PreClovis

Comment

Comment by Charlie Hatchett on August 28, 2008 at 12:47pm

Cactus Hill would be a very cool site in which to participate. Three 14C dates ranging from 20 to 18 ka are reported from Cactus Hill, in strata below the Clovis deposits.

Comment by Dan McLerran on August 27, 2008 at 5:26pm

Thanks for the info, Charlie. I may look into what (if anything) may be going on with the Cactus Hill site in Virginia, as well.

Comment by Charlie Hatchett on August 24, 2008 at 3:11pm

Thanks for the info about your photos. Quite frankly, I did not know that, given the sampling you show here, there was so much preClovis material unearthed at this point. This is very exciting and indicates that we may only be looking at the "tip of the iceberg" on recoverable preClovis material. Please keep me apprised if you hear of any significant new sites with this kind of promise that may be open to volunteers.


I agree that we may be only looking at the "tip of the iceberg" of recoverable preClovis material in the Americas. Many new, potentially preClovis sites are being reported currently. I think this because many researchers are actively searching for preClovis deposits with cultural material. As you probably know, this sort of activity was taboo in the past. That barrier has now fallen, with the vast majority of archs convinced that people were in the Americas prior to Clovis. A whole new horizon of research has opened up, whereas, before, published research was pretty much stuck at the Clovis threshold.

The Topper Site’s staff solicits volunteers annually:

http://www.allendale-expedition.net/

I’ll keep my eyes and ears open for any other volunteer opportunities at potentially preClovis sites.

Comment by Dan McLerran on August 22, 2008 at 8:23pm

Thanks for the info about your photos. Quite frankly, I did not know that, given the sampling you show here, there was so much preClovis material unearthed at this point. This is very exciting and indicates that we may only be looking at the "tip of the iceberg" on recoverable preClovis material. Please keep me apprised if you hear of any significant new sites with this kind of promise that may be open to volunteers.

Comment by Charlie Hatchett on August 20, 2008 at 12:15am

Hi Dan.

I'm glad you've enjoyed the photos. The majority of the material is from preClovis context; though it’s obvious some mixing has occurred in the upper strata (Clovis and San Patrice points):

http://archaeonet.ning.com/photo/photo/show?id=1844590%3APhoto%3A9449&context=album&albumId=1844590%3AAlbum%3A9500

http://archaeonet.ning.com/photo/photo/show?id=1844590%3APhoto%3A9522&context=album&albumId=1844590%3AAlbum%3A9500

1-2’ below the surface of the lowest stratum, which consists of fluvially deposited and rounded gravel:

http://api.ning.com/files/uCeR*YPha0N3PY48SOAdtElGViBHK8QKJZ7nocAEFjaGg2v7l*7UfmYB2tTQ9EtA36JfcTJKBTUXPA7e-nlKDuLyX8rZ08fI/wilsonleonard3.jpg__http://archaeonet.ning.com/photo/photo/show?id=1844590%3APhoto%3A9814&context=user

http://archaeonet.ning.com/photo/photo/show?id=1844590%3APhoto%3A9811&context=user

http://archaeonet.ning.com/photo/photo/show?id=1844590%3APhoto%3A9813&context=user

I have observed a consistent pattern of core/ biface and flake/blade tech(s).


Many of these specimens are iron stained/ thermally altered(?) and exhibit remnants of laminated carbonate coatings overlying the iron staining. Note the difference between Clovis and San Patrice points and the majority of the other material that has been posted:

http://archaeonet.ning.com/photo/album/show?id=1844590:Album:9663

http://archaeonet.ning.com/photo/album/show?id=1844590%3AAlbum%3A9500&page=2



As to other potentially preClovis sites, the following have been offered up through the years (though very controversial):

1. Hueyatlaco/ Valsequillo:

http://www.valsequilloclassic.net/nuke/index.php


2. Calico:

http://www.calicodig.org/wp-gallery2.php

3. Pedra Furada:

http://www.athenapub.com/10pfurad.htm

http://forum.palanth.com/index.php/topic,1134.0.html


I’ve never read a serious refutation to the antiquity indicated by the various dating analyses performed on samples from these sites. I’ve also not read a serious refutation
to the claims of the cultural status of the specimens recovered from these sites.

Comment by Dan McLerran on August 19, 2008 at 8:10pm

I love the photos you have posted -- extremely interesting. Which of these have been identified within PreClovis contexts? Also, are there other sites other than those you have mentioned here that are potentially PreClovis?

Comment by Charlie Hatchett on August 4, 2008 at 6:14pm

This group is established to discuss the problem of the peopling of the Americas. In the last couple of decades compelling evidence has been produced by various researchers indicating colonization of the Americas prior to Clovis. Such evidence has been produced from research at Monte Verde, Taima-Taima, Meadowcroft, Cactus Hill, Topper, Schaefer, Hebior, Mud Lake, Bluefish Caves, Old Crow River, Paisley Cave, La Sena, Lovewell, Gault and Buttermilk Creek.

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last