PREFACE

The Portales Complex is no longer valid. Johnson and Holliday (1997) have demonstrated that the bonebed containing the type collection was churned and probably consisted of bison bone from at least twodiscrete events widely separated in time. The type collection itself is a mixed assemblage of heavilyreworked points. Wheat (1972:153) incorporates most of the Portales into his Firstview Complex, whichis seen as the central and southern Plains equivalent of the northern Plains Cody Complex. As originallydefined, both Firstview and San Jon points were diagnostic of the complex, but subsequent research(Wheat 1976) indicated that the latter were reworked Firstview points. Based on his analysis of the pointsfrom Olson-Chubbuck, Wheat argues that there are subtle but consistent morphological differencesbetween Eden-Scottsbluff and Firstview points. Judge (n.d.:44–45) emphasizes that the stems ofFirstview points are fashioned by lateral abrasion in a direction perpendicular to the point axis rather thanby pressure flaking. Bradley (1993:260), however, states emphatically that on technological grounds, theFirstview points from Olsen-Chubbuck are Cody points.The Evans bone bed from which the Portales type collection was recovered is located in the upper part ofHaynes’ Unit E at Blackwater Locality No. 1 (Johnson and Holliday 1997). Firstview-Cody materials arereportedly present throughout Unit E, which is dated between 10,000 and 8500 rcy BP, and in lower UnitF dated 8500–8000 rcy BP. At Lubbock Lake, Firstview-Cody artifacts are found in stratum 2m, whichdates 10,000 to 8500 rcy BP (Holliday 1997:195). The stratigraphic evidence therefore indicates thatFirstview-Cody on the Southern High Plains may date between 10,000 and 8000 BP. The only directdates for Firstview-Cody, however, are 8690 rcy BP and 8970 rcy BP from the Evans bone bed (Johnsonand Holliday 1997:337), and 8500 rcy BP from the a Firstview feature at Lubbock Lake (Holliday1997:195). Those dates are more in line with the 9400–8700 rcy BP date range for the Cody Complex onthe northwestern Plains (Frison 1991:Table 2.2).In the northwestern Plains, the Cody Complex is succeeded by the Allen-Frederick-Lusk Complex,marked by lanceolate parallel-oblique projectile points (Frison 1991). The complex is dated between8500 and 8000 rcy BP and is the last of the classic Paleoindian complexes. Dating the end of thePaleoindian period in the Southern Plains is more problematic since there are no known sites in the LlanoEstacado (Holliday 1997:197) or greater Southern Plains (Hofman 1989:44) that span the Paleoindian toArchaic transition. In the Central and Lower Pecos regions of Texas, however, Paleoindian styleprojectile points (Golondrina, Texas Angostura, and possibly Lerma) are associated with evidence for thekind of broad-spectrum hunting and gathering characteristic of the Archaic. Golondrina points date fromabout 9000 BP to perhaps as late as 8000 BP, and Angostura is dated between about 8800 and 8000 BP(Holliday 1997:154–157; Turner and Hester 1993). Although these point styles appear rare or absent insoutheastern New Mexico, it is clear that the Paleoindian and Archaic periods, or more precisely theadaptations characteristic of those periods, overlap at a pan-regional scale.From the above discussion, it is clear that the priority chronological issue relating to the Paleoindianperiod in southeastern New Mexico is determining the age and relationship among the unfluted pointseries. Absolute dates and stratagraphic evidence are needed to firmly establish the relative ages of thevarious point styles. Given the situation at Blackwater Locality No. 1 and Lubbock Lake, however,stratified sites are most likely to be rare, serendipitous discoveries associated with major land disturbingactivities. Most of the chronological data is therefore expected to come from radiocarbon dates on boneassociated with the projectile points. Typological and technological studies are equally important to thisresearch. Although the immediate concern is to ensure consistent typology of the projectile points, thelonger-term goal is to determine if the sequence of projectile point styles represents successivedevelopments within a single technological tradition or multiple traditions. In other words, do thedifferent point styles represent different cultural adaptations and/or different populations? The ultimateanswer to this question will, of course, require more than chronological and technological data. Thesubsistence and settlement strategies associated with the different Paleoindian complexes must also be reconstructed.4-6