Evaluating Kill-Camp Organization in a Terminal Pleistocene Lithic Scatter: Computational Spatial Analysis of the Reddin Folsom Site, San Luis Valley, USA
{"title":"Evaluating Kill-Camp Organization in a Terminal Pleistocene Lithic Scatter: Computational Spatial Analysis of the Reddin Folsom Site, San Luis Valley, USA","authors":"Kelton A. Meyer","doi":"10.1007/s10816-026-09808-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Models of terminal Pleistocene (Early Paleoindian) land-use in North America explore the interplay of residential and logistical mobility. Researchers often structure interpretations using simple site categories, like <italic>residential camp</italic> or <italic>kill site</italic>. Excavations in several components reveal terminal Pleistocene groups occasionally tethered residential and logistical choices, forming <italic>kill-camp</italic> sites characterized by hunting activities, animal butchery, and residential downtime. A popular rule-of-thumb method for distinguishing camping from hunting activities involves comparing the types and quantities of projectile point fragments between localities. Researchers have classified entire sites as <italic>camps</italic>, <italic>kills</italic>, or <italic>kill-camps</italic> using this metric. However, much of the Early Paleoindian record is dominated by surface scatters which exhibit continuous and diffuse artifact distributions, lacking discrete localities. Some lithic scatters far exceed the normal sizes of single component sites and better reflect a lithic landscape, making it difficult to define site categories or analyze spatial relationships between artifacts. In this paper, I first define a spatially explicit framework for projectile point fragment discard in kills and camps, addressing behavioral inferences for discrete occupations and surface scatters. I then use computational techniques to characterize the spatial covariance of projectile fragments at the Reddin site, which is the largest Folsom lithic scatter in North America. I address a long-standing hypothesis which suggests Folsom groups segregated hunting activities away from campsites on the landscape. Results of the analysis do not support this hypothesis, but suggest Folsom groups formed kill-camp deposits across the site surface.","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":"10861 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-026-09808-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Models of terminal Pleistocene (Early Paleoindian) land-use in North America explore the interplay of residential and logistical mobility. Researchers often structure interpretations using simple site categories, like residential camp or kill site. Excavations in several components reveal terminal Pleistocene groups occasionally tethered residential and logistical choices, forming kill-camp sites characterized by hunting activities, animal butchery, and residential downtime. A popular rule-of-thumb method for distinguishing camping from hunting activities involves comparing the types and quantities of projectile point fragments between localities. Researchers have classified entire sites as camps, kills, or kill-camps using this metric. However, much of the Early Paleoindian record is dominated by surface scatters which exhibit continuous and diffuse artifact distributions, lacking discrete localities. Some lithic scatters far exceed the normal sizes of single component sites and better reflect a lithic landscape, making it difficult to define site categories or analyze spatial relationships between artifacts. In this paper, I first define a spatially explicit framework for projectile point fragment discard in kills and camps, addressing behavioral inferences for discrete occupations and surface scatters. I then use computational techniques to characterize the spatial covariance of projectile fragments at the Reddin site, which is the largest Folsom lithic scatter in North America. I address a long-standing hypothesis which suggests Folsom groups segregated hunting activities away from campsites on the landscape. Results of the analysis do not support this hypothesis, but suggest Folsom groups formed kill-camp deposits across the site surface.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field, presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline. The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology. Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines. Specific topics covered in recent issues include: the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology, new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing. The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues. Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List. For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm