Skip to main content

An Assessment of the Impact of Hafting on Paleoindian Point Variability

Resource type
Date created
It has long been argued that the form of North American Paleoindian points was affected by hafting. According to this hypothesis, hafting constrained point bases such that they are less variable than point blades. The results of several studies have been claimed to be consistent with this hypothesis. However, there are reasons to be skeptical of these results. None of the studies employed statistical tests, and all of them focused on points recovered from kill and camp sites, which makes it difficult to be certain that the differences in variability are the result of hafting rather than a consequence of resharpening. Here, we report a study in which we tested the predictions of the hafting hypothesis by statistically comparing the variability of different parts of Clovis points. We controlled for the potentially confounding effects of resharpening by analyzing largely unused points from caches as well as points from kill and camp sites. The results of our analyses were not consistent with the predictions of the hypothesis. We found that several blade characters and point thickness were no more variable than the base characters. Our results indicate that the hafting hypothesis does not hold for Clovis points and indicate that there is a need to test its applicability in relation to post-Clovis Paleoindian points.
Published as
Buchanan B, O'Brien MJ, Kilby JD, Huckell BB, Collard M (2012) An Assessment of the Impact of Hafting on Paleoindian Point Variability. PLoS ONE 7(5): e36364. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036364
Publication title
Document title
An Assessment of the Impact of Hafting on Paleoindian Point Variability
Publisher DOI
Copyright statement
Copyright is held by the author(s).
You are free to copy, distribute and transmit this work under the following conditions: You must give attribution to the work (but not in any way that suggests that the author endorses you or your use of the work); You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
Scholarly level
Peer reviewed?
Member of collection
Download file Size
journal.pone_.0036364.pdf 169.11 KB

Views & downloads - as of June 2023

Views: 0
Downloads: 0