The Solutrean Hypothesis: Retracing Ancient Footsteps Across Atlantic Ice ft. Ancient Americas
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 พ.ค. 2024
- WAAAAAY back in my 4th video in June 2020 I said I would talk about the Solutrean Hypothesis and then I promptly decided I wasn't that interested in putting that much time and energy into researching a topic that wasn't really that interesting to me. Years passed and I wound up becoming internet bros with the Ancient Americas channel. (check him out. He's got my favorite TH-cam archaeology channel / @ancientamericas ) Pete kindly agreed to help me research, write, and present this episode, so the style is going to be completely different from what I normally do.
The basic premise is that Bruce Bradley and Dennis Stanford considered it unlikely that the Paleoamerican cultures like Clovis and the eastern Pre-Clovis complexes were the product of immigrants from Siberia, because Siberian material culture doesn't resemble Paleoamerica at all. Paleoamerican material culture looks much more like material from western Europe between 25,000 and 16,000 years ago, and that led them to suggest that a group of Solutrean migrants following sea mammals across the Atlantic eventually made it to the Tidewater region of North America. This was a compelling hypothesis and it got a lot of attention from academia and the popular press. I was taught about it in undergrad and we were encouraged to take it seriously as a potential model for the peopling of the Americas. It has not aged well however. Were the Solutreans Graham Hancock's Lost Advanced Civilization? No. Of course not. Don't be ridiculous.
Instagram: / nfosaaen_archaeology
Sources:
Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley 2012: Across Atlantic Ice: The Origin of America’s Clovis Culture
Jennifer Raff 2022: Origin: A Genetic History of The Americas
J. David Kilby 2019: A North American perspective on the Volgu Biface Cache from Upper
Paleolithic France and its relationship to the “Solutrean Hypothesis” for Clovis origins
www.academia.edu/en/24273014/...
Kilby 2008: AN INVESTIGATION OF CLOVIS CACHES: CONTENT, FUNCTION, AND TECHNOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION
www.academia.edu/2311773/An_i...
O'Brien, M.J., Boulanger, M.T., Collard, M., Buchanan, B., Tarle, L., Straus, L.G., Eren,
M.I.,
2014 On thin ice: problems with Stanford and Bradley's proposed Solutrean
colonization of North America. Antiquity 88, 606-624.
Related Content:
Eske Wilerslev presentations on archaeogenetics.
• What we can learn from...
• "From Siberia to the A...
![เปิดบ้าน เปิด Supercar อั๋นโอกิ เคยเอา rolls Royce เเลกพระ องค์ละ 100 ล้าน l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FeGwJwXauZ0/mqdefault.jpg)
Why doesn't ancient kurgan culture in America make it a Solutream fact?? I mean, that is what these mounds are- kurgans.. It's not just the kurgans, it's their genetics, which have never been found on the "northern route". They were a copper wares kurgan culture, and we think we don't know who they were?! Nonsense! Obfuscating nonsense. Clearly, the mere idea is outside the scope of The Overton Window.
"The eyes of that species of extinct giants whose bones fill the Mounds of America, have gazed on Niagara as ours do now." - Lincoln.
First of all, Solutreans didn't build kurgans. You're mixing unrelated cultures and time periods. Second, as we explained, there has never been legitimate European DNA found in precolonial America. Third, burial mounds started in the Americas LONG after the Kurgan culture. They're not related.
@@NathanaelFosaaen That's only because your kind don't consider haplogroup X, "European DNA", but it most certainly is. So what is the time window for so-called Solutreans?
@@NathanaelFosaaen Everything under the sun is "related".
@dieselphiend X2b,c,and d are European. X2a is not. The Solutrean culture ended some 17,000 years ago, and the "Kurgan Culture" didn't begin until a full 10,000 years later. They have nothing to do with eachother.
@@NathanaelFosaaen Perhaps you're comfortable with the idea that kurgan culture in North America emerged from nothingness. I'm not.
Loved being a part of this ! Thank you!
Thanks for all your contributions!
This was the best collab ever!
No the caveat is - I have told you we have the burials everyone seeks at a twice documented Mound 100+ yr. C.O. Here is evidence for our ancient city site !
Early Human Settlement of Northeastern North America - Parsons Island
Charcoal collected above this in-situ biface produced an age estimate of 17,133 ± 88 14 C yr BP or 20,525 ± 341 cal yr BP.
.Artifacts discovered by a Smithsonian affiliated archaeologist along the Island’s eroding southwestern shoreline indicate that Parsons’ original inhabitants were pre-native people whose origins span the Atlantic Ocean to the Solutré territory of east-central France some 20,000 years ago - suggesting a new timeline and arrival route for human settlement on the North American continent. ! Magdalenian sites stretched from Portugal in the west to Poland in the east, and as far north as France, the Channel Islands, England, and Wales.
As an archaeologist myself, and as someone who has handled a lot of fluted points, and been immersed in the literature for several decades, it is important to recognize that while "pre-Clovis" components were "obvious" to some of us, others flatly rejected the notion, and when Stanford and Bradley published their book, there were many North American archaeologists who still insisted Clovis was the earliest occupation, reflecting the actual colonization of the Americas. This was despite the inherent logical problems and evidential issues the Clovis First hypothesis, which had been regarded by many as a proven fact. Recently (2022) work has been published by the National Academy of Science that demonstrated that the Ice Free Corridor was not open soon enough or long enough for people from the arctic to populate the lower latitudes.
Most American archaeologists were still supposing that while pre-Clovis had to be a thing, that the time depth of their entry could not be too much earlier than the appearance of Clovis. Bradley and Stanford were adhering to that. If you add an additional 5,000 years to earliest Clovis, then you are still looking at an entry not much earlier than Meadowcroft. ca. 18 kya. There are still problems, because scattered older dates _must_ mean the continent was largely explored by that time. If you add dates from South America even that 18 kya estimate begins to look too recent. The White Sands footprints, and osteoderm beads in Brazil push the problem back immensely farther. Currently there are no working hypotheses that handles the available evidence efficiently. The one fact we can draw is that Clovis hunters did not emerge from the Ice Free Corridor, and eat every mammoth on the continent, along with every horse, camel, giant ground sloth and short-faced bear.
As concerns the size of Clovis populations, the distribution of a technology _may_ correlate with a people, but it may also reflect the spread of an idea through many peoples. The spread of the use of the bow and arrow in North and South America is an example. Clovis technology, the manufacturing and weapon construction ideas may well have spread widely through word of mouth or example rather than colonization. In fact, entire technological, material culture and ritual complexes can spread through adjacent populations, independent of colonization. The late prehistoric archaeology of California, or the Northwest Coast both exhibit this. In California much of the northern state reflects a broadly uniform material and ritual culture which multiple linguistic populations p[articipated in prior to historic contact. The Northwest Coast shows a similar spread of material culture reachin from southern Alaska, south along the Pacific Coast to Northwestern California, with dentalium shell used as a medium of exchange throughout that range. So, a technological distribution is not at all necessary evidence of a single population.
The real take away, IMHO, that despite what looks like an immense amount of data, 1) it is not that much data when you are trying tunderstand around 20,000 years or more of prehistory, and 2) we don't know much at all when you accept the reality of the immense canyons of missing information. Unlike the science of archaeology, prehistory is mainly story telling, based on tiny glimpses of what might have happened once upon a time.
Thank you for your service.
Early Human Settlement of Northeastern North America - Parsons Island
Charcoal collected above this in-situ biface produced an age estimate of 17,133 ± 88 14 C yr BP or 20,525 ± 341 cal yr BP. Jonathan C. Lothrop,Darrin L. Lowery,Arthur E. Spiess &Christopher J. Ellis
This video made me hungrier than I would have anticipated 😂
Being a scientist by training and profession, and having long been interested ancient American culture (and, incidentally, living about 1.6 km from the Anzick site) what I find particularly interest is that the Solutrean hpothesis
was actually presented as a testable hypothesis. That meant it could be tested, with some rigor, and either either falsified or accepted (but never actually proven, of course). And, then, how the subsequent studies actually did support an alternative hypothesis. Your treatment and presentation was informative, balanced, and well-done. Actually, the whole resultant body of work generated by the Spolutrean hypothesis is one the best really clear-cut discrete examples of archaeology being truly a science, I have seen. This joint presentation was really good, playing off both narrator's strong points. Nicely done, gentlemen!!! Thanks!
That's mostly because people's eyes glaze over when we get into the hard science part of archaeology, so we usually leave that stuff out of our public education material. Even this is SUPER stripped down.
@@NathanaelFosaaen
I personally think the Solutrean Hypothesis is unlikely. Even if it is an intriguing possibility. And a remote possibility at that. Unfortunately some unsavory individuals latched on to it. To be followed by the knee jerk political correctness response about racism. And predictably Native Groups responded with talk that it was all about justifying dispossing them. In response to the whole question l have several questions
1) How many lithic cultures worldwide post or pre Solutrean developed very similiar stone working techniques.
2) What are the time frames similiar stone working techniques relative to Solutrean.
3) What type of blue water boat technology did exist or could have existed during the Wisconsin/Wurm Glaciation. I know that the terms Wisconsin and Wurm are obsolete but the still act as a convenient place holder in terms of era. Plus a lot of people might not be familiar with terms such as MIS 2 or MIS 4) Why is the highest concentration of Clovis artifacts in Eastern North America. More specifically in the Delmarva Peninsula area. Is this due to a higher percentage of excavation for building purposes. Due to Late Wisconsin environmental conditions.
What could prove a Solutrean presence of any sort in North America.
1) Genetic evidence. First is there any genetic information as to the origins of the Solutreans. As l recall Stanford thought their source vm population was Northwest Africa. Even if they were not derived from a recent migration out of North Aftica they would have been from the Hunter Gatherer population that occupied Europe at the time.
2) Lithic evidence. This would require finding stone tools of the proper type. In undisturbed datable soils. And most importantly of stone that could be traced to quarries in the region occupied by the Solutrean Culture.
#1 would be hard given the general lack of skeletons connected to early occupation. #2 is possible but not probable.
Having listened to a number of talks by Stanford ty here are a number of points he brought up. One is a stone tool which I believe is from Meadowcroft. The stone has been traced to a quarry on the coast of Labrador. How does anything that sources from Labrador wind up in Pennsylvania during a Glacial Advance. Either we are completely wrong about ice coverage or it implies boats. The second is a stone tool found as a surface find in the Jamestown area. A stone knife traced to a known Solutrean quarry. First what are the odds that any English settlers from Roanoke onwards were using stone knives. And they just happened to be using stone sourced in Southwest France. If the knife is Native made it has to date from the pre contact period. And if it how did they get the stone. Possible ballast stone from a European wreck? Or is there a source of stone in the region that is chemically indistinguishable from the one in France.
Looking forward to this! Two of my favourite channels on a crazy hypothesis 🔥
It's significantly less stupid than most channels are willing to concede.
Very nice Nat and thankyou, nick zentner is on with in half hour he is south of me rocking washington state. Imagine a basalt cedar splitter?
@@NathanaelFosaaenarchaeology has found cache sites of roughed-in but unfinished points often coated in red ochre. Has anyone considered that these strategically placed caches were drop off points in a long distance trade practice? One tribe might leave a set of goods, which another tribe might later pick up the goods, and deposit their own reciprocating trade goods?
@NathanaelFosaaen I never thought it was stupid
@@DanDavisHistory I definitely did. You're a better person than I am.
I keep reading the title as The Soultrain Hypothesis.
We should all be so fortunate!
So I'm not the only one. I also sing it to myself to the tune of the O'Jays' _Love Train._
The Soultrain Hypothesis proposes that the first migrants making their way into the Americas sung an ancient version of Soultrain as they traveled. No evidence of this exists or could really exists but archeologists unanimously agree that it would be really cool if it were true.
Source: Me just now making it up for the joke.
Oh, no. The Lost Ancient Funky Technology theorists have arrived.
Hilarious gonna use it ...
Two of my favorite archaeology channels teaming up! Great video!
When you talked about the clovis cache and the variety of finished pieces and unfinished ones all the way to raw chirt, it made me wonder if these were a way of teaching other people how to do it. A early power point kinda of deal.
Great presentations. You two really worked well together!!! Here is another hypothesis - Maybe the Solutrean did make it to North America 5000 years earlier but then abandoned their sites or migrated south during a cold period. It was only later that an early indigenous archeologist found a Solutrean cache of projectile points and said "Wow these are really neat and so much better than what we have. Lets learn how to make them".
Excellent work you two! I appreciate the framing that this hypothesis isn't as totally wild or racist as it seems on its face, but also the discussion about why it doesn't make sense after it drove so much good research.
That's how actual archaeologists tended to talk about it.
It is becoming part of the long and proud history of archeological/paleontological hypothesises (what's the plural form of hypothesis?) that started out as serious academic theories but were then abandoned only to get picked up again by pseudoscientists.
Great collaboration of the two of you! Thanks!
Dude I need that paper on the phylogenetic (phylomemetic?) relationship of Clovis and Solutrean lithic material! I’m an evolutionary biologist and just seen the figures blew my mind! I need the doi, please, I wanna impress my doctoral adviser 😅.
Kudos on the good work! Excelent video 🎉🎉
It's in the book Across Atlantic Ice. You can find it on Libgen
@@NathanaelFosaaen thank you so very much!
You can also find an excellent paper on researchgate testing the hypothesis about blade/core technology and the similarities between Clovis/pre Clovis/Solutrean. It' s open access.
Two of my favorite channels teaming up!! Fascinating subject, glad you two cleared some of that up.
Thanks for what has to be the most thorough address of the Solutrean Hypothesis on TH-cam since Stanford; that I can find.
Though I’m a Solutrean “Fan Boy”, I appreciate the thoroughness, as opposed to outright dismissiveness, which only fans my paranoia more than answering any real questions.
I can’t fault you for “keeping hope alive”, but it’s a closed case unless there are findings that warrant reopening the case and reconsidering the hypothesis.
Great Collaboration!! Would love to see more of these. Very interesting!!!
Great content y'all. Appreciate the commitment to proper analysis. Nice collaboration from two of my fav creators.
I appreciate that you have approached this with respect for all involved. It pained me to see the ad home I'm attacks that Stanford was subject to. Thank you.
I clicked so fast for this collab, and the topic is just a bonus.
The BBQ plot twist has convinced me.
Thank you both for exploring this topic. I appreciate that you are not destroying anyone’s hopes about a possible Solutrean influence, only that it is becoming increasingly unlikely, and the more dna evidence we have, the less likely it seems to be. I applaud your objective critical approach, it is refreshing to see, cheers!
This was awesome. Excellent collaboration
Glad you enjoyed it!
Excellent and sympathetic review of a popular, interesting, unsuccessful hypothesis. Thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Great to see you two working together!
Oh wow! I love Ancient Americas stuff. Great to see you guys working together
I’m not giving up on Solutrean or pre Clovis artifacts found at Cactus Hill…right down the road from where I live. Amazing what you can find just by digging another 6-10 inches. Mind blowing. I imagine much more will be discovered in the next 10-20 years about how these people came here.
Awesome collaboration! Thank you both.
I'm glad you did this because it helped me understand it a little better. I've been around long enough to have been aware of the Solutrean hypothesis when it was still pretty new. I thought I had seen the late Dennis Stanford talk about it on video and say that it was no longer as hopeful as it had been because of new DNA evidence. It made me sad for him and his colleague.
One of the reasons the Solutrean Hypothesis always interested me is because when I was a kid there was a diehard insistence that paleolithic people didn't know about or use boats. Since all young boys and a few of the girls I knew spent time trying to make things float during warm weather, I thought they were wrong. The last fifty years or so has made a dent in the boat viewpoint. And there are those interesting sites such as Monte Verde.
Do you have that video of Dennis Stanford?
@@renzoalarconperez9590 I'll think about it. I think it was before I got rid of the cable. A year or a few before he died.
@@kitefan1Thank you
@@renzoalarconperez9590
There are videos of Stanford out there on the web. The question is if the site owners kept the material available. I would think the idea of a migration from Southwestern Eurasia around the Iberian Peninsula is highly unlikely. The possibility of a small number people from the region winding up in North America after a summer of hunting seals along the fringe of the ice is a possibility. Even if a remote one. One thing l think that could prove any Solutrean presence in North America is an artifact found in a datable soil layer. An artifact tracable to a known quarry used by the Solutreans.
Fantastic video, gentlemen. I love the collaborative effort. Excellent work👍
Much appreciated!
One thing I think gets overlooked by people opposed to the Solutrean Hypothesis is the fact that currently there are tons of people who can make flint tools in styles other than those of the culture into which they were born. For example, EVERYONE currently making stone tools is doing so in a style other than the non-stone age technology in which they were raised. As such, it would be possible for a single individual with a Solutrean point to make it to the East coast and either demonstrate the technology or trade the point to someone with enough know how to reverse engineer it. At that point (pun) the Solutrean tech can travel across the whole of North America without any additional individuals coming over.
Clovis as a "culture" is really just a technology. It could be a single culture spanning the entirety of North America or it could be thousands of individual cultures who've all gained access to the same material technology and are producing their version of the latest iPhone -- a much better tool than what they had been using and it gets adopted by everyone who comes across it.
There's just the slight issue that Clovis only appears about 6000 years after the Solutrean material culture disappears, so unless that single man survived for 6000 years and also somehow cross the North Atlantic alone with stone age technology this isn't really possible.
Also like your second paragraph is just a description of what a material culture is. There's a reason why archeologists use the term material culture, or technological complex, and not just culture, because the two aren't the same thing.
@@hedgehog3180 If you think about how slowly ideas and people would be moving around back in those days, 6000 years really isn't that long a time gap. Plus, the timeline is only based on the finds we have and the gap could actually be a lot shorter.... but we don't have the evidence to show it. Just like we've only recently discovered those very old footprints in the desert southwest, and are revising the timeline of human habitation, we could turn up something new tomorrow that'll completely rewrite our understanding of the Solutreans and a thousand other things.
@@threeriversforge1997
And evidence could currently by under a couple hundred feet of salt water.
@@mpetersen6 Yep. The scientific community makes a lot of assumptions. They might be very educated assumptions based on the evidence we have, but it's very very slim evidence.
There is another point (1) about today's flint knappers. They are copying historical items that they have examples that they have seen. Techniques they have read about or seen demonstrated. They are not copying styles or techniques that they have not seen or have no knowledge of.
1) No pun intended
what an excellent combination of talents in archeological science communication.
I hope you two do more collaborations!
Thank you gentlemen for covering this. I have been looking for more than conspiracy information about this topic for a while & this is exactly what I wanted lol.
Loved this, you two are both fantastic. I've always been intrigued by the Solutrean Hypothesis and for a while found merit in it but more recent scholarship has given me reason to doubt its usefulness with things like you've presented here. One thing I do enjoy about it still is that if anything it has produced more research and scholarship on both sides leading to more discoveries and understanding, and after all isn't that what a good hypothesis is supposed to do?
Thank you both for sharing the results of your research.
What a great adressing of the topic. I have seen so many unknowledgable people on the internet and in the other medias adress the Hypothesis out of hand as Eurosupremacist and leave it at that. As you acknowledge, many non-academic proponents do indeed take that view. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't engage with the idea honestly. Which you both do.
Best short-form analysis of the hypothesis I've seen. I totally agree with the conclusion.
Thank you Nathanael...looking forward to seeing your next installment...especially the cache contents. Cheers 🥂
Very good. Many insightfully presented.
Excellent collaboration an video. Very nice assimilation and presentation of facts n findings..
What a GREAT collaboration! Very happy to see this. I'm really grateful to Ancient Americas for the policy of not showing remains of Native folks out of respect. I'm a non-Native person who cares about that issue very deeply, and am grateful.
Thank you for your work, actually pretty good.and and thorough.
The collab I’ve been waiting for
Great job by both of you
Great video. Thanks.
love the collab, 2 great channels!
Really enjoyed this! Something I had heard about and was wondering about.
Great video! I haven't heard this hypothesis before and very interesting. I like that you look at all the evidence and it's very respectful. Also, kudos on the team up. AA is another favorite of mine. Keep up the good work Nathanael!
Coincidentally, I had heard about it for the first time just earlier today prior to seeing this video pop up.
The pinned comment thread is insane idk how you were so patient with that person 😭
I remember discovering this hypothesis around 2015 and was forever intrigued by it. Great video!!
Epic colab you guys! That was awesome
This theory does have a strong potential. There have been several recreations of ancient Atlantic voyages, The Brendan voyages and the Ra Expeditions by Thor Heyerdahl come to mind. And the ancient voyages describes by Herodotus where Phoenician ships circumnavigated Africa. Indeed, there is no Ocean on the planet that cannot be crossed by primitive boats; a 40-60 foot dug out canoe can travel around the world
thank you for the video
This is like a good Avengers movie. A crossover inside the TH-cam archeology universe.
Great job, guys!
Glad you enjoyed it!
I thought this was a very good episode, informative. I remember reading the text book that was attributive to the theory, and noticed the similarities as well back in the early eighties. Much appreciation for the breakdown.
I read a book by this title many years ago, so when I happened across your video, I clicked, I 👍🏻 I subscribed
So much expanding mind. Collaborations are CRAZY!
Great video 👌 Love the collab.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I love this channel
This is fascinating. You kept it interesting with images. I do a lot of reading on the Archaic in North America and have just started making content because of this encounter lithic related materials. I aspire to make content like you. P.s working on a BA
Hyped for this
An excellent examination and explanation as always but the mention of BBQ & a rib dinner really focused my attention.
He ruined my day with the garlic mashed potatoes reference as well. Now that's all I can think about.
Hello there. This is fascinating. I’m definitely here for the wisdom that’s presented. I’m into kayaking and rock hounding around the creek beds around where I live. I just wish I didn’t wait until my mid-40’s to begin learning.
New sub here👍🏻
Thank you for a fascinating dive into this. I had not heard of this hypothesis before, but you folks both laid out its contents and the evidence extremely well.
I definitely don't feel the hypothesis is white supremacist in nature, but instead a rather plain attempt at applying Occum's Razor to the lithic information we had. Its also good that we can rule it out with a healthy amount of certainty, though, because it makes the real story so much more interesting and shows just how ingenious our ancient ancestors were (ours as in all of humanity, as I do not claim any Native American decent).
To me, it feels similar to the fact that copper was worked around the great lakes, and that central america showed evidence of ceremonial use of iron, both of which were developed completely independently from metal working technology from the Middle East from which European metalworking technology developed. Iron working also seems to have sprung up independently in Sub-Saharan Africa as well, if I remember correctly. This is just a similar (but even more impressively intricate) example of that same technological convergent evolution.
Actually middle eastern metal working developed from European metal working as Bronze and Iron working were first seen in Neolithic European Farmer civilizations of the balkens and in proto-indo-european cultures respectively
You mean Occam's?
@@alexdunphy3716 copper working and iron working had multiple independent developments.
@@alexdunphy3716 I can see why you object to the criticism of ethnocentrism. Does metal working in the Balkans imply that metal working elsewhere originated there?
The bit about white supremacism is because it very quickly became popular with white supremacists. Their interpretation obviously didn't make sense and bore little similarity to the actual hypothesis but that's just how it goes with white supremacists since their worldview is fundamentally pseudoscientific. And of course now that the hypothesis has largely been rejected I'll bet that white supremecists will claim that this is somehow the work of the woke cabal or whatever their current antisemitic dogwhistle is.
2 questions. one is outlandish but im still curious. How could all this connect and relate if say instead of saying that ancient western europeans went to eastern america, that western europeans and eastern americans were disseminated from say greenland. Yes I know greenland has been an ice cube for at least 100k years, and they had to come from somewhere but human migration is full of back n forth and criss crosses and is messy, and greenlqands ice has 'changed' its age before.
2nd question. is it possible that there is a specific prey item in the north atlantic that may necessitate these types of similarities in hunting tools?
What is the style where a slightly curved flake is the entire piece (arrow point) and there is absolutely no flakes removed from the concave side? It only has 1 flake knocked off for the base, 2 for the sides and 3 or 4 for the point. 3/4 of an inch long by almost half. Pretty much diamond shaped with a flat bottom and only a suggestion of "wings" to tie to (not sure the term). Between the east coast and the Great lakes area. Solid tan and nearly transparent like a lighter beer bottle glass that is slightly milky.
It isn't anything like the grey flint I find that's got 70 to 100 flakes removed to finish it. It looks nothing like all the rest (dozens of points and scrapers), except the polished slate blade/scraper. That's kinda novel too, slate chest plates are not unheard of around here along the rivers.
If it helps more, the flakes of the sides meet in the center, so does one tip flake. The rest are just little nips close to the edge.
You guys get to it 17 minutes in. I'll leave it for the algorithm's sake tho.
20:18 - 20:48 Another thing to point out, regarding convergent evolution, is the different peoples working stones the same way in different places at different times, are working with very similar materials for a prolonged period. Remember, the Eastern coasline of North America and the Western Europe were just a single landmass before the Atlantic Ocean formed. These rocks that 2 different cultures an ocean apart were working were once the same rocks, not an ocean apart because said ocean is younger than the rocks in question.
I gave you a like, even though I misread the title. I thought this was about the Soul Train hypothesis, with Don Cornelius.
This must be a good channel. Look at all the trolls.
Video and trolls got me subscribed....
Fantastic presentation. It helped me to hear that this was only proposed as a hypothesis to be tested in the original publication. I am very interested in genetic genealogy as well as precolumbian history. A couple of possible problems with evaluating Native American genetics is that they suffered an extremely high population loss after European contact. Some say 90%. Also, probably the majority of Native American burial grounds were destroyed by agriculture and construction. This skews the genetic data for surviving Native Americans and burials in the extreme. For example, there are accounts of black-skinned NA in California and Costa Rica and white-skinned NA in Venezuela for which there is no surviving evidence. So genetic comparisons with old world populations is going to be hit-or-miss at best. I appreciate you doing these videos for those of us who have the interest but not the same education as you. My family farm was a Keyauwee campsite on the NC Great Trading Path and my gr-grandmother was from the NC Catauba tribe, so the information you share about east coast tribes answers many life-long questions for me personally. -Andy
Nice study, I congratulate you. You should also take into account that X mtdna is close relative of A mtdna, possibly younger than A mtdna. I think A, X mtdna are paralel to P, Q, R ydna. P1 is altaic siberian ydna and ancestor of both native american Q and central asian and european R similar to A is older and X is younger maternal linage of same separation to east and west from siberia. Because, A mtdna is found inside turkic, siberian people as also found in native americans. If we take into consideration, X is related to A mtdna and found both in Turkey (west) and America (east) originated from siberia. So, everything is getting clear in my mind. Thanks and regards!
I think you're right about the Solutreans.
Since the gap was so long ago people dont have a feel for how long the 5,000 years between Solutreans and Clovis is. 5,000 years ago Sumerians were just learning how to keep records by drawing pictograms on wet clay. It was 5,000 years before that wheat, sheep and goats were domesticated. Another 5,000 years back and you're in Clovis time. Another 5,000 years back and you're in Solutrean time. We lose track.
Roughly 5k years ago we were building the pyramid at Giza and New Grange.
21:01 The feature common to Magdalenian and Clovis, _"the pebble paved floors are __20:52__ interesting but the Solutreans never made __20:54__ them as far as we know that's a later __20:57__ Magdalenian feature"_ ... well, would fall within the years from 2693 and 2644.
It would also fit within the lifespan of a single early post-Flood artist.
I kept rewinding to try and figure out if that coffee at the start was some kinda Easter egg 😂
Here's the scoop on that and I'm gonna tell ya. went to start editing and realized I didn't like the intro recording I had made, and decided I had to re-record it real quick first thing. Basically rolled out of bed, went down to the lobby to get breakfast, and then had that realization. I set up my camera real quick with full bedhead, took one last swig of coffee, and recorded it. I realized I didn't leave enough of a gap between the sip and when I started talking, and I was in no mood to try it again, so I just left it.
@@NathanaelFosaaen 😂 Understandable. It's hilarious that I read too much into it
Great collab!
But sad to see the kidiots in the comments didnt learn a thing from the video. History, much like science, is constantly evolving. Much respect to both! A'ho!
Much as the tool making would be a lovely connection, we have too many examples of when completely different cultures developed similar things at the same approximate time. We forget that humans are inquisitive, inventive and intelligent and we tend to think alike in problem solving, like this way of shaping a rock works better than that way of doing so. We don't need a Solutrean intrusion in pre-Columbian America to explain how this happened. And that's OK. Our ancestors were just as smart as we are, they just had shorter shoulders to stand on.
This is fascinating and I think maybe in 20 years we’ll be closer to the truth. I think the bog bodies having no genetic relatives and having 1000 years of habitation, evidence for Vikings in America, the footprints in New Mexico, the mammoth carved monuments at the bottom of the Great Lakes, the bluefish caves in Canada. I think it’s time someone tried to synthesize all that with the Clovis data. Polynesian influence in South America but not north? Seems everyone picks their own little piece of history, ignores everything else and says here’s how people got to America. Would just love to see someone try to paint an actual picture of what was going on here 25k years ago.
The journal PaleoAmerica deals with much of this stuff.
@@jackrifleman562 I’ll check it out! Thanks!
Exactly- and not to mention the mound builders and the red head cannibal 😮
My theory is that because geologically the americas and europe share some similar stone types and working the same type of stone would cause one to make similar choices in working the stone without any contact.
Where do unifaced granite points from the New England area fit in ? Is it Clovis or Folsom learning how to work harder stone ? Is it before that ? Lithic ?
I've never heard of that. Do you have a source?
@@NathanaelFosaaen ya, me. I live in MA. I'm not a scholar but I specialize in collecting granite and other hard stone artifacts from around my area. It's a unifaced style for the most part but not always. Quartzite is another seemingly preferred material around here . Any thoughts on this ? You can see some of my collections !
@@AncintArt2ndColony
*_"ya, me"_*
So, you found some rocks, and you think they look like spear or arrow points?
And no archaeologist has ever found such things?
{:o:O:}
See for yourself . I've videos on the matter. And are you saying no archeologist has ever found a unifaced point made of granite ! I must be special.
@@AncintArt2ndColony
*_"are you saying no archeologist has ever found a unifaced point made of granite"_*
No, I though that's what you were saying.
{:o:O:}
tyvm
I believe, and Gravettian also, I have collected both from collections some over 100 yrs old along the east coast. For the last12.years, the book is a wakeup call Rember Toper dates 50,000 years ago. Great videos thank you very much Nathanael. .
Even Al Goodyear doesn't think his 50,000 cal BP dates at Topper are legit. Neither does David Anderson, or anyone who actually worked there.
I would like to recommend Dr.Darrin Lowery work on ResearchGate , Parsons Island and other . He has very great knowledge of this subject and should be mentioned with the Solutrean hypothesis. He would make a great addition to a interview on your channel. Thank You Nathanael , I try to keep a open mind on this subject. The Upper Paleolithic is a important part of our History.
I've got one degree of separation from Lowery and I'm privy to some group emails with him and colleagues on the eastern bipoint phenomenon. I referred to his work several times when I was doing background reading for this episode.
Yessss a dream combo
Thanks for watching!
Is this guy you did this collaboration with the same guy who has the Dark Footage and Dark Docs channels? His voice sounds familiar.
it is terrible that some people definitely did not watch the video, yet they swarm here to comment. Or they did watch, yet they learnt nothing.
Nice work guys. I love the idea of ancient, heroic migrations but I prefer to let the evidence convince me (or not).
We call that "being an adult."
Cheer! Cheer! 🍻
Too bad you couldn't get Bruce Bradley to come on your program to counterpoint your argument He's an incredible archaeologist and would be a great asset to be able to have his point of view in this discussion.
The stone actually is likely similar because at one time europe and north america were connected so you may see similar stone tools when the same kind of stone (with even a shared source) is used.
When North America was joined into Pangea the East Coast was up against North Africa.
Truly fascinating. I wonder" without the accusations of Eurocentric supremacy, would the Solutrean Hypothesis have been subjected to the same degree of *urgent* scrutiny? In other words, it seems that in this case an objection born out of an ideological premise was actually stronger that a purely technical argument as a motivating factor in stimulating futher research on the topic.
The eurocentric issues weren't really a big thing until many years after the hypothesis had permeated academic circles. That whole thing was the product of white supremacist writers misusing the hypothesis in bad faith. That's about when academics got really loud about our objections in the press. Within published academic material we were already objecting pretty hard based on the merits.
The very people who proposed the hypothesis went out of their way to encourage critical examination of it and specifically pointed out what should be done to confirm or reject the hypothesis. So like given that why wouldn't archeologists go out and try to examine it right away? I mean it was an interesting theory that hit at just the right time where it could be given the scrutiny it deserves and in rejecting lots of interesting things were learned.
Awesome crossover. Many Native American oral traditions hold that they came from this land, standing directly against tradition anthropological explanations such as a migration through the Bering straight or, in this instance, over the Atlantic. I find the relationship between the two to be fascinating, and I think it’s worth mentioning :) Thanks for the video!
*_"Many Native American oral traditions hold that they came from this land"_*
But that's a Creation myth based on ideological and religious traditions. It's no more real than the Babylonian flat Earth under a crystal dome separating the primeval waters when Marduk killed Tiamat and used her body parts to create the Earth and the Dome.
{:o:O:}
@@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095 If the goal is to create a holistic “history” of a land which has no written records I feel it’s important to grant a voice to those who have not only been stripped of their culture and identity but who have a direct stake in the matter at hand. This includes THEIR story.
Well said Mike!
@@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095 This would imply that myth takes no influence from real events though, no? By ignoring its implications you are doing a disservice to archaeology, a subfield of anthropology. One cannot exist without acknowledging the other.
@@mikedewine4694
*_"This would imply that myth takes no influence from real events"_*
Well, I saw a claim that the Great pyramid of Giza was built 20,000 years ago by Men from Atlantis. Greysham Hack-crock and UneducatedX said so, and all mythology comes from historical fact.
We know that no humans evolved _de novo_ separately in the Americas, we all come from Africa. The convergent evolution in this video was talking about the technological evolution of the spear points in two distinct populations.
Changing Woman did not create the American natives from the land and Coyote is just a wild dog. The Hactcin are no more real than Marduk or Enlil and the Sky Woman was not made pregnant by the Great Spirit. And all their stories differ. Greatly.
Multiple layers of Troy existed, and there was a late bronze age collapse where some people even lost writing for a few hundred years. But Hercules was not a half-god and Achilles, if he existed, was just a very good warrior. But he was not invulnerable to injury except at the heel because his father dipped him in the Styx as a baby by holding him by his ankles. Homer was a poet, not a historian.
{:o:O:}
Great vid as usual, more power to both (great) channels.
.
The Solutrean Hypothesis, although likely incorrect, cannot, and should not be dismissed to the same dustbin of crazy "hypotheses" of the Hancock or Pyramid-Building aliens type. You can find there all the typical reasoning chains and evidential standards sought by archaeological interpretation generally. There is talk of local or regional technical precursors (or absence thereof), there is a concern with the likelihood of independent innovation, interpretations are guided by grounding all the relevant archaeological entities both spatially and chronologically, and so on.
.
At best the authors can be accused of sweeping complicating bits of evidence under the rug (selective use of evidence), or of failing to follow the whole thread of implications to their claims, likely wary of the potentially destructive consequences as far as their main argument goes. Spotting the problems with the hypothesis is certainly a good exercise in archaeological interpretation.
How do they explain the distribution of Clovis points? Maybe I missed something but to me it seems it was more established on the East Coast and moved out westward. It seems like a beachhead when you look at the map...
There's really not much to explain. By the time Clovis points were invented, the continent had already been inhabited for about 10,000 years. The eastern part of the continent is full of fertile river systems that attract lots of people so you end up with more clovis representation in the east than you do the west.
@@NathanaelFosaaen But why are some of the oldest also in the east? Decades ago I helped briefly with a dig on the DelMarVa peninsula and we were told the oldest Clovis points were all on the eastern side of the Mississippi and the oldest of the oldest was in the mid Atlantic area.
@richjageman3976 I don't understand the question. They're oldest in the east because the tradition was probably invented there. Like I said in the video, the pattern is one that moves northwest from the southeast.
@@NathanaelFosaaen The question should have been worded better and was only partially for you. If as many others elsewhere stated that Clovis point proved the only prehistoric peoples came from Siberia why does it not match their stone tech and the most numerous and oldest are on the opposite side of the continent and more closely matches others? I rewatched the video without outside interruptions here and have a better understanding.
@@richjageman3976 Ok. Yeah Clovis has nothing to do with Siberia. Right on there. people had already been living in the continent interior for thousands of years before the Clovis technological complex was developed and it appears to have been invented in the eastern woodlands.
Can you guys explain the Chesapeake bay site?
Or are we going to ignore that being older than clovis?
Also using genetic data of people clearly of different region to say Solutreans didn't make it to America is kind of weird.
Of course the indigenous of central and western US are not going to be sharing genetics with eastern natives that we have very little genetics data on comparatively
What about the X haplogroup being present in 35 to 50% of the Ojibwa people of the Great Lakes region?
Wrong kind of X haplogroup. European X is X2b, c,and d. American X is X2a and X2g.
Thanks for the clarity.
Do you have any more insight on the dating of X2a splitting from X2? Reidla et al, 2003 finds it to be ~18000 YBP and the Altaian X2e is much more recent ~6700 YBP@@NathanaelFosaaen
Personally I think there were multiple waves of migrations. The American continent was known and there was trade across the atlantic and even via pacific. The Eskimo are a good example of a people that live on the edge of thie ice and were more than capable with basic tech to make the trip.
Personally I think the groups may have met and perhaps taught others and it spread like wildfire with Clovis.
I think if they had other artifacts that were similar we could surmise that the Solutreans did indeed make it to N America. The tool kits are a good start.
This needs more research. I am an armchair history nerd and actually have found a small clovis stash which I gave to the state. Ever aince I have been obsessed.
Neat
The analysis seems to also open the evolution of technology to the possibility that there were 2 solutrean migrations. 1 before the younger dryas and one after? would also be interesting to see a genetic study similar the neanderthal/modern man study. how much dna from a previous group would be left in an event where they were slowly replace by a later group.
There's the slight issue that the Solutrean culture had disappeared by the time of the younger dryas, but sure if you can solve that gap of a couple of thousand years. Not that I see why you'd be compelled to try to keep this hypothesis on life support.
Graham Hancock posits a worldwide younger Dryas civilization that achieved most of what it needed through mind control. Those would be dogs. That golden retriever sitting in front of you with his leash in his mouth? Mind control. YOUR mind!
While I am not going to dispute anything spelled out here, I will point out that everything we are told about the past (especially where it comes to humanity) demands that we ALL accept the idea that EVERYTHING is a product of co-evolution. Around the world we see stone works like Stonehenge, and we are told that ALL the cultures who erected these sites did so for the exact same reason-- astrological mapping or something like following the seasons. We are likewise assured that even though the people who constructed these almost sites had no contact with each other, and yet we see that a bit younger than the Stonehenge-type constructions we see (around the world) pyramids, and looking closer we see that there is a sort of polygonal construction method (where stones are set one upon the other without mortar, and featuring corners that interlock perfectly) in every place from Easter Island, South America, Egypt even in the islands of the South Pacific. Again we are assured that each culture sporting these building methods did not have any contact with each other. This is like seeing a Ranch Style ( a domestic architectural style that originated in the United States) house in places around the world like China, or Australia and not understanding that its being there is because someone who knew about Ranch style homes used that style to build their home. It did not spring up coincidentally around the world as we are expected to believe these other building styles did. When you look at the other things we we are told to accept as coincidental we see the same tortured logic being used to explain them. The dates on these ancient buildings, cave are (compare the newly discovered 9 mile long wall in South America and the cave paintings in Lascaux to see that they are not only of the same age, but depict much the same style of drawing and animals) and even tool marks (the same around the world) are not only the same age, (30,000 years), but use similar materials. Red Ochre is also used around the world in much the same way--especially when dealing with the dead. How can all of these things be coincidental? They can't. However, they could reset the entire history of Earth but perhaps this is being concealed for a reason.
Loved the video. Even my wife, who usually watches laughing babies and cats, was asking me about bifaces.
So is land bridge theory still predominant?
I don't follow prehistory as closely as I should.
Good question! It was always a little more complicated than just the land bridge itself. The old idea was that there was the land bridge, and the ancestors of Native Americans lived up there for a while, but couldn't get into North America because there were two giant ice sheets blocking the way. They hung out on the land bridge for a few thousand years, and then the roadblock started to melt around 14000 years ago, and those people eventually walked through the ice-free corridor created by those ice sheets melting.
The land bridge part hasn't really changed, but we don't think they got into the American interior via the ice-free corridor through Canada anymore. It's more likely that they bypassed the ice sheets altogether by following the coast by boat from the land bridge to modern day California, and then got into the interior via the Colorado and other river systems.
@@NathanaelFosaaen thank you for the informative response! Do you think there has been an improved understanding of prehistoric water transport in the last few years? Maritime history has become one of my favorite subcategories to learn about.
No improvement at all. We don't have evidence of the boats at all. It's just the only way to get people from Beringia to the North American interior as early as we know they did.
@@NathanaelFosaaen That's unfortunate. I suppose we will always have to fill in some gaps this far back in time
Is it logical to believe both things that Solutreans came and also Natives from Siberia came via a land bridge?