Across Atlantic Ice The Origin of America's Clovis Culture

[homestyle]

I received an email notification yesterday that my copy just shipped. It should arrive today according to UPS.

[Mud Hawk]

Huh!!! I thought it wasn't coming out till February. Which site did you order from?

Amazon $23:
Across Atlantic Ice: The Origin of America's Clovis Culture:Amazon:Books

UC Press $35:
Across Atlantic Ice : Dennis J. Stanford and Bruce A. Bradley - University of California Press

Barnes & Noble $24:
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/acro...ord/1101921016

[knife river]

My copy arrived yesterday. Just glanced through it, but was disappointed they didn't spend more time on the Cinmar Site. It deserves a chapter of its own.

There are some other Solutrean finds from the Maryland/Delaware area and from the Gulf of Maine, but I haven't come across them yet in the book...

[homestyle]

I pre-ordered it from UC Press when the link was first posted.

[rokdok]

Cinmar site? The Cinmar bipoint (named after the ship that dredged it up) and "associated" mammoth remains dated to around 25,000 years b.p. were dredged out of the Atlantic 20 miles or so off the Virginia coast. The "Norfolk bipoint" shares the same legacy. If an amateur(or most professionals) attempted to associate the mammoth remains and a lithic artifact dredged non-stratigraphically from the ocean floor, he would be laughed out of the country.

But, for arguments sake, let's assume the association and radiocarbon dates are correct. If this bipointed foliate were of Western European origin, these dates would place it in either the proto-Solutrean(whose toolkit consisted of unifacial points and other tools of Mousterian aspect)
or early Lower Solutrean,both of which used not only bifacial foliates and Blade core technology, but also levallois technique, a holdover from middle paleolithic mode 3 technology, most frequently associated in Western Europe with Neanderthals.

The origin of the Solutrean horizon is still not known.There are 3 major hypotheses as to their origins.
1. Origins in Eastern Europe and diffused West.
2.Originated in N. Africa and diffused to Spain and France.
3.Evolved independantly in Western europe from one or another of the preceding industries(Aurignacian, Mousterian, Chatelperronian,Szeletian,etc)

The Chatelperronian and Mousterian have been reliably associated with Neanderthal remains, while there has been NO ASSOCIATION OF SOLUTREAN TECHNOLOGY WITH ANY HOMINID REMAINS,although because of the Solutrean associations of art and Blade core technology, has led to the assumption that anatomically modern humans(AMH) are responsible. These INFERRED cognitive and behavioral differences thus became the explanatory basis for the success of modern humans relative to Neanderthals.This is dogma.

Levallois technique is a complex strategy and requires abstract thought processes, the production of bone artifacts and beads at Arcy sur Cure in France, artifacts long thought to be produced only by AMH, have now been attributed to late Neanderthals based on actual physical remains.The Chatelperronian culture of Southwestern France(the same area of initial appearance of the Solutreans) one candidate as a Solutrean predecessor, is now also firmly attributed to hominids with Neanderthal features based on excavations at St. Cesare and Arcy sur Cure.

The origins of the Solutreans have long been debated by archeologists. Peyrony believed the Solutreans originated as an "evolved Mousterian" of Eastern Europe. Breuil, after extensive travel in Eastern Europeand examination of Szeletian and other transitional industries believed the Lower Solutrean derived from the Tata mousterian through perfection of Mousterian bifaces. The Szeletian is associated with Neanderthal remains.

It was long thought that true Neanderthals went extinct around 35,000 years ago, but recent excavations at Gorham's cave in Gibralter have yielded Neanderthal remains reliably dated to 24,000 years ago and associated with Mousterian tools , squarely in the time range of the Solutrean horizon.Remember, NO hominid remains have, to date, been found in Solutrean levels in Europe.Deep sea core data has revealed that Gibralter's climate (and that of Western Europe) cooled precipitously at that same time.

Could the Solutreans have been Neanderthals, or a population with a strong neanderthal family history? There is no credible proof, in my opinion, that this was not so.If the Solutreans were Neanderthal/part Neanderthal, is there any other evidence which supports this idea?

Traditional thought both by archeologists and anthropologists has long believed Neanderthals did not inhabit north America. This position was enforced by the fact that no Neanderthal remains or Mousterian technology has been found in Eastern Asia or Siberia. It was also bolstered by the belief that, according to the Out of Africa replacement theory, that Neanderthals represented a genetic dead end, and did not contribute to the AMH gene pool. Mtdna evidence also supported this position, and seemed to prove that all Native Americans were derived from relatively recent mongoloid populations in Asia.And then Svante Paabo announced the fact that the Neanderthal Genome had been deciphered from DNA in fossil remains, and soon after that ALL CURRENT NON SUB-SAHARAN AFRICANS HAVE NEANDERTHAL GENES.

It gets even better. Prior to the determination of the Neanderthal genome, extensive research on the Dystrophin gene(the defect in the cytoskeletal protein it codes for causes Duschennes muscular dystrophy) revealed that the oldest form of the gene is a haplotype named B006.B006 is the type FOUND IN THE NEANDERTHAL GENOME. So, not only did Neanderthal contribute genetic material, they apparently are responsible for one of the most critical and highly conserved genes in mankind. This was am real shock to the scientific community, who had long espoused the theory that IF Neanderthal contributed ANY material to AMH that the gene would be of little significance. Wrong again.

Let's examine that B006 haplotype a little further. The frequency of B006 had long been examined in worldwide populations, and now that we knew it was the Neanderthal type, we could study the occurence in current populations. While it was no real surprise that the highest frequency of occurrence in the Old World was highest in Western Europe at around 9%, an unexpected finding emerged SOME NATIVE AMERICAN POPULATIONS EXPRESS THE GENE AT FREQUENCY OF 27%. If Neanderthals or their descendants never made it to the New World, how could this be? The geneticists opined that the gene arrived here by populations carrying it from Siberia.Wrong again, the B006 haplotype does not occur there, and if it did, we should expect it to occur at higher frequencies because of the supposed "bottleneck" where the supposed progenitors of Clovis stewed around for thousands of years, waiting for the mythical "ice-free Corridor to open.Again, it does not occur there. So, how do we explain the abnormally high frequency of this genetic material in native Americans, especially populations in the Eastern USA? Hmmm?

Occams razor assumes the simplest explanation is usually correct. You fill in the blanks.

Is there any evidence of Levallois technology present in North America in Clovis contexts? The Wells Creek Crater site is considered to have yielded one of the most complete Clovis assemblages in the Eastern USA. It's excavator Don Dragoo commented explicitely on it's "Mousterian" similarities. The Little River Clovis Complex identified by Carl Yahnig (an avocational, Carl also has a classic Levallois tortoise core from these sites pictured in his book"MY 101 FAVORITE CLOVIS ARTIFACTS") was investigated by Tony Baker where he identified a technique which he calls "Dome and Plane" reduction of cores, which he had not seen in his exhaustive examination of Western Clovis. DOME AND PLANE IS LEVALLOIS TECHNIQUE, and occurs in the Eastern USA and not the West in Clovis contexts.He came to the conclusion that this was a NEW technique developed after Clovis had migrated east. I have come to the opposite conclusion, based partly on the published findings by Dr. Barbara Purdy from the C.C.A site in Northern Florida, where she described IN A STRATIFIED DIG, LEVALLOIS LITHICS ESTIMATED TO BE AROUND 25,000 YEARS OLD BASED NOT ONLY ON STRATIGRAPHY , but also on thermoluminescence and patination techniques. 25,000, another coincidence??

Comments?

[uniface]

I certainly can't go stride-for-stride with you, Roc. But I can and will confirm from experience (for whatever value that has -- if any) that the equation (South)Eastern Paleo = Clovis is assumed more than demonstrable. The two do share much in common, starting with fluted bifacial points. But there are tool forms (and sizes) that turn up roughly from Northern Alabama up the east side of the Mississippi through to the Ohio River to which -- unless there are major, gaping holes in that part of the current record to which I have access -- the only analogues (at least, known to me) are Trans-Atlantic. And (as currently assumed) were previous to them.

Looking forward to the book, needless to say !

[rokdok]

Uni, would you care to expand on those specific tool types?

[uniface]

Hi Roc

At the moment, that's hard to do without being able to illustrate them. I never bothered photographing most of the collection before I sent it off on study loan ; a few of one type (extensively & systematically re-touched lamellar blades) are pictured here :
Message - Arrowheads and Indian Artifacts Gallery
Message - Arrowheads and Indian Artifacts Gallery
Message - Arrowheads and Indian Artifacts Gallery
although they aren't necessarily the best examples.

Sending you a PM.

[Rick doninger]

Hey ya'll, been a while and the Stanford and Bradley book I am sure will be interesting reading. Just thinkin, It really doesn't mean all that much whether the solutrean developed into clovis if there were an even older tool "technology" present here and provable. Keep in mind I am saying older "technology", a technology already identified in older sites abroad but not here as yet. If there was "solutrean" tech here it would parallel the solutrean abroad and would be obvious. Just as if there was a levallois mousterian technology abroad any such technology here should parallel what is known abroad. Clovis in the east is paralleled with clovis in the west. SOO, if there was an alleged "old world" technology here it should be obvious, if there were toolmakers here that made solutrean tools then the solutrean tools should be here, if there were toolmakers here that made levallois tools then the tools should be here and the same goes for oldowan, acheulean, mousterian and on thru the upper paleolithic, aurignacian and later as they are dated. rocdok, is on the money in regard to the levallois technology being present and he has it and it is obvious when you have enough of it to actually see it. Though I can't prove the age, I can prove the technology and it has it's parallel technology both here and abroad. The presence of a "technology" that is older than clovis is provable, rocdok has some of it, Dr Blaine Ensor has some of it, and others from other states and there are many who have it and don't realize it.
In order to "see" a tool "technology" you have to have it. If you have the prepared cores and the tools struck from the cores you can begin to see it. The pre-clovis tool technology is here, and it is provable and "solutrean into clovis" is just a small piece of the story, but I do believe that solutrean technology is present as well, but i believe there is more of the earlier levallois core preparation being found. Now you guys can all determine that the window cleaner is crazy but the truth is in the artifacts. Every early man core preparation that has been found anywhere in the world is found right here in the USA. It just looks different than the blade based industries seen in the solutrean and clovis.The industries that are dated much earlier everywhere else in the world are tools made on flakes as I understand it, so the technology and appearance of the "industry" will look very different and could very easily go unrecognized and unassembled. We have been so well indoctrinated into the theories of the academic mainstream that we may miss what is really out there looking for only what "they" say is there. What do Stanford, Bradley, Collins and the rest think a pre clovis industry is goin to look like? If earlier than solutrean technology exists here, then that solutrean into clovis theory is proven to be just that.....a theory, If a known middle paleo technology were identified here, the whole dating and migration game changes at the foundation. I think theories ought to be free........rick

[uniface]

Beautiful and intriguing relics, Rick !

Love that old stuff, for sure.