- "Association of Man with Pleistocene Mammals in the Sandia Mountains, New Mexico," American Antiquity, 2(4):260-263. [the first article to describe Sandia Cave.
- The Lost Americans (1946)
- Treasure in the Dust (1951)
- Prehistoric Man in Europe (1958)
- Digging Up America (1960)
- ^ a b Frank Hibben Funds New UNM Anthropology Building
- ^ a b Frank C. Hibben
- ^ Dalton, Rex (2003). "University buildings named on shaky ground". Nature (Society for American Archaeology) 426 (374): 200–201. doi:10.1038/426374a. PMID 14647348.
- ^ a b "The Mystery of Sandia Cave". New Yorker Magazine (New York) 71 (16): 66–83.
- ^ Josephy, Jr., Alvin M. (1973). The Indian Heritage of America. New York: Bantam Books. pp. 42.
- ^ Bliss (1940a). "A Chronological Problem Presented by Sandia Cave, New Mexico". American Antiquity (Society for American Archaeology) 5 (3): 200–201. doi:10.2307/275278. JSTOR 275278.
- ^ "Sandia Cave". Correspondence in American Antiquity 6 (1): 77–78. 1940b.
- ^ Hibben, F. C., 1943, Evidence of early man in Alaska. American Antiquity. v. 8, no. 3, pp. 254-259.
- ^ Thorson, R. M., D. C. Plaskett, and F. C. Dixon, Jr., 1978, A Reported Early-Man Site Adjacent to Southern Alaska's Continental Shelf: A Geologic Solution to an Archeologic Enigma. Quaternary Research. v. 13, no. 2, pp. 259-273.
IMHO, the need to clear the pre-Clovis cultures off the playing field at first led to the assertion that the stratigraphy of Sandia cave could not be trusted because of the actions of burrowing rodents-a criticism which might be claimed with equal force at ANY archaeological dig at any time, the whole world over, and then claiming some obviously invalid dates (far out of the possibility of C14 testing) were somehow indicative that the points had to have been introduced below that level. More obviously, the bad dates must be discarded. The entire case is one of unsubstanytiated allegations and innuendo. One famous Archaeologist "got a funny feeling" about Hibben and his actions, and somehow this was taken to be evidence against his professionaintegrity. I need not point out that it does not work that way and you cannot call that evidence in a court of law. The existance of a pre-Clovis precoursor culture was done away with by a whispering campaign and it amounts to character assassination done to support an already-disproven theory that there were no pre-Clovis cultures.
Below are two diagrams of the French Solutrean lithic styles. You do not need to be an expert to see that there were many different lithic typologies. It is an indicator of different people that lived in the area under the Solutrean banner and time period. This diagram is a collection of Solutrean projectile points from the French book “Le Solutréen en France” which can be found on the internet, compliments of the visionary Bruce Bradley of the University of Exeter.
Publications de l’Institut de Préhistoire de l’Université de Bordeaux, No. 5.
Author: Philip E. L. Smith
I have been told that the dot diagrams in the Iberian/French caves are representations of water. Ancient humans looked out across the lakes and oceans seeing vast expanses of water. What impressed them the most was the sparkling glints of light patterns that waves and sun create. These “diamonds” on the surface became magical to them as they defied explanation and had no corporeal existence. To them water was also an impassable barrier that only certain animals had the capacity to enter. Magic, water, and these certain animals became symbols of spiritual power and awe. Shamans recognized both light and the fact that bodies of water were a different form of reality. With this view of water their symbolic representations became “polka dots of light”.
El Castillo Cave, Spain (of Solutrean origin)
In the above pictograph from the El Castillo Cave is a good example of this understanding. The dots are rivers of water and on these rivers are hide stretched boats, obviously a powerful impression to be recorded and talked about in a legend. You can see on the right side there is a boat on the water, as the water is covered by the rear part of the boat. The boat sits on the water covering the area that it occupies, from that perspective. The object above this boat it is a sail full of wind, but not fully recognized by the observer as to how it is attached to the boat. There is a start of a mast in the middle of the boat but time has erased it or it was never recognized and recorded. Both the boat and the sails are stitched together with more than one piece of hide. In fact the gunwale (gunnel) can also be seen with more stitching as it is an attachment area to the wood frame. You can also see on the left boat the middle section had two smaller hides sown together, showing there was more than one boat being observed.