NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.geneticarchaeology.com/Research/Students_Discovery_Could_Help_Rewrite_Prehistory.asp

A little boy's natural curiosity may have turned up archeological evidence that the earliest Native Americans came from Europe, not Asia.

When UD doctoral student Darrin Lowery was 6, he and his father began collecting arrowheads and spearheads that they found along the shoreline of Tilghman Island in the Chesapeake Bay. "We found some interesting things, but we didn't know what they were," Lowery said.

These artifacts remained interesting curiosities until the late 1970s when Lowery and his father were watching "The Search for the First American," a television program about the first inhabitants of North America. During the broadcast, Dennis Stanford, chairperson of the National Museum of Natural History's anthropology department, showed a Clovis point, or fluted spearhead made of stone, used as a hunting tool at the end of the last ice age about 11,000 years ago and named after the first of its kind discovered in Clovis, N.M., in 1932. Clovis tools have rock spear points, are thin and bifacial and share "overshot" flaking characteristics that make wide, flat blades.

After watching the program, Lowery said he told his father he had Clovis points in his collection, but the senior Lowery was skeptical. "My father wondered why someone during the ice age was living on what is now Tilghman Island," Lowery said. At that time, Clovis points were mostly found in the west, and anthropologists believed they were used by hunters who migrated from Siberia to Alaska across the Bering Strait.

Then, when Lowery was 13, he and his sister went to a conference in Washington, D.C., where Stanford was speaking. Lowery brought along his collection, and when he had the opportunity, he approached Stanford. Lowery said Stanford was astonished that these artifacts had been gathered in Maryland and began excavating on Tilghman Island almost immediately.

Stanford found that Tilghman Island's Clovis points were older than those found in New Mexico--about 2,000 years older. Since then, a site discovered more recently near Richmond, Va., has yielded Clovis points that may be 17,000 years old.

After years of excavating in Alaska and finding little evidence of Clovis technology and with the abundance of Clovis tools found in Virginia, Delaware and other parts of the East Coast, Stanford and others have become proponents of the Solutrean theory, which holds that some Native Americans migrated from Europe by boat. Other theories contend that all Native Americans came from Asia.

The Solutrean theory is based on the assumption that hunters, living in prehistoric Europe (now France and Spain) approximately 21,000-17,000 years ago, traveled to North America looking for game and brought their methods of making stone tools with them, providing the foundation for later Clovis technology found throughout North America. The theory rests on the similarities in Solutrean and Clovis tools that have no known counterparts before 11,200 in eastern Asia, Siberia or the Bering Strait.

While Lowery is still involved with the Tilghman Island excavation, his field of doctoral research in geological sciences at UD is geoarcheology. Under the supervision of Michael O'Neal, assistant professor of geography and geological sciences, Lowery is studying how landscape changes through time. That was the subject of his master's degree research at Temple University.

Lowery's interest is in how geological formations reveal weather patterns and how these weather patterns affect human development.

He said his excavations on Tilghman Island show evidence that around 12,900 years ago, it suddenly got really cold and dry. "In 20-50 years, it went from a mild climate to almost full glacial conditions. There were a lot of Clovis occupations before 13,000 years, but after that this area becomes a no-man's land," Lowery said.

"In today's world we talk about global warming and cooling, but the best way to understand the impact of climate is to look at the past," he said.

Lowery, who works as a survey archeologist, co-teaches a six-week field school at Washington College in Chestertown, Md. The course, for college students interested in archeology, is targeted at locations in Kent County, Md. Their research will help test a model aimed at locating prospective archeological sites on the upper Eastern Shore of Maryland. The model predicts areas Native Americans were most likely to have inhabited. If the model proves accurate, archeologists will have a head start in identifying historically sensitive areas.

Excavations along the East Coast are revealing important information about the origins of the first Americans, especially, the 20-acre Tilghman Island site that Lowery once owned. He sold it to the Eastern Shore Land Conservancy, a private, nonprofit organization working for sound land-use planning on Maryland's Eastern Shore. The sale protected the site from development, securing it for archeological research.

Lowery said that the Tilghman Island site still has much to reveal, and now, its protected status will give scientists the time they need to dig deeper.

Wow, interesting article. I really don't have too much commentary. I just found it really interesting.

That is interesting.

It will be interesting to see what else they find on Tilghman Island....

i expect that in the future we'll learn more from genetics than we will from artifacts. american indians dont look much like europeans.
its hard to imagine a way that they start out in europe, move to the americas and start looking like asians.

Oh, they're finally doing a re-write? That's good, maybe somebody will finally follow my advice and add a few car chases.

I'm not sold on this but just to stir things up...

http://www.theperspective.org/olmecs.html

The claim is that the first Civilization in America was built by migrants from Africa, I just know some black people I've talked to on the internet believe it :D but not everyone

http://www.geneticarchaeology.com/Research/Students_Discovery_Could_Help_Rewrite_Prehistory.asp



Wow, interesting article. I really don't have too much commentary. I just found it really interesting.

The Solutrean hypothesis as it is called ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis ) is rather interesting. Like all theories of the early colonization of the Americas it has it strong points and weak points. I'd like to see more research done on it.

i expect that in the future we'll learn more from genetics than we will from artifacts. american indians dont look much like europeans.
its hard to imagine a way that they start out in europe, move to the americas and start looking like asians.

They have done some gentic research that points to the possibility of some early European ancestry as well as the primarily Asian ancestry of American Indians. From the article linked above:

"The idea is also supported by mitochondrial DNA analysis insofar as the fact that some members of some native North American tribes share a common yet distant maternal ancestry with some present-day individuals in Europe identified by mtDNA Haplogroup X. Unlike other Native American mtDNA Haplogroups A, B, C and D, Haplogroup X is not common in Northeastern Asia or Siberia (although occurrence of Haplogroup X2 of more recent origin has been identified in the Altai Republic). The New World haplogroup X DNA (now called subgroup X2a) is as different from any of the Old World X2 lineages as they are from each other, indicating a very ancient origin. Although haplogroup X occurs only at a frequency of about 3% for the total current indigenous population of the Americas, it is a major haplogroup in northeastern North America, where among the Algonquian peoples it comprises up to 25% of mtDNA types."

But again, more research needs to be done.

I saw some documentuary about that theory, it was some skin head screaming that european travel to america along the edge of the ice sheet. He had two french style spearheads, I wasn't convinced... maybe it was poor production values, maybe it was the rants about racial purity, or maybe it was the complete lack of any evedence.

That is interesting.

It will be interesting to see what else they find on Tilghman Island....

I'm not bought, in the least.

Why, you ask?

They state that few Clovis points are found in Alaska, and many in the North East. Surely this means they came from Europe!

Of course, let's forget that Glaciers are very well known for completely destroying almost any archaeological evidence from the area. Oh yes, let's forget that.

As well, let's forget that no boat capable of even traveling the torrential seas of the Atlantic existed at least for 10,000 years after the last Ice Age(At least no evidence indicates such). Find me such technology, and granted, it is viable.

I have other problems, but those are the main ones for right now.

I'm not sold on this but just to stir things up...

http://www.theperspective.org/olmecs.html

The claim is that the first Civilization in America was built by migrants from Africa, I just know some black people I've talked to on the internet believe it :D but not everyone

They make a lot of claims on that sight. Slightly odd that they don't really show evidence. They simply state "This is true because we say it's true."

I would like to see the evidence that "clearly" shows that they are no different than the Africans from Mende. They don't give it, so I'm skeptical, to say the least.

I would also need to see the methodology used to show that the script used was derived from Mende. Is it simple correlation among a few given words, phrases, or in morphology(You can relate almost any language to any other language if you want to-I've seen some "studies" claiming that all language are related because the term for "milk" has the "m" sound at the beginning for almost all languages, or something of the sorts-hardly convincing), or are we talking of a pattern that is very similar to that of the Mende language? Once again, they speak of the methodology used, or even any of the evidence which is supposed to make it clear evidence, hence, I must remain skeptical once more.

Next, let's move onto the use of astronomy... Now, I'm assuming that by "venus complex" they mean Venus and the cluster of stars around venus... which doesn't making it surprising they studied it. Aside from the Sun and the Moon, it is the brightest object in the sky. It was an object of great interest to many cultures across the world. Sirius is the brightest star in the sky, so, due to the same exact reason as Venus, it is obviously going to be of interest, to many cultures.

Then they talk about Thunder Gods, and the hammer. Well, boy-howdy, the Norse must have been Africans, or Native Americans because there is no way they could have thought of that by themselves.

Or perhaps Thunder and Lightning are seen as mystical and godly across the world at the time, and that the "clang" of the hammer strike is very reminiscent of thunderstrikes. Nah... that just seems downright logical.


That's where I'm going to stop.

Now, I'm not saying it isn't possible, however, quite frankly the "evidence" provided is barely that at all, and sometimes no evidence is provided, merely claims that evidence exists for such claims. I don't care what you claim the evidence shows, I want to see the evidence for myself.

Note: Never take anything at face value, especially from the internet.

Note: Never take anything at face value, especially from the internet.

I know, I first learned about it with this video

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GVqteohtYPg&mode=related&search=

but I'm skeptical because the heads don’t necessarily have to be African. In fact I think this might be just as bad as the theory of nordic desert men building Egypt or the mythical white race that built Ghana or the Aryan invasion of India idea. I just wanted to stir things up :D

edit: but it might be possible, I don't know much about the subject

I know, I first learned about it with this video

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GVqteohtYPg&mode=related&search=

but I'm skeptical because the heads don’t necessarily have to be African. In fact I think this might be just as bad as the theory of nordic desert men building Egypt or the mythical white race that built Ghana or the Aryan invasion of India idea. I just wanted to stir things up :D

edit: but it might be possible, I don't know much about the subject

Or the Lost Tribes of Israel in North America(Mound builder myths, you gotta hate em).

Really, I see no evidence to support practically any of their claims, just claims.

It is *technically* possible.

However, until they can find an ocean going craft that is around 15,000 years old, or something of similar regard, I'm not going to be convinced in the least.

Man, my Archaeology professors would have a field day with this(As they are all very well versed on prehistoric Native Americans, especially around the Ice Age-it's a subject of interest here in Minnesota, really).

i expect that in the future we'll learn more from genetics than we will from artifacts. american indians dont look much like europeans.
its hard to imagine a way that they start out in europe, move to the americas and start looking like asians.

There's not much stock to put in genetics. According to most studies, most blacks are really white and whites are really asians.
Also, the physical appearance of a people can change over time because of convergence. Everyone in the north is likely to develop a slant eye appearance because that is the best biological method for protecting the eyes from the bite of the freezing winds of the north. That's regardless of ethnicity.
Put some wide eyed Africans up at the North Pole and in 100 years, their children will have slant eyes.
Slant eyes being an example.

The fact that there is material evidence in the northeast that many natives came from Europe while there is no material evidence in Alaska that all natives came from Europe is compelling.

But it doesn't explain the similarities between some mexican groups and chinese groups. Except to note stories of chinese sailors who claimed they got lost, came upon a land and mated with its women before finding a way back to China.

I'm not bought, in the least.

Why, you ask?

They state that few Clovis points are found in Alaska, and many in the North East. Surely this means they came from Europe!

Of course, let's forget that Glaciers are very well known for completely destroying almost any archaeological evidence from the area. Oh yes, let's forget that.

As well, let's forget that no boat capable of even traveling the torrential seas of the Atlantic existed at least for 10,000 years after the last Ice Age(At least no evidence indicates such). Find me such technology, and granted, it is viable.

I have other problems, but those are the main ones for right now.
If that is true, then the glaciation at Tilghman Island would have destroyed those clovis points too.

If you find that one interesting you may also find the "Kennewick" man of Washington state interesting. At 9300 years old he does not resemble any native tribe of the area. Funny thing is they (native tribes) still tried to claim him and re-bury him. A court order paved the way for further scientific research.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/04/060425183740.htm

i expect that in the future we'll learn more from genetics than we will from artifacts. american indians dont look much like europeans.
its hard to imagine a way that they start out in europe, move to the americas and start looking like asians.

Turks in Turkey don't look like Turkic peoples in Uzbekistan either.

It's possible that the Americas were settled in waves and that different areas have different genetic substrata.

PS: Forgive the pretentious wording, I'm a dink. :(

I'd like to hear what my old archeology teacher has to say about this, she specialized in paleolithic (old stone) artifacts. She's also the one who told us, while passing a piece of Mississippian pottery around; "Don't worry about breaking it, you'll only increase the sample size."

EDIT: Looked her up, she's still a prof at SEMO. Surprisingly enough, so was my historic preservation adviser. After nearly ten years. Cool

I'm a dink. :(


Great word that is not nearly used enough. Also, yes I do agree with you on this point. :p

Honestly, if all they have to go on is Clovis points, it's rather shaky.

Stone Age tech is tricky, but it's not exactly "rocket science". Given enough time, even an isolated group can master most primitive tool-making techniques, without having to "import" the knowledge from their previous homelands.

As far as "European traits" in the mitochondrial DNA goes, let's see. Natives raped by Colonials, check. Colonials going native, check. Early Vikings sailing over, check.

From what I know, Native Americans look more like Polynesians and South East Asians than they do Europeans.

If that is true, then the glaciation at Tilghman Island would have destroyed those clovis points too.

You don't have reading comprehension, do you? The island had near glaciation climates, not actual glaciation. The glaciers never came anywhere close to the island itself.

So, nice try, but you fail.

There's not much stock to put in genetics. According to most studies, most blacks are really white and whites are really asians.


Source.


Also, the physical appearance of a people can change over time because of convergence. Everyone in the north is likely to develop a slant eye appearance because that is the best biological method for protecting the eyes from the bite of the freezing winds of the north. That's regardless of ethnicity.
Put some wide eyed Africans up at the North Pole and in 100 years, their children will have slant eyes.
Slant eyes being an example.


Eh... no. Try a couple thousand years, at the very least. Evolution is slow, especially in humans, due to long rates of reproduction between generations.


The fact that there is material evidence in the northeast that many natives came from Europe while there is no material evidence in Alaska that all natives came from Europe is compelling.

As I stated, Glaciers usually destroy archaeological evidence. As well, Humans are found in the Americas far earlier than this site. The reason why you don't find much archaeological evidence before the last Ice Age in Alaska and other Areas is quite simple.

The glaciers would have destroyed any artifacts there.

The island site, I assure you, WAS NOT covered by glaciers.


But it doesn't explain the similarities between some mexican groups and chinese groups. Except to note stories of chinese sailors who claimed they got lost, came upon a land and mated with its women before finding a way back to China.

Yeah...

Yay conjecture without physical evidence(And frankly, I've never heard these stories).

This is what we call "crapthropology".

As far as "European traits" in the mitochondrial DNA goes, let's see. Natives raped by Colonials, check. Colonials going native, check. Early Vikings sailing over, check.All of which happened > 12000 years ago...? You must've missed the bit where the DNA 'Marker' in question was introduced in excess of ten thousand years before the vikings came along.

From what I know, Native Americans look more like Polynesians and South East Asians than they do Europeans.You must also have missed the bit where this particular hypothesis doesn't exclude migration from Asia, nor does it even deny that the majority of (Today's) natives came from there, but merely states that it wasn't the only migratory route - that there were, in fact, two (If not three, via the pacific, albeit still a similar route) directions from where the continent was originally settled.

Try again.

As it is, the similarity in the tools is there (And it is worth noting that this similarity is lacking in Siberia), the genetic evidence/ suggestion is there, crossing the Atlantic near the ice sheet was definitely possible with paleolithic technology (I mean, stoneage civilisations have done rather more impressive feats than that), hell, even the geography (Hydrography?) works, insofar that it's easier to reach America via the north Atlantic than the other way around (One of the reasons for the relative isolation of the continent)...

How very interesting. By the way everyone knows the "Solutrean theory, which holds that some Native Americans migrated from Europe by boat" is correct and the Irish discovered America. Hoists a pint and salutes the Irish. :p

Oh, they're finally doing a re-write? That's good, maybe somebody will finally follow my advice and add a few car chases.

More sex! More Sex!! More SEX!!!

:)

i expect that in the future we'll learn more from genetics than we will from artifacts. american indians dont look much like europeans.
its hard to imagine a way that they start out in europe, move to the americas and start looking like asians.

Could it be they came from Asia and Europe? Then the two fully mixed over the thousands of years to create a new race?

Could it be they came from Asia and Europe? Then the two fully mixed over the thousands of years to create a new race?

well it would not surprise me if there were some eurpean coastal peoples who got swept all the way over to the americas at various times in the distant past. over the course of...20,000 years surely at least a few survived storms that swept them westward.

what they would have met when they washed up on the shore, i dont know. if they met people, those people are likely to have taken them in. it seems unlikely that they were the source of eastern indians.

american indians are not really one race. they dont have one source of origin. there are at least several waves of bering straits migration to take into consideration.

dont you also find it doubtful that all the people from asia WALKED here? sure there was a land bridge but travel is much quicker by boat no matter how small a craft. the dispersion of people down the west coast was so fast that it must have invovled some amount of adventuring into the unknown rather than a spreading by population growth.

in any case, many of these questions will be answered by dna research. as we have discovered in the past 35 years since i took a biology class, looking alike doesnt mean much. genetics reveals unexpected relationships.

genetics reveals unexpected relationships.

So...you could be...my sister. :eek:

So...you could be...my sister. :eek:

daddy was a travellin' man?

i do have a brother older than you. its not impossible just unlikely.