Customer Reviews

Settlement Of The Americas A New Prehistory

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

At first glance this book looks like popular account of the early peopleing of North and South America. It is instead a serious semi-scholarly work -- a polemic if you will -- challenging long held beliefs about the migration of people to the New World.

Dilleyhay is best known for his archeological work at a site in Monte Verde Chile. After nearly 25 years of hard work Dillehay has pushed back the time frame for the earliest migration to around 15000 B.P. and hints that it could be pushed back to 25000 B.P. or even further. Conventional wisdom has held the Clovis people, known by their unique projectile points, were the earliest migrants arriving here around 11000 B.P. Since 1930, says Dillehay, the archeology community has held tenaciously to the Clovis belief and often dismissing any contrary evidence, sometimes with great creativity. His work has now convinced all but the most dedicated Clovisites within the archeological community.

Falling along with the Clovis paradigm is the long held belief of the ethnic origins of the earliest migrants. Dillehay tiptoes about on these issues as they touch on sacred beliefs of current Native Americans and he only briefly discusses these issues at the summation of the book. You can almost hear the little voice inside him saying "Don't go there."

This is not a book for the casual reader. Two of the chapters are chock full of brief discussions on sites, dates, and the Who's Who of current archeology. In the appendix is 25 pages of radiocarbon dates for various sites. There are many arguments concerning bifacial vs unifacial stone tools and their implications. None of the book was over my head though he did expect us to know what obsidian hydration dating was.

Since this author stands out like an elk with a red bulls-eye painted on him during hunting season, I fully expect some flame reviews here in due time.

My interest is only slightly more than casual and I have no archeological expertise from which to judge his work in the total. I did find the book of interest though it was bit more than I was looking for. He is clearly arguing his point to his peers. It did however, whet my appetite for a more general survey of this fascinating topic.

As a reader who is well outside any professional understanding of archeology but who is also very interested in the topic of the earliest Americans, I can strongly recommend Dillehay's, The Settlement of the Americas, although the title should perhaps be modified to reflect the emphasis on South America as the focus of study. This book is clearly written, well organized, and covers the length and breadth of the topic geographically, technically, and intellectually. Of particular interest are chapters 10 and 11 which offer creative insights into the mode, tempo, and motivation for the invasion-through-colonization process that must have happened on our side of the world. It is refreshing to have a researcher go beyond the mechanistic data of demography, technology, ecology, etc. and plumb the depths of the cognitive side of our prehistory. Dillehay does this well.

A word of caution though, the dating of many of the sites mentioned is still tentative, but at times the author gives the impression, at least to this reader, that the chronology is written in stone...no pun intended. One has only to read Anna Roosevelt's recent review in Scientific American, as unnecessarily acidic as it was, to get the idea that the branch of the archeological family dealing with the early prehistory of our hemisphere is an intemperate one, expecially concerning temporal matters! Also, a minor criticism could be raised about the quality of the illustrations.

Putting these two criticisms aside, Dillehay has written an exceptional book that is worth the read by anyone interested in the initial colonization of the Americas, and a book whose final chapter, Lingering Questions, will leave the reader pondering the colonization process for some time to come.

While Dillehay's book The Settlement of the Americas refers to both the northern and southern continents, it is primarily concerned with the archaeological evidence from South America, giving a thorough assessment of data from several sites. I suspect that the middle chapters on lithic technology may be less than engrossing to the average reader, but there is still much of interest for anyone interested in the topic. The author discusses the current debate, and while he has his own opinion, his assessment of the data is not overly credulous. In particular the heated contentions over the date and significance of the Pedra Furada site of Brazil are evaluated with a balance and thoroughness that is open minded but professional. The author's attention to taphonomy, geological processes, and off site data in the interpretation of the significance of on site finds is very good. It certainly shows the reader how archaeological data are interpreted and what the problems in doing so are. It also highlights why there is still so much disagreement between researchers.

The author, Thomas Dillehay is a professor of anthropology at the University of Kentucky and has conducted extensive research into the subject of early American origins. He has done research at Monte Verde in Chile, in Peru, Argentina, and Uruguay. The Monte Verde site, discussed at some length in the book, is particularly significant as it preserved many usually perishable artifacts that encapsulate a much fuller understanding of the lifestyle of the people living there than is usually the case with sites that preserve mostly only lithic cultural materials.

Of interest to me, if for no other reason that it had not occurred to me, is the author's note that some of the confusion over the first peopling of the Americas may be due to the fact that our information may be confusing itself. The author looks at things such as the possible back flow from the Americas to Siberia and Asia which may have mixed the genetics of the populations under study. While he notes that it is currently not provable, the fact that it might have been possible cannot be neglected. He also notes that skeletal material from the earliest period is conspicuously absent and that this may represent a paradigm shift necessitated by survival in new territories by the immigrants or a research bias based upon expectations drawn from research conducted in the Old World environment. He notes that until we are ready to shake free of preconceptions, we will probably not make much real headway.

The greatest contribution of the book to my own stock pile of information is the concept that the major factor affecting the survival and spread of modern humans in any environment may have been a change in the mental equipment of the human being. This may have been the ultimate change that divides the anatomically human from the intellectually human being. In particular the author speaks of cognitive maps involved with an exploring skill. Here too might reside the social skills required to roam into unknown territory , a willingness to take environmental risks based upon an effective evaluation of the costs and benefits of such a move and an ability to fall back on long range social contacts that spread out risk. Much has been written about the possible insurance activities in which Southwestern pueblo groups may have participated in a climatically unstable environment, but little-to my knowledge-has been made of the importance of these same risk-reducing social paradigms among even earlier human groups. Perhaps the reason that modern humans were able to spread as successfully as they did to every inhabitable environment on earth has to do with this capacity to maintain social links over long ranges. By these links, however great the temporal or spacial distance, early people could exchange information, mates, and help. Perhaps even shared links of tradition, remembered by elders much as they were and are among Arab groups, provided a measure of long term connection even after long separations. If one can recount ones linage back to a common ancestral root one can make claims of charity.

An intriguing book.

Dillehay, from the University of Kentucky, may be the most important American archaeologist of the last half century. He has challenged and may have demolished the "Clovis barrier" -- the cherished and long-held belief of archaeologists that the Clovis big game hunters of 11,200 years ago were the first humans in the Americas. The artifacts Dillehay found at the Monte Verde site in Chile are dated reliably to 12,500 years old -- and possibly much older. This is not pop-archaeology of the "Chariot of the Gods" variety. Dillehay is a professional and has worked at Monte Verde for a quarter of a century.

This book outlines Dillehay's theories as to how the New World was settled, including brief descriptions of his work at Monte Verde. The focus is on the little known archaelogical sites in South America, and there are many of them. The writing is intended for the general reader, although the author gets more than a little technical in discussing bi-facial and uni-facial projectile points, radiocarbon dating, and other topics only barely famiiar to the non-specialist. He describes a large number of old archaeological sites in South America -- and one can get lost in the abundance of detail. Persist! Or skip some of the detail. The last four chapters (of 11) are the most interesting in the book.

As an icon-breaker Dillehay has undergone much abuse for his Monte Verde claims and there is a bit of subtle response and pay-back in this book to his critics. One can perceive anger hidden just below the surface of his plodding scholarly prose. The important question is, of course: Is Dillehay right? I'm not an archaeologist, but I am inclined to think he is -- although I have a few lingering doubts. Why, for example, if people were in the Americas before 11,200 years ago have we found no skeletons and so few indications of their presence?

This is an important book and one that everyone interested in New World archaeology should read.

Too many times thought becomes a closed system in which a specified few dictate everything and prevent any opposing or dissenting views from being heard. Thomas D. Dillehay dissents in grand form, offering intriguing and excellent material to break the closed system of North American archaeological thought.

Books of the genre are sometimes disappointing in that they offer a title of interest and intriguing implications and offer nothing but crackpot oddity within the pages. Here is a book which dispenses with any nonsense and gives a regimented and data laden picture of the differences between North and South American archaeology.

Excellently written and presented, a treat to read.

Creation myths hold a certain fascination - even when they're not your own. In North America, the finding of a set of finely hewn stone points established a new creation myth - the Clovis People. Clovis Points are unique to the Western Hemisphere - indeed, unique to North America. Their discovery created a dogma of origins with the story locked in time and place. The Americas, it was declared, were founded by Asian peoples skirting the last glaciers beginning their own withdrawal north - about 11 000 years ago. The dating and the path were thus inexorably set in the minds of scholars and the citizenry alike. Tom Dillehay wants to overthrow that dogma. He presents several challenges to long-held concepts, supporting his contentions with detailed information on recent finds and analysis. And all the information arises from an unsuspected source - South America.

Although Dillehay is hesitant to condemn North American archaeologists for their studied avoidance of South American possibilities, the inference is clear. Northern, mostly white, Protestant archaeologists left unacknowledged the work of their Catholic, Indo-Spanish colleagues digging in the other half of the hemisphere. Dillehay, breaking into that unexplored territory, encountered another unique find. At Monte Verde, he unearthed the remains of a prehistoric camp. The moist conditions of the site, almost unknown in North American locations, preserved skins, wood, even rope. These artefacts also pushed back the settlement of the Western Hemisphere some 1500 years.

The Clovis mythology contained more than timing. A lifestyle was deduced as well. The finely hewed points suggested a hunting people - moving and breeding rapidly. It was calculated they filled the hemisphere in but one millennium. Dillehay and his South American colleagues demonstrated that this scenario is highly unlikely. The settlers left too much evidence of opportunistic hunting, mixed with a well-established vegetable diet. The sites also long-term residency in rock shelters and built-up structures. The pre-Clovis people may have been mobile, but the mobility was likely seasonal with plant fruition, not the following of migratory animals.

Although Dillehay asserts scientists are accepting the notion of pre-Clovis Americans, he concedes some critics remain strenuously vocal. Most of the objections now fall into the "contaminated dating" theme - the radiocarbon samples were corrupted by introduced material. Dillehay simply counters that after a generation of collecting, such objections are demonstrably spurious. There are simply too many supportive cases verifying his contentions. He lists and describes many of these, even adding a chart of all the samples taken up to the time of publication. Many ideas, including some current legal ones, will have to be reconsidered. For the issue isn't purely academic. One of the United States' most ill-conceived pieces of legislation, the Native American Graves Protection and Registration Act [NAGPRA] has opened the door to a plethora of claims to research material. Many of these claims have already been shown to unsubstantiated. The new dating will likely reduce new claims and force reconsideration of the law.

Dillehay enhances this book with maps, photographs and diagrams. The maps of site locations clearly indicate South America was a well-populated area in pre-historic times. While Dillehay avoids sinking into the polemics of some of his colleagues, the text remains clear and understandable. He reminds us that discovery, excavation and analysis of South American prehistory await more students. Perhaps you could be the next to reveal a campsite or established community from the dim past. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Although I was very pleased with Thomas D. Dillehay's presentation of sufficient and clear evidence about the archaeology of South America, a pre-Clovis occupation of the Americas, and the existence of people at Monte Verde around 12,500 years ago, with regard to the older occupation of the Americas and the existence of people elsewhere in Central and South America, I found him almost equally guilty of "reading or misreading, observing or failing to observe, the record as a result of preconceived biases ingrainted in his thinking," and omits or overlooks significant evidence of local and regional migrations that though small were extremely significant, stating only in his final chapter "Lingering Questions" - "in the future we may discover that the Americas of the late Pleistocene were one of the world's first real ethnic melting pot and multicultural society. Excavations and discoveries made in 1999 just prior to the publication of The Settlement of the Americas: A New Prehistory (2000), by The Sunday Times, August 22, 1999 "Tracking the First Americans, The Learning Channel Science Frontiers; a BBC documentary, [...] , reporting evidence of "the first Americans" crossing the Pacific Ocean by boat and settling on the continent long before Siberians trekked across the Bering Straits after the Ice Age," and, after 2000,after Dillehay's book was published, [...] on January 7, 2001 reporting "New theory on Americas settlement,"

[...]

This is a worthwhile book but it has some detractions. A big chunk of the book consists of dry archaeological site descriptions - not for the faint of heart. This book is suitable for archaeologists and very interested non professionals only. The author does not discuss any North American sites - he focuses solely on South America. This is not made clear in the editorial descriptions published by Amazon, or in the book title for that matter. The very important Monte Verde site excavated by the author is discussed only briefly - the author states that a detailed description is

not the purpose of this book. However, the degree of preservation at Monte Verde is so much better than at any other late Pleistocene site in the Americas that a lengthier description would have been appropriate. The antiquity of the deepest level at Monte Verde (33,000 BP by C-14) is supported by limited but apparently problem free data. The author reserves judgement until more very old sites are found. One wonders how long we will have to wait.

This was one of the first books that was signaling a paradigm shift in ancient American archaeology. Americans were here far longer than commonly taught. It makes sense, really, when you consider their advancement and population levels. These last two things have also had their truths uncovered. Natives weren't idle barbarians of small numbers. Records of early explorers confirm this, but have long been ignored thanks to the collective memory loss caused by the natives' decimation. Dillehay describes why certain beliefs were held for so long and the forces involved. It's a window into how science and history often work: slowly uncovering truth in the face of bias and misconceptions. Sometimes it takes decades, but it need not always be that way, Dillehay also hints that the "no visitors to American before Columbus" claim has some cracks. If people were here for 30,000 years, why is it so hard to believe that other people stumbled upon them time to time? Good book for those interested in studying archaeology, perhaps too much detail for others. But for those fascinated by ancient America, a must read. Because it's ten years old, some points are dated. He comments that neaderthals are a human species and/or interbred with humans. This is untrue (see Who Was Adam?: A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man). For more on ancient America, see The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology's Greatest Mystery, 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus and A Voyage Long and Strange: On the Trail of Vikings, Conquistadors, Lost Colonists, and Other Adventurers in Early America.

In 1986 I lived in Coquimbo, Chile, while I was down there on a field project for weather. I had a chance to see some of the country and to read a few books. One was by a Chilean archeologist who had excavated a cave in Tierra del Fuego (Fell's Cave? I can't remember.) Among other things, she found a hearth with charcoal that had a radio-carbon date about 20000 BP.

She flat-out stated that it was impossible for people to have entered the continent from the north and to have gotten all the way south to Cape Horn BEFORE they showed in Clovis NM.

So that got me thinking -- how did they get there? I think it is easily possible to have used a maritime route. The natives along the Pacific northwest coast of America and Canada retain a maritime tradition.

But what about a direct passage? Wind and current are favorable for a voyage from Australia or New Zealand. Get blown out to sea by accident and you might have no choice but to head east -- and land in Chile. Alan Villiers gives us the sailing directions from Hobart Tasmania to Cape Horn. We may find that the story is much more complicated than we imagine.

Anyway it is good to see South America getting the attention it deserves. People have been there for a very long time, long enough for all those languages to develop. You may want to read America B. C. by Barry Fell.