Was Clovis Really First?

Wouldn't it have been more intellectually complete to mention the large number of pre-Clovis sites found elsewhere around around the U.S. that validate each other, rather than talking at the end as though Topper is the only one?

What about the pre-Clovis conference last year with info from dozens of digs, and the one planned in the next year or two?

And why did you make it look as though the Time Team were the only folks digging at the site, when actually there are other archaeologists, geologists, etc., plus many volunteer worker bees working there at the same time (and every week of the season),,, who actually did the TT dig preparation work?

The TT's many invisible professional and avocational "colleagues" deserved more credit, in my book, and would present a more complete, accurate picture of what the field and a dig site actually involves.

There are many pre-Clovis sites, as mentioned, but the oldest site with well-accepted dates is in South America at Monte Verde. All the other pre-Clovis sites have dating problems or some other problems that cause archaeologists to quest one aspect or another of them. I expect that someday a pre-Clovis site will turn up that answers all the problems the critics throw at it. We just don't have one yet. Regarding the large numbers of volunteers, avocationalists and others who have worked at Topper over the years, we are deeply grateful to them, as is Dr. Goodyear. We did not intentionally present the site as only being dug by Time Team America, but, as it is stated at the beginning of the episode, we volunteer our expertise, equipment, strong backs, etc., to help the site investigators try to answer one single question. We intentionally showed the large number of people digging outside of the Time Team trench.

I own what I believe to be a pre-Clovis site. I have just identified artifacts that look like they were used for tattooing and bloodletting. The site would make an interesting TV show, as well answer all the problems pre-Clovis critics can dig up.

ssweer

Can't say I agree with B.R. Walters' complaints. I saw plenty of evidence of those other workers he missed, including a straight mention that the TT trench was prepped by the site team, taking it down through most of the Archaic period layers. The map that was projected on at least two occasions did a nice job offering an overview of the work that had been done there over the years.

I was pretty amazed at the walls of that prepped trench. On camera, they looked like they were cut with a laser. I guess that's what happens when you know your trench will be on television!

Overall, I thought this episode was quite a bit more complete and detailed than the opener. I suppose the opener had to get a bit of the "here's who we are and what we do" stuff out of the way. As for this one, one of the archaeologists stated that 95% of archaeologists haven't seen a Clovis floor. I feel you've done a great job filling in that gap for me. Well done.

Jim

Dr.joe Watkins, i just finished watching you'r wonderful program on pbs,you'r wright the wooden throwing stick was used in hunting, iam from ama tribe one of nuba tribes in Sudan,that stick is still in use today,it's used in hunting sport,to hunt rabbit with dog assistance,the stick has somewhat a( J )shape , and it's called (sabarog)...nice program,very educational,thanks.

At the very least they might have mentioned the Meadowcroft site in Pennsylvania instead of pretending, as has been noted, that Topper is the only one. Meadowcroft is near Pittsburg, Pa. It just isn't that far from South Carolina.

I enjoyed this episode. The main thing about the program layout itself (not the show's content) was that it felt more like a History Channel presentation than an episode of Time Team which focuses on the dig. That being said, it did put a lot of emphasis on the experimental archaeology involved with working with stone tools and their construction, very reminiscent of what Phil Harding does on the British show. I also enjoyed watching the geophysics team working on a process to try and detect possible Clovis artifacts.

I was also curious as to why there was no mention of Cactus Hill in VA as a potential pre-Clovis site.

The paleo show had a few things that bothered me. the use of Clovis "people" instead of Clovis "technology".

Talking about "spears" instead of "darts used with the atlatl".

The art showing people trying to kill a mammoth with thrusting spears and people carrying what appeared to be thrusting spears and no atlatl. The foreshafts would probably been carried separately and only placed when hunting. They probably carried a small quiver with multiple foreshafts and one to two dart shafts. The foreshafts would also be their knives for skinning, butchering, filleting, etc the animal. The atlatl spur used to pull chunks of meat during butchering.

The hafting shown on the foreshafts in the art.

Do not know if those involved have ever read Errett Callahan's experiments with a dead circus elephant? His experiments are reprinted in The Bulletin of Primitive Technology #7 Spring 1994. Thrusting spears could not penetrate more than 3 inches. Atlatl darts penetrated half the depth of the chest cavity (a sure kill). The depth of foreshaft penetration ceased where the foreshaft met the shaft, explaining why recovered foreshafts are at least 20 inches long. Specific styles of hafting and foreshaft design penetrated better than others. A well tapered foreshaft penetrated deeper.

The best foreshafts had just the cutting edge of the Clovis point exposed, the flute acting as a channel to hold the tapered wood foreshaft... making a strong tip despite the thinness of the point (page 31, figure 9 in the reprint).

Yes, Dr. Gilsen. Were I going to hunt mammoth with stone tools I would surely look to wound it with a volley of missile weapons, perhaps aiming for the back legs to bring it down, and then use a thrusting spear to the throat or belly for the kill. I can't quite figure out this idea that our ancestors were so stupid that they could only use one tool at a time!

The concept of a small group of hunters going after a mammoth with thrusting spears is pure Hollywood. Could a small H/G band have sustained the inevitable casualty rate that would result from that type of attack?

Brace yourselves......my comments are not academic.

I live in SC and ever since I first read about the Allendale/Topper finds, I have been dying to get down there. What has stood in my way is the financial cost of being a 'volunteer'. It is possible I have misunderstood the Topper website, but after numerous e-mail attempts, I could not obtain a clear understanding of why I would have to pay to help. I'm not sure why I didn't just call. Anyhoo....

The reason for my post is to say that firstly, I have always been a passionate Time Team fan (the show from the UK) which I found on History International, but they no longer carry it. Secondly, when I saw that there was now a Time Team America, I was elated! Finally, to see last week that this week's show was the Topper site, I was over the moon!

Thank you Time Team for giving me a glimpse of the Topper site which, from my understanding, I would have had to sell a kidney to see firsthand.

Also, the artist does not claim to be an archeological expert, one of his roles is to help novices like ME to understand what things might have looked like...and to host. But I do understand why experts would want the images to be portrayed in a more actual manner.

~

Hi Jim,

When I first saw the prepped trench it reminded me of a really nice chess board. Wonder if Dr/Mr. Goodyear had a hand in it? I thought he did a really good job on the show by the way.

~BJ

Hi Folks,

I caught the show last night, and as one who has an avocational interest...and has watched plenty of the original Timeteam...I was pleased to see a team working in a North American context.
I believe I heard the statement made, though, that you can't date rocks. Admittedly, one can't do a C14 test on a rock, though there [i]are[/i] methods such as potassium argon, uranium series and fission track that may be used to date stone artifacts.

Any of these mightn't be appropriate to the Topper site, but the interested public shouldn't walk away thinking you can't date a rock.

Aside from that...kudos, and I look forward to the next programme.

Tom,

You can certainly date a rock, but not a stone artifact per se. The methods you mention will give you the date of the source material, not when the stone was modified. 30 millions years, as a random example, would be pre-Clovis indeed! Great for fossils, not so much for artifacts.

You can use thermoluminescence on surrounding sediments, of course, but I think the show covered that adequately in pointing out that stone artifacts need to be dated in relation to context.

Jim

I liked the episode,but the method of reproducing the clovis points bothers me some .The knapper sitting in a chair and using a moose antler billet. Neither of these have been found in the archaeological record . The only antler billets that I have heard of being found, were small to medium size deer antler. Mostly too small to be used for direct percussion effectively.
Mike

The origin of Clovis technology is in the Cumberland and Tennessee River valleys. Nearly 18% of all documented clovis points in North America have come from three counties in northern Alabama and three counties in Tennessee. Dr. Don Dragoo investigated the Wells Creek site in 1973, and in a 1991 publication clearly states that in his opinion there are pre-clovis sites in Tennessee and Alabama. The paleo sites in Tennessee, such as the Nuckolls site, are extensive, with literally thousands of flint tools.
This Time Team documentary was excellent in all respects, particularly because it showed how much effort is needed to study these sites correctly. At the same time, when Professor Goodyear showed the other academic professionals the unifacial graver spur recovered from the pre-clovis trench, the"political correctness" of all the comments made by the academics quickly
became evident. This is the same "politically correct" cloud that has been dogging the hard won results from Meadowcroft.
When you compare the scientific results made in literally every field of science, compared to North American Archaeology, it is pathetic that after more than 100 years, we still do not know
when Early Man arrived in North America, nor do we know who they were.
The origins of clovis technology are in the Cumberland and Tennessee River valleys, and once this generation of politically correct academics fades into retirement, a new generation of archaeologists will be able to open their eyes, and excavate a little deeper, just like at Topper, and they will find that Early Man
has been in North America at least 20,000 years. The reason
excavators at Blackwater Draw, Clovis New Mexico did not find anything below the Clovis layer is that these western sites are kill-sites for specialized big game. The sites in Tennessee and Alabama are quarry/habitation sites that were utilized for many generations. This writer has Sandia II knives, planes, disc cores, and many other early paleo tools from the Nuckolls site if any professionals would like to examine these pieces. Please contact me at edwardpfisher@aol.com. ,

I think it is interesting that there was no mention whatsoever of the pre-Clovis evidence from South America, especially in the section on peopling of the americas theories

Saad --

Thanks for your note -- the Taos Pueblo people in northern New Mexico still use these "rabbit sticks" in ceremonial rabbit hunts for specific ceremonial days.

As leary as I am for a archological digs taking place in only three days; my wife and I are both intrigued by each episode so far. The people and the facts discussed are fantastic. It's an interesting way to explain science, though I'm not sure how much actual science is being done. Though a novel approach to showcase archology is more than enough reason to enjoy the show. Where can we buy T-Shirts w/ the logo?

Dear Dr. Gilsen,
Thank you for your feedback! I was particularly interested in what you said about the art depicting the Clovis technology. The particular pieces you're talking about are, I believe, art we used from an existing source before the episode filmed, so I can't personally speak to those. That said, though obviously Joe and Adrien can speak to this with a great deal more authority, we have a few drawings that show the atlatl and foreshafts you spoke of. On my profile on the team page, Image 5 shows a drawing the archaeologists walked me through depicting a man from the Clovis period. See if that's closer to what you're talking about, and please continue to send your feedback on!
Many thanks,
Colin

I think I found evidence of the comet strike 13,000 years ago. I was in the Carolina Beach State Camp Ground three years ago and found two layers the the sand with charcoal falling out of the layer. This was exposed in the past when a canal was dug from the Atlantic to the river that goes to Wilmington, NC. I showed the park ranger and he has been there about 14 years and never saw my discovery. I e-mailed people involved with the 1st PBS show on the subject of the comet strike and never got any replies. I can e-mail photos on the layers if anyone in interested. Ron Gower

The show was mostly great but I completely agree that it fell short presenting Topper as the be all and end all in pre-clovis sites. Meadowcroft, Cactus Hill among others should have been mentioned to give much needed perspective-

I may just be an enthusiast, but even I realized that the map used to illustrate the Solutrean Hypothesis was embarrassingly wrong. That's a modern map. 20000-15000 years ago was the Last Glacial Period. Between lower sea levels and the glaciers covering everything from Doggerland to New England, the coast that Solutreans would have had to follow would have been very different from the one shown on that modern map. What about http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/images/d/d1/Glacialperiod-1.jpg or http://www.nature.nps.gov/Geology/parks/bela/index.cfm ?

Ever heard of the Calico Canyon Site in S.E. California? Neither had I, until I noticed a marker in my California mapbook. It refered to the "Calico Canyon Ancient Man Site" a few miles from Yerba, CA. I thought to myself "Right. Ancient man in the U.S.; this I've gotta see..."
Turns out, I'm glad I did. Turns out that this site has been actively excavated for better than 50 years; and Louis B. Leakey, who was no slouch at identifying early tool types, actually visited the site. He verified the validity of the artifacts from the site and assisted the archaeologist in charge in determining the best area in which to dig in documentably undisturbed soil. He kept abreast of progress at the dig right up until his death a few years later.
Oh; did I mention that artifacts have been recovered at depths up to 26 feet beneath modern surface? Or that they have documented hearths with associated cultural material dating over 60,000 years before present? Needless to say, the mainstream archaeological community has discounted the age of this site for decades.
Not having much money, I only donated $500.00 to the group currently carrying on the work there; but I wish I could afford to send them more.

Oops. A couple of corrections re. my previous comment. It's the Calico EARLY Man Archaeological Site. Also, it dates to 200,000+ YBP. AND I found the website I was looking for:
calicodig.org

ENJOY!

-Dan! (B{b)

I have enjoyed each of the Time Team episodes I have watched so far! It's great to see yet another quality educational show on PBS. I have a little problem with the Clovis episode, however. In particular, the *theory* that extinctions ~13,000 years ago, though supported by some evidence, also does not fit other evidence, and is therefore far from well accepted in the geoscience field. Unless I missed something dramatic in the last few months, it remains quite controversial, and most scientists (like me) are not convinced. The theory was presented too much as if it is established fact.