Pre-Clovis Culture

During the 1930’s, proof of a culture predating any other known at the time in the Americas was discovered. This culture was dubbed the Clovis culture, after the site’s location in Clovis, New Mexico, and existed about 11,000 years ago. Since then, there has been numerous sites found that contain evidence of people in America before Clovis, and they are known as the pre-Clovis culture. The existence of a pre-Clovis culture is still highly debated, with people sticking to the Clovis model of population, but there is a profusion of evidence that suggests the people of the Clovis culture were not the first ones to occupy the Americas.

Whenever evidence is found in the archaeological world that suggests something newly discovered, or that an

old hypothesis is wrong, the validity of the excavation is questioned. It is the same with the evidence found proving the existence of pre-Clovis culture, advocates of the Clovis model tend to upbraid whoever was in charge of the excavation. In the article, Clovis Counterrevolution, by Eliot Marshal, he relates that people who have to defend their work feel “that pre-Clovis discoveries are asked to meet standards that go beyond what is normally expected” (Marshal 739). For example, James Adovasio, who excavated the Meadowcroft Rock Shelter in Pennsylvania, acquired 52 radiocarbon dates to prove that the chronological order of the sediment there is correct. Yet doubters still found ways around the proof, saying the charcoal used for the dating was displaced or contaminated. The reason why it is so tough for people to accept the pre-Clovis culture, is due to varying possibilities such as the critics may want to preserve the status quo, especially if they had a hand in forming it. Also, there have been times in the past when major findings fell through, and no one is willing to jump the gun on something that may not hold true (Marshal 739-741).
Subsequently, many of the artifacts found bear convincing proof that there was not only a pre-Clovis culture, but one that lead life differently than the Clovis culture. Perhaps one of the most significant sites in pre-Clovis culture is Monte Verde, located in Chile. This site revealed human presence there at least 12,500 years ago, which is 1,000 years older than any evidence of the Clovis culture. The proof comes from radiocarbon tests done on wood that was used to build these people’s homes: wood framed huts with animal skin roofs. The layer of stratification holding the artifacts has a layer of peat on top of it which is dated between 10,300 and 12,000 ago, meaning all of the artifacts are older than that. For those skeptics who may say that the excavation was flawed, “Those who have seen his evidence in recent years say it is remarkably thorough and convincing,” this referring to the excavator, Thomas Dillehay (Gibbons 1257). Among the people who have seen the site are former challengers, including C. Vance Haynes, whom once seeing the top layer of peat over the artifacts, became a believer of the pre-Clovis people (Marshal 741) (Gibbons 1257).
Following the proof of overall existence from the Monte Verde and other sites, comes the realization that their lifestyles were actually quite different from those of the Clovis culture. For instance, the Paisley Caves in Oregon revealed stone tools that were not shaped like the fluted projectile points familiar to the Clovis culture. These tools were also fabricated from stone fragments, whereas Clovis tools were fashioned from large stone cores. The pre-Clovis culture is now recognized as relying more on wood and plant gathering, while the Clovis people are known for their big game hunting, as well as stone tools. The findings “indicate that another population was here at the same time, or possibly before, Clovis,” (Swaminathan 15). Revealing that there were people living separately from the Clovis culture and surviving by different means, gives undeniable confirmation that the Clovis model is flawed (Swaminathan 15) (Marshall 249).
While the shortcomings of the Clovis-first theory keep popping up, so does more convincing corroboration of pre-Clovis culture, and possibly a culture in between.

During the late 1970’s a mastodon bone was found at the Manis site in Washington, and through a reexamination of the bone in 2011, the tip of a bone projectile was seen embedded into the mastodon rib. Both pieces of bone were tested and are dated at 13,800 years old, over 2,000 years before the Clovis culture appeared. If the dating on these bones is valid, the Clovis model cannot be true, this find is “prompting archaeologists to consider that there might have been earlier migrations of settlers.” (Swaminathan 9). Michael Waters, who is responsible for the reevaluation of the mastodon bone, has also found convincing evidence at the Buttermilk Creek site in Texas. The oldest layer of sediment at this site held 20,000 pieces of tools, and is dated to be around 15,500 years old. Besides the sheer age of these finds, none of the tool resemble any found at other pre-Clovis sites. However, they are not exactly of Clovis origins either. The Buttermilk Creek tools’ “incorporation of bifacial and bladelet technology does recall Clovis culture, suggesting a lineage between the two.” (Swaminathan 9). Due to this suggested lineage, archaeologists are expecting to find something they call, proto-Clovis. Finding this would poke even more holes in the Clovis model, because it would suggest that Clovis evolved from the proto-Clovis

people.