We already know that during the
same epoch, that Ice Age hunters were operating along the Alaskan and Siberian coastlines
in kayaks. We know this because we have
skeletons showing massive upper body development not seen since. This culture operated close to the ice and
could well have spread along the tundra toward the west or could even have arisen
in the West in the first place. This is
no more that the Eskimo accomplished.
Once skin boats are used and
allowing for a lower sea level bringing even parts of the North Atlantic ridge
above water to say nothing of emptying the Bay of Biscay and the Grand Banks , summer travel becomes very plausible. Importantly, ice floes would be covered with
seals providing ample food for such trips.
Since these peoples were adapted
to this unusual niche they likely concentrated along its edges, even into North
America as is evident in Europe . Like the Eskimos, travel was no problem but warmer
climates definitely were. Eskimos do not
thrive outside the Arctic .
By the way, the map above needs to show the way more likely Pacific route. The mid continent route was likely never open to travel at all until the end of the Ice Age, any more that one could cross the Antarctic easily. Also the Bay of Biscay likely knocks of several hundred mile of travel. Thus the real distance to traverse is from the Grand Banks to near Ireland. which is half what is on this map. Put even one island in the middle and it looks quite feasible.
Radical theory of first Americans places Stone Age Europeans in
Delmarva 20,000 years ago
By Brian
Vastag, Published: February 29
When the crew of the Virginia
scallop trawler Cinmar hauled a mastodon tusk onto the deck in 1970, another
oddity dropped out of the net: a dark, tapered stone blade, nearly eight inches
long and still sharp.
Forty years later, this rediscovered prehistoric slasher has reopened
debate on a radical theory about who the first Americans were and when they got
here.
Archaeologists have long held that North America remained unpopulated
until about 15,000 years ago, when Siberian people walked or boated into Alaska and then moved
down the West Coast.
But the mastodon relic found near the mouth of the Chesapeake
Bay turned out to be 22,000 years old, suggesting that the blade
was just as ancient.
Whoever fashioned that blade was not supposed to be here.
Its makers probably paddled from Europe and arrived in America
thousands of years ahead of the western migration, making them the first
Americans, argues Smithsonian Institution anthropologist Dennis Stanford.
“I think it’s feasible,” said Tom Dillehay, a prominent
archaeologist at Vanderbilt
University . “The evidence
is building up, and it certainly warrants discussion.”
At the height of the last ice age, Stanford says, mysterious Stone Age
European people known as the Solutreans paddled along an ice cap jutting into
the North Atlantic . They lived like Inuits,
harvesting seals and seabirds.
The Solutreans eventually spread across North America, Stanford says,
hauling their distinctive blades with them and giving birth to the later Clovis culture, which emerged some 13,000 years ago.
When Stanford proposed this “Solutrean hypothesis” in 1999, colleagues
roundly rejected it. One prominent archaeologist suggested that Stanford was
throwing his career away.
But now, 13 years later, Stanford and Bruce Bradley, an archaeologist at
England’s University of Exeter, lay out a detailed case — bolstered by the
curious blade and other stone tools recently found in the mid-Atlantic — in a
new book, “Across
Atlantic Ice.”
“I drank the Solutrean Kool-Aid,” said Steve
Black, an archaeologist at Texas State University
in San Marcos .
“I had been very dubious. It’s something a lot of [archaeologists] have
dismissed out of hand. But I came away from the book feeling like it’s an
extremely credible idea that needs to be taken seriously.”
Other experts remain unconvinced. “Anyone advancing a radically
different hypothesis must be willing to take his licks from skeptics,” said
Gary Haynes, an archaeologist at the University of Nevada-Reno.
At the core of Stanford’s case are stone tools recovered from five
mid-Atlantic sites. Two sites lie on Chesapeake Bay
islands, suggesting that the Solutreans settled Delmarva early on. Smithsonian
research associate Darrin Lowery found blades, anvils and other tools found
stuck in soil at least 20,000 years old.
Displaying the tools in his office at the National Museum of Natural History, Stanford
handles a milky chert blade and says, “This stuff is beginning to give us a
real nice picture of occupation of the Eastern Shore
around 20,000 years ago.”
Further, the Eastern Shore blades strongly resemble those found at
dozens of Solutrean sites from the Stone Age in Spain
and France ,
Stanford says. “We can match each one of 18 styles up to the sites in Europe .”
In 2007, Lowery, who also teaches at the University
of Delaware , was hired by a landowner
to survey property on Tilghman Island , Md. , at a place called Miles Point .
Almost immediately, Lowery saw a chunk of quarzite jutting out of a shore bank.
It was an anvil, heavily marked from repeated beatings, a clear sign that it
was used to make stone tools. Lowery dated the soil layer holding the anvil and
other stone tools with two methods, radiocarbon dating and a newer technique,
optical stimulated luminescence. Both returned an age of at least 21,000 years.
“We were like, geez what
the hell is going on here?” Lowery said.
Another site, 10 miles south, Oyster Cove, yielded more Stone Age
artifacts. Those too, came out of soil more than 21,000 years old.
Lowery published the finds in 2010 in Quaternary Science Reviews, but
the report made nary a ripple in the conservative world of archaeology, where
new ideas tend to progress at a glacial pace. “People are going to think we’ve
clearly gone off our rocker here,” Lowery remembers musing.
One problem: The ancient dates came from the soil, not the artifacts
themselves.
“It’s an indirect date,” Dillehay said. “You need a feature like a
hearth or something that’s clearly human. But it’s still suggestive.”
In 2008, Lowery toured a tiny museum on Gwynn’s Island ,
Va. , at the southern end of the Chesapeake . He asked the
curator if the museum had any stone tools. They did: The eight-inch blade,
displayed next to a bit of mastodon tusk and a molar, recovered by the Cinmar.
Lowery immediately called Stanford. “He got real excited,” Lowery said.
Lowery also contacted the Cinmar’s captain, Thurston Shawn. The tusk
and blade were so unusual that Shawn had made a point of marking the spot on
his charts. It was 60 miles east of the Virginia
cape, in 240 feet of water. At the end of the last ice age, when the oceans
were low, that spot was land, on the coast.
Stanford carbon-dated the mastodon to 22,760 years old. He and Bradley
— two of the world’s foremost stone tool experts — also scrutinized the blade.
It had not been smoothed by wave action or tumbling. They concluded the blade
had not been pushed out to sea but had been buried where the Cinmar found it.
“My guess is the blade was used to butcher the mastodon,” Stanford
said. “I’m almost positive.”
But some question the meaning of the find.
“I’m not going to hang a completely novel interpretation of the
peopling of the Americas from something dredged off the sea bottom 40 years ago
and not properly documented,” said David Meltzer, an archaeologist
at Southern Methodist University.
Stone tools recovered from two other mid-Atlantic sites — Cactus Hills,
Va., 45 miles south of Richmond, and Meadowcroft Rockshelter, in southern
Pennsylvania — date to at least 16,000 years ago. Those tools, too, strongly
resemble blades found in Europe .
Little is known about the Solutrean people. They lived in Spain , Portugal
and southern France
beginning about 25,000 years ago. No skeletons have been found, so no DNA is
available to study.
But the Solutreans did leave behind rock art, which showed a
diamond-shaped flat fish in delicate black etchings. It looks like a halibut. A
seal also appears, an arrow-headed line stabbing through it.
Stanford contends that the art proves that the Salutreans built boats —
halibut are deep-sea fish — and knew how to survive at the edge of an ice cap
that drooped deep into Europe.
“The reason people don’t like the Solutrean idea is the ocean,” he
said. No Solutrean boats have been found. But given that people arrived in Australia
some 60,000 years ago — and they didn’t walk there — wood-frame and seal-skin
boats were clearly possible, Stanford argues.
His idea faces another challenge: At the end of the last ice age, the
polar ice cap may not have extended all the way across the Atlantic ,
leaving iceberg-strewn gaps of open water for the Solutreans to navigate as
they headed West for unknown reasons.
Meltzer is among those still skeptical of the Solutrean hypothesis,
citing the scant evidence. “If Solutrean boat people washed up on our shores,
they suffered cultural amnesia, genetic amnesia, dental amnesia, linguistic
amnesia and skeletal amnesia. Basically, all of the signals are pointing to Asia ” as the origin of the first Americans.
Since the 1930s, archaeologists have favored a single migration from
Siberia to Alaska as the epic event that
peopled the Americas
about 13,000 years ago. Stone tools found at Clovis, N.M., and elsewhere,
suggested that a single culture spread across much of the continent. This “Clovis first” idea became entrenched.
But starting in the 1990s, archaeologists dated sites in Texas , Chile
and the mid-Atlantic region to pre-Clovis times. Few archaeologists accepted
those dates at first, said Michael Collins, an archaeologist at Texas State .
“People learned it in college and built careers on ‘Clovis
first,’ Collins said. “They’re unwilling to turn it loose.”
But now they might have to adopt Stanford’s Europe-first slogan: “Iberia , not Siberia .”
However, Stanford acknowledges that his evidence is scant. He calls the
Solutrean hypothesis “a skeletal idea.” And he worries that a rising sea might
have washed away compelling evidence.
Later this spring, Stanford plans to take a boat to the Cinmar site,
where he will dredge for more clues to an ice-age journey that just might have
been the first voyage to America .
I have been posting about this story on my blog since before the story broke: in fact you might say I have had a lifelong interest since I have been following the theory since I lrearned it had been published by a Dr. Greenman in the 1960s. I would like to reprint your version because it includes one very telling statement I wanted to be certain everybody noticed.
ReplyDeleteBTW, Robert, I'd like to list you as a friend on Facebook but I can't seem to locate yopu out of the dozens of OTHER Robert Klines that are listed there.
Best Wishes, Dale D.
First of all the Aborigines left Mombasa around 44,000 BC and were the first migration out of Africa after the Great Die Off. Spencer Wells DNA study positively dates them to this time.
ReplyDeleteYour original thesis holds however. The Aborigines left Africa in hollowed out logs with one outrigger, sailed all the way across the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea arriving on the northern shore of Australia. This was a small group of no more than two dozen people.
If they could do it, Magdalenians or Solutreans could have sailed from central France to central Maine in sealskin boats as long as they stayed close to the ice sheet. This would have provided them food by hunting seals and replacement skins for their boats as necessary.
The question is were they social criminals ostracized by their people or simply hunters blown way off course in some violent storms and continued on to see what lay at the end? Maine.
There was no chert, flint or obsidian in New England so they made their way south pretty quickly hunting volcanic stone, and found it in Virginia. Like you I think between those two beautiful, long European knapped ceremonial blades found in the Virginia cave as well as Wells seminal DNA research, Europeans were here at least 6,500 years before the Chukchi left their Lapp brethren and ventured over the bridge. Very nice article, keep up the good work. - T. Hannibal Gay, El Paso
Tell me about the great die off
ReplyDeleteI noticed recently that further DNA work has mapped the peopling of the Pacific coast all the way down to Tierra Del fuega a few thousand years before other dates as i had long ago conjectured.
Certainly, dug out technology was up to ocean work very early on and this means vessels such as were used until recently in the Pacific northwest. skin boats are needed to transverse the north Pacific coast and the Atlantic ice edge though.