Clovis First under pressure

9 July 2016
Archaeology

Give a day or two and they will give a bit. At http://vancouversun.com/news/national/aboriginal-anthropologist … and I thought for a moment she was an archaeologist. It seems we have somebody not very keen on 'authority' or being told aboriginal history (in Canada) which is contradictory to tribal tradition. She is kicking at the wall that is Clovis First – and good luck. Can't say I have much sympathy for the Clovis First proponents but arguing from emotion doesn't appear to be too effective. So far. Some sections of the wall have crumbled – there are weak links (that is human nature)It does put into perspective the immovable mind set involved with Clovis First – and that is all there is to it. Not sure there is anything negative towards the aboriginals of Canada – but that is the accusation (of course). Not sure if this is worth posting even as Clovis First has been able to gag all archaeologists in N America for an awful long time. They have been forced by evidence to give some leeway and have pushed back the date for humans arriving by a couple of thousand years but are definitely loathe to push it back into the Late Pleistocene. All that has been established is that people migrated from Eurasia into the Americas at some stage – genetic evidence suggests so. The Clovis blade is distributed mostly in eastern and especially SE N America rather than western or central N America where you would think a route from northern Asia would show up. In this instance it is being suggested people have been in N America since 60,000 years ago – possibly 100,000 years ago. Unfortunately archaeology is not productive as far as early human artifacts are concerned. You can graft as much as you like on your hands and knees with a trowel in your hand but the evidence is in short supply – or has been covered up in the past. If there had been a major catastrophic event between 40 and 30,000 years ago there would not have been many people to migrate into the Americas – and few people leave few traces.

Having said that, if people migrated west into Europe around 40,000 years ago there is no reason why they should not have moved eastwards at the same time -or northwards even, crossing the Arctic Ocean into the northern territories. The Late Glacial Maximum may have removed all trace of them – along with a lot of geology too. Velikovsky mentions stone tools in Alaskan muck deposits – this might be one way to research the issue. Some sort of movement on this question is desirable – but it behoves her to find the evidence to back her theory (as an archaeologist as well as anthropologist).

Skip to content