James,
I understand you are an archeologist so better versed in these things than I
am. I read, and develop thoughts or theories, and then wait years for more
reading and thoughts to develop.
As I understand it, what made Peru and Chile attractive was indeed the rich
waters for fishing off the coast. A "vertical society" developed with fish
as food being supplied up the mountains, while cotton, rather than
foodstuffs, were grown in the small patches of arable land, woven into fish
nets and traded down the mountains. Further up the mountains some corn and
alpaca wool were produced to round out the diet and give variety to the
clothing.
The last book I read said that the Clovis sites were still not completely
accepted by mainstream historians, so your saying that they are now better
accepted is good news.
Anne
Anne Pemberton
[log in to unmask]http://www.erols.com/apemberthttp://www.educationalsynthesis.org
______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html