What's the difference between a handaxe and a Folsom point?

[Digit]

Recently Cog I've been researching population growth in the paleolithic period in Europe, and assuming, that the growth pattern would be duplicated in NA, I find it very difficult to believe that a few migrants across the Strait could have resulted in the estimated millions when the Spaniards arrived. The same with 250 yrs for a continent wide cultural shift.
An earlier date than proposed by the club makes much more sense.

[Rokcet Scientist]

This is only a span of 250 years for Clovis technology to penetrate most or all of North America.

Afaik no culture in NA before or since spread so fast (or lasted so short). So Clovis was a very different culture. A very different culture indicates very different people. The 'others' were proto-indians. So Clovis people were not!

[Cognito]

Afaik no culture in NA before or since spread so fast (or lasted so short). So Clovis was a very different culture. A very different culture indicates very different people. The 'others' were proto-indians. So Clovis people were not!

Exactly, R/S. However, an analogous technological comparison would be the introduction of the rifle in New England by the Puritans just following the year 1620. By 1870 (250 years later) every native american worth his scalp had one of those along with a horse for mobility (courtesy of Popé's Pueblo Revolt in 1680).

I suspect that the Clovis technology spread rapidly among an existing population base, starting in the east and rapidly moving west.

[Digit]

So what sort of technology would the population have been using before the Clovis point spread through them Cog?

[Minimalist]

Pre-Clovis!

Where's Charlie?

[Digit]

Well Min, either the Clovis people spead across America like the plague or their culture did, or neither.
As I commented once before I find it very difficult to accept that people can breed that fast.
(I just know I'm going to get some flak on this one.)

[Cognito]

So what sort of technology would the population have been using before the Clovis point spread through them Cog?

Min, for lack of a better classification the technology is called "Paleo Indian" and differs subtly by region. That is what I find at my site which is at least 18,000 years old; primarily tools for processing meat, hides, etc., choppers and cutters (i.e. for wood), and a few points that could be fastened to the end of a spear if necessary. And then ... hand axes are in evidence (although we know there were none at that time).

The above items could get the daily job done, but they are nothing like Clovis technology.

[Digit]

So in other words Cog, the people had many thousands of years to populate the country.
So what was the final extent of Clovis technology?

[Charlie Hatchett]

Pre-Clovis!

Where's Charlie?

Hey, Bro.

Just got back from our family reunion. I concur with what Pat has had to say.

[Digit]

Consequently, we've been - or at least, I've been, convinced that Clovis is a New World invention and developed from a population of people that were already in North America.

So I see that Stanford supports what I said that Clovis spread through an existing population. He also suggests that there is little in Asia that resembles anything American.

[Charlie Hatchett]

Consequently, we've been - or at least, I've been, convinced that Clovis is a New World invention and developed from a population of people that were already in North America.

So I see that Stanford supports what I said that Clovis spread through an existing population. He also suggests that there is little in Asia that resembles anything American.

More accurately, he doesn't see anything Asian in Clovis. There's no doubt there were younger Asian migrations, and possibly older ones.

[Digit]

I stand corrected Charlie. But tell me this, if Clovis is so distinctly different from anything in Asia where are the transitional forms? In there absence two options would seem to exist.
1 They haven't been found yet.
2 They don't exist, that there is no Asian connection.

[Cognito]

I stand corrected Charlie. But tell me this, if Clovis is so distinctly different from anything in Asia where are the transitional forms? In there absence two options would seem to exist.
1 They haven't been found yet.
2 They don't exist, that there is no Asian connection.

The closest explanation for this would be the Solutreans. It isn't perfect, but there are no Clovis-similar points in Asia that I have seen. The Solutrean culture, although earlier, made points that were very similar in technique and appearance to Clovis. Dennis Stanford continues to work on the problem of technological transition and I have yet to hear anyone talk about Magdalenians.

[Charlie Hatchett]

I stand corrected Charlie. But tell me this, if Clovis is so distinctly different from anything in Asia where are the transitional forms? In there absence two options would seem to exist.
1 They haven't been found yet.
2 They don't exist, that there is no Asian connection.

I agree with Cogs. Solutrean (France/ Spain- ca. 21,000-17,000 B.P.) seems to be the closest match technologically. What I find to be an equally intriguing question is the origin of Solutrean.

[Digit]

I have to agree gentlemen, the Asian technology seems to be very different. My problem is that the native Americans are so obviously Mongol, but with little technological evidence to support an Asian diaspora.
There seems to a conflict here.