MEETINGS # 1637 and #1640

4:00 P.M.

October 5 and November 16, 2000

Humankind's Discovery of the New World:
The Calico Connection

by Allan D. Griesemer Ph.D.

Assembly Room, A. K. Smiley Public Library

SUMMARY

This paper is a tribute to Ruth “Dee” Simpson, who dedicated her professional life to the exploration of the Calico site near Barstow, CA in hopes of proving the intriguing possibility that humans had inhabited the New World not thousands, but hundreds of thousands of years ago. In her lifetime, which stretched from May 6, 1918 to January 19, 2000, such thoughts were considered (and still are) heresy in the anthropological world in the U.S., a fact which did not deter Dee, whose passion for this quest was undivertable. With initial organizational help from Gerry Smith (and later, as Director of the San Bernardino County Museum), the ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY ASSOCIATION serving as her initial volunteers, and Louis Leakey, who influenced the National Geographical Society, to provide financial help, the search for prehistoric humans at Calico began on November 1, 1964. This paper is the story of those efforts, that are still going on today.

The paper briefly describes the current thinking of the evolution of humans from their African birth place, through their dispersion into Asia and Europe, which some feel was caused by the massive climatic changes that were occurring in Africa during the early Pleistocene. It explores the current positions of the traditionalists and those who are proposing a new paradigm to explain the ever more commonly occurring evidence that humans were on this continent long before the Clovis culture, dated at 11,500 years ago.

The latter half of the paper deals specifically with California’s most heralded early human site, which is right on our doorstep, the Calico site near Barstow. Calico it appears, was a workshop site on the shores of the once very extensive Pleistocene Lake Manix. Lake Manix was the most southerly of the over 100 pluvial lakes that formed in the Great Basin during the Pleistocene. These mostly internal drainage bodies of water formed because of the major climatic changes that occurred as North America experienced massive continental glaciation related to much higher than normal precipitation rates.

The last third of the paper deals with the discovery of the site, its gradual growth and related contributions to the growing data on pre-Clovis humans in North America. It discusses the trials and tribulations of the forty year effort, the personalities, the evidence, and the present status of the proponent’s conclusions.

BACKGROUND OF THE AUTHOR

The author retired from the directorship of the San Bernardino County Museum in 1997. He had served in the Museum profession for thirty six years, having started out as an apprentice at the Newark Museum in Newark New Jersey. He also served as a Curator for three years at the Dayton Museum of Natural History in Dayton, Ohio, and filled various roles at the University of Nebraska State Museum in Lincoln, Nebraska for nineteen years, leaving that institution to come to Redlands in 1984. He received his Bachelors degree from Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois, his Masters from the University of Wisconsin in Madison, and his doctorate at the University of Nebraska.

He has published twenty three museum related articles, and eight academic papers. He is a member of several community based organizations and is a member of Sigma Xi. He is married to his wife Nancy and has three sons living in the Midwest.

Humankind's Discovery of the New World:
The Calico Connection

I) Introduction

Human origins have been an intriguing concern for our species for all long as “humans” have been defined. However, it is only in the past thirty years that anthropologists have accepted the concept that the genus Homo (the scientific word for human) reaches back over two million years. The earliest human forms are now believed to have been a small statured (five foot tall, 120 pound) hominid called H. habilis which began it’s life in eastern Africa. This form was first found by the famous anthropologist Louis Leakey in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania. As some of your know, Leakey will become a major player in the second part of this paper when the Calico site near Barstow becomes our focus. For the purposes of this discussion, the word ‘human’ is based on the scientific definition which refers to the ability of a form to not only use but also fashion tools, aided by a brain capacity of six to seven hundred cubic centimeters. The tools used by this early human were very primitive, mostly picked off the ground, with only rudimentary efforts made to shape them. It is assumed they did not keep the tools, but started over each time one was needed, much like chimps today.

Although the purpose of this paper is not to discuss the origin of humans, in this Introduction, I shall briefly relate the chronology accepted by most anthropologists that outlines the human lineage from H. habilis to the forms that could have made the initial venture into the New World perhaps as early as 280,000 years ago, more on this later.

There seems to be little doubt that Africa was the cradle of humanity, and that H. habilis was fairly widespread on the continent although not necessarily dominant for there were other related non human hominid forms on the scene, who were bigger and stronger. For these forms, the genus Australopithecus is applied. The classification hominid as a more general term is defined as a primate that walks erect, generally has similar sized teeth, grinds its food rather than tears it apart, has a parabolic shaped jaw, and a relatively flat face. Some estimates based on the few sites that are known, suggest that population densities were quite low for all hominids, perhaps no greater that modern day lions - one to two individuals per square mile. This was the picture you could paint for our ancestors for more than two million years living in tropical Africa. A little less than two million years ago, a new form began showing up on the scene, a form that not only made tools, but also learned to use fire and had developed a brain capacity of nine to eleven hundred cubic centimeters - H. erectus. Some believe a major reason for this evolutionary change was that the Earth at this time was undergoing a major climatic change in the northern hemisphere beginning about 2.7 million B.P. (before present). This resulted in a considerably colder and drier climate, and consequently a much reduced vegetation cover in tropical and subtropical Africa . Some feel this is related to an astronomical event caused by a combination of motion related irregularities in the Earth’s orbit and axial wobble. This northern hemisphere phenomena effects the south as well, due to related wind pattern shifts that significantly change precipitation amounts over broad areas. Some feel it was this kind of broad climatic change that spurred on the evolutionary process and forced, and perhaps actually “pumped”, the human population from the drying Africa, into the wetter climes of the colder, but wetter north. By 1.7 million years ago, H. erectus begins showing up in sites across northern Africa, and Asia, and perhaps even into the New World, a possibility we shall discuss later.

Although H. erectus has not been found in Europe, this form is wide spread over Asia, and the middle East. It was with H. erectus that a “humanness” began to manifest itself. These forms began making sophisticated stone tools requiring multiple impacts with a hammer stone, and they learned how to use fire. They also learned how to hunt and kill animals larger than themselves, in other words, they began to manipulate their environment with planning and cooperation. Although they possessed several advanced characteristics, they still had a small spinal cord, and a conical rib cage, both throwbacks to their australopithecine ancestors. Also, these humans, apparently knew nothing of art or carving, and seemed to have not developed a need for religion. Their life appears to have been ritualistic and utilitarian. However, the break through in the use of fire, cannot be overstated. Not only does it provide heat, but also light and smoke, and finally a way to soften up the toughest meats. All of these issues double in importance when the impact of these benefits is understood as a major step toward developing family life, and perhaps cooperative group living in something other than temporary shelters.

H. erectus remained the dominant hominid all across a broadening range for more than a million years, not losing dominance until about 4-500,000 years ago when our species, H. sapiens first came on the scene. The how and where of this occurrence is unresolved at this time. Some believe this more modern form also started in Africa (the earliest forms are found there) and spread to the rest of the world, others seem to feel this form evolved in several locations. The first European of this species is called H. sapiens neanderthalensis. H. sapiens neaderthalensis did develop a sense of religion and a brain size approaching modern humans, about 1400 cc. Molecular biologists using mitochondrial DNA felt they could mathematically predict the origin of the H. sapiens species if they could compare this extra nuclear DNA molecule, whose rate of change could be calculated by using the genetic banks from the women of many different living human populations. This work was done by biochemist Allan Wilson, and his student, Rebecca Cann at Berkley. Ms. Cann in 1993 concluded that they could trace back the ancestry of all modern humans to a single African female that lived 200,000 years ago. This ancestor has since been dubbed “Mitochondrial Eve”.

It is now known that the modern H. sapiens sapiens our version, first appeared at least 100,000 years ago. In this case the oldest known specimens come from caves in the Middle East, and in fact, alternating strata at several sites in the general area, indicate that Neanderthals and modern humans both inhabited the area, but not at the same time. The most recent Neanderthal forms that come from these caves have been dated at 40,000 years old, and from that point on only modern human remains are found. In Europe, the Neanderthal lineage continued until about 32,000 years ago, and modern forms have been dated from about 35,000 years, but some suggest that modern humans were living in Europe at least by 50,000 B.P.

For the purpose of this paper, the key question still remains, how to coordinate human migration to the New World, with the massive northern hemisphere glacial advances that occurred during the last two million years. This is key since it is assumed by most that those continental accumulations of ice were critical to the concept of worldwide sea level lowering. This lowering would have to be extensive enough to expose the Bering Straits, providing a land bridge between Siberia to Alaska, now called Beringia. All that seems to be needed at this point, is a group of adventurers to take advantage of this new continuous shore line and follow it to a whole new world. Assuming these peoples were enticed enough to trust their eagerness to see over the next hill, how did they do it, what path did they take? Is it to be assumed that they followed various herds of mammals, or did they hug the coast, living off of small animals, marine and otherwise, either at sea, or on the expanded land area that now makes up the continental shelf. It has been well documented that during the Pleistocene Epoch, (the last l.8 million years) there were several periods that were cold and wet enough to have stockpiled enough moisture as land based snow, to expose those continental shelves. This loss of water from the oceans is known to have dropped sea levels by over two hundred feet on several occasions, thus easily exposing the critical Beringia land mass making it as much as 1200 miles wide! An excellent passageway if you could stand the climate.

Although both forms of H. sapiens are known to have made it through all these rather unpleasant climatic changes in the northern climes of Europe and Asia, during the first half of the Epoch, so did their ancestor, H. erectus! The question still remains however, could those earliest new world adventurers have been H. erects, but if not H. erects, was it the Neanderthal branch or ours or both? Traditionalists think they know the answer, and not only who, but almost the month and day, sound familiar!? However, it is sites such as Calico that continue to slow their band wagon, as more and more evidence comes forth to suggest, humans were on this continent long before those dominating the profession are willing to admit.

II The Earliest Humans in the New World - the traditional view

The traditional position that has held forth since the l930’s states - “the earliest Americans were technologically specialized Upper Paleolithic big game hunters who migrated from the steppes of central Asia across the tundra of Beringia and southward onto the Great Plains near the end of the Wisconsin stadial”. It should be noted that the name ‘Wisconsin’ is used to designate the last major continental glacial advance in North America, since that is where the sediments associated with this advance were first recognized, and subsequently named.

Interestingly enough, in Europe during the latter half of the 19th century, scientists were all scurrying about hoping to be able to claim the “oldest” human form for their country. To be able to do so was considered a coup, for that country could then claim the cradle of at least western civilization and the preeminence of “their” people. In fact, the Pilt-down hoax was a direct result of this unfettered flurry of tainted pseudo-scientific activity which infected Europe at the time. It showed that even the proper British were willing to throw caution to the wind, if it allowed them to claim prominence in human history for Britannia. It might be interesting to note at this juncture, that European anthropologists for some time had been in a quandary as to how to explain the existence of any native peoples in the Americas. Some thought they must be the Lost Tribes of Israel. It was these kinds of problems and the dominance of European anthropologists at this time, that caused American anthropologists to back off from seeking comparable evidence on this continent. In fact the subject of who were the oldest inhabitants in the New World was almost taboo in main stream American anthropological circles until the mid nineteen twenties.

The current traditional view, still held by most North American anthropologists, is based on the belief that humans didn’t reach the New World until the last major glacial advance which ended about 10,000 years ago. These people believe l-3,000 years before the end of the Wisconsin Glaciation, the hunters of the Siberian arctic made the first attempts to traverse Beringia, coming down through what is now Canada between the two major ice masses of the time, the Laurentide continental glacier that was centered in eastern Canada, and reached as far south during early and middle Pleistocene as central Illinois and Kansas, and the Cordillera ice sheet, which was a consolidation of mountain glaciers along the Rocky Mountain chain. Prior to 1927 even this suggestion was considered heresy, for the preeminent anthropologist of the day, Dr. Ales Hrdlicka of the Smithsonian Institution, refused to entertain anyone’s suggestion that would propose anything older than 3,000 - 5,000 BP as the initial human contact on this continent. However, in 1927 a very finely fashioned fluted spear point was found in the rib cage of a mammoth in Clovis, New Mexico, suggesting strongly that a date closer to 10,000 years was more reasonable. With that break through, many more connections began coming to light relating humans to long extinct mammals. And with the advent of radio carbon dating, the pre 1927 arguments totally faded away. Since that time, nearly one hundred sites have been found all across both North and South America, and although these new finds have pushed the acceptable dating back to about 13,000 BP, the traditionalists continually refuse to accept any substantially older dates - almost by definition.

Some of the reasoning used to substantiate the 11,500 - 13,000 BP barrier is based on the linguistic assessment published by J.H. Greensburg in 1986, which concludes that all Native American languages can be divided into three groups. It is his belief that the earliest migration occurred at least 11,000 years ago. These were the Amerind speaking peoples who very successfully spread to all of South America and the United States, and most of eastern Canada. The second migration which he speculates occurred about a thousand years later, was by the Na-Dene speaking peoples who currently inhabit a good portion of northwest Canada and central Alaska. The third and last migration, dated at about 4,500 years ago was accomplished by the Escalute language group which currently lives along the Alaska coast and the islands of northern Canada, including the coastal margins of Greenland. Another line of study that has been recently reported by TG Schurr, suggests a much more complex migratory picture, with as many as four major migrations and several minor ones coming from southern Siberia, and eastern Asia including Mongolia and Japan among others. His work, also based on mitochrondial

DNA, however suggests that the migrations could have started as early as 48,000 years ago. This encouraging new technology provides an interesting embarkation point from which to seriously explore the mounting evidence that supports the heresy which suggests the existence of a pre-Clovis Amerindian population in the New World. This technology and the recent findings of non-Asian looking remains in Nevada and Washington indicate that we are still along way from understanding when, how, and who the first migrants to the New World actually were. It is becoming very evident that the minds of those trying to unravel this mystery must be kept open to multiple possibilities. Even tens of thousands of years ago, human beings were very complex creatures, with amazing capabilities and imaginations, we must learn not to underestimate them.

III. The Earliest Humans in the New World - the minority view, a new paradigm

One of the reasons that it has been so hard for anyone to get new discovery information accepted by the fathers of the discipline is that American standards for proof are much more demanding than they are in the rest of the world. In this country, for data to be accepted, it must have a clearly identifiable geologic context, definite artifacts or human remains, and substances amenable to dating by “reliable methods”. Whereas in Europe, Louis Leaky indicated that it is not necessary to find “a living floor” sort of proof, rather to be accepted as solid evidence of human habitation, all that is needed is a non random flaking pattern, unifacial core tools, and perhaps altered bone. Based on his experience, he had no qualms stating that the materials found at the Calico site represented good evidence of human habitation. At many New world pre-Clovis sites, these criteria are present, and in many there also are radio carbon dates and in some cases datable mammal remains to support the proposed age. What researchers, that suggest dates beyond the current model, are strongly proposing is that the very nature of science demands that any discipline needs to maintain a healthy prospective and outlook toward alternate hypotheses based on new evidence. It is only in this way that new models can reach the light of peer review and subsequent testing. Just not being compatible with the existing model, no matter how long standing, is not adequate reason to dismiss new concepts.

One of the problems facing those trying to get pre-Clovis dates accepted, is that the discipline has been so accepting of the 11,500 - 13,000 year time table, that few would even consider looking at older sediments. In fact, if they were to suggest the possibility of older habitations, they very likely would be ostracized by the their peers, and their work would be labeled as “equivocal” at best. The new breed of anthropologists often refer to the traditionalists as the “Clovis Mafia”. One California traditionalist has stated that the possibility of humans in the New World is “kept alive by a small cadre of patron zealots”. He goes on to say that we cannot accept the Calico findings “because it would create a gap of 2000 centuries in the New World archaeology record”. Such logic is hardly based on scientific reasoning, again it is condemnation by definition and negative evidence, rather than probing scientific endeavors. He doesn’t mention that he regularly dismisses all other suggested pre-Clovis dates that fall into that 2000 century gap.

The new paradigm that is being proposed by several current non-traditionalists is that the earliest migrations could have taken place during any one of the several glacial advances during the Pleistocene, including 70,000, 110,000, 175,000 years ago, or even earlier. It suggests that these peoples were not necessarily hunters, following large mammal herds across the glacial ice fields and tundra. Instead, they could have been foragers and gatherers that traveled down the coast by land and or sea. Their source of food would have been marine life and small mammals and birds that inhabited the shore / near shore areas. If only those off shore terraces, which were then exposed could be explored. This theory, which Leakey himself alluded to in his trip here in l970, was suggested seriously by K. R. Fladmark in 1979, and by John Alsoszatai-Petheo and Alan Bryan in 1986 in separate papers. They felt that these people were a “status quo” people who were not concerned with innovation. Their migration was not to dominate the new environment, but to become an integral part of the existing ecology. Therefore, no dramatic technological changes occurred until much later when the climate began changing dramatically, and survival of the fittest and intelligence became the mother of invention. This theory suggests why the early North American sites contain mostly unifacial tools. These relatively simple tools are commonly found in eastern Asia, especially China and Siberia. Unfortunately, it is these very unifacial tools that American anthropologists invariably question as being human made, even though in all other parts of the world they are readily accepted as the product of human hands. Certainly they are rather primitive, but they have been found in undeniably human sites. Their unwillingness to consider these objects as tools, permits them to stand by their definition that the earliest humans in the New World were talented bifacial tool makers. Therefore, any evidence to the contrary is omitted by their definition, which leads to inevitable circular reasoning, and an impossible situation for the development of new thought.

As noted, in the New World there have been almost one hundred sites reported with dates exceeding 11,500 B.P. The twenty five most interesting are shown on the map (see Figure 1). Naturally these early age sites are difficult to find and interpret. First of all, in this country, few bother to look! It is also important to understand that the populations were quite low, and these people lived in small isolated groups of no more than ten to twenty people. They were constantly on the move, with the only possible evidence of their presence in an area being the remains of their kills, discarded stone tools, debitage (flakes produced by striking the core rock), perhaps a hearth, and if you are very lucky, a burial. Actually anthropologists are lucky to find any evidence of their existence at all. Their impact on the present or future was the furthest thing on their minds - rather it was the next meal, basically how best to stay alive. We will now switch our attention to one of the most appealing early human sites in California, right in our own back yard, the Calico site on the shores of Pleistocene Lake Manix near the town of Yermo.

IV A Focus On Pleistocene Lake Manix and the Calico Early Human Site

The History of Lake Manix

Prior to the Pleistocene, this area we now call the high desert, was relatively flat, with a slighly westward slope, and all existing basins were east-west in their alignment. In the Pliocene and very early Pleistocene (ten to one million years ago), southern California experienced a major uplift that created the San Bernardino and San Gabriel transverse ranges and related structural elements, which as a result, formed at least one hundred and ten smaller basins with internal drainage (which means no outlet). These ranges now form the southern boundary of the Great Basin (see Figure 2). The Manix Basin, twenty five miles east of Barstow, is bordered by the Cave and Cady Mountains on the east, the Paradise and Alvord Mountains on the north, the Calico Mountains on the west and the Newberry Mountains on the south. All of these 4 - 5,000 foot mountains are youthful, and in large part, are of volcanic origin. In fact, some of the most recent lava flows in the Amboy area are only a few thousand years old. The Mojave River, which now primarily drains the western portion of the San Bernardino Mountains, developed in early to mid Pleistocene, but initially flowed only as far as the Barstow area. By 500,000 years ago climatic changes resulted in considerably greater precipitation for our area which meant water began to accumulate in embryonic Lake Manix (see Figure 3). The eventual high stands of the lake were at 280,000, 188,000, 31,000, 21,000 and 14,000 years ago. At about 13,800 years ago the river cut through a natural dike at Afton Canyon, which rapidly lowered the lake level 394 feet and in so doing, created Lake Mojave twenty miles to the northeast. Today, the Mojave River is primarily an underground stream that terminates in Silver and Soda Lakes near Baker.

Lake Manix was one of the most appealing sites for early humans in this region because it had all the qualities needed to sustain human life - a stable water supply due to fairly consistent precipitation in the surrounding mountainous areas, a reasonable climate even during glacial maxima, and a very rich plant and animal biota. It has been estimated that for Lake Manix to be maintained at its highest water level it would take as much as ten times the current rainfall (which is about 3.6 inches per year). When the lake was at its maximum it drained 3615 square miles and had a surface area of 91 square miles, with a depth of 492 feet (see Figure 4).

As indicated earlier, the climate in the region during the last glaciation (14,000 - 22,500 years ago), and probably during each of the glacial maxima was much cooler and wetter than today. The mountains had some mountain glaciers and many intermountain basins had shallow pluvial lakes. This climate lasted until about 8,000 years ago when warmer and drier weather became the norm, leading to what we experience today. The land during the latter half of the Pleistocene was dotted with a mosaic of woodlands and grasslands. The trees during the glacial maximum were mostly pinion pines, scrub oaks, and juniper in the mountains, and live oaks and grasslands in the valleys. The fauna was quite magnificent, with a mega fauna rivaled today only by the savanna of Africa. Mammoths and mastodons were present, as were musk oxen, antelope, bison, camels, horses, sloths, and their counter part carnivores, including dire wolves, saber toothed cats and very large lions and bears, all of which are part of the seventy seven species that have since become extinct. Being the southern most lake in the Great Basin system of Pleistocene lakes, Lake Manix is often described as having had a Mediterranean climate during the summers, with very wet winters. The fauna is very similar to the well known Rancholabrean tar pit assemblage in Los Angeles, and the recently excavated fossil assemblage near Hemet, including lions 25% larger than the African lions of today, and a short faced bear which roamed all across the continent, and stood five feet tall at the shoulder! Obviously the food chain of this environment was quite impressive and bountiful. This truly was a hospitable environment for the early human inhabitants, whenever they arrived.

As mentioned above, Lake Manix is believed to have formed about half a million years ago. The initial sediments as would be expected were stream deposits made up of coarse to fine sediment from the surrounding uplifted areas. Although they vary a great deal, the maximum thickness of the Lake Manix sediments has been measured by George Jefferson at about 120 feet, and has been designated the Manix Formation. As an interesting side light, Jefferson’s study estimated that the deep water portion of the sediments accumulated at a rate of about one foot in 3,870 years. This determination was possible because of several radio metric dates that were obtained which gave boundaries for a given thickness of sediment. Although the level of the lake did fluctuate considerably over its lifetime, for a good part of that period it was a very deep and productive supplier of food for those living near its shores and marshes. The youngest sediments that have been found have been dated at about 17-18,000 years old. These dates have been determined by the use of uranium - thorium dating of ground water produced calcareous deposits ( which contain particles of uranium ) found associated with the sediment. It is very interesting to note that Fred Budinger, while doing his master’s thesis in the early 1990’s found a unifacially worked artifact in these lake sediments at a depth of 45 feet, seventeen feet below a volcanic ash bed that was preserved in the lake and dated at 185,000 B.P.! This is a very exciting find which adds a positive perspective to the growth of the new paradigm.

The nature and content of the sediments that form the alluvial fan on which the Calico site is situated, have been examined by many scientists, with various conclusions being drawn. However, the majority seem to feel that the sediments came out of Mule Canyon in the Calico Mountains, beginning about 200,000 years ago. This age was determined by dating a carbonate ‘calcrete’ material that has formed on pebbles in the lower portion of the Manix Formation. Since that starting date however, it has been suggested that major faulting occurred which could have moved this fan away from its source. The conclusion is that this now isolated fan, has been heavily eroded and in fact none of the original surface materials are any longer present. Currently the fan which is called the Yermo Formation is between ten and thirty five feet thick. It is made of normal alluvial fan sediment ranging from fine sand to boulders, and is very heavily indurated, making digging in it very tough work. There is a rough upward fining of the sediment, suggesting that the region was experiencing a gradual change from a semi-arid to arid climate (see Figure 5).

The History of the Calico Early Human Site

The Calico Mountain area has been of interest to non Indian inhabitants of our County for almost two hundred years. That interest was commonly based on the financial gain that could be realized from the minerals that were anticipated to be components of the mostly igneous rocks that makeup this small chain. Although gold and silver were sought, the greatest value has since been determined to be in its store of rare earth minerals, which can be more valuable than gold. The beautiful colors that gave the chain its name are a testimony to the presence of these rare minerals. The Calico Ghost Town a few miles to the west of the Early Human Site bears witness to that once booming mining phase of the Calico’s history.

A long time friend of the San Bernardino County Museum, Ritner Sayles, was the first to discover Indian surface materials on the alluvial fans that skirt the Calicos in the early 1940s. He also was a friend of Gerry Smith, then a teacher in the Bloomington School system, and beginning in the 1930’s they began exploring the Manix basin. In 1942 he took Gerry ( then also a member of the San Bernardino County Historical Society) and Ruth ‘Dee’ Simpson then of the Southwest Museum in Los Angeles to the area of the Calico hills, in search of old Indian campsites. While there they met Joel Hauser and his sons who were looking for rocks they could take home to cut and polish. Gerry noticed that some of the specimens the Hauser’s had found had percussion scars and were very likely early Indian artifacts. Hauser showed them where he had found the artifacts, and Gerry and Ruth realized very shortly that the area was in reality “a quarry workshop of significance”. However, it wasn’t until 1952 that further serious archeological activity was directed to the site. At this time, Dee was still employed by the Southwest Museum and helped organize, with Gerry, the Lake Manix Survey. This was accomplished by enlisting the help of the Archeological Survey Association of Southern California, an organization of amateur and professional archeologists. These surveys covered several desert dry lakes, and included large portions of the Lake Manix Basin including the Calico fans. It was during this period that Dee took a six month leave from the Southwest to work with Gerry at the site. However, after only three months, she felt a conflict of interest and quit the Southwest Museum when offered a job by Gerry as the Curator of Anthropology at the newly formed San Bernardino County Museum, so that she could make a concerted field investigation which they both felt had great potential. Dee felt that she would be able to conclude the study in two to three years, but as many of you know, it is still going strong after more than forty years, and is far from being finished.

It was during this survey period (1952 -1956) that those working in Dee’s portion of the survey, which included the Calico Hills, began finding a great deal of Indian material. The materials found at the lowest elevations near the modern river channels were obviously only a few hundred years old. As they worked their way up the slopes of the Calicos, more intermediate aged artifacts were found, but when they got to the upper most shore line (1780’) they found distinctly different kinds of tools. At its highest stand, Lake Manix reached within only 420 feet of the Calico workshop site. It was at this ancient shore line that Dee found surface artifacts associated with calcareous tufa, a spongy fresh water deposit and clam shells, that were subsequently dated by a UCLA laboratory at about 19,000 years old. Dee subsequently described these tools as the Lake Manix Lithic Industry. This is a significant date in itself, for it too goes far beyond the 11,500 - 13,000 year bench mark engraved in stone by the traditionalists, therefore, this assemblage also has suffered the fate of being dismissed as an assemblage of leftovers of a Native Americans workshop of recent vintage. However, these tools were larger, more crude, and were found with a lot of what looked like quarry blanks and rejects, in other words it looked like a classic workshop of a people with limited technology. Some artifacts showed skilled knapping, but all were hand held tools, and no projectile points at all were in evidence. It turned out that this was the same general area that Ritner Sayles had taken Gerry and Dee ten years earlier. And the interesting thing was that almost all of the stone material could be identified as having come from the local Calico Mountains - some jasper, but mostly another type of siliceous rock called chalcedony. Perhaps most exciting of all, was that these surface collected tools had a Lower to Mid Paleolithic look to them (35,000 to 500,000 B.P).- something American anthropology was not ready to embrace since no such culture was supposed to exist in our isolated quarter of the world.

It was at this juncture that the story takes a major turn. In 1956 Dee attended a meeting in Philadelphia of the International Archeology Conference. She had taken some of the recently discovered unifacial tools and showed them a variety of people. One of those shown the artifacts was Father Worms, an Australian priest familiar with aborigine technology. He was impressed with the materials and introduced Dee to a number of European archeologists at the meetings. Later that year she also attended an archeology meeting in Denver. Here too she took her precious stones, and again she received a good reception from a Dr. Kenneth Oakley of the British Museum of Natural History, and Dr. Marie Worthington of the Denver Museum of Natural History. They both insisted that Dee needed to travel to Europe to get a good background in European prehistory, in particular the Paleolithic technologies. Consequently, in 1958, Dee did travel to Europe and was invited by Dr. Oakley to base her visit at the British Museum. She visited several museums in England and was about to leave for home when Dr. Oakley told her that Louis Leakey had just arrived in town and that she should really try to show him her artifacts. In her own words, Dee describes her visit with Leakey:

“At first I was told that there was no time to meet with me, but then I was told that he could see me for five minutes. My appointment at the Museum was for 9:00 a.m., but I arrived at 8:00. Dr. Leakey didn’t arrive until 1:00 p.m., and at first the secretary said that he wouldn’t have time to see me after all. But at 1:30 p.m. she came in and told me that I could get my five minutes. The five minutes lasted until 5:30 p.m. when the janitor notified us that he would have to close the museum. Dr. Leakey came to the hotel that evening and we talked until 2:00 a.m. We had a valuable discussion of the most recent excavations in Africa and my work in the American deserts. I shall long remember the perplexed facial expressions of our English waiters as they served dinner that evening and saw us tearing bread and rolls to resemble artifacts and using the silverware to demonstrate flaking techniques.”.

Instead of going home, Dee then was convinced to go to Paris to the Museum of Man and met Pat Kelly a chief researcher at the Museum. This person coordinated the remainder of her European trip and worked with Dee at the Museum teaching her flint knapping techniques. Her visit to Europe included sites and museums in Denmark and Spain in addition to those in France. Nowhere during her journeys in Europe did she experience skepticism concerning the human crafted nature of her artifacts. Although Dee probably did not realize it at the time, upon her return, she very likely had a better knowledge of Paleolithic technology than 90% of the anthropologists in America. And even fewer were interested in applying that understanding to sites and lilthic industries found on this continent.

In the ensuing years, Dee spent a great deal of time at the site, and was encouraged by Leakey’s continued interest. He convinced Dee to begin looking below the surface, and told her that if these Paleolithic artifacts could be found in place, he felt he could find funding for a major excavation. Very near the present site, Dee was attracted to an excavation for a bentonite mine that had been made by Glen Gunn, an individual with mining rights in the area. When Dee examined the site she was thrilled to find several artifacts several feet below the surface. Mr. Gunn was very cooperative at this point and often would stop and watch Dee work the site. Shortly after this discovery, Dee learned that Leakey was going to be in the area in the spring of 1963 to give a lecture at the University of California at Riverside. Dee took advantage of this exciting development and took Leakey to the site for the first time that spring. He looked over the area and soon decided where Dee should begin the excavation . The site he choose was twenty five feet square on the side of the fan where he felt the overburden would be the least. Dee agreed to begin the work. On his way back to Africa, Leakey stopped at the offices of the National Geographical Society to solicit funds for the project. In July, some concern was voiced by the Secretary of the Society, after which Gerry went to Washington to resolve their questions. Gerry impressed the Secretary with a well worked out plan and a list of respected scientists who would actually be working on the project. The next spring, Dr. Dale Stewart of the Smithsonian came out from the Society to do an on site evaluation. In the spring of 1964 the Society awarded a $7,000 grant and asked that Louis Leakey be the overall Project Director, with Dee Simpson as the Field Supervisor, Thomas Clements the Project Geologist, and Gerry Smith to serve as Project Administrator. Many volunteers were drawn from the Archeological Survey Association and with a permit in place from the Bureau of Land Management to the County Museum, the project was ready to get under way, and did so in November of 1964. It perhaps should be mentioned that Mary Leaky, Louis’ wife, came to the site in l963, but never supported the effort, in fact was strongly opposed to her husband’s involvement. This could have been the case because Leaky was considered an interloper in this country by many anthropologists, and perhaps Mary was trying to deflect criticism of him and their related work in Africa. Nevertheless, her opinions were not going to dampen the enthusiasm of this group, including her husband - the search would definitely go on.

This initial crew were all amateurs, but very dedicated to the task. They assembled at the site on November 1st, 1964 to clean the surface of the spot Leaky had designated several months before. They marked out five foot squares, one for each volunteer. Dr. Leaky demanded that each worker use small hand tools, such as dental picks, linoleum knives, small hammers and chisels, and nut picks and brushes. They were not to miss even small flakes. This type of excavation is very tedious, and it was common that the workers would be able to do no more than three inches a day under these circumstances. In the first forty eight inches, they were able to detect A, B, and C soil horizons, that later, Dr. Roy Shlemon, a geomorphologist was able to conclude had been developing for at least 80,000 years. At this depth a major change occurred in the character of the sediment, from here on, the sediment was line cemented making the work much tougher, and tool sharpening became a regular evening chore. The good thing about this new sediment, is that for the first time tools were being found!! By Christmas of that year, the “collection” was made up of two tools, which were considered flakes used for scraping. One of the critical factors relating to whether or not these tools could have been washed into the site from some other area, in other words not original or local, was answered by a close examination of the sediment. There was absolutely no evidence of rounding, or preferred orientation that would suggest running water brought them into the area - they were made and dropped where they were found.

Within six weeks, the visitations began, including geologists, anthropologists, and even politicians, for instance, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors. The scientific team decided to dig a “speed pit” to determine the depth to the bottom of the formation. This was done and found to be at least thirty feet. With this information, it became evident that the project would take much more time than they thought, and certainly would exhaust the three month excavation money that had been supplied by the National Geographic Society. Several prominent scientists visited the site in the next few months including people from U. C. Berkley, the University of Washington, a flaking expert, and geologists from Cal Tech, and the University of Arizona. All were impressed enough to support the continuation of the project. In March of 1965, Leakey returned with Dr. Mat Sterling of the Smithsonian. Leaky was very impressed with several of the specimens, calling one a definite hand ax, and Sterling said he was at least 85% convinced. That same month, Dee went to Washington herself to show the Society and the archeological staff of the Smithsonian her best specimens. Based on this visit, and the strong support of Leakey and Sterling, the Society granted the project an additional $12,000 so that work could continue through the 1966 season.

Work continued at the site for the next five years, although the National Geographic Society ended its involvement after the fourth season, the program was able to sustain itself with at least partially paid staff due to awards from both the University of Pennsylvania and the newly formed Leakey Foundation, with three to five thousand dollar amounts coming from a few others. Highlights from these additional five seasons included continued visits by Leakey and other respected scientists. Near the end of the second year, The Society sent out a team to inspect the efforts which resulted in a good give and take session with the on-site group. The conclusions arrived at that meeting, were that they were doing a good job, and that the excavations should continue. They also indicated that it would be very wise to establish one or two control pits at some distance from the main pit to determine if the materials from these localities were in fact different (meaning no artifacts). If in fact that turned out to be the case, the conclusion that the main pit results represented a workshop area would be greatly strengthened. A significant grant of almost $43,000 came at the beginning of the third season from the Society. The major effort for this season was the start and completion of the two test pits. These test pits produced only three specimens out of over 11,000 pieces of siliceous material collected, that Leakey considered to be human crafted. Although the Society had been willing to call the Calico Project successful if these control pits came up “empty”, when push came to shove, they were still not willing to declare openly that the project was a success. By the end of the third year, Leakey had selected 400 specimens as human artifacts, half tools and half flakes. One other highlight during the third year was the first, and only, preserved fragment of organic material, pieces of a mammoth tusk at a depth of about twelve feet. Unfortunately, the tusk material was too old to be tested for radio active carbon.

As indicated above, the fourth season was the last supported by the Society. They contributed $28,500 this final year for a total over four years of over $71,000, not insignificant for the times, and especially since the concept of humans here prior to 11,500 B.P. was not popular, nor was the idea that American grant money was going to support an English rival. The other significant event for the year was the start of a second Master Pit, which was placed forty feet to the northwest. This pit also produced significant numbers of human made artifacts, although there were many more flakes and fewer tools. Dr. F. Clark Howell of the University of Chicago was a visitor in the spring of 1968 and made the analogy that the flakes and their pattern is comparable to the shavings one would find on the floor of a carpenters shop, pointing out that the pattern and the distance away from the object being crafted is significant. There was a important non archeological contribution to the effort in the fourth season, that was the roofing of the two Master Pits. To quote Dr. Walter Schuiling, who is writing a detailed history of the Calico Project, “The roof of Master Pit II was built at ground level, but the roof over Master Pit I required greater engineering skill, with a sheet metal and timber roof supported by 45 foot power poles (see Figure 6).

It was also during the fourth season that news of the site began to leak out to the press and other organizations, which the Society was not pleased about. All of the secrecy that the Society was imposing on the project was causing significant frustration for the crew, especially Dee. What leaked information produced (often inaccurate) was suspicion within the profession, which certainly didn’t help the cause. Dee had hoped to publish a preliminary announcement in NATURE magazine in 1967, but was thwarted again by the Society. However, since their financial involvement ended in the summer of 1968, an article authored by Leakey, Clements. and Simpson was published in SCIENCE that summer.

One rather large snag developed during the spring of 1968, that was whether or not the group had the authority to continue to excavate on the site since a mining permit had previously been awarded to Glen Gunn. The thought was to offer Mr. Gunn a financial compensation to acquire the mining rights he possessed. The work had been progressing on the basis of a 1964 signed contract with Mr. Gunn that called for a dollar a day payment. In this case, the Nature Conservancy had offered to pay Mr. Gunn $20,000 for the mining rights. His reply was that he accepted the concept, but he wanted to be compensated for all thirty one mining rights he owned, and his asking price was $25,000,000! When Dee, Gerry and Tom Clements almost laughed at his response, he became offended and ordered the site to be vacated by May 31st. The group’s response was to appeal to the BLM to invalidate his claim and issue the permit to the San Bernardino County Museum. After a hearing and much rankling, the BLM handed down its decision in May of l969 that Mr. Gunn’s permits were null and void or abandoned, and his action against the group were dismissed. Now work could go on.

Perhaps one of the most exciting finds (although now in question), during the entire history of the excavation was the “circle of stones” that Rosemary Ritter found in Master Pit II at twenty one feet in December of 1968. The size and shape of the rocks as well as their placement suggested to everyone that the circle could be a hearth (see Figure 7). Specimens of one of the stones from the circle were sent to Dr. Vaslav Bucha in Prague by Dr. Rainer Berger of UCLA. Using a spinner magnetometer, Bucha determined that one end of the stone had been heated more than the other, however, Berger could find no evidence of carbon on the stone, therefore, questions concerning the hearth still remain.

As an example of the paranoia that existed within the profession in North America at the time, when thirty seven casts of some of the best artifacts were sent to the Smithsonian in 1969, Dee received a glowing letter about their authenticity, a portion of which said: “We are delighted to see the specimens for they look so much like the kind of chipped artifacts that come from sites in southern Brazil, northern Argentina, and Uruguay and other parts of South America. Anyone who doubts these are artifacts is making a grave error.” But when Leakey made pubic mention of their reaction, their enthusiasm rapidly diminished. They sent another letter to Dee stating that those words were written “in confidence”.

In the following years, articles began appearing in a variety of non peer reviewed publications, such as SCIENCE DIGEST, and the 1970 BRITANNIA YEARBOOK. This produced another influx of visitors, and some strong interest from the University of Pennsylvania, in particular Dr. John Witthoft a lithic specialist. His support of the authenticity of many of the specimens resulted continued financial support from the University. Leakey too was eager to expose their work to a broader scientific community and began working in1968 to bring together a prestigious field of archaeologists and lithic specialists for a symposium on the site. It was finally agreed to hold a Conference at San Bernardino Valley College in October of 1970.

The Conference was held at the College on the 22nd to the 25th of October. It was a very significant conference for it brought together more than one hundred scientists from seven foreign countries - France, Great Britain, Venezuela, Mexico, Canada, Australia, and Kenya. The Conference was supported financially by the Louis Leakey Foundation, the University of Pennsylvania, and the County Museum. The attendees came to the Conference for several reasons, first the proposal of Simpson and Leakey that there was good evidence for humans in North America tens of thousands of years before the traditional line dictated, was a bit astounding; second that the human form that made that journey could have been H. erectus, the ancestor of our species, or the early H. sapiens which certainly caused a few eye brows to rise; and third, it was the major protagonist of the American traditionalist line, Louis Leakey that had come over to the United States to point out the error of their position that had been dogma in this country for forty years. These features resulted in this conference bringing together the largest number of multidisciplinarian scientists and historians that were ever assembled to review the findings of a single archeological site. Mary Leakey did not attend.

The opening remarks were made by Gerry, as he welcomed the attendees and introduced several distinguished guests. Leakey then presented his general remarks, laying the ground work for the possibility that humans could have made the trans-Beringia journey long before 10,000 - 13,000 years ago. He concluded his remarks by stating “I believe that from this weekend on, a new chapter will be written in the prehistory of America”.

This was a very bold statement, which unfortunately has yet to be realized. This delay of acceptance and proof, is probably the exact problem his wife Mary was afraid would develop, and ultimately hurt his reputation, and perhaps her’s as well. After a tour of the site on the second day, they all got together again for their second general session on the 24th. Again, Leakey began the session, with his conclusions as to why the site deserved to considered a pre-Clovis site. Dee followed with her own assessment of the site, including the history of the site. The third paper was given by Tom Clements, the project geologist, suggesting that the fan was at least 70,000 years old. The next presentation was by Dr. Berger of UCLA who spoke on the potential that the “circle of stones” was in fact a hearth. The remainder of the day was spent at the Museum’s laboratory examining the artifacts and hearing evidence that these objects were human made. The final session was again back at Valley College where a lively discussion was chaired by Dr. Howell of Berkley. At this point some in the audience suggested that the fan was at least 500,000 years old and therefore way too old for humans to be contemporaries of its formation. At this time, the state of the art for determining fan age was still quite subjective, therefore, everyone’s opinion, within reason, was as valid as the next. The other major issue concerning the authenticity of the artifacts being human crafted, received more acceptance. Dr. Glynn Issac from Berkley made the following statement: “We saw yesterday a very impressive array of artifact-like objects. No archeologist with experience of fractured stones could be anything but impressed with this array. It really is a singular collection. A great many of the objects would arouse no comment if they were found in normal archaeological situations--”.

The general consensus was that the stones more than likely were human crafted, but to suggest that the site represented evidence of humans in North America tens or even hundreds of thousands of years before the currently accepted date was far from considered proven. This, of course, was a great disappointment to the team, especially Leakey. He probably should have realized, as perhaps his wife had, that he had taken on a much bigger issue than the evidence at Calico, it was the U.S. Archaeological establishment he was confronting, and they probably were not displeased with the opportunity to discount the bold position he had taken with such zest. However, undaunted, at the press conference on the last day, Leakey proclaimed to the world that the material taken from the Calico site represented strong evidence that humans had inhabited North America long before previously thought. Unfortunately for Calico and the anthropological world, Louis Leakey died in 1972, and with him went much of the national and international focus on the site, even though it continues today, with good results, as will be noted below. The site almost became part of the County Park system, but that effort was stymied by the passage of Prop. 13.

V. The Evidence for and Against a Pre-Clovis Age for the Calico Site

As has been stated in several passages above, the traditional line for North American anthropologists is that humans did not venture onto this continent until eleven to thirteen thousand years ago. They were supposedly hunters who followed the large mammal herds across the Beringia straits into the New World. During that particular time period, they were fortunate enough to find a convenient corridor through Canada between two massive ice sheets (something like Moses coming through the Red Sea as it parted). These were modern humans who had developed a very sophisticated hunting tool kit, including finely flaked bifacial fluted projectile points that today we call Clovis and Folsum. They also had the amazing ability to disburse through out both continents of the New World almost simultaneously, in fact in some cases seem to have reached South America before they inhabited North America, I guess they dashed right through with out stopping.

In light of the growing evidence to the contrary, those that continue to stand by this logic cite little evidence to support their view, but instead feel contented to mostly ignore work to the contrary, or off handily reject it as incomplete. Their arguments, when given, fall into only a few categories. With only cursory investigation, they nearly always find either the data flawed, tainted, sloppy, untried, not detailed enough, or in the case of whether or not the artifacts are human crafted, a product of mother nature. When they are asked to demonstrate evidence to support their criticisms, none appears, for they feel silence is the best defense. A good example is the commonly heard argument that the Calico artifacts are geofacts, meaning they were produced by geologic forces such as rushing water, mud flows, or heating and cooling of the rocks. If unusual markings are found on bones, suspicion is cast by saying that the marks could be made by digestive actions in a carnivore’s stomach. And if only a few bones in a grouping show unusual markings, they prefer to call it fortuitous, again to be ignored. Never is any scientific study cited that would indicate such alternatives actually have been observed or reproduced. But the dispersion is cast, and the traditionalists hope those shaking the standard will quietly go away. When all else fails, the complaint is that there just isn’t enough evidence or incidences to totally rewrite the text books, the gap is always too great to accept H. erectus as the adventurer, so they choose to ignore it all.

So what is the growing group of those proposing a new paradigm to do, what methods, and lines of evidence can they develop to finally break the 11,500 ‘ 13,000 year barrier?

The first answer is not to stop looking beyond the Clovis barrier, to not lose sight of the fact that they are looking for very elusive evidence, left by a being that was very present oriented, and gave little thought for the future. These early adventurers were few in number, had no permanent residences, and did not create things likely to be preserved for discovery by future generations. They were constantly on the move, perhaps until they found compatible surroundings, such as a large lake with fresh potable water, an abundant fauna and flora, and a reasonable climate even during the winter months (and at glacial maxima) a lake like Lake Manix! What evidence does Calico offer to support such a conclusion? Lets look at the work of the past forty years.

1) At the direction of Louis Leakey and Dee Simpson, the Calico operation has produced over 800 artifacts accepted by a dozen or more professional anthropologists, and as many as 60,000 flakes, often found in distinctive patterns suggesting debitage produced by a tool making process.

2) These artifacts are not widely distributed, but rather have been found in concentrated areas, and show increased quantity with depth.

3) This concentration has been carefully mapped by the digging of twenty two pits and trenches, including two control pits that were dug to better define the dimensions of the workshop site.

4) Evidence for human crafting includes well documented flaking patterns, evidence for retouching, typical bulb scars, and wear patterns on mostly unifacial but also some bifacial hand tools.

5) The tool kit includes the following: scrapers, gravers, reamers, denticulated cutting tools, hand axes, chopping tools, cleavers, picks, anvils, hammer stones, pecking stones, and blades.

6) Some of the stone material used for tools, is an exotic lace agate, not found anywhere within miles of the site, it had to be transported to the site.

7) A circle of stones found at 21 feet in Pit II, looked an awful lot like a hearth, however, the proof for this conclusion has been questioned.

8) Two Russian scientists, who have worked archeological sites in Siberia with accepted dates between 280-300,000 years old, feel Calico has definite merit, and accepted the artifacts as comparable.

9) Fred Budinger has recovered an excellent unifacial artifact from Lake Manix sediments, 17 feet below a radiometrically dateable ash fall - suggesting a it was dropped in the lake over 200,000 years ago.

10) Good radiometric dates have given a beginning date for the Calico fan at about 200,000 years ago.

11) A second form of dating called thermoluminescence was conducted on a small 5 cm. cube of sediment taken at a depth of 18 feet in Pit I. This sample was run in a laboratory in Nottingham, England in 1999. The result which only came back recently indicated an age of the sample of  135,000 years, in perfect harmony with previous dating efforts.

Where does this leave Calico and the hunt for the truth about when humans first came to the New World? Regardless what the hard liners say, the evidence is mounting all over these two continents. Although most of the pre 13,000 year dates only go back a few thousand years, several suggest tens of thousands, and at least two others, one in Mexico and another in Brazil propose dates equal to the findings at Calico. The crack in the door is widening, a light is shining through, and our site, our people, our Museum are still in the thick of the formidable effort to solve the mystery, and it will more than likely happen soon, as the confidence of those not afraid to look deeper continues to increase. Whether or not the traditionalists at this juncture are ready to accept the concept, the work of Louis Leakey, Dee Simpson, and Gerry Smith who stuck their necks out early, and that of the current researchers, such as Fred Budinger and Roy Schlemon, demonstrates that there is a growing core in this field that are confident that their persistence will eventually be recognized and rewarded, I do believe. All anyone associated with the Calico site have ever wanted was echoed by Dee in her final letter to her friends and compatriots which was read at her memorial ceremony, “I sought the truth, I practiced the truth”, what more can one hope to have said about one’s life or efforts.

 References

l) Alsozatai-Petheo, J., 1986, An alternative paradigm for the study of early man in the new world, in Bryan, A., ed., New evidence for the Pleistocene peopling of the Americas, Univ. of Maine Printing Office, p. 15-26.

2) Begley, R., and Murr, A., 1999, The first Americans, in Newsweek, V 133  no. 17, p 50-57.

3) Berger, R., 1979, An isotopic and magnetic study of the Calico site, in Schuiling, W., ed., Pleistocene man at the Calico site, San Bernardino Co. Mus. Assoc., Quart. V. 26, no. 4, p 31-34.

4) Boaz, N., 1997, Eco Homo, Harper Collins, New York, New York, 278p.

5) Bonnichsen, R., and Sorg, M., 1986, Organizing research on the peopling of the Americas, in Bryan, A., ed., New evidence for the Pleistocene peopling of the Americas, Univ. of Maine Printing Offiice, p. 357-360.

6) Bryan, A., 1986, Paleoamerican prehistory as seen from South America, in Bryan, A., ed., New evidence for the peopling of the Americas, Univ. of Maine Printing Office, p. 3-14.

7) Budinger, F., 1992, Targeting early man sites in the western U.S.: an assessment of the Manix type section, Central Mojave desert, CA, (MS thesis), Cal. State San Bernardino, Department of Anthropology, 229p.

8) Budinger, F., 1999, The Calico early man project at thirty five: review and suggested future directions, (unpublished paper), 12p.

9) Budinger, F., 2000, A tribute, in The Calico Report, The Friends of Calico Newsletter, Spring edition, 2p.

10) Leakey, L., 1972, Pleistocene man in America, in Schuiling, W., ed., Pleistocene man at Calico: Report on the 1970 Conference, San Bernardino Co. Mus. Assoc., p 9-16.

11) Moratto, M. 1984, California archaeology, Academy Press, Orlando FL, 757 p.

12) Scarre, C., 1993, Timeline of the ancient world: a visual chronology from the origins of life to A.D. 1500, Smithsonian Institution Press, 256 p.

13) Schuiling, W., 1979, Pleistocene man at Calico: an introduction, in Schuiling W., ed., Pleistocene man at Calico, San Bernardino Co. Mus. Assoc., Quart. V 26, no. 4, p 7-8.

14) Schuiling, W., The search for Pleistocene man at Calico: a retrospective, (unpublished manuscript).

15) Schurr, T., 2000, Mitochondrial DNA and the peopling of the new world, Amer. Scientist, V. 88, no. 3, p 246-253.

16) Simpson, R., 1979, The Calico Mountains archaeological project, in Schuiling, W., ed., Pleistocene man at Calico, San Bernardino Co. Mus.Assoc., Quart. V. 26, no 4, p 9-20.

17) Simpson, R., 1999, The history of the Calico experience, (personal communication).

18) Simpson, R., and Higginbotham, R., and Kasper, D., 1999, An introduction to the Calico early man site lithic assemblages, San Bernardino Co. Mus. Assoc., Quart. V. 46, no.4, 47 p.

19) Smith, G., 1999, How it all began, (personal communication).

20) Shlemon, R., and Budinger, F., 1990, The archaeological geology of the Calico site, Mojave Desert, California, in Donohue, J., and Lasca, N., eds., Archaeological geology of North America , Centennial Special, V. 4, Geological Society of America, Chpt. 16, p 301-313.

21) Whitthoft, J., 1979, Technology of the Calico site, in Schuiling, W., ed, Pleistocene man at Calico, San Bernardino Co. Mus. Assoc., Quart. V. 26, no 4, p 48-49.