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