Anthropology 4380: Peopling of the New World
Spring 2008, 1:30 – 2:45 p.m. T, R (Eng 203)

Professor : Dr. Bonnie Pitblado (my last name is pronounced with a long “a” sound)
Office : Old Main 245F Phone : 797 – 1496 E-mail : bonnie.pitblado@ usu.edu
Office hours : Tues, 8:45 – 10:00 a.m.; Wed, 1:15 – 2:45 p.m.; by appointment

R.A.s : Miquette Martin, kettyann7@hotmail.com, 801-663-4557
Justin Potter, justin.potter@aggiemail.usu.edu, 801-574-6695

Course description

Anthropology 4380 (Peopling of the New World) will introduce you to the dynamic and controversial domain of the earliest human colonization of the Americas. The course is organized around four key “peopling” debates that have raged for years: why giant Pleistocene mammals went extinct; how and from where the first human immigrants came; when people first arrived in the New World; and if and how ancient human skeletal remains should be studied. You will read about these debates, evaluate evidence related to them, write a paper about one of them, and ultimately debate one yourself in a formal debate.

The course entails heavy reading; however, you will find much of that reading to be lively (to say the least)—a reflection of the controversial nature of this field of study. The course also requires a fair amount of writing: two short “critical thought” papers and a longer research paper. Help in preparing all of these will be provided by rhetoric assistants and two visits with a USU library reference specialist to learn to conduct scholarly research. Most importantly, the course will require you to think critically about issues. Almost everything we talk about can be—and has been—viewed from many angles. It will be up to you to weigh evidence and come to informed conclusions of your own about the many intriguing questions that constitute the “state of the art.”

Program learning goals & assessment

The USU Anthropology program has identified learning goals to help guide students through coursework in the discipline. Specific goals that Anth 4380 will help you reach include the following:

• Attaining depth in a subfield of anthropology (archaeology)
• Gaining familiarity with the early cultures of a major world region ( North America)
• Applying methods specific to an anthropological sub-field (archaeology)
• Communicating effectively in written and oral forms
• Conducting library research using modern methods
• Using a computer for research and writing
• Thinking critically about issues requiring a synthesis of perspectives from the humanities and the sciences

The writing assignments and reading quizzes for Anth 4380 will help me assess your progress toward these learning goals. The quizzes will evaluate the scope of your understanding of the earliest prehistoric North American cultures as presented in scholarly readings. “Critical thought” papers will help me evaluate the development of your critical thinking and writing skills. A more substantial research/writing assignment will provide you with the opportunity to (a) explore a particular archaeological problem in more depth than is possible in the classroom; (b) develop your library and computer research skills; and (c) improve your writing skills. In-class debates and short presentations will allow me to assess your ability to communicate effectively through a formal oral medium.

Your classroom participation is an important assessment tool as well. Your comments and questions will help me identify anthropology program goals that are being met by the class, and those that require further attention on my part. Your comments will also afford you the opportunity to practice expressing yourself orally, and me with the means to evaluate whether or not your critical thinking skills improve over the course of the semester.

Required textbooks

Two books are required for this course and additional readings will be made available via e-reserve. Both required books are available from Amazon.com and the USU bookstore for a reasonable price. I’ve listed them on the USU Museum of Anthropology web page http://www.usu.edu/anthro/museum/catalog/amafundmus.html , from which you can link to Amazon.co m . To purchase the books this way, navigate to the above URL, click on “Anthropology” and then scroll down to “Anth 4380” for links to the books for our class. By using this link sequence rather than going directly to Amazon’s web site, 6.5 % of the proceeds from the sale of the listed books (and 6.5 % of the sale of everything you buy, actually) are donated to the USU Museum of Anthropology—a way for us to raise much-needed funds. As of this writing, free shipping is available from Amazon.com on purchases over $25.

If you choose to buy the texts at the USU bookstore, you will find new copies of Adovasio for $12.85 and used copies for $9.65. The cost for new copies of Jablonski is $31.35 at the USU bookstore; however, the bookstore does not have any used copies this semester. Amazon does have a bunch of used copies available for purchase. The citations and current Amazon prices for the two texts are:

Adovasio, J.M. (with Jake Page)

2003 The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology’s Greatest Mystery . The Modern

Library, New York. Amazon.com price: $11.96 (used from $5.50).

Jablonski, Nina G.

2002 The First Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the New World . Memoirs of the California Academy of Sciences, No. 27, San Francisco. Amazon.com price: $32.30 (used from $24.14).

E-Reserve Readings

To access the Anth 4380 e-reserve site, start at the Merrill-Cazier library home page (http://library.usu.edu/). Select “find resources” and then “course reserves.” Highlight “instructor” and type in my name: “Pitblado.” All of my courses will appear. Choose “Anth 4380, Spring 2008.” When prompted for a password, enter “PIT4380.” You can now select, save, and/or print a given reading. Note: I will do my best to make copies of all readings—even those from the text books—available via e-reserve. The quality won’t be as good, but if you are strapped for cash or waiting on a book you ordered, you can use these to remain up-to-speed.

Assistance & ADA

I strongly encourage you to ask questions and make comments in class, by e-mail, or during my office hours. If you have a disability that may require classroom assistance or other accommodations, please see me as soon as possible so that we can make whatever arrangements are necessary to help you succeed. Alternative format print materials, large print, audio, diskette or Braille may be made available through the Disability Resource Center as necessary.

Course grading

A (100 - 93%); A- (92 - 90%); B+ (89 - 87%); B (86 - 83%); B- (82% - 80%); C+ (79 - 77%); C (76 - 73%); C- (72 - 70%); D+ (69 - 67%); D (66 - 60%); F (≤ 59%)

Course requirements (425 possible points)

• Critical thought paper 1 (25 points)
• Critical thought paper 2 (50 points)
• Oral presentation of critical thought paper 2 data (25 points)
• Research paper (75 points)
• Paper/report draft submission (3 X 25 points/each = 75 points)
• In-class debate (50 points)
• Current Research in the Pleistocene Peer Review (25 points)
• Critical reading quizzes (50 points)
• Attendance and participation (50 points)

Critical thought paper 1. You will write a short (2-page), double-spaced paper that responds to the Adovasio readings through January 17. This paper does not require you to do additional research, although you may if you wish. The goal of this exercise is for you to think critically about your reading and to communicate your thoughts clearly to me. I am not looking for a “book report” reiteration of the reading(s). Rather, I want to hear your intellectual response to Adovasio’s ideas and presentation style. A draft of the first essay is due to a rhetoric assistant on Thursday, January 24. Shortly thereafter, you will meet one-on-one with an R.A. to receive input on how to improve your paper. A final draft, stapled to the rough draft (with R.A. comments) must be turned in to me on February 5, 2008. Failure to turn in the rough draft along with the final draft will result in a loss of draft points. Generally speaking, failure to take into account your R.A.’s suggestions for improvement will also result in a loss of draft points.

Critical thought paper 2 . The second paper will require you and a partner to research a pre-Clovis site contender and to critically evaluate the data you gather. I will assign teams of two of you to a site that has been advanced as a pre-Clovis candidate. You will compile all the scholarly data on the site that you can obtain in a 4 – 5 page double-spaced paper. The page total refers only to text; figures such as the profile and your reference section are “extra.” Your paper should follow this blue-print:

• Introduction
• Relevant archaeological findings (artifacts, features, number of components, etc.)
• Profile (a photograph or line drawing of the site’s stratigraphy, with a clear indication of where the material in question occurs within the profile)
• Dating technique(s) employed, results, and any “red flags”
• Controversy (others’ arguments “for” and “against” the site’s status as pre-Clovis)
• Your assessment of whether the site is or is not pre-Clovis (with a clear archaeological justification of your reasoning—don’t root your assessment in anyone else’s opinion of the evidence)
• References (3 minimum), in American Antiquity format

You will turn in a draft of your paper to an R.A. on February 26 th, and then meet with him/her later that same week for feedback. On March 6 th, you’ll turn in a final draft to me. Please turn in the paper stapled to the R.A.-reviewed draft. Failure to turn in the rough draft along with the final draft will result in a loss of draft points. Generally speaking, failure to take into account your R.A.’s suggestions for improvement will also result in a loss of draft points.

Oral presentation of critical thought paper 2

March 25 – 27, you will give an 8- to 10-minute presentation of your findings. More important than rote citation of the details of the site will be your assessment of the evidence (although you need to provide sufficient background such that we can follow along—consider using overheads or Power Point for this). Your presentation should focus on demonstrating whether the evidence supports accepting or rejecting the site as pre-Clovis. I will allot the 25 points for your presentation on the basis of how well you demonstrate your own critical thinking, and upon your preparation and professionalism.

Research paper . You will compose an 8 – 10 pp. research paper to be submitted at the beginning of class, April 15 th (see late paper policy, below). You will submit a complete rough draft to a rhetoric assistant on April 1 st and meet with him/her to receive input later that week. The paper will focus on one of four key debates about the peopling of the Americas (to be introduced in class):

• Late Pleistocene extinctions: overkill vs. climate change
• Mode of peopling: via foot vs. boat vs. ship
• Timing of peopling: Clovis-first vs. pre-Clovis
• Kennewick repatriation: Scientists vs. Native American tribes

We will assign topics within the first few weeks of the course. Roughly 25% of the class will research and write on each one. Your job as an individual is to research and clearly present some element of your debate, citing scholarly references for whatever position you take. Yes, you should take a position in this paper. You should not merely summarize literature; instead, you should invoke the literature to support your thesis. Your paper must adhere to the following bulleted criteria. For every requirement that you violate, you will lose points. Please use the following as a check-list before you hand in your drafts, so that you do not lose points for picky stuff. Should you have trouble adding page numbers or with any aspect of your research, I’ll be glad to help you during my office hours, as will our rhetoric assistants.

Paper requirements (again, please check off each one before submitting your paper)

• A clearly stated position (thesis)
• An introduction (with a “map” to the rest of the paper), body and conclusion
• A minimum of 10 references (the heavier on scholarly books and journals the better)
• At least eight must be scholarly books or refereed journal articles
• You should only use internet and popular magazine articles if no other sources on the topic exist (this will rarely, if ever, be the case; check with me if in doubt)
• 8 – 10 double (not space-and-a-half, not triple) spaced pages
• References in American Antiquity style (e.g., see citations on pp. 10-13 of this syllabus)
• 1 or 1.25” margins
• 12-point, Times New Roman font (as used for this syllabus)
• Impeccable spelling and grammar
• Page numbers at the bottom of the page, center or right position
• For final draft: rough draft stapled below the final version

Critical thought and research paper draft submissions . You will earn up to 25 points apiece for your draft submissions of your two critical thought papers and your term paper. Rhetoric assistants will provide me with written input to allow me to assign point values based on the completeness of your draft, the effort you expended producing it, your receptiveness to constructive criticism, and the extent to which you incorporated your R.A.’s suggestions into your revised paper. To receive credit for your rough drafts, you must staple the R.A.-reviewed version to your final draft and turn both in by the due-date indicated on the syllabus for the final draft. R.A.s will tell me if they do not receive a paper draft on time, and you will lose all 25 points available for the draft. This is a silly way to lose valuable points, so please put your best effort into writing your drafts and turning them in on time.

Oral debate . During the final two regular class periods of the semester (April 22 and 24 th), we will hold two debates per class on the topics you wrote about in your research papers. Each topic will be debated by the 25% of the class that wrote about it. The teams will decide who will represent a given position, who will argue and who will rebut, and how the debate will be run (you have some leeway; the following are guidelines only). Each debate team will have half the class period to present their debate. The format will be roughly as follows (again, if you can tweak the format to good effect, feel free to do so):

• The proponent(s) of the first position will argue their points
• The proponent(s) of the second position will argue their points
• The proponent(s) of the third position –if there is one—will argue their points
• The proponent(s) of the first position will rebut the other argument(s)
• The proponent(s) of the second position will rebut the other argument(s)
• The proponent(s) of the third position—if there is one—will rebut the other argument(s)
• The proponent(s) of the first position will offer a “closing argument”
• The proponent(s) of the second position will offer a “closing argument”
• The proponent(s) of the third position—if there is one—will offer a “closing argument”

The debates will be the intellectual culmination of what we cover in the course. I view them as your final exam, and I expect you to put significant preparation into them. You should meet with your team (both sides) frequently to ensure a competent and polished performance in the in-class debate. I will recruit outsiders to serve as debate judges, so your audience—those you need to convince of your position—will be educated laypeople; non-experts in the field. Present your “side” and evidence in language and with images they will grasp—or you will not prevail.

Hint : before deciding how to frame your individual written papers, strategically map out the points you want to make in your group debate. Research and write on different elements of the debate so you will cumulatively cover as much intellectual territory as possible.

Your debate grade will be based on the following criteria:

• Preparation (15 points)
• Content (20 points)
• Delivery (10 points)
• Victory (5 points)

Current Research in the Pleistocene Peer Review. I serve as an associate editor for the journal Current Research in the Pleistocene (CRP). As many of you will learn as you research early North and South American sites and “peopling” debates, CRP presents short (2-3 page) articles on topics of interest to “peopling” scholars. Every year, I review 7 – 10 or so articles for possible inclusion in the following year’s issue of the journal. When I teach “peopling,” I have my students—you all—serve as reviewers along with me, so you get a first-hand taste for what happens during the peer-review process. Your job will be to read over the articles we’re assigned to review and to write a short paragraph for each, suggesting whether the article should be (a) accepted with no or minor revisions; (b) accepted pending major revisions; or (c) rejected. You must justify your recommendation and rank the papers from best to worst. We will discuss your findings in an in-class panel, and I will collect your write-ups and use them to assign your grade for the exercise. You should not write more than one paragraph per entry. Be concise and to the point. Before the assignment, we will talk about evaluation criteria you should apply in making your publication recommendations.

Critical Reading Quizzes . This class has no midterm and no final exam. However, I do expect you to read all of the assignments, reflect upon them, and to come to class prepared to discuss them. I will administer six (unannounced) reading quizzes during the semester that ask you to respond to the readings in a way that shows me that you read and thought about them. They will only be “hard” if you fail to read. Each quiz is worth 10 points. I will drop the lowest grade and count only the five highest grades. Reading quizzes cannot be made up (see “missed reading quizzes” in “classroom policies,” except under the most extraordinary of circumstances).

Attendance and participation . Attendance and active participation in this course are imperative. The class is relatively small, so it will be clear to me is present, prepared, and actively participating. I may also occasionally circulate sign-in sheets to help me keep track of attendance. Fifty points will be determined by your commitment to attend class and actively engage in class discussions. Please don’t squander these easily earned points.

Classroom policies

• Late papers: I will not grant extensions for any of your three papers, and rhetoric assistants will not accept late drafts (resulting in a loss of 25 points each). Final drafts of all papers will be docked 10 points/day for each day they are late. Note: the definition of “late” is “anytime after the end of class on the day the paper is due. ”

• Missed reading quizzes : You may not make up reading quizzes except under the most extraordinary of circumstances (e.g., extended hospitalization). However, I will drop your lowest quiz grade, so if you happen to miss a day that a quiz is offered, I will drop the zero. If you miss a second quiz (or fail to receive points on a second quiz), the zero will count…so please come to class, and come having completed the reading.

• Tardiness . Late arrivals are distracting to me and other students. If you cannot arrive on time—barring an emergency, of course—please do not come to class. If you will be systematically late to class for some extenuating reason, please let me know this early in the term to avoid losing participation and attendance points.

• Classroom etiquette . During class time, do not talk to others, allow your cell phone to ring, snap your gum, read the newspaper, or engage in other inconsiderate activities. If your behavior disturbs your colleagues or me, I will ask you to leave.

• Academic dishonesty . Cheating on reading quizzes, plagiarizing on a paper—or engaging in any form of academic dishonesty as outlined in the USU honor code—will result in a grade of “F” for the course and referral to HASS Dean Gary Kiger.
  

Anthropology 4380 Syllabus

Date Topic Reading*

Jan. 8 Intro to course None

Jan. 10 Video: Intro to “peopling” issues & players None

Jan. 15 History of discipline and peopling debates Adovasio, Ch. 1, 4

Jan. 17 Pleistocene landscapes Adovasio, Ch. 2, 3

Jan. 22 Archaeology 101: artifacts & stratigraphy Hester et al., Ch. 10

Jan. 24 Archaeology 101: dating techniques Adovasio, pp. 109-117

Tammy Rittenour, Research Professor of Geology

& Manager, USU OSL Laboratory

Critical thought paper 1 draft due to R.A.s

(Meet with R.A.s Jan. 26 – 29)

Jan. 29 Research techniques: Meet in Library 155 None

Wendy Holliday, Coordinator of Library Instruction

Jan. 31 Research techniques: Meet in Library 155 None

Wendy Holliday, Coordinator of Library Instruction

Feb. 5 Debate 1: Pleistocene extinctions Adovasio, pp. 117-130; Grayson &

Critical thought paper 1 (final) due Meltzer (2003); Fiedel & Haynes (2004)

Feb. 7 Debate 2 (intro): How people got to the Americas Tankersley, Ch. 12; Elias (2002);

Mandryk(2001)

Feb. 12 Debate 2, cont: Boats, ships or foot Stanford and Bradley (2002);

Erlandson (2002)

Feb. 13 (W)Grand Opening: “Peopling of the New World & N/A

Utah,” USU Museum of Anthropology, 5:00 p.m.

Feb. 14 Debate 3 (intro): When people got to the Americas Adovasio, Ch. 6; Haynes (2002:1-11)

Feb. 19 NO CLASS (Monday classes meet today)

Feb. 21 How, when, from where: linguistic evidence Nichols (2002)

Richley Crapo, Professor of Anthropology

Feb. 26 How, when, from where: genetic evidence Merriwether (2002)

Mike Pfrender, Assistant Professor of Biology

Critical thought paper 2 draft due to R.A.s

(Meet with R.A.s, Feb. 28 – March 1 st)

Feb. 28 How, when, from where: bone and dental evidence Steele and Powell (2002); Turner (2002)

Pat Lambert, Associate Professor of Anthropology

Mar. 4 How, when, from where: oceanographic evidence Wyatt (2004)

Nancy Mesner, Associate Professor of Watershed Sciences

Mar. 6 Debate 4: Kennewick Man Downey, Ch. 1, 10, 13

Critical thought paper 2 (final) due

Mar. 11 SPRING BREAK

Mar. 13 SPRING BREAK

Mar. 18 Classic pre-Clovis sites: Sandia & Meadowcroft Preston (1995); Adovasio, Ch. 7

Mar. 20 Breaking the Clovis barrier? Monte Verde Meltzer et al. (1997); Adovasio, Ch. 8, 9

Anthropology 4380 Syllabus, cont.

Date Topic Reading*

Mar. 25 More North American Pre-Clovis Dixon (1999, Ch. 3)

Student presentations

Mar. 27 More South American pre-Clovis Roosevelt et al. (2002:179-205);

Student presentations Gruhn (2004)

Apr. 1 H ow, when, from where: synthesis Meltzer (2004), Grayson (2004) &

Research paper draft due to R.A.s Madsen (2004)

Meet with R.A.s April 3 – 5 th

Apr. 3 Introduction to Clovis, Part 1 Haynes (2002, Ch. 2:38-70); Waters &

Stafford (2007a); Haynes et al. (2007);

Waters & Stafford (2007b)

Apr. 8 Introduction to Clovis, Part 2 Haynes (2002, Ch. 2:71-108)

Apr. 10 Clovis origins Goebel (2004); Haynes (2002, Ch. 4)

Apr. 15 Clovis colonization of North America Meltzer (2002); Kelly and Todd (1988);

Research papers (final) due Waguespack and Surovell (2003)

Apr. 17 Current Research in the Pleistocene Peer ReviewCRP submissions (e-reserve)

Apr. 22 DEBATES: extinctions; peopling routes None

Library Auditorium (Lib 101)

Apr. 24 DEBATES: peopling timing; Kennewick Man None

Library Auditorium (Lib 101)

NO FINAL EXAM—HAPPY SUMMER J

* Reading should be completed by the class period for which it is listed.

Full Citations for Readings (American Antiquity format)

Adovasio, J.M. (with Jake Page)

2003 The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology’s Greatest Mystery . The Modern Library, New York.

Dixon , E. James

1999 Bones, Boats and Bison: Archeology and the First Colonization of Western North

America. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Downey, Roger

2000 Riddle of the Bones: Politics, Science, Race, and the Story of Kennewick Man .

Copernicus, New York.

Elias, Scott

2002 Setting the Stage: Environmental Conditions in Beringia as People Entered the New

World. In The First Americans: the Pleistocene Colonization of the New World, edited

by Nina G. Jablonski, pp. 9-25. Memoir of the California Academy of Sciences, Number

27, San Francisco.

Erlandson, Jon M.

2002 Anatomically Modern Humans, Maritime Voyaging, and the Pleistocene Colonization

of the Americas. In The First Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the New

World , edited by Nina G. Jablonski, pp. 59-92. Memoir of the California Academy of

Sciences, Number 27, San Francisco.

Fiedel, Stuart and Gary Haynes

2004 A Premature Burial: Comments on Grayson and Meltzer’s ‘Requiem for Overkill.

Journal of Archaeological Science 31:121-131.

Goebel, Ted

2004 The Search for a Clovis Progenitor in Sub-Arctic Siberia. In Entering America,

Northeast Asia and Beringia before the Last Glacial Maximum , edited by D.B. Madsen,

pp. 311-356. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Grayson, Donald K.

2004 Monte Verde, Field Archaeology, and the Human Colonization of the Americas. In

Entering America, Northeast Asia and Beringia before the Last Glacial

Maximum , ed. by D.B. Madsen, pp. 379-387. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Grayson, Donald K. and David J. Meltzer

2003 A Requiem for North American Overkill. Journal of Archaeological Science 30:

585-593.

Gruhn, Ruth

2004 Current Archaeological Evidence of Late-Pleistocene Settlement of South America.

In New Perspectives on the First Americans, edited by Bradley T. Lepper and Robsen

Bonnichsen, pp. 27-34. Center for the Study of the First Americans, College Station, TX.

Haynes, Gary

2002 The Early Settlement of North America, the Clovis Era. Cambridge University Press,

United Kingdom.

Haynes, Gary, David G. Anderson, C. Reid Ferring, Stuart J. Fiedel, Donald K. Grayson, C. Vance Haynes, Jr., Vance T. Holliday, Bruce B. Huckell, Marcel Kornfeld, David J. Meltzer, Julie Morrow, Todd Surovell, Nicole M. Waguespack, Peter Wigand and Robert M. Yohe III

2007 Comment on “Redefining the Age of Clovis: Implications for the Peopling of the Americas.” Science 317:320b.

Hester, Thomas R., Harry J. Shafer and Kenneth L. Feder

1997 Field Methods in Archaeology, Seventh Edition. Mayfield Publishing Company,

Mountain View, California.

Kelly, Robert L. and Lawrence C. Todd

1988 Coming into the Country: Early Paleoindian Hunting and Mobility. American

Antiquity 53(2):231-244.

Madsen, David B.

2004 Recapitulation: The Relative Probabilities of Late Pre-LGM or Early Post-LGM

Ages for the Initial Occupation of the Americas. In Entering America, Northeast Asia

and Beringia before the Last Glacial Maximum , edited by D.B. Madsen, pp. 389-396.

University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Mandryk, Carole A. S.

2001 The Ice-Free Corridor (Or Not?): An Inland Route by any other Name is not so

Sweet nor Adequately Considered. In On Being First: Cultural Innovation and

Environmental Consequences of First Peopling , edited by Jason Gillespie, Susan

Tupakka, and Christy de Mille. Proceedings of the 31 st Annual Chacmool Conference.

Chacmool, The Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary, Alberta.

Meltzer, David J.

2002 What Do You Do when No One’s Been there Before? Thoughts on the Exploration

and Colonization of New Lands. In The First Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization

of the New World , edited by Nina G. Jablonski, pp. 27-58. Memoir of the California

Academy of Sciences, Number 27, San Francisco.

2004 On Possibilities, Prospecting, and Patterns: Thinking about a Pre-LGM Human

Presence in the Americas. In Entering America, Northeast Asia and Beringia Before the

Last Glacial Maximum , edited by D.B. Madsen, pp. 359-377. University of Utah Press,

Salt Lake City .

Meltzer, David J., Donald K. Grayson, Gerardo Ardila, Alex W. Barker, Dena F. Dincauze, C.

Vance Haynes, Francisco Mena, Lautaro Nunex, and Dennis J. Stanford

1997 On the Pleistocene Antiquity of Monte Verde, Southern Chile. American Antiquity

62(4):659-663.

Merriwether, D. Andrew

2002 A Mitochondrial Perspective on the Peopling of the New World. In The First

Americans: the Pleistocene Colonization of the New World , edited by Nina G. Jablonski,

pp. 295-310. Memoir of the California Academy of Sciences, Number 27, San Francisco.

Nichols, Joanna

2002 The First American Languages. In The First Americans: The Pleistocene

Colonization of the New World , edited by Nina G. Jablonski, pp. 273-293. Memoir of the

California Academy of Sciences, Number 27, San Francisco.

Preston, Douglas

1995 The Mystery of Sandia Cave. The New Yorker, June 12, pp. 66-83.

Roosevelt , A.C., John Douglas, and Linda Brown

2002 The Migrations and Adaptations of the First Americans: Clovis and Pre-Clovis

Viewed from South America. In The First Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of

the New World , edited by Nina G. Jablonski, pp. 159-223. Memoir of the California

Academy of Sciences, Number 27, San Francisco.

Stanford, Dennis and Bruce Bradley

2002 Ocean Trails and Prairie Paths? Thoughts about Clovis Origins. In The First

Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the New World , edited by Nina G.

Jablonski, pp. 255-271. Memoir of the California Academy of Sciences, Number 27, San

Francisco.

Steele, D. Gentry and Joseph F. Powell

2002 Facing the Past: A View of the North American Human Fossil Record. In The First

Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the New World , edited by Nina G.

Jablonski, pp. 93-122. Memoir of the California Academy of Sciences, Number 27, San

Francisco.

Tankersley, Kenneth B.

2002 In Search of Ice Age Americans. Gibbs Smith, Salt Lake City.

Turner, Christy G., II

2002 Teeth, Needles, Dogs, and Siberia: Bioarchaeological Evidence for the Colonization

of the New World. In The First Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the New

World , edited by Nina G. Jablonski, pp. 123-158. Memoir of the California Academy of

Sciences, Number 27, San Francisco.

Waters, Michael R. and Thomas W. Stafford, Jr.

2007a Redefining the Age of Clovis: Implications for the Peopling of the Americas.

Science 315:1122-1126.

Waters, Michael R. and Thomas W. Stafford, Jr.

2007b Response to “Comment on ‘Redefining the Age of Clovis: Implications for the Peopling of the Americas.’” Science 317:320c.

Waguespack, Nicole M. and Todd A. Surovell

2003 Clovis Hunting Strategies, or How to Make Out on Plentiful Resources. American

Antiquity 68(2):333-352.

Wyatt, Steve

2004 Ancient Transpacific Voyaging to the New World via Pleistocene South Pacific

Islands. Geoarchaeology 19(6):511-529.