 |
Weekly Chat from About Archaeology
Moderated by Pat Garrow and K. Kris Hirst
Transcript: March 4, 2001: Speaker Dr. Tom Dillehay (University of Kentucky).
| You are at: Page 2. Go to: Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 | |
| toad | Do you think the site would be important regardless of whether or not it is pre-Clovis? Why? |
| Tom Dillehay | I think the site would be very important without all the Clovis discussion. It is like the Ozette site in the northwest; the preservation is very good. |
| Pat Garrow | It's quite rare to get wood, bone, and even flesh preserved on any site. how did you deal with so many organic remains? |
| Tom Dillehay | We had chemical preservatives and experts on site |
| Pat Garrow | sure would need them! incredible preservation |
| mohr | On a more personal level, Tom, what were your thoughts when the archaeological world went from "Monte Verde?" to "Monte Verde!" Was there a sense of relief? |
| Tom Dillehay | Yes, there was some relief among all of us. the team includes more of course. |
| IreneH1 | This may be a naive question: Was this the first "pre-Clovis" site found? |
| Tom Dillehay | First pre Clovis site. Don't know. Maybe some of the surface sites found by Kreiger, which he thought were pre-Clovis in 1964. |
| calico | Many of us think there are acceptable pre-Clovis sites in the U.S. |
| nali | My understanding of the situation with Clovis was that from Central America going north, the remains are largely Clovis, and going south they appear to be Fishtail, but with many similarities between them and a kind of meeting in the middle so to speak, but with neither consistently dating older than the other |
| Tom Dillehay | nali: you are correct. South America is very different. |
| Aulus | I may have missed it as I was late arriving, but has there been any human organic material found and enough to do any DNA testing so as to compare to existing populations? |
| Tom Dillehay | No human remains officially found, meaning we had a human bone but it was shipped to a lab and lost there in 1979. We are working on DNA matter still but we have lots of problems with it. It's old stuff; and the older the bone, the harder it is to get acceptable DNA. |
| coop | Has "lost info" been a frequent problem? |
| Tom Dillehay | coop: only with the one bone. |
| IreneH1 | That must have been frustrating though |
| calico | any human hair? |
| Tom Dillehay | A few but very degraded. |
| Pat Garrow | Monte Verde was not only an extremely complex site, but it was excavated over a course of years. Did that cause problems? |
| Tom Dillehay | Yes. we had to protect the site, re-invite colleagues each time, and pull together and add to the research team. |
| Pat Garrow | Also, excavation and recordation methods have changed over the years as the field has matured. That must have caused some problems |
| Tom Dillehay | It did. For instance, at first, we knew nothing about how to prevent contamination of DNA matter; then we moved from piece-plotting by hand to finer instruments in later years. etc. |
| Pat Garrow | In contracting we rarely spend even 6 months of a single site. problems must have been daunting |
| BobOconee | Is the Monte Verde site currently being excavated and if so what is the direction of study? |
| Tom Dillehay | The site is not being excavated at present. The Chilean government is building a site museum. We plan to return for the deeper possible cultural level next year. |
| calico | Is that the stuff which might be dated as old as 34,000 years? |
| Tom Dillehay | Yes. |
| Tom Dillehay | Current direction of work: I am working in Peru on early and late material. Also have students working in various areas. |
| calico | any coprolites? |
| coop | Tom, have you seen much in the way of bone tools of preClovis age? |
| Tom Dillehay | Coop: I have seen early bone tools in South America, mainly Argentina. They are flakers. |
| coop | flakers? |
| Tom Dillehay | Bone flakers for working unifacial pebble tools. |
| Pat Garrow | How long was your typical field season on the site? |
| Tom Dillehay | Pat Garrow: Most field season lasted 2 months. We lived in tents and cooked out; about 20-30 people. |
| Pat Garrow | That is a decent amount of field time. I admit I would rather camp out at Days Inn myself though |
| nali | Pat: that's no fun! |
| Pat Garrow | is at my age nali |
| nali | hahaha |
| IreneH1 | ==sympathize== |
| Tom Dillehay | It was fun though taxing. We always had a large campfire, a little pisco (Chilean brandy), and lots of guitarra and singing. |
