Bones: Discovering the First Americans

Rating:
Summary: A Mixture of the excellent and the awful.
Review: Dewar has attempted to combine an investigation into the peopling of the Americas with a consideration of whether the researchers or the Native Americans should control the relics of the past. Unfortunately, the book is very uneven in quality, even disjointed, and if one might say that life is disjointed, it would still have behooved Dewar to examine the disconnects. I found it worth reading since I'm interested in the topic and she presents information that I haven't encountered before, but I did have to keep reminding myself not to grind my teeth. Both because of her attempt to catch the process of science as well as the results (which I applaud) and her many, many digressions (which I hated) I wouldn't recommend it to someone who just wants to know what the present thought on the topic is.

I almost put the book down around page 10. In the first place, I wish authors would not attempt to sneak autobiographies into their books; even after Dewar's research gets going she tells us more than I care to know about her airplane flights and the places she eats. More significantly, it makes no difference to me if Native Americans came to this continent 99,999 years BP, or in 1450 AD or evolved here from Homo erectus migrants. They were here when the ancestors of anyone else living here came and were barbarously pushed aside. Even if they were just as violent as their supplanters, the point is that we are trying to create a new ethic against shoving aside people just because we can, similar to the attempt to abolish that other ancient and nearly universal human custom, slavery.

The book was fascinating for the next 300 pages or so as Dewar talks with various researchers about their own and other people's work often, admirably, allowing for rebuttals. (She was rather unhappy when James Chatters turned the tables and grilled her.) If that makes some of them look bad, well maybe they'll learn to stop shooting their mouths off. There is a world of difference between inquiring whether one's learned and esteemed colleague checked to make sure that there is no evidence of a forest fire that might have produced surprising ancient charcoal and making vicious accusations of incompetence and fraud when one has never actually examined the evidence. It is very significant to consider, in weighing the claims of researchers versus Native Americans, the care that scientific institutions have taken of the remains that they have in their hands already. I'm not learned enough in the subject myself to really judge her competence, but she sounded knowledgeable most of the time and the bibliography was impressive. There were one or two questions that made me wonder if she was bluffing, and she wasn't always entirely even-handed, but on the whole, she was pretty impressive. The book flags serious during her account of her trip to Brazil, largely because she spends more time recounting her trip and less recounting the research that I picked up this book to read about. At one point, she becomes fascinated by some ancient paintings and spends a great deal of time arguing about the intended subjects with her hosts. The argument strikes me as a waste of time, and potentially exasperating to her hosts, and it was utterly boring to read about it since with the exception of the cover and the dingbat, we can't see the pictures in question. This is especially frustrating: since I only read English this research is much less available to me than US or Canadian studies.

Her attempts to consider Native American sensibilities, on the other hand, while well-meaning, are a combination of arms-length sentimentality and New Age fuzzy thinking. Dewar does very little to seek out Native American informants, with the exception of a couple of story-tellers, and the information that she picks up from incidentally encountered informants makes it clear that their attitudes are not uniform. As a white journalist, she might find probing these issues difficult, and they are very complex (beginning with who is Native American and do traditionals have more right to control these decisions than the assimilated and/or christianized) but she would have done better to have dropped the pretense of representing their views and simply noted the controversy. One pipe-carrier that she meets tells her that the dead are dangerous. Dewar actually questions him a little, and elicits the information that for this reason, he thinks that all Native American remains must be buried even if they belong to a culture that does not share his beliefs. This gives her an idea of a "Curse of the Bones" which she spends the rest of the book looking for. She never asks how he applies his beliefs to non-Natives: the worst nightmare of the claimants in the Kennewick Man case must be that the anthropologists associated with the case will donate their remains to science, stipulating that they be used as anatomical displays in Washington state. She never examines the difference between fearing and respecting the dead; the latter opens the possibility of compromise, the former doesn't. She pretty well shoots down her own arguments for considering legends as historical evidence when she argues that the story of Noah's flood fits well with the scientific descriptions of the retreat of the glaciers in North America., including massive extinctions of species. That last bit is exactly backwards: the point of Noah's ark is that while millions of animals presumably drowned, no species went extinct since Noah had at least one breeding pair on board. (The story about the unicorns missing the boat is not in Genesis.) Worse, Noah's tale is set in the area where Africa meets Eurasia. When in human history or prehistory was that area glaciated?

Rating:
Summary: Tracking the First Americans
Review: Elaine Dewar traversed the Western Hemisphere in a quest to understand the origins of Native Americans. This book presents the results of her search in a thought-provoking and thoroughly researched account. Her focus is the Kennewick Man - an ancient skeleton found on the banks of the Columbia River. Kennewick Man became the centre of storms of political, anthropological and racial controversy. Native Americans sought the remains for burial under the provisions of the Native Americans Graves Protection and Repatriation Act [NAGPRA], while the anthropologists sought to date and establish their historical origins. An announcement that the skull appeared "Caucasoid" fanned the flames of racism among scientists and politicians alike. What, precisely, constitutes "Caucasoid" features in a skull, ancient or modern? In answering that question, and others it raises, Dewar expanded her quest for information, visiting scholars and leading her into a maelstrom of debate.

The "Caucasoid" contention raised the issue of the validity of consensus theories about the origins of Native Americans. Anthropologists have long contended that Native Americans are migrants from Eastern Asia. The time frame suggests their migration would have to have taken place during the time the Laurentian Ice Sheet left a narrow corridor in Western Canada allowing these invaders to journey south into North America. As Dewar notes, this idea gave early anthropologists a handle for ranking "natives" as inferior to later European invaders. The tenuous grounds for this assertion are thoroughly explained in this book. However, the idea persisted as part of the "out of Africa" theory of prehistoric human migration used to refute the "multi-regional" evolution of humanity. Dewar attempts to balance the evidence of artifact and skeletal evidence age, with what is known about the environment in times past.

Timing in resolving those two theses is the critical factor, as Dewar shows. Standard thinking on humanity's evolution means Homo sapiens must have arrived here about 12 000 years ago. She explains the importance of the "Clovis Culture" artifacts supporting this date. She then introduces the hitch in the timing issue caused by the discovery of the Monte Verde site in Chile. This site suggests human occupation far down the South American coast as long ago as 35 000 years. Dewar also spoke with Brazilian sources, who claim finding evidence of human occupation there up to 30 000 years ago. She follows the claims back and forth among those who support and those rejecting the dating trying to determine who is likely to have a final answer.

One can only sympathize with Dewar's clearing articulated frustrations. She strives to find the balance point among the many contending claims. Untrained as an anthropologist, molecular geneticist or even lawyer, she makes an outstanding effort to present the evidence given her and try to evaluate it for us. The process is doubly complicated by the personalities of those she must deal with. There are the prima-donnas, the narrowly focused academics, the open-minded field researchers all presenting her with opinions, evidence, history. Much evidence seems good, other assertions poorly substantiated. As she complains, the quest eroded many of her own long-held views. "I left behind the awe I once felt for the authority of scientists." Reading this book will leave you sympathetic to her plaint. The shortcomings of this book are rarely hers, and you will find yourself fully drawn in to her desire to achieve justice in ethnic strife and scientific endeavour. It's a masterful attempt, reflecting our own prejudices and misconceptions. She's to be commended for her persistence and the clarity of her presentation.

Rating:
Summary: A non-scientist examination of pre-history
Review: First, I think that comments concerning the length of this book are valid. There are extraneous elements that could be removed in order to streamline it (such as the mini-autobiography at the beginning and throughout the text). However, unlike some of the other reviewers, I don't mind the asides that occur, nor am I bothered by her descriptions of the characters involved, the locations, and the mundane aspects of daily life (i.e. getting coffee at Starbucks). I think people have to remember that Dewar is trained as a journalist, not an archaeologist or forensic anthropologist. As such, she continues to write in a journalistic style and, given the subject of her book, this style is not inappropriate. It is this style that makes the book readable. While more informative, I'm not sure there would be a market for a purely descriptive examination of New World pre-history. Hell, I'm an archaeologist who would understand what is being discussed and I'm sure I'd be bored to tears.

The one problem I do have with the book is that Dewar seems to have believed that archaeology should be treated as a hard science and cannot understand the ambiguities that exist (though she does touch on some of the reasons, perhaps by accident, such as the relative newness of the science, a rather disreputable history - archaeology as treasure hunting and looting, and the lack of funding that exists). Still, I enjoyed the book for what it is.

Rating:
Summary: Discovering the First Americans
Review: Given that Canadian First Peoples have traditions and creation stories that say they come from right here in North America and have been here for Eons; journalist Elaine Dewar wants to know why the tale that passes as history - about arrival by way of the Bering Strait some 11,000 years ago - still remains such a widely held belief. BONES: DISCOVERING THE FIRST AMERICANS is her investigative journey into this subject.

Traditional history says that Mongoloid migrants from Siberia came across a land-bridge spanning the Bering Straits at the end of the last Ice Age. They penetrated South from Alaska through an "ice-free corridor" then East and eventually back North, thus occupying the entire North American continent.

A lot of this is now in doubt by scientists but Dewar takes relish in dismantling the whole theory. At 600 plus pages her book has plenty of room to do so. For someone who is a self-admitted non-expert in the field she puts together seemingly well reasoned arguments. I'm a lay person in this area so I can't say if she's correct with her analysis. What I can say is that the book is well written and heavily researched and she puts forward her views in a way that makes it clear that readers like me, not experts, are her intended audience. As such I would expect this book to be criticized by anthropologists, ethnographers, and archaeologists, as usually happens when non specialists dare to tred on scientists turf. Dewar highlights the sloppiness and selective nature of some archaeological research and is able to assert that "the practice of archaeology in Ontario has become a disgrace." She's backed up in this by the Province's former director of the London Museum of Archaeology. It's certainly not just in Canada though and it's not just corporate and government influence and interference either.

In a couple of chapters dealing with Kennewick Man and one of the primary researchers on his origins - American archaeologist Jim Chatters - we see a very modern menace raise its head. Chatters had been receiving cooperation from Native Americans of the Colville tribe, even with regards to the vexing issue of destruction of ancestral bones for DNA research. Chatters tells Dewar that once he published findings that indicated possible Caucasoid origins for Kennewick Man the tribe suddenly said "all studies of human remains are a desecration." Chatters suffered as a result of "suppression of anything negative about Native Americans" The uniquely 21st century threat to his reasearch "was all a result of political correctness."

BONES will certainly rattle some professionals and stakeholders in the relevant sciences. To the extent that the author has uncovered skeletons in the closet as it relates to issues such as the issuance of grants, academic rivalries, and selective science, she has does her own area of specialization - that of investigative journalism - quite proud.

Rating:
Summary: Digging the dirt
Review: Like many others, I have something of an interest in the origins of people, and take some notice of the findings of the scientists whose job it is to gather and interpret hard data. The peopling of the Americas has some special interest, of course, not the least because it is so controversial. The central dogma, found in all the textbooks and encyclopedias of our day, is that the earliest Americans arrived at about 11,000 BC or so ago, and the route was over the Beringian land bridge from Siberia to Alaska.

This book, written by a very well informed journalist, is an honest effort at an examination of the data, pro and con, for the dogma, told in a most delightful way. Her method is to read everything, visit every museum involved, and interview everybody involved in the controversy that she can. It is not a dry tome that merely relates the findings, but a sort of personal journey through it, a travelogue to some of the important sites, and a reflection on the meaning of it all.

What she finds is at times quite eye-opening and even sometimes pretty distressing. It seems that the dogma is so strong that some investigators suppress evidence against it for fear of losing standing and funding, which is controlled by a tyranical old guard, charged with a righteous fervor to protect it.

I found the story quite fascinating. Was it possible for people to traverse the land at the time required? Apparently not, according to the latest findings. Are there sites older than 11,000 BC? It seems there were! A most persuasive argument to me was the finding that the migrants brought the hookworm with them. Because the hookworm must reside for part of its life-cycle in warm soil, it could not have come by the Beringian route. Pretty persuasive to me!

The style of writing is lively and immediate and the book is hard to put down, once started. I only regret that there are no illustrations at all.

Dewar has done quite an outstanding job in bring this story together, and it will reward your time spent with it.

Rating:
Summary: Where have all the editors gone?
Review: When I spotted _Bones_ I was thrilled. The subject--the peopling of the Americas--is one I am fascinated by. The author is an investigative journalist who spent years tracking down the archaeological sites, the scientists, and the artifacts that promise to reveal when, how and by whom the Americas were first populated.

The book has some major strengths. In its 556 pages of text it does address pretty much every aspect of the story: the Clovis First paradigm and the recent cracks in its foundation, the Beringian land bridge-Canadian ice-free corridor entry into the New World and its critics, the oldest bones and their intensely controversial cultural/geographic connections, and the intense debate, especially in the U.S., over scientific study of ancient human remains vs. reburial by interested Native American groups under the NAGPRA law.

It also has some glaring weaknesses. The biggest problem is the author's tendency to inject herself into the story. Not only did I learn far more about how every landscape, lab or pictograph looked to her, and even what she ate for lunch than I needed or wanted to know, but I also ran into far more of her theorizing about digs, artifacts, findings and theories than I wanted. She interviewed most of the players in this field and seems to have read most of the literature. But in selecting from this mass of material, I would have liked a lot more science and a lot less gossip. It seems to me that a good editor could have trimmed this book by 50 percent, and greatly improved it in the process.

One thing that emerges from the book is that the story is far from finished. Hopefully a new generation of scientists, less wedded to rigid doctrines such as "Clovis First," and using newer and better analytic approaches, will shed much-needed light on this vexed subject. And hopefully someone will tell the story with the clarity and discipline it deserves.

Still, anyone interested in this fascinating area will get something from _Bones_, even if, like me, they find themselves thumbing impatiently through the verbiage to try to find the real "bones."

Robert Adler
Author of Science Firsts: From the Creation of Science to the Science of Creation (Wiley, 2002).

Rating:
Summary: shortfall
Review: Without doubt, a rich, investigative, life's work. At first read, I was absolutely taken with the exacting detail and almost minute-by-minute record of Ms. Dewar's exploration of a difficult subject. However, the detail becomes overwhelming after the first several hundred pages and your mind is aching for at least one map, photo, or illustration. Where on earth were Ms. Dewar's editors? Her efforts are unleveraged by her publisher and this is quite sad. Do not attempt this book without sufficient reference materials by your side. It would have been a much better read if it were 100 pages shorter, replaced by adequate illustrations.