Clovis points are the characteristically fluted projectile points associated with the New World Clovis culture, a prehistoric Paleo-American culture. They are present in dense concentrations across much of North America and they are largely restricted to the north of South America. There are slight differences in points found in the Eastern United States sometimes leading them to be called "Clovis-like".C. J. Ellis and J. C. Lothrop, "Early Fluted-biface Variation in Glaciated Northeastern North America", PaleoAmerica 5, no. 2 (2019): 121–131, 2019 Clovis points date to the Early Paleoindian period, with all known points dating from roughly 13,400–12,700 years ago (11,500 to 10,800 C14 years BP). As an example, Clovis remains at the Murry Springs Site date to around 12,900 calendar years ago (10,900 ± 50 C14 years BP).Haynes, C. Vance, et al., "The Murray Springs Clovis Site, Pleistocene Extinction, and the Question of Extraterrestrial Impact", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 107, no. 9, pp. 4010–15, 2010 Clovis fluted points are named after the city of Clovis, New Mexico, where examples were first found in 1929 by Ridgely Whiteman."The Initial Research at Clovis, New Mexico: 1932-1937", Plains Anthropologist, vol. 35, no. 130, pp. 1–20, 1990
A typical Clovis point is a medium to large lanceolate point with sharp edges, a third of an inch thick, one to two inches wide, and about long. Sides are parallel to convex, and exhibit careful pressure flaking along the blade edge. The broadest area is towards the base which is distinctly concave with concave grooves called "flutes" removed from one or, more commonly, both surfaces of the blade. The lower edges of the blade and base are ground to dull edges for hafting.Slade, Alan Michael, "To haft and to hold: Evidence for the hafting of Clovis fluted points", Journal of Lithic Studies 8.3, pp. 133-151, 2021 There is debate about how Clovis points were used. Originally it was assumed that they were used in a thrusting spear. Later suggestions arose that the points had been used as throwing spears, either as is or with spear thrower (atlatl) which technically would be considered darts, or as a braced weapon (pike).Baldino, Jacob, et al., "North American Clovis point form and performance V: An experimental assessment of spear thrusting penetration depth and entry wound size", Lithic Technology 49.3, pp. 295-310, 2024Byram, R. Scott, Kent G. Lightfoot, and Jun Ueno Sunseri, "Clovis points and foreshafts under braced weapon compression: Modeling Pleistocene megafauna encounters with a lithic pike", Plos one 19.8 e0307996, 2024Mukusha, Lawrence, et al. ,"Hit or miss: Do microscopic linear impact traces (MLITs) form on Clovis stone tips launched via atlatl into foliage and sediment?", Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 55 104517, 2024 It is also possible the points were used in the animal butchering process.Eren, Metin I., et al., "Experimental bison butchery using replica hafted Clovis fluted points and large handheld flakes", Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 55, 104480, 2024
Around 10,000 years before present, a new type of fluted projectile point called Folsom appeared in archaeological deposits, and Clovis-style points disappeared from the continental United States. Most Folsom points are shorter in length than Clovis points and exhibit longer flutes and different pressure flaking patterns. This is particularly easy to see when comparing the unfinished preforms of Clovis and Folsom points.Sellers, Paul V. “Fluted Points.” Central States Archaeological Journal, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 113–20, 1956 Analysis of radiocarbon dates suggests that the Haskett Projectile Point is contemporary with Clovis and Folsom points.Rosencrance, Richard L., et al., "Bayesian Analysis of Haskett Projectile Point Radiocarbon Dates in the Intermountain West Demonstrates Contemporaneity with Clovis and Folsom Points", PaleoAmerica 10.2-3, pp. 132-155, 2024
Type description
Only a few recovered Clovis points are in their original condition. Most points were "reworked" to resharpen them or repair damage.Peck, Rodney M., "Re-Worked Clovis Projectile Points", Central States Archaeological Journal, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 26–28, 2010 This can make it difficult to identify which lithic tradition they come from.Roosa, William B., "Some Great Lakes Fluted Point Types", Michigan Archaeologist 11(3,4), pp. 89-102, 1965
Clovis type description: Clovis is a comparatively large and heavy bifacially flaked fluted lanceolate point, lenticular to near oval in cross-section with parallel to moderately convex lateral edges, a majority having the latter. Maximum width is usually at or slightly below midpoint, frequently resulting in rather long sharp tips. Bases are normally only slightly concave, the depth usually ranging from and arching completely across basal width. Basal corners range from nearly square to slightly rounded without forming eared projections. Length range is considerable, with a majority between . Maximum width range is , a majority near the former. Maximum thickness range, . Normally fluted on both faces. Flutes are most often produced by multiple flake removals Length and quality of flutes is greatly variable, with length usually 30% to 50% of overall point length, and the majority near the former Base of flutes is often widened by subsequent removals of additional channel flakes or short wide flakes. There is minimal post-fluting retouch of basal areas. Overall flaking frequently irregular in both size and orientation, often including large facet remnants of early stage reduction processes There is very moderate evidence of pressure flaking Lower lateral and basal edges are smoothed by grinding, often resulting in slight tapering of base. Clovis points do not have recurved (fishtail) lateral edges, pronounced basal constrictions, or convex (Folsom-type) channel flake platform remnants.
Points generally weigh between roughly 25 grams and 35 grams.Bamforth, Douglas B., "Projectile Points, People, and Plains Paleoindian Perambulations", Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28 (2), pp. 142–5. 2009 Specimens are known to have been made of flint, chert, jasper, chalcedony and other stone of conchoidal fracture.Wilke, Philip J., et al., "Clovis Technology at the Anzick Site, Montana", Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 242–72, 1991 Quartz crystal were also used and those points tend to be smaller.Buchanan, Briggs, Nicholas Gala, and Marcus J. Hamilton, "The Functional Use of Quartz Crystal Points in Clovis Technology", Lithic Technology 51.1, pp. 76-87, 2026 Clovis points can vary even at a single site. The eight points found at Naco, while otherwise similar, ranged in length from 2 to 4 inches.Laub, Richard S., "Interlude 2 The Clovis People", Two Acres of Time: Unearthing the Ice Age at the Byron Dig, New York Chichester, West Sussex: Columbia University Press, pp. 94-100, 2022 A study suggested that Clovis points east of the Mississippi river had more diversity/richness than those in the west.Buchanan, B., A. Chao, C. H. Chiu, R. K. Colwell, M. J. O’Brien, A. Werner, and M. I. Eren, "Environment-Induced Changes in Selective Constraints on Social Learning during the Peopling of the Americas", Scientific Reports 7: 44431, 2017Buchanan, B., M. J. Hamilton, J. D. Kilby, and J. A. Gingerich, "Lithic Networks Reveal Early Regionalization in Late Pleistocene North America", Journal of Archaeological Science 65, pp. 114–21, 2016 Points found in North Carolina also suggest there were regional variations.Daniel Jr, I. Randolph, et al., "Toward a synthesis of Paleoamerican fluted point cultures in the Carolinas", Scientific Reports 15.1, 28341, 2025
Distribution
Clovis points have been found over most of North America and, less commonly, as far south as Venezuela.Dillehay, Tom D., and Jeremy A. Sabloff, "Probing Deeper into First American Studies", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 106, no. 4, 2009, pp. 971–78, 2009Pailes, Matthew C. and Searcy, Michael T., "Paleoindian Period". Hinterlands to Cities: The Archaeology of Northwest Mexico and Its Vecinos", University Press of Colorado, pp. 21-37, 2022 One issue is that the sea level is now about 50 meters higher than in the Paleoindian period so any coastal sites would be underwater, which may be skewing the data.Lothrop, Jonathan C., Darrin L. Lowery, Arthur E. Spiess, and Christopher J. Ellis, "Early Human Settlement of Northeastern North America", PaleoAmerica 2(3), pp.192–251, 2016 The widespread South American Fishtail or Fell projectile point style has been suggested to have derived from Clovis. Of the around 6000 points currently classified as Clovis found in the United States the majority were east of the Mississippi and especially in the Southeast.Toner, Mike. “Impossibly Old America?” Archaeology, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 40–45, 2006 Some researchers suggest that many of the eastern points are misclassified and most real Clovis Points are found in the west.Howard, Calvin D., "The Clovis Point: Characteristics and Type Description", Plains Anthropologist, vol. 35, no. 129, pp. 255–62, 1990 Significant Clovis find sites include:Waters, Michael R., and Thomas W. Stafford, "Redefining the Age of Clovis: Implications for the Peopling of the Americas", Science, vol. 315, no. 5815, pp. 1122–26, 2007
Anzick site in Montana Aubrey site in Texas Belson siteTalbot, Thomas, Henry T. Wright, and Brendan Nash, "The Belson site: A Paleoindian campsite on the outwash plains of the Central Great Lakes", PaleoAmerica 7.1, pp. 76-84, 2021 Bredan Nash et al, "Clovis organizational dynamics at a Late Glacial campsite in the central Great Lakes: Belson site excavations 2020–2021", PlosOne, May 29, 2024 Big Bone Lick State Park in Kentucky Big Eddy Site in Missouri Blackwater Draw type site in New Mexico Cactus Hill in Virginia Colby site in Wyoming Dent site in Colorado Domebo Canyon in Oklahoma East Wenatchee Clovis Site in Washington El Fin del Mundo in Sonora, Mexico Gault site in Texas Page–Ladson in Florida Lehner Mammoth-Kill Site in Arizona Mockingbird Gap site Murray Springs Clovis Site in Arizona Naco Mammoth Kill Site in Arizona Paleo Crossing site in Ohio Ready site (aka Lincoln Hills site) in Illinois Shawnee-Minisink Site in Pennsylvania Simon site in Idaho Sloth Hole in Florida
Fraudulent Clovis points have also emerged on the open market, some with false documentation."A Variety of Replica Fluted Clovis Points.", Central States Archaeological Journal, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 102–03, 2007
Caches
Clovis points, along with other stone and bone/ivory tools, have been identified in over two dozen artifact caches. These caches range from the Mississippi River to the Rocky Mountains and Northwest United States. While the Anzick cache is associated with a child burial, the majority of caches appear to represent anticipatory material storage at strategic locations on the Pleistocene landscape. In May 2008, a major Clovis cache, now called the Mahaffey Cache, was found in Boulder, Colorado, with 83 Clovis stone tools though no actual Clovis Points. The tools were found to have traces of horse and cameloid protein. They were dated to 13,000 to 13,500 YBP, a date confirmed by sediment layers in which the tools were found and the types of protein residues found on the artifacts. The Fenn cache is an important collection of 56 items of uncertain provenance but that was probably discovered in 1902 "near the area where Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho meet" and was acquired by Forrest Fenn in 1988.