Solturean Origins of Clovis (?)

[uniface]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1013315/posts

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Th3rty7]

Thanks for the article uniface. It's a shame the lamestream media isn't running this huge story. Seems like it's tucked into hard to find corners of the internet. The evidence keeps accumulating and the silence from the clovis first group speaks volumes imo. We underestimate the ancients will to survive.

Time to rewrite the books?

 

[Tnmountains]

Wonder what it will take. I thought the Topper site might move things Did you read the threads below the article some dated 2003 seems its been on the tips of tongues for some time. Thanks again Uni.
TnMtns

 

[blindpig]

Nice read there Uniface ,....

Thirty 7 ,.....Now , just slow down ,.... The lamestream have there hand’s full TODAY spinning TOMORROW’S history ........
But when they do get to spinning this it may read :

HEADLINE NEWS
African’s [solutrean’s] fleeing Europe discover America ,...In Beijing [Asia], Chinese officials said “WE don’t need are “Historic”claim to America anymore ,... hell we own it all now anyway !!

Well, maybe that’s one way to spin it ?? Sad truth is, it will be spun,... some how!

Blindpig

 

[coteau]

I don't know what media you guys are talking about. But all I've seen on PBS, Discovery channel, History channel, etc., the past 6 years or so are documentaries about the Solutrean hypothesis. I don't believe there's any Solutrean/Clovis connection at all.

A book that explains a lot of these issues is at the link:
http://rex.ucpress.edu/books/pages/10794.php

 

[blindpig]

Thanks Runtee,
But even in this book’s “description” it is said ,”He [MR.Melzer] also confronts some radical claims : That the America’s were Colonized from Europe : That a comet obliterated the Mega Fauna ... Maybe they should have said “explore” rather than “confronts” ,..but I only read into this with suspicion . Its taken me years to reach this level of cynical thinking , ...my bad ? But even with this said this book might be spot on ?
I watch these “mainstream” networks ,PBS , Discovery and the History Channel with the same cynical mind , a shame as I’m sure it takes away from the entertainment value , but as sure as I'm sitting here , they all have a point they want to make ,..we all do , many aren’t up front about this “point” , I even think the “mainstream” will spin up a “point” and worst yet when there’s a good point out there ,.. there silent ....
Now , I believe many peoples should be recognized for there “Discovery” of the America’s , Christopher Columbus , Vikings , A drunk Irish monk , Eskimo’s , Any number of lost fisherman from who knows where from ,Japan ,Africa , Pacific Islands , Europe ? Asian’s with there Micro-blades and even ,.. Just maybe the Solutrean’s ?
This Solutean Theory , is just that a theory ,.. And all theory’s should be forged with good [fair?] debate . Even Christopher Columbus was “confronted” with mainstream thought about his “Theory”.
Anyway , maybe was a poor choice of mine to try to make “funny” my thoughts/feelings toward are “mainstream media” here on the AIA forum , ..not the place for it ??
This is a great article that Uniface has brought to us here , seen a show on T.V. about the Solutean’s [nova?] that was good , read bits and pieces here and there ? This article was a nice summery , for me anyway .


Like a fish flopping around for air ,.. On the bank of the “mainstream”...... .......Blindpig

 

[coteau]

Thanks for your comments, Blindpig.

I just think the media showed way too many shows on the Solutrean/Clovis subject. The Solutrean hypothesis doesn't have much evidence to even be considered a solid theory, IMO. The outre passe flaking is the only good evidence. I was interested in the Solutrean/Clovis connection years ago, but now I think it should be put to rest.

I might change my mind though! At the moment I believe that the first Americans traveled down the NW coast and/or the ice-free corridor. And learned on their own, not with the help of Solutreans, outre passe flaking.

Meltzer's new book points out a lot of myths that circulate on the internet (like Kennewick man was a cuacasion). I don't agree with everything in his book, but he gives accurate up-to-date information.

 

[newnan man]

Mt. Verde, in southern Chile had an established settlement 12,500 years ago. This slightly precedes Clovis and is thousands of miles from the Bering Straight and the controversial "ice free" corridor.
Clovis first is losing a lot of credibility. It is all very interesting and fun to dwell upon. The American continents are so large several migrations from various areas could have been concealed from one another for centuries. Just my 2 cents tossed in.

 

[bravowhiskey]

I am of the middle clan, as in, if you take both hypothesis, Clovis on one side Solturean on the other the truth will lie somewhere in the middle. Portions of both origin theories may be correct. I.e. the radiocarbon dating of the Monte Verde site. And the documentation of certain key Clovis sites.
I'm sure man then, as man now, would have been forever trying to find a "better place" and eternally sought out that which he had not experienced. So the assault, or habitation of the Americas, depending on how you look at it, went on from all coasts.
JMO
I "ate up" that article. Fascinating stuff. Established science is not always the gospel. We can all take Otzi the "ice man" as an example, certainly set back the dating of copper tool manufacture. Pretty cool finding a copper ax and flint knife both being used at the same point in time by the same individual.

Thanks for the read, Uniface.

BW

 

[uniface]

Glad to be of service

At the moment I believe that the first Americans traveled down the NW coast and/or the ice-free corridor.

Fine -- I guess. Except that people were here long before it opened . . . (?) And that there are limits to population growth that turn the idea of one band of hunters into a continental population in even a thousand years' time a joke.

And learned on their own, not with the help of Solutreans, outre passe flaking.

Again fine -- I guess.

I would venture to offer the thought, however, that when people get emotionally invested in a theory, like the Clovis Firsters are, they tend to see evidence that undermines their position from the perspective that supports their assumptions. Not the way it is.

In this case, what they fluff over includes that

1) Outrepasse flaking is not the only technological parallel between Solturian and Clovis. Anybody who tells you it was is distorting the evidence.

Try finding cultures that characteristically made ultra-thin bifaces using soft hammer percussion. Anywhere. Ever. (Later cultures like the Texas people who made the Sweetwater Biface don't count, because they came later than either one). It's a short list. Real short.

2) Outrepasse flakes are, ordinarily, accidents in most lithic technologies. But that technique was at the heart of Solturian and Clovis practice. There's a difference. They did it deliberately, and consistently. This sets them apart from pretty much everybody else.

3) The whole "they duplicated and used Solturean technology independently" claim makes me wonder why nobody else ever did, then. And nobody else ever did.

You can't get there with the monkeys and typewriters model. Blindpig's Aussies had maybe 60,000 years to come up with refinements of the tools they came in with. Like even "evolving" from unifaces to bifaces. But except for ground hardstone, they didn't. You can't date their stuff. An artifact there might be 30,000 years old or 300. They had a lot of time there for "could have." But no "did it."

(Heck -- my grandmother could have asassinated President Kennedy).

I don't (to the extent that anybody cares -- if there even is one) think that one "peopling" of the Western Hemisphere accounts for the evidence. For that matter, I wonder why people seem compelled to assume that they couldn't have been here since whenever.

Except then we wouldn't all be Africans . . .

 

[coteau]

Fine -- I guess. Except that people were here long before it opened . . . (?) And that there are limits to population growth that turn the idea of one band of hunters into a continental population in even a thousand years' time a joke.

I said down the Northwest coast OR the ice-free corridor. According to the current evidence the ice-free corridor wasn't open in pre Clovis times, but long stretches of the NW coast were ice free between 16,000 and 14,500 BP, and by 13,400 years ago the coast was completely ice free from Alaska to Washington State and full of vegetation. They could have used boats along the Pacific coast too. I'm not saying the first Americans came here exactly 13,000 years ago. They could have come here fifty thousand years ago. I'm just saying that the Solutrean hypothesis should not be taken seriously.

Try finding cultures that characteristically made ultra-thin bifaces using soft hammer percussion. Anywhere. Ever. (Later cultures like the Texas people who made the Sweetwater Biface don't count, because they came later than either one). It's a short list. Real short.

Ultra-thin bifaces are specialized tools made by the Folsom culture. I've never heard of ultra-thins being found in Clovis contexts. Bifaces yes, ultra-thins no. If you know where I can read about ultra-thins found in Clovis contexts, I'd like the references. Soft hammer percussion was used to manufacture all types of tools and in all time periods. The Neanderthals probably didn't know how to use soft hammer percussion, but modern humans did.

 

[uniface]

Score one for Runtee !

Good looking. You caught me being imprecise.

You're right that ultra-thin bifaces are Folsom rather than Clovis.

What I had in mind were the "large platter-like biface cores" that are typical of Clovis, Folsom & their Paleo relatives in general. Examples :

http://www.wbreckinridge.com/ClovisBiface.html

http://www.lithiccastinglab.com/slide-set-pages/106anzickbif.htm

If these were found in Europe, no one would doubt they were Solturian. And if their European analogues were found in the US, no one would doubt they were from the Paleo era.

The point -- once again -- is that these come from two places on earth, and only two. Same general form, same reduction strategy and technique, same use. Nobody can make that go away.

 

[coteau]

Thanks for the links uniface! I know what you mean by the large bifaces made by early Paleo-Indians.

Here's a picture of a Clovis biface from the Beach Clovis site in North Dakota. You probably haven't heard about this Clovis cache. Originally discovered on private land about 40 years ago, but just recently identified by pros as a significant Clovis site! The site contains several closely spaced small cache pits (about the size of a soccer ball) each contained 10 to 12 artifacts. Approximately 135 bifaces have been recovered (so far) from this cache. There has been lots of work done on this site recently, but very little, if any new information has been made public.

This fine specimen is about five inches long and made of Rainey Buttes silicified wood. It's actually much thinner than it looks.