Archaeologica.org

hypothesize they came by boat, from Europe. Therefore the bodies of land, in close proximity to the Atlantic, were inhabited first, and then the populations spread from there.

So much for the Big Game Hunter over the Siberian Land Bridge fantasy that we still find in every school textbook. In California I have looked at thousands of in situ artifacts and not found one Clovis point so far. Yes, humans came through Siberia and across the Pacific by boat, but Clovis obviously originated somewhere else.

So much for the Big Game Hunter over the Siberian Land Bridge fantasy.

Right? Gault shows that Clovis people were hunter-gatherers, who certainly wouldn't pass up knocking off a convenient mammoth, or bison, but were in no way entirely dependent on them. I thought the most common animal remains found at Clovis sites interesting: turtles.

In Clovis faunal assemblages across North America, the most commonly identified animals are not elephants—they are turtles. And the Clovis diet was not based on animals alone.

http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/gault/clovis.html

Here a follow-on, better picture of the Calico point found last Saturday and referenced earlier in this thread:

Obverse:


Reverse:


This is a rather thin, well-formed teardrop knife, about 3 inches long. Material appears to be jasper. Pictures courtesy of Charlie Hatchett.

Here is a picture of a Calico bifacial hand axe.

Obverse:


Reverse:


The length is about 4-1/2 inches long and well-formed. There are more than a dozen percussion strikes on each side and impact stress on the point. The material is chert. Pictures courtesy of Charlie Hatchett.

Here's a picture of a small, crude bifacial Calico hand axe.

Obverse:


Reverse:


The length is about 4 inches. Although crude there are a significant amount of percussion marks on each side. The material is chalcedony. Photos courtesy of Charlie Hatchett.

Very neat Cogs. I'm a believer.

Hey Charlie,

Thanks again for taking the photos, they look great! I have posted them on Archaeologica with credit to you. That camera looks sweet and I plan to pick one up tomorrow. Circuit City has them listed on sale at $118.

The technology at Calico is weird; however, I still think we’re looking at H. erectus as opposed to Neanderthal … actually, H. erectus americanus. I don’t think Neanderthals made it farther than the eastern side of the Caspian Sea. I emailed Erik Trinkaus to get his feedback before I left work. Hopefully, he’ll respond.

I have a reason for believing that erectus took hold and survived in South and Central America and dispersed north from there. The Yellowstone caldera blew twice, at 1.3 million years ago and again at 640,000 years ago. These were both nuclear winter / near extinction events and would have made a mess out of North America. Further, sites seem to be originating from the south and heading north (Mexico, Texas, California).

Exciting times!

Patrick

Hey, Bro.

No problem at all. Really nice pieces. I'm still stumped though.

I've been studying both HNs and HE flake tools and HNS points, and it looks like these suckers are a little of both. Perhaps Upper Acheulean? There was a good bit of overlap between the Lower Mousterian and Upper Acheulean, I would imagine. Who knows, Bro? You've probably got a lot better idea than I, seeing you've been studying these particular lithics from Calico for a while. The Erectus Americanus idea is intriguing, and some of the pieces we both have are definitely Acheulean-type technology. It does appear to date, that several of these type sites have popped up in the south, though Alberta has a hypothesized Olduwan-type technology site: Grimshaw, Alberta.

Here's the club's take on it:

http://www.sfu.ca/archaeology/museum/pa ... rimsh.html

Shocker, ey?

Good deal on the camera! Once you get it, if you want, I'll walk you through tweaking it. You might want to set up a web site, also. Again, let me know, and I'm happy to help.

These are definitely exciting times, bro!!

I'm gonna post this correspondence on the preClovis forum at Archeologica, and let's keep hashing it out. We can get some input from others, also.

Oh, P.S.-When you get a chance, post the links for the high res photos of your pieces.

Later dude,


Charlie

Erectus Americanus, huh? Wait till the club gets hold of this!

Hey, that guy looks just like my neighbor's son!

Charlie and I don't quite know where to put the tools, but my best guess is an Acheulian technology.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheulean

So ... what are they doing in California, anyway? BTW, for our Britannic brethrens' benefit, "The Club" in this case refers to the American Clovis-first police who deny that anything older than 12,000bp exists in the Americas. Hominids could travel all throughout the world for over 1.5 million years and raft their way to Flores, but getting to America was considered impossible. Maybe they just didn't realize it was impossible at the time? Where in hell is Mr. Peabody's Time Machine when I need it?

my best guess is an Acheulian technology

It sure looks like it.

And... Erectus made it to Flores 800,000 yrs. ago over the water.
That's a long time ago. And you can get almost no comment from the Club. They can't deny it. So they just don't talk about it.

And... Erectus made it to Flores 800,000 yrs. ago over the water.
That's a long time ago. And you can get almost no comment from the Club. They can't deny it. So they just don't talk about it.

Beags, "The Club" in this case represents an established, small, but powerful group of North American archaeologists. To their credit, our English counterparts appear to be open-minded and inquisitive where it counts, and are not part of "The Club" (nobody cares about the French ). When faced with anomolous information English archaeologists seek answers instead of dismissing it out of hand since they haven't bought into the Clovis first agenda. American archaeology has been stymied for the last 40 years by a lack of imagination and inquisitiveness.

Wait till the club gets hold of this!

Cute lil' rascal, aint he!

Cognito wrote:

And... Erectus made it to Flores 800,000 yrs. ago over the water.
That's a long time ago. And you can get almost no comment from the Club. They can't deny it. So they just don't talk about it.

Beags, "The Club" in this case represents an established, small, but powerful group of North American archaeologists. To their credit, our English counterparts appear to be open-minded and inquisitive where it counts, and are not part of "The Club" (nobody cares about the French ). When faced with anomolous information English archaeologists seek answers instead of dismissing it out of hand since they haven't bought into the Clovis first agenda. American archaeology has been stymied for the last 40 years by a lack of imagination and inquisitiveness.

In the case of the Flores "voyage" many archaeologists have commented on it, but the upper echelon, or the Club, in all these countries have pretty much dismissed it out of hand.

Ultimately, North American archaeology will have to interface with primitive mans' travels, and the archaeology of countries around the world.

But, indeed, we seem to have a very special brand of prigs here.

Charlie and I don't quite know where to put the tools, but my best guess is an Acheulian technology.

Well, it would make sense, especially if the new preliminary dating of 350,000 B.P. for Calico holds up. That would make either Homo erectus or Homo heidelbergensis the main suspects. If I recall correctly, the Dorenberg skull , discovered by a German archeology team in Mexico, was assigned to Hh. I'm gonna do a little research, and verify the details of this find. It was lost during WWII.

Justa lookin' at all angles!

“Prehistoric Human Remains from Jalisco, Mexico” by
Joel D. Irish, Stanley D. Davis, John (Jack) E. Lobdell, and Frederico A. Solórzano published in Current Research in the Pleistocene 17, 2000.

Now I am sure the publication is under copywrite so I will only quote a few paragraphs.

“One Chapala superciliary arch deserves specific mention due to its large size. Studies by Solórzano show the bone resembles that in archaic Homo sapiens at Arago, France. In an unpublished 1990 report, Texas A&M ( ) osteologists suggest the brow’s thickness and robustness are comparable to those of KNM-ER 3733 (African Homo erectus). Our measurements show the central torus thickness is 13.3, compared with 8.5 mm for KNM-ER 3733; the lateral torus thickness is 11.5 versus 9.0 mm (Rightmire 1998). Thus for the sake of comparison, the brow is more like that of Zhoukoudian Skull XI (Asian Homo erectus), with a central torus thickness of 13.2 +/- mm; lateral torus thickness was not measured (Rightmire 1998). Modern brows are too diminutive to allow these measurements. The brow also shows pneumatization (air pockets) along its length.”

Here's one reference that speaks of an Erectus type skull found in Mexico.

Hey, why doesn't the club talk about this find.