Plains Indian Studies - Smithsonian Institution Libraries

NUMBER 30 213
and unifacial flake tools, as well as the flaked
bones similar to those found at the Old Crow
localities. Although lacking the support of radiometric
dating, the artifacts found at Little Canyon
Creek Cave (Wyoming), the Shriver site
(Missouri), and Levi Rock Shelter (Texas) fit well
into a core and flake industry.
The spatial and temporal development of bifacial
reduction techniques is yet another question.
Whether or not bifacial technology developed
independently in the New World or was a
Eurasian import is highly speculative. The bifacial
projectile points found at Meadowcroft,
Hueyatlaco (Valsequillo), and Taima-Taima
have no well-documented counterparts or prototypes
at a sufficiently early age in Eurasia. This
would support a New World origin for this reduction
technique. To say that Clovis may have
developed from it is pure speculation. Nevertheless,
since it is possible that bifacial lanceolate
projectile points did exist in the New World just
prior to the advent of Clovis, perhaps fluting did
develop out of this earlier technology and perhaps
as a response to a different cultural strategy adaptive
for hunting in grasslands rather than forested
environments. These thoughts to a certain degree
accord with Bryan's model of multilinear evolution,
in which there are regional and temporal
specializations.
Is there any evidence in Eurasia to support a
model from which a core and flake industry may
have been derived prior to 12,000 years ago?
Unfortunately, the data from northwestern Asia
are equally plagued by vagaries as are the American.
However, Soviet archeologists working in
Siberia (Figure 35) are beginning to establish a
long archeological sequence which may extend
into Pleistocene as far back as 35,000 years ago.
Two basic Pleistocene cultures identified in Siberia
are pertinent: the Proto-Diuktai and the
Diuktai complexes (Mochanov, 1977). These
complexes contain basically unifacial artifacts,
although an occasional "bifacial" tool has been
noted. The tool kit also consists of large pebble
cores and choppers, wedge-shaped cores and microblades,
multifaceted burins, as well as a very
small number of bone tools (excluding the flesher)
similar to specimens from Old Crow, Yukon.
These artifacts have been found in association
with bones of Pleistocene species, such as mammoth,
horse, bison, and woolly rhino.
The Proto-Diuktai stage is thought to date to
as early as 35,000 years B.P. Some sites that are
considered Proto-Diuktai are Ezhantsy (Mochanov,
1973), horizons B and C of Ust'Mil',
which date 30,000±500, 33,000±500, and
35,400±600 B.p. (Mochanov, 1973, 1977), horizon
B at Ikhine I, which is thought to be around
34,000 years old, and horizon C at Ikhine II,
which dates to earlier than 31,000 years old (Mochanov,
1977).
Diuktai Cave, is located on the Diuktai River
in the Aldan River Valley of northern Siberia
(Mochanov, 1977). The basic difference between
Proto-Diuktai and Diuktai is that the production
or use of microblades compared to other tools
becomes much more frequent through time. The
Diuktai stage is thought to date between 18,000
and 11,000 years old.
Mochanov postulates at least two migrations of
Diuktai into the New World (Mochanov, 1978).
The earlier, which took place between 33,000 and
18,000 years ago, most likely gave rise to Clovis;
a later migration, which dates between 18,000
and 11,000 years ago, resulted in the American
Paleo-Arctic traditions.
If the dates for Proto-Diuktai and Diuktai accurately
reflect the age of the artifacts that have
been assigned to these stages, then it is possible
that Diuktai was the ancestral population for the
New World cultures. However, the postulated
ages of the Proto-Diuktai stage in Siberia have
not been accepted by some Soviet prehistorians
(e.g., Abramova, 1979). It is possible that Proto-
Diuktai is no earlier than 20,000 years old, which
is near the upper age limit of the supposedly
descendant Diuktai stage. Because, as Diuktai
developed, there is apparently an increasing frequency
in the use of microblade cores, microblades,
and burins, and this degree of use of
microblades and cores is not found in Clovis
technology, I suggest that the initial tie between