Review of the Archaeology Channels Recently Posted Videos with Regard to Pre-Clovis Evidence.

The Archaeology Channel recently posted two short videos to their website about pre-Clovis evidence that is just now gaining traction and beginning to challenge the long held ‘Clovis First’ theory that has long dominated North American archaeology. This new evidence points to an earlier time frame for the population of the Americas, contrary to the date that has accepted as fact for so long in American archaeology.

The first video, titled Ice Age Discoveries: New Evidence , deals with various theories associated with the population of the Americas. This includes a brief introduction to the Beringia theory (that humans migrated over the land bridge between Russia and Alaska, then spread through modern day Canada or along the coast to populate the lower regions of North America and into South America) and the Solutrean Hypothesis, both of which have holes. It’s argued that the Solutrean theory stands only on similarity found between lithic technologies in mainland Europe and remains found in the eastern regions of Canada. Where this hypothesis is unlikely due to the duration of such a voyage by sea and the harshness of traveling along glaciated ice packs, the Beringia theory lacks the technological continuity that should be found if people really did migrate from Europe though Asia and finally into North America. Pre-Clovis evidence begins with the Topper site in South Carolina is reviewed, for its wealth of Paleo-Indian artifacts (and the fact that it is a chert quarry) including a modest selection of Pre-Clovis stone tools (picture).

The real turning point for a pre-Clovis theory came with the opening of the Cactus Hill site in Virginia. Fortunately two independent expeditions converged on Cactus Hill, one lead by Joseph and Lynn McAvoy and the other headed by Michael Johnson. I say fortunately because these two teams worked independently of each other and were able to verify the others findings through stratigraphy, lithic analysis and absolute dating methods independently of one another. After Johnson’s team hit the Clovis level they stopped digging, because at this point pre-Clovis inhabitation was just a wild hunch. Where Johnson stopped, McAvoy’s team (Cactus Hill, AREA B) continued to dig below the Clovis level and discovered pre-Clovis blades. At which point Johnson’s team mounted another expedition to Cactus Hill in 96’ to continue work and eventually discovered more pre-Clovis artifacts in their original area (Cactus Hill, AREA A). Both teams demonstrated extreme caution in the uncovering and recording of artifacts, taking care to measure and plot every minute detail during the excavation, lending to the integrity of Cactus Hill as a pre-Clovis site.

The beautiful stratigraphy at Cactus Hill lent further credibility to the pre-Clovis supporters. The stratigraphy at Cactus Hill involved a sterile layer (layers containing no artifacts or evidence of human habitation) between the Clovis artifact bed and the pre-Clovis discovery, indicating no disturbance in the layers. This ensured there could be no doubt about whether or not the pre-Clovis artifacts were actually assemblage from another layer that had migrated into lower levels as critics might suggest. It is not unusual for artifacts to move, depending on soil density (dense artifacts can actually ‘sink’ in the earth toward denser soil horizons), vegetation (tree roots), or rodent burrowing.

While Cactus Hill is not the first site to suggest a pre-Clovis human habitation, it is the oldest accepted evidence of pre-Clovis peoples on the East Coast. The first discovery of Pre-Clovis artifacts was at the Meadowcroft rock shelter in Pennsylvania by Dr. Jim Adovasio, but where Meadowcroft was the first evidence of pre-Clovis assemblage, Cactus Hill helped to reinforce the idea that people inhabited the Americas long before 11,000 years ago. The Meadowcroft rock shelter covers a 30,000 year period but the stratigraphy is complex and contains several reversals (a detail not mentioned in the video) which cast some doubt on the credibility of its Pre-Clovis assemblage. Another problem with Meadowcroft is its proximity to a coal seam, and some worry coal dust from the seam has affected radiocarbon dates for the site.

The second video, titled Ice Age Discoveries: the Investigators, deals more with the proponents of the pre-Clovis theory. It also includes more discussion of the theory and evidence itself, rather than focusing on the debate between Clovis First and pre-Clovis. Although it isn't the first thing that comes up in the second video, the lithic technology found at Cactus Hill holds continuity with what a pre-Clovis technology (in this case reflected in spear points) should look like. The basic shape of a pre-Clovis spear point is similar to a Clovis spear point, only shorter, thinner, and less technically sophisticated. Pre-Clovis points do not exhibit the characteristic channel flake from its base (a hallmark of Clovis points) nor is there any evidence of basal grinding. Pre-Clovis tools also tend to be made of poorer quality stone than that used by Clovis peoples. This shift in stone quality may be attributable to people discovering and utilizing new and better stone sources. It makes sense, after all people had thousands of years between the pre-Clovis and Clovis markers to practice making better stone tools with finer stone.

All in all, the videos present a solid argument for pre-Plovis, the stratigraphy eliminates doubt about the integrity of Cactus Hill. Lithic technology fits into the pre-Clovis construct, moving from less technically proficient (pre-Clovis from Cactus Hill) to more technically proficient (Clovis type points from various areas.) Relative dating puts the pre-Clovis artifacts in the right area, absolute dating indicates pre-Clovis inhabitation and phytolithic concentrations seem to concur with all other lines of evidence that people were in North America before 11,000. All of these are well represented in the second of the two videos. The first video was less informative with regard to the pre-Clovis theory, choosing instead to explain the various theories with North/South American population and giving the viewer a sense of where the Clovis First and pre-Clovis theories with regard to the larger history of man. Although the later half of the video gets back on topic and focuses back in on pre-Clovis theory. Overall, the videos posted on the Archaeology Channel website are very informative, cover their bases with regard to the budding pre-Clovis theory but are blatantly for pre-Clovis. They neglect to mention the heated debate associated with much of the evidence advanced to support pre-Clovis theories.

Also, the music is atrocious.

Link to the Archeology Channels website.