
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


In episode 330 of The Archeology Show, we discuss the latest controversy over the site of Monte Verde in southern Chile, long considered a cornerstone pre-Clovis site dated to about 14,500 BP. We summarize a March 2026 study led by Todd Surovell arguing the key occupation layer is much younger (about 8,200–4,200 years ago) based on geological and stratigraphic analyses, including an 11,000-year-old tephra layer allegedly beneath deposits, claims of redeposited older wood from erosion and flooding, and luminescence dating of nearby sediments. We then review strong criticism, including scathing critiques from about 30 researchers including Tom Dillehay (author of the original work), disputing sampling locations, assumptions about redeposition, and whether the tephra identification is correct. It seems like both sides raise points but more collaborative research is needed before rewriting interpretations of early human peopling of the Americas.
When did humans arrive in the Americas? A new study reignites the debate
A mid-Holocene age for Monte Verde challenges the timeline of human colonization of South America (Not open access)
ScienceAdviser: New dating of ancient Chilean site reopens old wounds
Study suggests younger age for Chile's important Monte Verde archaeological site
'Speculation' and 'egregious failure': 30 researchers publish scathing critiques of study that questioned date of early human occupation of Monte Verde in Chile
Chris Webster
Rachel Roden
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
By Archaeology Podcast Network4.1
115115 ratings
In episode 330 of The Archeology Show, we discuss the latest controversy over the site of Monte Verde in southern Chile, long considered a cornerstone pre-Clovis site dated to about 14,500 BP. We summarize a March 2026 study led by Todd Surovell arguing the key occupation layer is much younger (about 8,200–4,200 years ago) based on geological and stratigraphic analyses, including an 11,000-year-old tephra layer allegedly beneath deposits, claims of redeposited older wood from erosion and flooding, and luminescence dating of nearby sediments. We then review strong criticism, including scathing critiques from about 30 researchers including Tom Dillehay (author of the original work), disputing sampling locations, assumptions about redeposition, and whether the tephra identification is correct. It seems like both sides raise points but more collaborative research is needed before rewriting interpretations of early human peopling of the Americas.
When did humans arrive in the Americas? A new study reignites the debate
A mid-Holocene age for Monte Verde challenges the timeline of human colonization of South America (Not open access)
ScienceAdviser: New dating of ancient Chilean site reopens old wounds
Study suggests younger age for Chile's important Monte Verde archaeological site
'Speculation' and 'egregious failure': 30 researchers publish scathing critiques of study that questioned date of early human occupation of Monte Verde in Chile
Chris Webster
Rachel Roden
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

3,248 Listeners

512 Listeners

10 Listeners

4,817 Listeners

151 Listeners

93 Listeners

15 Listeners

19 Listeners

229 Listeners

31 Listeners

2 Listeners

2 Listeners

4 Listeners

19 Listeners

737 Listeners

4,014 Listeners

6,240 Listeners

2 Listeners

902 Listeners

16 Listeners

761 Listeners

0 Listeners

13,594 Listeners

15 Listeners

127 Listeners

3 Listeners

3,386 Listeners

27 Listeners

1,897 Listeners

2,063 Listeners

0 Listeners

72 Listeners

0 Listeners

1,767 Listeners