PaleoAmerica

A journal of early human migration and dispersal

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ypal20

The Rise and Fall of Alice Boer: A Reassessment of

a Purported Pre-Clovis Site

Astolfo Gomes de Mello Araujo, João C. Moreno de Sousa, Letícia C. Correa,

James K. Feathers & Mercedes Okumura

To cite this article: Astolfo Gomes de Mello Araujo, João C. Moreno de Sousa, Letícia C. Correa,
James K. Feathers & Mercedes Okumura (2021) The Rise and Fall of Alice Boer: A Reassessment
of a Purported Pre-Clovis Site, PaleoAmerica, 7:2, 99-113, DOI: 10.1080/20555563.2021.1894379

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/20555563.2021.1894379

Published online: 15 Apr 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 33

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ypal20
PALEOAMERICA
2021, VOL. 7, NO. 2, 99–113 Center for the Study of the First Americans
https://doi.org/10.1080/20555563.2021.1894379 Texas A&M University

RESEARCH REPORT

The Rise and Fall of Alice Boer: A Reassessment of a Purported Pre-Clovis Site
a b a
Astolfo Gomes de Mello Araujo , João C. Moreno de Sousa , Letícia C. Correa , James K. Feathersc, and
Mercedes Okumura b
a
Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil; bInstitute of Biosciences, University of São Paulo, São
Paulo, Brazil; cLuminescence Dating Laboratory, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
In this paper we present a review of previous research carried out at the Alice Boer site coupled Alice Boer; lithic analysis;
with new data regarding its lithic industry and ages. Our data suggest that the site, once pre-Clovis; geometric
believed to be at least 14,000 years old, most probably was occupied no earlier than 8000 years morphometrics; Rioclarense
ago. The lithic material, comprising both bifacial and unifacial formal artifacts, can be associated industry
to the Rioclarense industry. This industry is now well described and was dated elsewhere (at
Caetetuba site) as early Holocene. Therefore, in spite of not being as old as originally thought,
Alice Boer can be considered to relate to the late Paleoamerican occupation of South America
from a cultural point of view.

1. Introduction
potential due to the presence of formal artifacts such
The Alice Boer site is located in the Rio Claro region,
as bifacial points and unifacially retouched flakes (Crux-
southeastern Brazil, and was excavated by a team from
ent 1959, 1968). A private collector, Gualter Martins,
the National Museum of Rio de Janeiro led by Maria
donated several artifacts from Rio Claro to the National
C. Beltrão between 1961 and 1986. The first published
Museum of Rio de Janeiro and inspired the interest of
data stirred the archaeological community due to the
researchers (Becker 1966). At the same time, Fernando
possibility of Alice Boer being a pre-Clovis site. The
Altenfelder Silva (1967, 1968) and Tom O. Miller Jr
obtained ages put the site within a chronological range
(1968, 1972), from São Paulo State University
of 2000 radiocarbon years ago (14C yr BP) and 14,000
14 (UNESP), were working in the same area. Later, other
C yr BP, eventually providing ages as old as
researchers from the University of São Paulo (USP)
30,000 yr BP (Beltrão 1974) or even 130,000 yr BP
worked there (Uchôa 1988; Uchôa and Garcia 1976).
(Meis and Beltrão 1981). The site and its ages were sub-
All this activity made Rio Claro a “hot spot” for archae-
ject to some enthusiasm during the 1970s and 1980s, but
ology from the late 1960s until the 1980s (see Bryan
their mention in the literature faded almost to the point
(1973) for a reference on Miller’s work; also Araujo
of disappearance. Between 2010 and 2012 our research
(2001a)). As mentioned, the region gained more inter-
team revisited the site, excavated some units and reas-
national attention after Beltrão’s publications. The first
sessed the stratigraphy and chronology. In this paper
published ages for Alice Boer appeared in Portuguese
we present the obtained results, discuss some issues
(Beltrão 1974), showing a radiocarbon age of 14,200 ±
that were not very clear in the former publications,
1150 14C yr BP obtained by the Smithsonian Institution
and reassess the role of Alice Boer in the discussion of
(SI-1208) for the “middle of the layer III.” Based on this,
the peopling of the Americas. We specifically focus on
the author proposed that the site would be at least
archaeological aspects (mainly the lithic industry) and
20,000 years old (Beltrão 1974, 246). Soon Alice Boer
site age. Elsewhere we provide a detailed account of
started to be mentioned in the French (Laming-Emper-
the site-formation processes (Araujo et al. 2020).
aire 1975, 1976) and English literature (Gruhn 1977;
MacNeish 1976, 1978), and entered the “hall of early
sites” of South America, with ages being published in
2. Historical background English (Bryan and Beltrão 1978). In the 1980s a new
The Rio Claro region is located in the central portion of set of ages was published, including luminescence of
São Paulo State (Figure 1(A)), and was known since the sediments and burnt chert (Beltrão et al. 1982, 1983;
late 1950s as an area with strong archaeological Poupeau et al. 1984), and the site continued to be

CONTACT Astolfo Gomes de Mello Araujo [email protected]

© 2021 Center for the Study of the First Americans
100 A. G. M. ARAUJO ET AL.

Figure 1 Location of Alice Boer in southeastern Brazil: (A) location in São Paulo State, (B) detail of the site placement (red star) close to
Cabeça River.
 PALEOAMERICA 101

cited (e.g., Beattie and Bryan 1984; Bednarik 1989; bifaces.” Miller Jr (1968, 1972) classified the artifacts
Gruhn 1988; Hurt 1986). as the Marchiori Phase, a subdividion of the Rio Claro
Critiques of the ages and the nature of the artifacts Tradition, a higher level cultural taxomomic unit pro-
from Alice Boer started to accumulate in the early posed by him. Prous (1991) discarded Miller Jr’s classifi-
1990s (e.g., Bate 1990; Calderón and Politis 1989; cation and integrated the site into another
Fagan 1987; Lynch 1990; Schmitz 1990). Gruhn and archaeological taxonomic unit called the “Umbu Tra-
Bryan (1991) wrote a rebuttal of Lynch’s (1990) obser- dition.” The Umbu Tradition caused much debate in
vations about Alice Boer, which caused a heated debate the following years (cf. Moreno de Sousa and Okumura
(Lynch 1991, 1998, 90). The site continued to appear in 2018).
synthesis papers (e.g., Dillehay et al. 1992; Whitley and We could not find a clear description and spatial
Dorn 1993). More critiques followed (e.g., Prous 1995; location of the previous investigations in the published
Prous and Fogaça 1999), but without any rebuttal works, but thanks to an unpublished report (Poupeau
from Beltrão. et al. 1984) and a MA dissertation (Perez 1991), the
Since then, brief mentions of Alice Boer continued to location, profiles, and chronology of the excavations
appear in the literature (Dillehay 1999; Roosevelt 1998). could be assessed. Figures 2 and 3 show the spatial
Scheinsohn (2003, 345) mentions the “rejection” of arrangement of the original excavation units.
Alice Boer as an early site, but no references are cited. The first excavations were done in 1965, compris-
However, there seems no consensus about that. For ing an area of 18 m2 (6 × 3 m, according to the sche-
instance, in Dillehay (2008, 31) and Steeves (2015, 56), matic plan shown on Perez (1991, 239)) and reaching
the site appears as an “early archaeological site,” also a depth of 4 m. It was situated on the right side of
without references. the trail that went down to the river. The first pub-
lished ages (Beltrão 1974) probably came from this
excavation area. Presently there are no visible traces
3. Site characterization and previous work
of this excavation, and we can suppose it was
The Alice Boer site is located in a sandy terrace of the backfilled. Its probable location is labeled as “1965”
Cabeça River, currently ca. 4 m above the river level in Figure 2.
and 100 m before the confluence with the Passa Cinco A second excavation season took place in 1978/1979,
River (Figures 1(B) and 2). The geomorphology of the comprising four areas, three on the west side and one on
terrace suggests that it is relatively recent, at most dating the east side of the trail. The first area, marked as “1979”
from the late Pleistocene. Our observations and pre- on Figure 4, measured 12 m2 (3 × 4 m) and 3.20 m in
viously published data (Meis and Beltrão 1982) depth. This excavation area was later explored by our
suggested that at the time of human occupation the team. The second area measured 9 m2 (3 × 3 m),
river was higher and closer to the site than at present. marked as “1978” in Figures 2 and 3, and reached
This means that the human occupations most likely 3.09 m deep (Beltrão 2000, 11–12). The third area was
occurred on a shore of the Cabeça River, subject to placed north of the first two, marked as “1979-D” in
the periodic deposition of sandy sediments during Figures 2 and 3. The fourth excavation area was placed
flood events. Such sandy deposition occurred before, on the left (east) side of the trail but showed no archae-
during, and for a long period after the main human ological materials. There is no visible sign of this exca-
occupation of the site, until the lateral migration of vation nowadays, and its location is not shown in any
the river channel southwards and the incision of the sketch plan.
river in its bed made the terrace a relic testimony of In 1980 several excavations occurred in “sectors SIII
the past fluvial action. and SIV.” This area is labeled as “1980” on Figure 3.
The site was discovered by a local resident and collec- According to the sketch plan published by Perez
tor, Mr. João Boer, who found dozens of lithic bifacial (1991, 239) an area of 6 m2 (3 × 2 m) was excavated.
points in the eroding banks of a trail that linked the This excavation was probably backfilled, and no trace
main farm house to the river. of it can be seen on the present surface. We do not
Studies of the lithic artifacts found in Beltrão’s exca- know if the “1980” rectangle represents just one of
vation were carried out initially by Beltrão (1974; Bryan the “sectors,” or if they considered a single area as
and Beltrão 1978) and later by Cunha (1990, 1994) and divided into two sectors. Ten test pits and a trench par-
Perez (1991). At least 10,000 pieces were retrieved from allel to the trail, on its right side, were also opened.
the site (Cunha 1990, 18). Bryan and Beltrão (1978, 303) This trench reached a depth of 1.50 m, and scattered
suggest the “apparent evolution of a projectile point tra- archaeological material was found in it. Its position is
dition from an early assemblage containing large shown in Figure 2, labeled “1980 trench.”
102 A. G. M. ARAUJO ET AL.

Figure 2 The Alice Boer site. Topographic map modified from Perez (1991) showing the area excavated by Beltrão’s team (in gray) and
the areas excavated by our team (in black). The dashed rectangle is shown in detail in Figure 3.

In January 1984 another investigation took place. Perez (1991, 170) mentions a “1986” season, but there
The new selected area, 3.6 × 4 m, was located on the ter- are no other records about it. Perhaps some of the units
race, to the right (west) of the trail that leads to the excavated earlier were reopened. This could explain why
Cabeça River. This was directly in front of the trench only the locations of excavation areas “1978,” “1979” and
opened in July 1980, and south of the squares excavated “1979-D” can be seen nowadays on the surface, whereas
in 1978. Its position is marked on Figure 3 as “1984,” all other excavations were backfilled.
and it was probably backfilled. The “stratotype” published and mentioned in several
publications (Beltrão 1974, 2000; Bryan and Beltrão
1978), is summarized below from top to bottom. It
probably reflects what was found in the “1965” exca-
vation area, since there was no other excavation season
before the 1974 publication.

Layer I: Sterile from the archaeological point of view,

with a few inches of depth, covered by current
vegetation.
Layer II: Sterile from the archaeological point of view,
about 1.40 m thick “would correspond to the collu-
vium […] transported by surface sliding, from the
highest points of the slope” (Beltrão 2000, 19).
Layer III: Rich in archeological materials, composed of
silt and clay, about 2 m thick. In Beltrão (2000),
layer IIIa is defined as “sand-compact red clay,”
and IIIb (lower) as “non-compacted red-yellow
sand.” She postulated an erosive discontinuity
between these two layers. These same layers are
called “6” and “7” in Meis and Beltrão (1982).
Layer 7 is the IIIa, upper, “comprising thin and
coarse sandy deposits” (Meis and Beltrão 1982,
407). Layer 6 is the lower part of IIIb “composed
of a series of reddish materials, fine and coarse
Figure 3 The Alice Boer site. Detailed topography of the area sand with possible enrichment in quartz granules
excavated by Beltrão’s team. Our investigations were carried and silts, showing a very unclear stratification […]
out in the area marked as “1979.” and iron oxide concentration […] being a unit
 PALEOAMERICA 103

Table 1 Alice Boer site. Previously published radiocarbon and thermoluminescence ages on burnt flint (Beltrão 1974; Beltrão et al.
1983; Bryan and Beltrão 1978), with the corresponding probable depths inside excavation area “1965.”
Level (depth from surface) Thermoluminescence age Lab number Radiocarbon age Lab number
1 (150–160 cm) 2200 ± 280 1-1
2370 ± 220 1-11
2000 ± 200 1-22
3 (170–180 cm) 6050 ± 100 SI-1205
4 (180–190 cm) 2870 ± 450 4-53
3400 ± 200 4-109
5 (190–200 cm) 6135 ± 160 SI-1206
7 (210–220 cm) 6350 ± 1220 7-212
8 (220–230 cm) 6085 ± 160 SI-1207
10,970 ± 1020 8-339
10,950 ± 1020 8-340
10 (240–250 cm) 14,200 ± 1150 SI-1208

rich in lithic artifacts […]” (Meis and Beltrão 1982, enough to all other excavation units and the data we
407). At the boundary of Layer III with Layer IV produced can be compared with Beltrão’s results with-
there is another erosive discordance. out further concerns. Flakes of varying sizes began to
Layer IV: Sterile from the archaeological point of view, appear in the profile, and their position was taken by
sand deposit similar to those that exist in the cur- means of a total station. This work resulted in 362
rent margin of the Cabeça River. plotted pieces (Figure 4).
Layer V: Presenting archaeological material, “corre- We also opened three excavation areas (Figure 2). First
sponds to the old river bed, with more than 130,000 was a trench measuring 3 × 0.7 m on the floor of the unit
years A.P. [BP] and a semi-arid climate phase, more excavated by Beltrão in 1979, which we called “T1 – bot-
than the current one” (Meis and Beltrão 1981, 100). tom 1979 excavation” to verify if we could reach the basal
gravel, originally called “Layer V” (Beltrão 1974). As
If we take into consideration the description of the mentioned above, in this gravel layer Beltrão (2000)
profile, we would have approximately 1.50 m of soil claimed to have found artifacts, and our purpose was to
comprising layers I and II. Hence, the top of Layer III collect sediment samples for various analyses, in addition
would be 1.50 m deep. The obtained radiocarbon and to material for dating. Second was a 1 × 1-m unit, called
thermoluminescence ages are shown in Table 1, and E69/N34, placed inside an area where an informant (Mr
are all related to Layer III (i.e., 6 and 7). The depths Israel Trovó) said most of the occasional finds of bifacial
shown in Table 1 are, therefore, estimated in relation points occurred, on the east side of the trail, approxi-
to the original surface, since the original publication mately 25 m south from the main area excavated by Bel-
showed 10-cm spits inside Layer III (Beltrão 1974, trão. Third was an experimental 1 × 1-m unit on the
220), and did not mention depth below surface. present fluvial beach, to observe if charcoal particles pro-
duced by hearths lit by fishermen were preserved in the
stratigraphy.
4. Materials and methods We collected samples for soil micromorphology,
Between 2010 and 2012 our research team revisited magnetic analysis, microartifact analysis, and optically
Alice Boer. The main objective of our investigations stimulated luminescence (OSL) and radiocarbon dating.
was related to the collection of samples to establish Earlier accounts of the site mentioned the virtual
the age of the site, given the conflicting nature of the absence of large charcoal fragments and, therefore, the
previously obtained data. We chose one of the profiles difficulty in obtaining ages (Beltrão et al. 1983). To cir-
left open by the early excavators, and proceeded to cumvent this problem, we developed a dating strategy
clean it by careful scraping with trowels. The choice of using two different methods, radiocarbon and OSL.
this area was done for two reasons: first, the walls Regarding radiocarbon, we applied the method to
were somewhat straight and devoid of large tree roots; three different materials: charcoal fragments (whenever
second, the area is close to the other excavated units available), soil organic matter, and micro-particles of
where stratigraphic profiles were published or, at least, charcoal embedded in the sediment. The results from
recorded. By comparing the present state of the site magnetic, microartifact, and soil micromorphology ana-
with the earlier publications, it became clear that the lyses are detailed in Araujo et al. (2020).
area we chose was the west profile of the 1979 exca- Of the total archaeological pieces recovered in our
vation unit (Figures 2 and 3). Therefore, it was close fieldwork, 355 were subject to a technological analysis
104 A. G. M. ARAUJO ET AL.

Figure 4 The Alice Boer site, west profile of Beltrão’s 1979 excavation showing the plotted archaeological material (triangles), radio-
carbon samples (crosses), and OSL samples (circles).

following a protocol established by Morais (1987) and dating were sent to Beta Analytic, Inc. Figure 4 shows
Araujo (2001b). The technological analysis of bifacial the locations of the samples. Table 2 shows the results
points collected by Beltrão’s team was done using the from OSL according to three different statistical models.
protocol proposed by Moreno de Sousa and Okumura Sample UW 3049 was placed in the center of the archae-
(2020). The geometric morphometrics protocol fol- ological layer, while sample UW 3050 and UW 3051
lowed the one described in Okumura and Araujo represent, respectively, the bottom and the top of the
(2016). archaeological layer. For these three samples, the “mini-
A bulk sample of flint cobbles and pebbles coming mum age model” seemed appropriate, given the high
from “Layer V” were collected and analyzed in labora- over-dispersion (or scatter) and partial bleaching typical
tory to allow a closer inspection of possible artifacts of of many fluvial sediments, in spite of the age inversion
Pleistocene age. The analysis aimed to address the of sample UW 3049. This bracketed the archaeological
more common criteria used in the assessment of materials between 6300 and 8100 yr BP. The other
human-made flaking (see Parenti 2001, 139, and refer- ages are related to geological processes and are impor-
ences therein; also Borrazzo 2020; Gillespie, Tupakka, tant to understand the time frame of the terrace building
and Cluney 2004; Lubinski, Terry, and McCutcheon and fluvial-channel migration. Samples UW 3069 and
2014): flaking angle inferior to 90°, platform prep- UW 3063 were collected inside the sandy sterile sedi-
aration, number and position of flake scars, ripple ment, corresponding to Beltrão’s Layer IV, or the
marks, number and position of percussion marks, and upbuilding of the sandy river terrace. The obtained
differential weathering. ages of 14,700 and 18,200 yr BP, using the same “mini-
mum age model,” seem appropriate. The basal cobble
layer, which represents the old river bed, or Beltrão’s
5. Results Layer V, is represented by samples UW 3061 and UW
3062. In this case, the “minimum age model” seems
5.1. Chronology
poorly suited, with ages that are too young given the
Seven sediment samples for OSL dating were collected stratigraphy. Either the “central age” or the “finite mix-
and processed at the University of Washington Lumi- ture” models seemed more reliable. This would put
nescence Laboratory, and 10 samples for radiocarbon Layer V between 26,000 and 30,000 yr BP.
 PALEOAMERICA 105

Table 2 Luminescence samples and obtained ages. All samples collected from the east profile of the 1979 excavation, and placed in
stratigraphic order, from upper to lower (ages are presented in kilo annum).
Lab sample no. Sample ID Z/depth (m)a Central age model (ka) Minimum age model (ka) Finite mixture model (ka)
UW3051 OSL C 3.28/1.15 12.9 ± 0.99 6.29 ± 0.52 14.6 ± 1.06
UW3049 OSL A 3.01/1.45 11.4 ± 1.00 4.71 ± 0.45 9.48 ± 0.67
UW3050 OSL B 2.70/1.75 25.1 ± 2.24 8.11 ± 0.80 39.0 ± 2.76
UW3069 # 129 2.42/2.03 31.0 ± 2.26 14.7 ± 1.35 35.5 ± 2.36
UW3063 # 128 1.90/2.55 34.1 ± 2.04 18.2 ± 1.40 32.8 ± 1.96
UW3061 # 51 1.47/2.97 25.7 ± 3.49 5.45 ± 0.86 29.7 ± 3.53
UW3062 # 127 1.40/3.05 28.5 ± 2.30 11.3 ± 1.14 27.5 ± 2.00
a
“Z” is elevation above the current river level, while “depth” is the vertical distance below the current surface.

Table 3 shows the results of two radiocarbon samples . Denticulate (denticulè): piece incorporating a series
that are directly related to archaeological materials. Both of retouch scars or Clactonian notches on any
samples are 1-mm charcoal particles found during the blank (flake, debris or core).
microartifact analysis. . End scraper (grattoir): piece presenting continuous
Table 4 shows all ages obtained by our team in strati- retouch at one of its ends, so as to form a forehead
graphic order. which can be rounded or semi-circular, or even in
a muzzle shape.
5.2. Lithic industry characterization . Unifacial convergent scraper (limace): piece made by
intentional retouch, as it covers the entire upper face.
5.2.1. Compiling data from earlier excavations
These are made on flakes only.
It is estimated that more than 10,000 pieces were recov- . Burin (burin): piece with one or more removals per-
ered during Beltrão’s excavations (Cunha 1990, 36). To
pendicular to the flattening plane. They are also
our knowledge, the only formal publication on the topic
formed by the intersection of several superimposed
was a short note by Cunha (1994). We summarize these
or intersecting removals, or by the retouched trunca-
findings to give the reader an idea of the materials found
tion, or by breakage.
in the previous excavations. Documenting these . Perforator (perçoir): piece formed by a straight or
findings is important, not only because of the difficulty
curved point formed by bilateral retouch or associ-
of access to the academic unpublished works, but also
ated with a retouched notch.
because the material was destroyed by fire at the . Engraver (bec): piece formed by the intersection of
National Museum of Rio de Janeiro.
Clactonian notches which present a protruding end
The main source for the site’s lithic industry is a doc-
in the form of a beak.
toral dissertation by Leila Cunha, which analyzed 4000 . Bifacial artifacts (pieces bifaciales): pieces with the
pieces sent to France. The classification employed was
presence of retouch on both sides, so the blank is
based on the French system, and the description of
undetermined.
the types was explicit. They are useful to illustrate the
artifactual variability of the site, as presented in Cunha
The frequencies of the retouched artifacts are sum-
(1990, 43–49).
marized in Table 5.
The most abundant raw material for the manufacture
. Side scraper (racloir): piece made on any type of
of artifacts was flint (96%), followed by quartz (2%) and
blank (flake, blade, bladelet, debris, or core) and hav-
silicified sandstone (1.2%). These frequencies are the
ing continuous retouch, on one or more edges, so as
same for all categories (flakes, small debitage, and resi-
to obtain a semi-sharp edge, more or less regular.
dues). The majority of the flaking was done by soft ham-
. Notched piece (encoche): piece made by single or
mer (Cunha 1990, 136). Only 22 cores were retrieved,
multiple retouch, which gives a concave shape to
but most of them did not show any specialized core
the cutting edge of the blank (flake, debris, or core).
reduction method (Cunha 1990, 102). Regarding the

Table 3 Alice Boer, radiocarbon ages on charcoal, bracketing the archaeological layer.
Sample Lab number Z/depth (cm)a Conventional age (14C yr BP) Cal yr BPb
ALB 7 charcoal Beta-320199 3358/100–110 cm 7680 ± 40 8470 ± 50
ALB 12 Beta-320198 2849/150–160 cm 7200 ± 40 8004 ± 38
a
“Z” is elevation above the current river level in millimeters, while “depth” is the vertical distance below the current surface in centimeters.
b
Calibrated according to CalPal Version 2020.11, INTCAL 2020 curve (Weninger, Jöris, and Danzeglocke 2012).
106 A. G. M. ARAUJO ET AL.

Table 4 Compilation of all obtained ages (14C and OSL) and their vertical positioning. Italics represent dates on soil–humic fraction.
Radiocarbon ages calibrated according to CalPal Version 2020.11, INTCAL 2020 curve (Weninger, Jöris, and Danzeglocke 2012).
Radiocarbon
Sample Unit Depth (from topsoil) Z (mm above river) Sample type age (14C yr BP) Yr BPa
ALB 22 East profile 1979 0–10 cm 4328 Soil–humic fraction 101 ± 9 139 ± 93
ALB 22 charcoal East profile 1979 0–10 cm 4328 Charcoal 70 ± 30 108 ± 113
ALB 12 East profile 1979 100–110 cm 3358 charcoal 1 mm fraction 7680 ± 40 8470 ± 50
UW 3051 East profile 1979 115 cm 3280 OSL 6290 ± 520
ALB 11 East profile 1979 110–120 cm 3262 Soil–humic fraction 1950 ± 30 1875 ± 44
ALB 10 East profile 1979 120–130 cm 3141 Soil–humic fraction 2080 ± 30 2042 ± 47
ALB 9 East profile 1979 130–140 cm 3068 Soil–humic fraction 1490 ± 30 1360 ± 30
UW 3049 East profile 1979 145 cm 3012 OSL 4710 ± 450
ALB 8 East profile 1979 140–150 cm 2964 Soil–humic fraction 2580 ± 30 2721 ± 28
ALB 7 SOM East profile 1979 150–160 cm 2849 Soil–humic fraction 2970 ± 30 3134 ± 54
ALB 7 charcoal East profile 1979 150–160 cm 2849 charcoal 1 mm fraction 7200 ± 40 8004 ± 38
UW 3050 East profile 1979 175 cm 2699 OSL 8110 ± 80
UW 3069 East profile 1979 203 cm 2144 OSL 14760 ± 1350
UW 3063 East profile 1979 255 cm 1895 OSL 18,200 ± 1400
ALB 50 T1 excavation 1979 central basal cobble layer 1515 Soil–humic fraction 1430 ± 30 1325 ± 25
UW 3061 East profile 1979 297 cm 1472 OSL 29,710 ± 3530
UW 3062 East profile 1979 305 cm 1395 OSL 27,500 ± 2000
a
Yr BP meaning either calibrated radiocarbon or OSL.

metric attributes of the whole industry, Cunha (1990) state. This suggests that the assemblage cannot be
states that 80 percent of the pieces show lengths between classified as pertaining to the Umbu Tradition (see Ara-
10 and 40 mm, and widths between 16 and 35 mm. ujo (2015) for an overview of this lithic tradition). Mor-
eno de Sousa (2019) carried out a technological analysis
5.2.2. New results of the bifacial points, unifacial convergent scrapers
New studies about the lithics from Alice Boer have been (limaces) and a selection of 274 flakes (considered to
carried out recently. Okumura and Araujo (2013, 2015, be related to the façonnage stage) found in Beltrão’s
2017) applied a combination of geometric morpho- excavations, and found that there seems to be no differ-
metrics and technological analysis of the stemmed ence in the lithic industry across the stratigraphy. Bifa-
points found during Beltrão’s excavations (Figure 5), cial points occur throughout the profile, and also
and their results show a specific cultural pattern that unifacial scrapers (limaces), albeit in smaller numbers
so far has been only observed in central São Paulo (23 points and 6 lesmas). We now know that limaces
are a specific type of unifacial scraper found in sites
that are now being associated to the Rioclarense Indus-
Table 5 Frequencies of retouched artifacts from Alice Boer
according to Cunha (1990). try (Moreno de Sousa 2019, 2020; Moreno de Sousa and
Type Sub-type n Subtotal % Okumura 2020). Comparison with lithic industries
Scraper Lateral 72 160 57.14 found in other portions of São Paulo State suggests
Transverse 36 that the Rioclarense Industry is widespread and can be
Dent lateral 10
Crest 5
traced to the Pleistocene/Holocene transition (Tron-
Dent transv 3 coso, Correa, and Zanettini 2016).
Double lat 13 If our previous results showed the general differences
Double transv 2
Double lat/transv 6 between Alice Boer points and the Umbu Tradition, no
Convergent 4 detailed intra-site account of the points was done. Bel-
Triple 5
Other 4 trão (1974, 244) proposed the points showed a “techni-
Notched piece Retouched 14 36 12.86 cal evolution” through time, but this was never properly
Clactonian 21
Composite 1 tested. Therefore, we compared bifacial points from the
Denticulate Retouched 5 7 2.50 upper (0–120 cm) and the lower layers (> 120 cm) of
Clactonian 2
End scraper Frontal 11 19 6.79
Beltrão’s excavations. Statistical analysis (Mann–Whit-
Muzzle 8 ney U) comparing Beltrão’s excavated bifacial points
Unifacial convergent scraper 3 3 1.07 from the upper (0–120 cm) and the lower layers (>
Unifacially retouched flake 5 5 1.79
Burin 4 4 1.43 120 cm) showed a lack of significant differences between
Perforator 4 4 1.43 the two groups. Such groups are similar in terms of
Engraver 7 7 2.50
Bifacial point Preform 17 35 12.50 length (total length, body length, and stem length),
Stemmed 18 width (ear width and neck width), and breadth (body,
Total 280 100.00
neck, and stem breadth), as well as in terms of the
 PALEOAMERICA 107

Figure 5 Examples of typical artifacts from the Alice Boer site, found during Beltrão’s excavations: four stemmed points presenting the
Rioclarense technological and morphological patterns, and a lesma (multifunctional unifacial scraper).

rejuvenation index (Iriarte 1995). A chi-square test pebbles. Even the geofact that most resembles an arti-
comparing the different raw materials (quartz and fact, quite similar to a unifacial retouched scraper
chert) showed no significant differences between the (Figure 8), also had many water-polishing marks,
two groups (The chi-square statistic with Yates correc- masking all flaking surfaces. In sum, none of the
tion is 0.0441, the p-value is 0.833702, and it is not sig- flaked pieces collected by us in the basal gravel pre-
nificant at p < 0.05). Geometric morphometric analysis sented any evidence of Pleistocene anthropic activity
comparing the abovementioned points showed no in the site.
important differences between the upper and the
lower layers in terms of centroid size (Mann–Whitney
U = 6.00, p < 0.05 two-tailed) and shape (Figure 6). 6. Discussion
Our sample of artifacts collected between 2010 and The previously obtained radiocarbon and thermolumi-
2012 is much smaller (n = 355), but has the benefit of nescence (TL) ages obtained from Beltrão’s excavations
being recorded by means of a total station, on a single were somewhat inconsistent (Table 1) and so are ours
profile (Figure 4). Given the small sample size, we did (Table 4). We have to consider several aspects of these
not find any formal tools. The majority of the pieces discrepancies. Regarding the TL ages, it is important
(77.6%; n = 272) are under 2 cm in maximum length, to acknowledge that in the early 1980s TL dating of
suggesting in situ flaking activities (Table 6). In terms burnt flint was in its infancy, and the Beltrão et al.
of raw material, 98 percent of the pieces were made (1983) report was pioneering (Table 1). For some
on flint (Table 7), which is in accordance with Cunha reason, these results were never formally published,
(1990). Four pieces (nos. 16, 105, 328, and 375) showed and nor were the results of the Poupeau et al. (1984)
distinctive use wear. One hammerstone was retrieved, excavations. The TL results for the upper five samples
and one unifacially retouched flake (no. 2, shown in are internally consistent but much younger (between
Figure 7). 220 and 3400 yr BP) than the upper 14C age (ca. 7000
From the 11,362 flint pieces collected by us in the calendar years ago (cal yr BP)). The three upper radio-
basal gravel during the 2011 field season, only 74 carbon ages (samples SI-1205, SI-1206, and SI-1207)
showed flake scars. However, we could identify the are actually contemporaneous, all of them around
presence of water polishing on all flaked cobbles and 7000 cal yr BP. The lowermost sample (SI-1208) showed
108 A. G. M. ARAUJO ET AL.

Figure 6 Results of the geometric morphometrics analysis of the bifacial points showing no significant differences between the upper
and the lower layers in terms of centroid size and shape.

a very large associated error (14,200 ± 1150 14C yr BP), Table 7 Alice Boer, raw materials of the pieces retrieved in the
and we tend to consider it as unreliable, as several 2010–2012 investigations.
authors did. This age was never reproduced, and our Raw material Number of pieces %

results do not support it. Silicified sandstone 1 0.28

Argillite 1 0.28
Regarding our results (Table 3), sample ALB 7 rep- Quarzite 2 0.56
resents the top of the archaeological layer, while sample Quartz 3 0.85
Flint 348 98.03
ALB 12 was taken at the bottom. They show an age Total 355 100.00
reversal, but when we compare ALB 12 to UW 3050
(Table 4), which also represents the bottom of the humin fraction can travel widely across the soil
archaeological layer, both show a remarkable age con- profile, both vertically, by gravity (samples ALB 7
vergence (∼8100 cal yr BP). SOM, ALB 8, ALB 9, ALB 10, ALB 11) and horizontally,
In Table 4 the ages obtained on soil organic matter
(humin fraction) seem totally unreliable. This shows
that, far from being “static” as put by several authors
(e.g., Pessenda et al. 2004; Watling et al. 2017), the

Table 6 Classes of lithic materials recovered during the 2010–

2012 investigations.
Class n %
Flake 20 5.63
Flake fragment 23 6.48
Fragmented flake 17 4.79
Flake under 2 cm 272 76.62
Retouched flake 1 0.28
Utilized flake 3 0.85
Fragmented utilized flake 1 0.28
Lithic debris 16 4.50
Hammerstone 1 0.28
Core 1 0.28 Figure 7 Piece no. 2, a unifacially retouched flake on mottled
Total 355 100.00
chert, found at Z = 3487 (ca. 100 cm deep).
 PALEOAMERICA 109

following the water table flow (sample ALB 50). Our stratigraphic column” of the site is presented without
main conclusion is that the site age can be bracketed any scale, together with the information on the legend
between 6300 cal yr BP (or 7000 cal yr BP) and that “the total thickness of the outcrop is of the order
8100 cal yr BP. A lengthier discussion about the ages 4 to 5 m [sic].” A more detailed stratigraphic profile,
and the problems of dating soil organic matter was pre- including a graphic scale, was published in Meis and
sented in Araujo et al. (2020). Beltrão (1982, 409), but the authors do not mention
The vertical distribution of the pieces recovered in which unit it represents, although it probably refers to
our investigation (Figure 9) shows that most of them the “1980” area (see Figure 3). As we mentioned earlier,
(89.7%) are placed in a vertical interval of just 30 cm, the depth and thickness of the archaeological layer as
between the heights of 2.90 and 3.10 m above the observed by the previous publications in the “1965”
river; the distribution of the pieces is strongly unimodal, excavation area compared to our excavation seems fairly
suggesting that originally there was a single archaeologi- different (1 m thick, instead of 30 cm, and reaching a
cal layer, placed around 3.0 m above the current level of depth of 250 cm, against 130 cm). This can be related
the river (between 120 and 130 cm below surface). to the geometry of the site, since the “1965” area is
These observations clarify some questions about the placed downslope about 8 m southwards of our inter-
actual depth of the site. In Beltrão (1974, 219; Bryan vention (see Figure 2). It is possible that the fluvial
and Beltrão 1978, 304), the stratigraphic profile of the deposits were thicker at that point, forming a wedge
site shows an indication of a “1:25 scale,” leaving the upslope.
reader with no clue about its actual size. The same hap-
pens in Beltrão et al. (1983, 29) when a “typical

Figure 8 Photo (above) and drawings (below) of a geofact found

during the 2011 excavation season of the Alice Boer site. Notice Figure 9 Alice Boer site, west profile of the 1979 excavation. Fre-
that the river polishing “erased” many of the flaking scars and quency of pieces found (horizontal axis) by vertical intervals of
ridges. 10 cm (vertical axis).
110 A. G. M. ARAUJO ET AL.

Figure 10 Distal portion of a broken lesma found during Beltrão’s 1965 excavation season at the Alice Boer site. The artifact was
supposedly found around 400 cm depth, on the basal gravel.

To our knowledge, no data on the supposed lithic suggest a homogeneous industry, presenting no impor-
artifacts from “Layer V” have ever been published. tant changes through time, composed of bifacial and
According to Bryan and Beltrão (1978), the simple unifacial artifacts, where flint is the dominant raw
identification of knapping on flint cobbles and pebbles material.
would have been the key for the classification of the The lower cobble layer (Beltrão’s “Layer V”) can be
basal gravel into “artifacts.” However, after a careful considered to be associated with the late Pleistocene,
observation of the whole assemblage in the National dated around 30,000 yr BP. This layer represents the
Museum of Rio de Janeiro, none of the pieces labeled former river bed, and does not contain any artifacts.
as “Layer V” could actually be identified as a lithic arti- The fact that Alice Boer is younger than previously
fact, except for one lesma fragment (Figure 10). thought does not mean it is not culturally related to a
According to the label/document accompanying the Paleoamerican occupation. The lithic industry of Alice
lesma fragment, it was found during the first exca- Boer can be related to an older chronological range,
vation season of Beltrão, in 1965, around 400 cm given the material-culture similarity with the Caetetuba
depth, in the “riverbed.” Since lesmas were also found site (Moreno de Sousa 2019, 2020; Moreno de Sousa and
in the upper layers, the presence of a single tool frag- Okumura 2020; Troncoso, Correa, and Zanettini 2016),
ment could be explained by bioturbation. In Bryan located 90 km west of Alice Boer and giving an age of
and Beltrão (1978, 305), this same artifact is described 10,900 cal yr BP.
as being found “on top” of Layer V, and not inside it. It is unfortunate that most of Alice Boer’s collection
All other pieces from the 1960s–1980s excavations did was lost or damaged after the 2018 fire at the National
show some flake scars, but they were clearly derived Museum of Rio de Janeiro, where it was housed. The
from the impacts suffered during the natural river extant portion of the site comprises a small hill being
flow. All flaked surfaces presented typical water eroded by natural processes. It is possible that part of
polishing. the collection, which was transported to France in the
1990s, is still housed at the Muséum National d’Histoire
Naturelle in Paris.
7. Conclusions
Given the reassessment of the site stratigraphy, the
Acknowledgements
obtained ages, and the study of the artifacts, both
from the previous excavations and from our research, We would like to thank three anonymous reviewers for their
we can conclude that the sandy layers containing comments, which much-improved the present text. Thanks
also to Dr Antonio Carlos Sarti (EACH/USP), Dr Bernadete
archaeological materials started to accumulate at Castro (UNESP/Rio Claro), and Dr Lluis Mundet (University
18,000 yr BP, at a depth of 3 m below the present sur- of Girona, Spain) for support and fruitful discussions; to Dr
face, but the actual archaeological layer is placed José Eduardo Zaine (UNESP/Rio Claro) for sharing valuable
between 1.2 and 1.3 m below the surface, and can be data about the geology of the area and discussing site-formation
securely dated as not older than 8000 cal yr BP. processes; and to Dr João Messeti for granting access to his
property. Mr João Boer (in memoriam) also provided helpful
We did not detect any trend of cultural change in the
information about the site. Dr Paulo C. Giannini kindly granted
site, contra Beltrão (1974). Both the whole technological the use of the Laboratory of Sedimentology, Institute of Geos-
analysis applied to the entire lithic assemblage and the ciences, University of São Paulo. To Antoine Lourdeau for pro-
geometric morphometrics results on the bifacial points viding a copy of Cunha (1980). Aldo Malagó, Ana Cristina
 PALEOAMERICA 111

Hochreiter, Bruna Pechini, Graziela Rissato, Laina Honorato, America. The latter include several sites in Brazil, Uruguay
Leandro Possadágua, Luciana Zanetti, Lucas Guerrini, Priscila and Argentina. He has also done work in Peru and Chile.
Santos, Rafaela Pascucci, and Thomas Schrage participated in Mercedes Okumura, Holds a degree in Biological Sciences
the fieldwork. This work was supported by FAPESP, grants from the Institute of Biosciences of the University of São
2009/54.720-9, 2013/13.794-5, and 2016/23.584-6 (AGMA), Paulo (1999), a Master’s degree (2002) and a PhD from the
and 2019/08870-0 (JCMS); CAPES, grants 1478721 and same institution (2007). Worked as a researcher-curator at
88881.132729/2016-01 (JCMS); and CNPq, grants 300339/ the Department of Biological Anthropology at the University
2008-9 and 302024/2019-0 (AGMA). M. Okumura holds a of Cambridge in the United Kingdom (2006-2010) and then
CNPq Productivity Scholarship (302163/2017-4). did a post-doctorate at the Museum of Archeology and Eth-
nology at USP (2011-2014). Lecturer at the Graduate Program
in Archeology (PPGArq) at the Department of Anthropology
Disclosure statement at the National Museum-UFRJ (2014-June 2018). Currently,
lecturer at the Department of Genetics and Evolutionary
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). Biology of the Institute of Biosciences of the University of
São Paulo (IB-USP) and coordinates the Laboratory of
Human Evolutionary Studies (LEEH).
Funding
This work was supported by Conselho Nacional de Desenvol- ORCID
vimento Científico e Tecnológico [grant numbers 302163/
2017-4, 302024/2019-0]; Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento Astolfo Gomes de Mello Araujo http://orcid.org/0000-0002-
de Pessoal de Nível Superior [grant numbers 1478721, 0349-1226
88881.132729/2016-01]; Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do João C. Moreno de Sousa http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7269-
Estado de São Paulo [grant numbers 2017/20340-1, 2013/ 0838
13.794-5, 2009/54.720-9, 2019/08870-0, 2016/23.584-6]. Letícia C. Correa http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5059-3359
Mercedes Okumura http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1894-6430

Notes on Contributors References

Astolfo Gomes de Mello Araujo holds a degree in Geology by Altenfelder Silva, F. 1967. “‘Informes sobre a de Rio Claro.’
the Institute of Geosciences of the University of São Paulo Programa Nacional de Pesquisas Arqueológicas –
(1989), with a Master’s degree in Archeology - Museum of Resultados Preliminares do Primeiro Ano/1965–1966.”
Archeology and Ethnology / USP (1995), PhD in Archeology Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Publicações Avulsas 6: 79–
- Museum of Archeology and Ethnology / USP (2001) and vis- 88.
iting graduate student (SWE) in Anthropology / Archeology Altenfelder Silva, F. 1968. “Arqueologia pré-histórica da
at the University of Washington, Seattle, USA (1998). Pro- região de Rio Claro.” Pré-História Brasileira, IPH/USP,
fessor at the Museum of Archeology and Ethnology of the 157–166.
University of São Paulo. Coordinator of the Laboratory for Araujo, A. G. M. 2001a. “A Arqueologia da região de Rio
Interdisciplinary Research in Evolution, Culture and Environ- Claro: uma síntese.” Revista do Museu de Arqueologia e
ment (LEVOC). Etnologia 11: 125–140.
João C. Moreno de Sousa holds a degree in Archeology (2010) Araujo, A. G. M. 2001b. “Teoria e Método em Arqueologia
from the Goiano Institute of Prehistory and Anthropology Regional: Um Estudo de Caso no Alto Paranapanema,
(IGPA) of the Pontifical Catholic University of Goiás (PUC Estado de São Paulo.” PhD diss., Universidade de São
GO). Master in Archeology from the Museum of Archeology Paulo, SP, Brazil.
and Ethnology (MAE) of the University of São Paulo (USP), Araujo, A. G. 2015. “On Vastness and Variability: Cultural
and PhD in Archeology from the National Museum of the Transmission, Historicity, and the Paleoindian Record in
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (MN-UFRJ). Currently Eastern South America.” Anais da Academia Brasileira de
a Postdoctoral researcher at the Laboratory of Human Evol- Ciências 87 (2): 1239–1258.
utionary Studies (LEEH) of the Institute of Biosciences, Uni- Araujo, A. G. M., J. K. Feathers, G. Hartmann, F. S. B. Ladeira,
versity of São Paulo (IB-USP). E. Valezio, D. L. Nascimento, O. Ricci, V. Marum, and R. F.
Trindade. 2020. “Revisiting Alice Boer: Site Formation
Letícia C. Correa holds a degree in History at the Methodist Processes and Dating Issues of a Supposedly Pre-Clovis
University of Piracicaba (2010), Master in Archeology from Site in Southeastern Brazil.” Geoarchaeology: An
the University of São Paulo at the Museum of Archeology International Journal. doi:10.1002/gea.21831.
and Ethnology (2017) with a PhD in progress at the same Bate, L. F. 1990. “Culturas y modos de vida de los cazadores
Institution. recolectores en el poblamiento de América del Sur.”
James K. Feathers has been the director of the luminescence Revista de Arqueología Americana 2: 89–153.
laboratory at the University of Washington since 1993. He Beattie, O. B., and A. L. Bryan. 1984. “A Fossilized Calotte
has nearly 100 peer-reviewed publications, mostly in the lumi- with Prominent Browridges from Lagoa Santa, Brazil.”
nescence field. One focus of his research has been in dating Current Anthropology 25 (3): 345–346.
sediments from Palaeoindian sites, mainly in the southeastern Becker, M. C. M. 1966. “Quelques données nouvelles sur les
US, the southern Great Plains, Alaska and particularly South sites préhistoriques de Rio Claro. État de São Paulo.”
112 A. G. M. ARAUJO ET AL.

Actas y Memorias del XXXVI Congreso Internacional de Flaked Cobbles: A Test Case from Alberta,
Americanistas 1: 445–450. Canada.” Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 19
Bednarik, R. G. 1989. “On the Pleistocene Settlement of South (7): 615–633.
America.” Antiquity 63: 101–111. Gruhn, R. 1977. “Earliest Man in the Northeast: A
Beltrão, M. C. 1974. “Datações Arqueológicas mais antigas do Hemisphere-Wide Perspective.” Annals of the New York
Brasil.” Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências 46 (2): Academy of Sciences 288 (1): 163–164.
211–251. Gruhn, R. 1988. “Linguistic Evidence in Support of the
Beltrão, M. C. 2000. Ensaio de Arqueogeologia. Uma Coastal Route of Earliest Entry into the New World.”
Abordagem Transdisciplinar. Rio de Janeiro: ZIT Gráfica Man 23 (1): 77–100.
e Editora. Gruhn, R., and A. L. Bryan. 1991. “A Review of Lynch’s
Beltrão, M. C., J. Danon, C. R. Enriquez, G. Poupeau, and E. Descriptions of South American Pleistocene Sites.”
Zuleta. 1982. “On the Arrival of Men in America: Dating by American Antiquity 56 (2): 342–348.
Thermo-Luminescence of Heated Cherts from Hurt, W. R. 1986. “The Cultural Relationships of the Alice
Archaeological Site Alice Boer (Brazil).” Comptes Rendus Boer Site, State of São Paulo, Brazil.” In New Evidence for
De L’Academie des Sciences, Serie II 295 (5): 629–632. the Pleistocene Peopling of the Americas, edited by A. L.
Beltrão, M., C. R. Enriquez, J. Danon, E. Zuleta, and G. Bryan, 215–219. Orono, ME: Center for the Study of
Poupeau. 1983. Thermoluminescence Dating of Burnt Early Man.
Cherts from the Alice Boer Site (Brazil). Report no. CBPF- Iriarte, J. 1995. “Afinando la puntería: tamaño, forma y reju-
NF-004/83. Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas. venecimiento en las puntas de proyectil pedunculadas del
Borrazzo, K. 2020. “Aportes de la tafonomía actualística al Uruguay.” Actas del VIII Congreso Nacional de
estudio arqueológico de los pseudoartefactos.” Revista del Arqueología Uruguaya (1995), 1: 142–151.
Museo de Antropología 13 (1): 333–340. Laming-Emperaire, A. 1975. “Problèmes de préhistoire
Bryan, A. L. 1973. “Paleoenvironments and Cultural Diversity brésilienne.” Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales 30 (5):
in Late Pleistocene South America.” Quaternary Research 3: 1229–1260.
237–256. Laming-Emperaire, A. 1976. “Le plus ancien peuplement de
Bryan, A., and M. Beltrão. 1978. “An Early Stratified Sequence l’Amérique.” Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française.
near Rio Claro, East Central São Paulo State, Brazil.” In Comptes rendus des séances mensuelles 73 (9): 280–287.
Early Man in America from a Circum-Pacific Perspective, Lubinski, P. M., K. Terry, and P. T. McCutcheon. 2014.
edited by A. Bryan, 303–305. Edmonton: University of “Comparative Methods for Distinguishing Flakes from
Alberta. Geofacts: A Case Study from the Wenas Creek Mammoth
Calderón, G. I. A., and G. G. Politis. 1989. “Nuevos datos para Site.” Journal of Archaeological Science 52: 308–320.
un viejo problema: Investigación y discusiones en torno del Lynch, T. F. 1990. “Glacial-age Man in South America? A
poblamiento de América del Sur.” Boletin Museo del Oro Critical Review.” American Antiquity 55 (1): 12–36.
23: 3–45. Lynch, T. F. 1991. “Lack of Evidence for Glacial-age Settlement
Cruxent, J. M. 1959. “Noticia sobre litos de sílex del of South America: Reply to Dillehay and Collins and to
Brasil.” Boletin del Museo de Ciencias Naturales 4-5 (1-4): Gruhn and Bryan.” American Antiquity 56 (2): 348–355.
7–46. Lynch, T. F. 1998. “The Paleoindian and Archaic Stages in
Cruxent, J. M. 1968. “Theses for the Meditation on the Origin South America: Zones of Continuity and Segregation.” In
and Distribution of Man in South America.” In Biomedical Explorations in American Archaeology: Essays in Honor of
Challenges Presented by the American Indian, edited by J. Wesley Hurt, edited by M. Plew, 89–100. Lanham, NY:
Van Neel, 11–16. Washington, DC: Scientific Publication University Press of America.
165, Pan American Health Organization. MacNeish, R. S. 1976. “Early Man in the New World: A Survey
Cunha, L. M. 1990. “La région de Rio Claro, São Paulo, of the Archaeological Evidence Suggests that a Number of
Brésil: Contribution à l’étude des Oupations Specialized Tool Complexes were Widely Distributed in
Précéramiques du Site Alice Böer.” PhD diss., Muséum the Americas before 12,000 Years Ago.” American
National D’Histoire Naturelle, Institut de Paléontologie Scientist 64 (3): 316–327.
Humaine, Paris. MacNeish, R. S. 1978. “The Harvey Lecture Series. Late
Cunha, L. M. 1994. “Le Site d’Alice Boer (Brésil).” Pleistocene Adaptations: A New Look at Early Peopling
L’Anthropologie 98 (1): 110–127. of the New World as of 1976.” Journal of Anthropological
Dillehay, T. D. 1999. “The Late Pleistocene Cultures of South Research 34 (4): 475–496.
America.” Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Meis, M. R. M., and M. C. Beltrão. 1981. “The Alice Boer Site:
Reviews 7: 206–216. Lithostratigraphic Background.” Union Internacional de
Dillehay, T. D. 2008. “Profiles in Pleistocene History.” In The Ciencias Prehistoricas y Protohistoricas, XX Congresso,
Handbook of South American Archaeology, edited by H. Mexico: Comision XII, 99–100.
Silverman and W. H. Isbell, 29–43. New York: Springer. Meis, M. R. M., and M. C. Beltrão. 1982. “Nota prévia sobre a
Dillehay, T. D., G. A. Calderón, G. Politis, and M. C. Beltrão. sedimentação neoquaternária em Alice Boer – Rio Claro,
1992. “Earliest Hunters and Gatherers of South America.” SP.” Atas do IV Simpósio do Quaternário no Brasil, Rio
Journal of World Prehistory 6: 145–204. de Janeiro, 401–414.
Fagan, B. 1987. The Great Journey. The Peopling of Ancient Miller Jr, T. O. 1968. “Duas Fases Paleoindígenas da Bacia de
America. New York: Thames and Hudson. Rio Claro, Estado de São Paulo – Um Estudo em
Gillespie, J. D., S. Tupakka, and C. Cluney. 2004. Metodologia.” PhD diss., Faculdade de Filosofia, Ciências
“Distinguishing between Naturally and Culturally e Letras de Rio Claro, SP, Brazil.
 PALEOAMERICA 113

Miller Jr, T. O. 1972. “Arqueologia da região central do Estado from Fossil Charcoal and Soil Carbon Isotopes.”
de São Paulo.” Dédalo 16: 13–118. Quaternary International 114: 35–43.
Morais, J. L. 1987. “A propósito do estudo das indústrias Poupeau, G., L. M. Cunha, M. P. Fonseca, M. R. Meis, S. M.
líticas.” Revista do Museu Paulista 32: 155–184. Neme, R. Perez, and J. H. Souza. 1984. “Une Revision
Moreno de Sousa, J. C. 2019. “Tecnologia de Ponta a Ponta: Geologique-Geochronologique du Site Archeologique
Em busca de Mudanças Culturais durante o Holoceno em Alice Boer (Rio Claro, SP-Bresil).” Rapport d’une mission
Indústrias Líticas do Sudeste e Sul do Brasil.” PhD diss., de terrain du, 9 au 13 janvier 1984. Report presented to
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. the Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas, ms. no. CBPF-
Moreno de Sousa, J. C. 2020. “The Technological Diversity of MO-001/84.
Lithic Industries in Eastern South America during the Late Prous, A. 1991. Arqueologia Brasileira. Brasília: Editora
Pleistocene-Holocene Transition.” In Pleistocene Universidade de Brasília.
Archaeology – Migration, Technology and Adaptation, edi- Prous, A. 1995. “Archaeological Analysis of the Oldest
ted by R. Ono and A. Pawlik, Vol. 562, 1–12. London: Settlements in the Americas.” Revista Brasileira de
IntechOpen. Genética 18 (4): 689–699.
Moreno de Sousa, J. C. M., and M. Okumura. 2018. “The Prous, A., and E. Fogaça. 1999. “Archaeology of the
Association of Palaeoindian Sites from Southern Brazil and Pleistocene-Holocene Boundary in Brazil.” Quaternary
Uruguay with the Umbu Tradition: Comments on Suárez International 53: 21–41.
et al. (2017).” Quaternary International 467: 292–296. Roosevelt, A. C. 1998. “Ancient and Modern Hunter-gath-
Moreno de Sousa, J. C., and M. Okumura. 2020. “A New erers of Lowland South America: An Evolutionary
Proposal for the Technological Analysis of Lithic Points: Problem.” In Advances in Historical Ecology, edited by W.
Application for Understanding the Cultural Diversity of Balée, 190–212. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hunter Gatherers in Eastern South America.” Quaternary Scheinsohn, V. 2003. “Hunter-Gatherer Archaeology in South
International. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2020.07.037. America.” Annual Review of Anthropology 32 (1): 339–361.
Okumura, M., and A. G. M. Araujo. 2013. “Pontas bifaciais no Schmitz, P. I. 1990. “O povoamento pleistocênico do Brasil.”
Brasil Meridional: Caracterização estatística das formas e Revista de Arquelogía Americana 1: 33–68.
suas implicações culturais.” Revista do Museu de Steeves, P. F. 2015. “Decolonizing the Past and Present of the
Arqueologia e Etnologia 23: 111–127. Western Hemisphere (The Americas).” Archaeologies –
Okumura, M., and A. G. M. Araujo. 2015. “Desconstruindo o Journal of the World Archaeological Congress 11 (1): 42–69.
que nunca foi construído: Pontas bifaciais ‘Umbu’ do Sul e Troncoso, L. P. S., A. Correa, and P. Zanettini. 2016.
Sudeste do Brasil.” Revista do Museu de Arqueologia e “Paleoíndios em São Paulo: nota a respeito do sítio
Etnologia 20: 77–82. Caetetuba, Município de São Manuel, SP.” Palaeoindian
Okumura, M., and A. G. M. Araujo. 2016. “The Southern Archaeology 1 (1): 50–71.
Divide: Testing Morphological Differences among Bifacial Uchôa, D. P. 1988. “Programa de pesquisas arqueológicas na
Points from Southern and Southeastern Brazil Using região de Rio Claro, SP.” 40° Reunião Anual da Sociedade
Geometric Morphometrics.” Journal of Lithic Studies 3 Brasileira para o Progresso da Ciência (SBPC), 141.
(1): 107–131. Uchôa, D. P., and C. D. R. Garcia. 1976. “Subsídios à arqueo-
Okumura, M., and A. G. M. Araujo. 2017. “Fronteiras sul e logia pré-histórica de Rio Claro.” 10° Reunião da
sudeste: Uma análise morfométrica de pontas bifaciais de Associação Brasileira de Antropologia. Salvador, Bahia.
Minas Gerais, São Paulo, Paraná e Rio Grande do Sul Watling, J., J. Iriarte, F. E. Mayle, D. Schaan, L. C. Pessenda, N.
(Brasil).” Journal of Lithic Studies 4 (3): 163–188. J. Loader, F. Street-Perrott, R. Dickau, A. Damasceno, and
Parenti, F. 2001. Le gisement quaternaire de Pedra Furada A. Ranzi. 2017. “Impact of Pre-Columbian ‘Geoglyph’
(Piaui, Brésil): stratigraphie, chronologie, évolution cul- Builders on Amazonian Forests.” Proceedings of the
turelle. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les civilisations. National Academy of Sciences 114: 1868–1873.
Perez, R. A. R. 1991. “A Ocupação dos Terraços Fluviais do Weninger, B., O. Jöris, and U. Danzeglocke. 2012. “Calpal-
Baixo Passa Cinco: Arqueologia Experimental.” MA thesis, 2007. Cologne Radiocarbon Calibration. Palaeoclimate
Universidade de São Paulo, Brasil. Research Package.” http://www.calpal.de/.
Pessenda, L. C. R., S. E. M. Gouveia, R. Aravena, R. Boulet, Whitley, D. S., and R. I. Dorn. 1993. “New Perspectives on the
and A. N. D. E. P. E. Valencia. 2004. “Holocene Fire and Clovis vs. Pre-Clovis Controversy.” American Antiquity 58
Vegetation Changes in Southeastern Brazil as Deduced (4): 626–647.