitive man could kill that many animals even if they got a “stand.” Although there are plenty of varied opinions on the matter, I believe most mass deaths among bison had a natural origin. Even if it is a popular theory or image, the idea of massive amounts of bison being driven off a cliff (for example) makes little sense to anyone who has tried to drive buffalo anywhere. Lighting storms or prairie fires are much more likely, least to my simple mind.

The Crawford site does have plenty of evidence of butchering. But it is more likely that the meat was harvested after a natural event.

As I have said, theories and opinions abound. The only evidence to feed any of them is the bone or stone that has survived thousands of years, leaving all the rest which might add clarity decayed and lost to us. At this point, no eyewitnesses have come forward to verify one opinion over another. None are expected. Radiocarbon dating of the Folsom Site puts the bison kill there about 10,500 years ago.

One of the gifts (or curses) given mankind over the rest of the earthly critters is that they can study their past while contemplating their future. Hopefully, we become practiced enough at both to add wisdom to our own choices. We can hope.

NOTE:

The podcaster interwoven in these last three entries was Clay Newcomb whose podcast is titled Bear Grease and is a part of the Meateater Network.

I was not aware of them before that Wednesday morning and looked them up later to listen to some of their presentations about Daniel Boone and Warner Glenn, the Arizona lion hunter. At this point, they have broadcast two episodes on Folsom and have one more to go.

I have said before I am not much of a podcast listener because each one takes about an hour and I rarely listen to anything that long. But I have seen first-hand that these are sincerely researched and well-written with a balanced approach.

As I have said before, that afternoon Clay’s friend and I were sent to the back of the museum while Newcomb recorded with my friend and Matt. The two podcasters still had to drive back home to Arkansas that afternoon and we were already way off any schedule that might have been envisioned before. After about an hour and half, I was asked if I thought my friend was out of stories yet. I replied something to the effect that if that was the goal they should brought a bedroll and provisions.

“Well, we should have already left.”

“Then we had just better go up there and stop it.”

After about another 30 minutes or so, they were able to make it to the SUV and strike out across the width of Oklahoma for Arkansas and home. They still had to meet with Dr. Meltzer of SMU the next week.

Regardless, if one has any interest in the Folsom Site, if they enjoy thoughtful and honestly done discussion of things outdoors I suggest they give the Bear Grease podcast a try.