Coming to America
By: Michael D. Lemonick
From: Time, May 3, 1993
J. Geffen
5
10
15
20
25
30
1.
Know-it-alls are fond of pointing out that the only true Americans are the
descendants of the diverse tribes found by Columbus and Cortés when they first
arrived in the New World. That’s wrong, of course. Even North and South American
Indians had immigrants for ancestors: northeastern Asians who crossed from Siberia
to Alaska in prehistoric times across the bridge of land that then spanned the Bering
Strait.
2.
But when did these adventurous souls reach Alaska? What kind of people were
they? How fast did they spread down through the Americas? For decades,
archaeologists felt sure they knew the answers: the first Americans were skilled
hunter-gatherers and toolmakers who arrived about 11,500 years ago and moved
rapidly southward, reaching deep into South America within about five centuries as
well as helping drive to extinction such prehistoric mammals as mastodons and wooly
rhinos.
3.
Now, a competing theory about the original Americans, once touted by only a
small band of renegade archaeologists, has become too compelling to ignore. Its thesis
is that the first migration took place not 11,500 years ago but 20,000 or 30,000 or
even 50,000 years ago. Although the evidence is still sketchy, archaeological digs in
Chile, Brazil, Venezuela, the U.S. and Canada have yielded tantalizing clues that this
radical notion might be correct. “This is a hot area of research,” says Dennis Stanford
of Washington’s Smithsonian Institution. “Man’s origin in the New World is one of
the major unanswered questions of archaeology.”
4.
The old assumption that humans arrived in the Americas about 11,500 years ago
is known as the Clovis hypothesis. The name comes from the 1933 discovery of a
fluted stone spearpoint dated to that era in a pile of mammoth bones near Clovis, New
Mexico. Over the years, similar spearpoints were unearthed all over North America,
all apparently about the same age. Because the weapons, known as “Clovis points,”
were so widespread, and because essentially no artifacts at all were found in older
sediments, archaeologists and anthropologists concluded that the Clovis people were
the first and that they came over from Asia in the last years before melting glaciers
and rising sea levels submerged the Bering land bridge.
5.
The theory has flaws, though. One is the idea that prehistoric people could have
populated an entire continent in a mere 500 years, the span between the time of the
presumed land migration and the time by which Clovis spearpoints had been
deposited throughout North America. Even more problematic are signs of very early
Coming to America / 2
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
culture in South America. “Humans don’t sprint through their environment,” says
archaeologist James Adovasio of Mercyhurst College in Pennsylvania. “But that’s
what the Clovis guys would have us believe. There’s no analogue for that in
archaeological history.”
6.
More doubts arise from studies of linguistic and genetic diversity. Modern
North and South American Indian languages presumably evolved from a single
ancestral tongue, but they differ so greatly that it is hard to imagine how this could
have happened in just a few score centuries. Similarly, the mitochondrial DNA in the
cells of Native Americans differs so much from tribe to tribe that a single, relatively
recent ancestral group seems unlikely.
7.
Still, if the Clovis people were not first, where is the evidence of their predecessors? According to a growing group of archaeologists, the signs of the original
Americans can be found in several places:
Monte Verde, Chile
8.
Perhaps the most convincing candidate for a pre-Clovis site is Monte Verde, on
the Chinchihuapi Creek in southern Chile. A team led by University of Kentucky
archaeologist Tom Dillehay discovered indisputable traces there of a human
settlement that was inhabited between 12,800 and 12,300 years ago. Usually all
scientists can find from that far back are stones and bones. In this case, thanks to a
peat layer that formed during the late Pleistocene era, organic matter was mummified
and preserved as well.
9.
In a decade of digging, Dillehay’s team found an unparalleled array of artifacts,
including not only stone tools and animal bones but also chunks of mastodon meat,
wild potatoes, and seaweed and other plants that must have been imported from the
Pacific coast, some 65 km away. The archaeologists discovered fire pits surrounded
by burned wood chips, wooden lances with hardened tips, wooden basins containing
seeds, grindstones – and a human footprint. The foundation of a wishbone-shaped
structure held the remains of more than 20 types of medicinal plants, some of which
bore marks that may be the imprints of human molars. Most intriguing of all, the
scientists unearthed wooden foundations and crude timbers that Dillehay believes
supported an oval, tentlike dwelling similar to late Pleistocene shelters found on the
Siberian plains. Says he: “We know these people exploited a wide variety of resources
stretching from Monte Verde all the way to the coast. They used wood, ate plants,
fashioned stone tools and from time to time captured game animals, such as
mastodons and paleollamas.”
10. All the artifacts from Monte Verde have now been subjected to dozens of radiocarbon analyses – a standard archaeological dating technique in which the amount of
radioactive carbon in an organic specimen is used to calculate its age. Dillehay says
he is “very confident” that he has found remnants of a culture that existed some 125
centuries ago.
Coming to America / 3
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
11. Dillehay has also uncovered traces of what may be an even older campsite
nearby on a buried promontory. The evidence: 26 fractured stones, some of which
were clearly worked by human hands, as well as three clay-lined pits containing
charcoal that may be nearly 33,000 years old. Although radiocarbon dating supports
this idea, Dillehay is reluctant to draw any conclusions. “The older level is a hell of a
problem,” he says, “and it simply will not go away. The more I look at the evidence,
the more it looks like it represents human culture, but intellectually I still can’t accept
that humans were in the New World earlier than 15,000 to 20,000 years ago.”
Meadowcroft Rock Shelter, Pennsylvania
12. Although the age of the earliest objects from Meadowcroft remains
controversial, this rock shelter 50 km southwest of Pittsburgh has long been
considered one of North America’s most promising pre-Clovis sites. Among the
findings: charcoal, pieces of bone and antler and charred fragments of basketry that
are estimated to be between 12,000 and 15,000 years old. There is also an assortment
of non-Clovis blades and points. Says Mercyhurst’s Adovasio, who has studied
Meadowcroft for nearly 20 years: “It may well be the oldest archaeological site in
North America.”
Bluefish Caves, Yukon Territory
13. Discovered in 1975 by researchers with the Archaeological Survey of Canada,
these caves in the remote northern Yukon have yielded flaked stone tools that are
10,000 to 13,000 years old, what appear to be butchered mammoth bones 15,500 to
20,000 years old and bone tools from perhaps 23,500 years ago. To date, however, the
researchers have not found any hearths or other cultural features.
Taima-Taima, Venezuela
14. An ancient water hole called Taima-Taima in northern Venezuela became the
deathbed of a young mastodon – killed, apparently, by some of the first Americans.
The site, excavated by Alan Bryan and Ruth Gruhn of the University of Alberta in
Edmonton, appeared to contain 13,000-year-old mastodon bones, one of the
embedded with a pointed stone projectile. Mixed in were stone tools and rounded
pebbles that could have been made only by humans. Some archaeologists, however,
believe the artifacts found at Taima-Taima became interspersed with the mastodon
bones as the water level in the hole rose and are therefore much younger than they
seem. Even so, there is strong interest in the site because its reputed age is close to
that of Monte Verde.
Pedra Furada, Brazil
15. Of all the plausible places for early human settlement of the Americas, Pedra
Furada, located in a region of dramatic sandstone cliffs in the arid outback of
northeastern Brazil, is probably the most exciting – and most disputed. When
archaeologist Niéde Guidon of the School for the Advanced Study of Social Sciences
in Paris first excavated the site in 1978, she found cave paintings, ash-filled hearths
and what she believes are stone tools that are at least 30,000 and perhaps more than
Coming to America / 4
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
155
50,000 years old. Says Guidon: “I was the first person to be surprised. I believed the
standard theories.” Each successive radiocarbon test, though, bore out her initial
findings. She became a convert – and an untiring champion – of the pre-Clovis theory.
16. But convincing fellow scientists has been a battle. Guidon’s conclusions have
been greeted with skepticism by many archaeologists. One problem, explains Randall
White of New York University, is that the “tools” from the deepest levels at Pedra
Furada are mixed with naturally fractured river gravel. This suggests that the
geological layer was not laid down in an orderly way. The stone flakes could easily
have been churned together with much older rock before settling. Moreover, they
might not be human-made at all; the artifacts themselves could have formed by
natural erosion.
17. Critics have similar doubts about charcoal Guidon believes came from ancient
fireplaces. “Radiocarbon dating is tried and true,” explains archaeologist David
Meltzer of Southern Methodist University in Texas. “The problem is linking the
dating of objects to human occupation. How do you know it was a piece of charcoal
touched by human hands and not just a piece of burned tree?” Brian Fagan of the
University of California at Santa Barbara is a bit more blunt: “I think Pedra Furada is
absolute horse manure.”
18. That kind of derision doesn’t faze the feisty Guidon. On the charcoal deposits,
she argues, “If they had been left by forest fires, carbon deposits would have been
found scattered across a wide area.” They are not. In many cases, the charcoal is
ringed by stones, says Guidon, which is strong supporting evidence that these were
man-made hearths, not natural formations. Besides, the area was a humid, tropical
rain forest 30,000 years ago, and natural fires would have had a hard time getting
started.
19. The artifacts in deep layers don’t trouble her either. They couldn’t have been
washed in from elsewhere and mixed, she says, because the rock shelter where they
were found is more than 19 m above the surrounding terrain. Nor could the objects
have tumbled down from higher up on the cliff, says Guidon, since the cave is
protected by a massive rock overhang that would have kept out both falling rock and
flowing water.
20. Those who remain skeptical of pre-Clovis findings are most troubled by the
ambiguous nature of many of the artifacts. To make a convincing case for a preClovis culture, says archaeologist Thomas Lynch of Cornell University in New York,
“recognizable artifacts from that period must be dispersed over a broad area,
reflecting the movement of primitive peoples from place to place. A Clovis point is
just as recognizable as the tail fin on a 1952 Cadillac.”
21. Like its more conventional counterpart, the pre-Clovis theory has some
logistical problems. If humans got to South America by 13,000 years ago, they would
have had to cross the Bering land bridge many thousands of years earlier. That would
have been no problem, but heading south from there would have been tough: ice
Coming to America / 5
160
165
sheets – or the inhospitable terrain they left behind – cut off virtually all access to the
bulk of North America from Alaska between 20,000 and 14,000 years ago. Guidon’s
rather controversial answer: maybe the immigrants came over to South America in
boats directly from Asia.
22. Despite all the doubts and unanswered questions, the case for pre-Clovis
Americans is gaining ground. Even if the discoveries at Pedra Furada fail to satisfy
the critics, sites such as Monte Verde and Meadowcroft are powerful testimony that
early migrations did take place. However the first immigrants got to the New World,
and whatever the reason why they left behind so little physical evidence, it has
become difficult to deny their existence – and increasingly likely that earliest
American history will have to be rewritten.
Coming to America / 6
Questions should be answered in your own words, in English, unless otherwise
indicated.
1.
Answer the question below in English.
Who were until recently presumed to be – paragraph 1 – the earliest true
Americans?
Answer : ____________________________________________________________
Answer the question below in Hebrew.
2.
What are the two competing theories concerning the arrival of the early
Americans?
Answer : ____________________________________________________________
3.
Answer the question below in English.
What findings might suggest that the Clovis hypothesis is at fault?
Answer : ____________________________________________________________
Answer the question below in Hebrew.
4.
How does the writer account for the fact that the organic matter at Monte Verde,
Chile, was preserved for so long?
Answer : ____________________________________________________________
5.
Answer the question below in English.
By what means have the archaeologists dated the artifacts found at Monte
Verde? (paragraphs 8-12)
Answer : ____________________________________________________________
Coming to America / 7
6.
Answer the question below in English.
What are the findings in Yukon Territory – paragraph 13 – which might suggest
that its inhabitants predate those who were supposed to have arrived 11,500
years ago?
Answer : ____________________________________________________________
Answer the question below in Hebrew.
7.
What makes Pedra Furada, Brazil – paragraph 15 – such a likely candidate for
the early settlement of the Americas?
Answer : ____________________________________________________________
Answer the question below in Hebrew.
8.
Why have some scientists – paragraphs 16-17 – remained unconvinced by
Guidon’s arguments concerning the early arrivals?
Answer : ____________________________________________________________
9.
Complete the sentence below.
The weaknesses in Guidon’s theory concerning the early arrivals in South
America – paragraph 21 – could theoretically be resolved once we assume
Choose the best answer.
10. At present a growing number of researchers is inclined to __________________ the
theory of immigrants reaching America at any time preceding 11,500 years ago.
a. support.
b. reject
c. question
d. refute.