Location | Near the Vuntut Gwichin community, Old Crow |
---|---|
Region | Yukon, Canada |
Coordinates | 67°09′N 140°35′W / 67.150°N 140.583°W |
History | |
Founded | 24,000 BP (disputed) |
Bluefish Caves is an archaeological site in Yukon, Canada, located 54 km (34 mi) southwest of the Vuntut Gwichin community of Old Crow. [1] It has been controversially suggested that human occupation radiocarbon dates to 24,000 years Before Present (BP) based on radiocarbon dating of animal remains, [2] but these dates are contested due to the uncertain stratigraphic context of the archaeological remains relative to the dated animal remains. [3] [4] There are three small caves in the area. [5]
Bluefish Cave was initially known to the local First Nations[ citation needed], but was popularized by a fishing expedition in 1976, and later by researchers.[ clarification needed][ citation needed] This site is made up of three small caves, ranging from 10 to 30 m3 (350 to 1,060 cu ft). [6] The first cave contains various animal bones that appear to have been dragged there by predators; findings of cut marks may point to a human presence. [7]
The Old Crow Flats, another important area with early human presence, are located about 75 km northeast of the Bluefish Caves. [8]
The site was excavated by archaeologist Jacques Cinq-Mars between 1977 and 1987, and the initial radiocarbon dating suggested an age of 24,000 before present (BP). [9] This was considered controversial as it was in contrast to the Clovis-First theory, widely accepted by academics at the time, which considered the earliest settlement date of North America to be around 13,000 BP. [10] A review of the site in 2017 found it to be 24,000 years old, [11] lending support to the "Beringian standstill" hypothesis — that the ancestors of Native Americans spent considerable time isolated in a Beringian refuge during the Last Glacial Maximum before populating the Americas. [12] A later paper questioned the dating (based on claimed disturbances) and the culturality of the faunal remains, [3] but support for the 2017 study was reiterated by the author of that report. [13]
Location | Near the Vuntut Gwichin community, Old Crow |
---|---|
Region | Yukon, Canada |
Coordinates | 67°09′N 140°35′W / 67.150°N 140.583°W |
History | |
Founded | 24,000 BP (disputed) |
Bluefish Caves is an archaeological site in Yukon, Canada, located 54 km (34 mi) southwest of the Vuntut Gwichin community of Old Crow. [1] It has been controversially suggested that human occupation radiocarbon dates to 24,000 years Before Present (BP) based on radiocarbon dating of animal remains, [2] but these dates are contested due to the uncertain stratigraphic context of the archaeological remains relative to the dated animal remains. [3] [4] There are three small caves in the area. [5]
Bluefish Cave was initially known to the local First Nations[ citation needed], but was popularized by a fishing expedition in 1976, and later by researchers.[ clarification needed][ citation needed] This site is made up of three small caves, ranging from 10 to 30 m3 (350 to 1,060 cu ft). [6] The first cave contains various animal bones that appear to have been dragged there by predators; findings of cut marks may point to a human presence. [7]
The Old Crow Flats, another important area with early human presence, are located about 75 km northeast of the Bluefish Caves. [8]
The site was excavated by archaeologist Jacques Cinq-Mars between 1977 and 1987, and the initial radiocarbon dating suggested an age of 24,000 before present (BP). [9] This was considered controversial as it was in contrast to the Clovis-First theory, widely accepted by academics at the time, which considered the earliest settlement date of North America to be around 13,000 BP. [10] A review of the site in 2017 found it to be 24,000 years old, [11] lending support to the "Beringian standstill" hypothesis — that the ancestors of Native Americans spent considerable time isolated in a Beringian refuge during the Last Glacial Maximum before populating the Americas. [12] A later paper questioned the dating (based on claimed disturbances) and the culturality of the faunal remains, [3] but support for the 2017 study was reiterated by the author of that report. [13]