Monte Verde site in Chile is far younger than thought!

I have posted several times menitoning the Monte Verde site in Chilean Patagonia, in the Lake District (see it on Google maps). It has been proclaimed and dated as the oldest site in Southern South America (and most of America) with an age of around 15,000 to 18,000 years. However, new research published in Science by Surovell et al., last week, suggests that it is far more recent, just 8.2 to 4.2 ky old!

The research paper is this one: Todd A. Surovell et al., A mid-Holocene age for Monte Verde challenges the timeline of human colonization of South America. Science 391, 1283-1288 (2026). DOI: 10.1126/science.adw9217.

The Very Old Age of Monte Verde (until now)

First reported by the team that had excavated the site since 1977, Tom D. Dillehay & Michael B. Collins, 1988, in an article published in Nature, the authors stated that "We report here two carbon-14 dates from charcoal taken from cultural features associated with the older materials of ∼33,000 yr BP. These findings provide additional evidence that people colonized the Americas much earlier than was previously thought."

Above is a view of the site (Source), it is set on the western side of the Andes in an area with forest coverage, by a stream. This area was heavily glaciated during the Ice Ages which carved out the lakes in the regin (Llanquihue, Todos los Santos, Ranco, etc.) it is also close to several active volcanoes (Osorno, Puyehue, Puntiagudo, Calbuco), and not far from the Pacific Ocean.

Dillehay et al, 2008 gave old, but not so old, dates to the site: "Remains of nine species of marine algae were recovered from hearths and other features at Monte Verde II, an upper occupational layer, and were directly dated between 14,220 and 13,980 calendar years before the present (∼12,310 and 12,290 carbon-14 years ago)." and again, Dillehay et al, 2015, an old date: "New evidence of stone artifacts, faunal remains, and burned areas suggests discrete horizons of ephemeral human activity in a sandur plain setting radiocarbon and luminescence dated between at least ~18,500 and 14,500 cal BP."

Over the course of 38 years, the site has been proclaimed as ancient, among the oldest in America, and it surely is, but now, controversy about its age has flared up again.

Much more recent: Clovis First Strikes Back

I must be fair and let you know that Todd Surovell, author of the paper suggesting a much later date for Monte Verde, does not believe in an early peopling of America. This position is clear, as we can see in Surovell et al., 2022: "[Our] findings support the hypothesis that the first human arrival to the New World occurred by at least 14,200 years ago in Beringia and by approximately 13,000 years ago in the temperate latitudes of North America. Strong evidence for human presence before those dates has yet to be identified in the archaeological record."

Surovell et al., 2018 also criticize early arrival, question the continuity of pre-Clovis and later Clovis paleoindians, and the Pacific coastal route vs. the inland one (favored by Surovell).

Having mentioned this, below I will comment Sturovell's new 2026 paper, and what it says about Monte Verde, its age and the arrival routes into America:

The researches looked at the sedimentary layout of the Monte Verde site, erosion, and volcanic ash, and concluded that it is half or even one-quarter of the formerly acknowledged age!

The authors state the following (I highlight the important part) "We argue that radiocarbon and luminescence dates from alluvial exposures, in combination with the identification of a tephra dated to 11,000 years B.P. stratigraphically underlying the archaeological component, suggest that Monte Verde cannot be older than the Middle Holocene (8200 to 4200 years B.P.). With colonization no longer anchored by Monte Verde, our revised chronology supports a more recent date of human arrival to South America."

Their analysis of sedimentary deposition of glacial sediments, volcanic ashes, and tree trunks that were later eroded is neat and seems coherent, and of course, the will to validate their preconceptions and the beliefs they support (like a late peopling of America).

Pushing their Clovis cause, the authors caution that "...any inferences made about the peopling of the Americas based on a Late Pleistocene date for this site should be reevaluated. Although a pre-Clovis human presence in the Americas is accepted by many archaeologists, a Holocene age for Monte Verde leaves open the possibility of later initial colonization. The acceptance of the pre-Clovis age of Monte Verde led some to reject migration through the ice-free corridor as a possible route of initial entry, and a coastal route along the Cordilleran ice margin has been suggested to be more likely. Although our findings do not preclude the possibility of earlier dates of initial entry to the Americas, they do support an initial interior migration into continental North America as a viable colonization hypothesis. As demonstrated here, the age of the MV-II component should not be used as a constraint or check on colonization models derived from other sources, including the genetics of modern or ancient populations. Our findings also underscore the critical need for independent study and verification of early sites."

I look forward to comments and rebuttals. This is indeed an interesting development!

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2026 by Austin Whittall ©