GLACIAL AGE MAN IN SOUTH-AMERICA - A EURO PEAN PERSPECTIVE

Europeans, more than Americans, have long been inclined to accept a Pa leolithic period in South America, which would have occurred long befo re the sudden and obvious appearance, about 11, 000 years ago, of Pale oindian hunters. Over the past ten years a pre-Clovis occupation of No rth America has begun to appear increasingly unlikely, but, at the sam e time, a number of North and South American archaeologists have joine d with Europeans in arguing for an early, non-Paleoindian occupation o f South America. This paper is an attempt to put the dispute about Ear ly Man in South America in historical context, and to review the most convincing and important evidence that has been put forward. Essential ly no skeletal remains, in either continent, have survived recent scru tiny and direct dating by AMS and small CO2 counters. Only a handful o f North American sites are still considered reasonably likely to be pr e-Clovis, but the concept of an earlier, generalized hunting and gathe ring adaptation is still popular. In South America the pre-Paleoindian sites of the 1960's and 1970's are re-evaluated and found to present only weak or negative indications of early occupation. Recently discov ered sites in Brazil and Chile are critically examined and the evidenc e is questioned. The results of this survey and evaluation suggest tha t we still lack the absolutely certain case that would be necessary to demonstrate the hypothesis. Moreover, the statistical probability is seen to decrease, rather than increase, as the Paleoindian horizon is increasingly defined with more certainty while only equivocal cases ar e marshalled for an Archaic-like pre-Paleoindian stage. Archaeologists should depend more on the unambiguous and replicated cases, rather th an regional exceptions, in writing the general patterns of American pr ehistory. A plea is made for more interpretive caution, especially whe re there are possibilities for mixture and secondary deposition. Natur al processes often mimic cultural patterns, confusing the positive ide ntification of informal hearths and simple artifacts.