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/apembert
http://www.educationalsynthesis.org 

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html