01 March 2012

New evidence supports the "Solutrean hypothesis"


The Solutrean hypothesis:
The Solutrean hypothesis is a controversial proposal that peoples from Europe may have been among the earliest settlers in the Americas, as evidenced by similarities in stone tool technology of the Solutrean culture from prehistoric Europe to that of the later Clovis tool-making culture found in the Americas. It was first proposed in 1998. Its key proponents include Dennis Stanford, of the Smithsonian Institution, and Bruce Bradley, of the University of Exeter.

In this hypothesis, people associated with the Solutrean culture migrated from Ice Age Europe to North America, bringing their methods of making stone tools with them and providing the basis for later Clovis technology found throughout North America. The hypothesis rests upon particular similarities in Solutrean and Clovis technology that have no known counterparts in Eastern Asia, Siberia or Beringia, areas from which or through which early Americans are known to have migrated.
TYWKIWDBI had three posts on pre-Clovis finds last year, discussing skulls found in a Yucatan underwater cave, paleo-era tools on California's Channel Islands, and a pre-Clovis point found in a mastodon bone.

Today the Washington Post and The Independent have articles about new findings on the Atlantic coast of North America that support the Solutrean hypothesis.
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 [note only the soil can be reliably dated, not the artifacts themselves]...

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.”..

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...

“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... 
One major problem facing investigators is that early peoples would have lived on the coast next to the ocean - but sea levels have risen so far since that time that the original coast is perhaps 50 miles off the current shoreline and deep underwater.  Caves and artifacts from those locations are difficult to find.

35 comments:

  1. The racist/white power excitement that surrounds this theory is truly despicable. So sad that these notions of white European superiority have to ingrain themselves in all aspects of history.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ?? why in the world would you consider this theory "racist?" You do understand this is about 20,000 years ago?

      Delete
    2. Intrigued by your comment, I did some searching. Apparently some neo-Nazis have embraced the Solutrean hypothesis to claim that North America was settled by "white" people first. Archaeologists know that this is nonsense. From an article at the Southern Poverty Law Center (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2011/spring/kyle-bristow-takes-aim-at-splc):

      "There are several major problems" with using the Solutrean Hypothesis to advance a white nationalist racial politics, said Stanford. The biggest, he explained, is that "even if the Solutrean hypothesis is demonstrated, there is no evidence that these people were the same race as modern Europeans; in fact, they most likely were not the same race. Their origin in Europe is a major research question. At the present, most scholars believe the people who made the European Solutrean artifacts came out of North Africa [around] 25,000 years ago."

      The other leading proponent of the Solutrean Hypothesis, Bruce Bradley, is no better disposed to the efforts that Bristow and others are making to use it as intellectual fuel for the white power movement.

      "It is quite likely that [if] these events happened, [it was] before 'racial' diversification occurred," Bradley, now an associate professor of experimental archeology at the University of Exeter in England, told the Intelligence Report. "Any facile explanations about the possible implications in relation to modern history will certainly be discredited."

      Delete
    3. ...and I realize now that you weren't speaking of your own viewpoint. Sorry if I suggested that with my initial reaction. :.)

      Delete
    4. Intrigued by your comment, I did some searching. Apparently some neo-Nazis have embraced the Solutrean hypothesis to claim that North America was settled by "white" people first. Archaeologists know that this is nonsense.

      Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. Sorry, that was not directed at you or anybody associated with the site. If you google around you can see all the white power sites that are titillated by this hypothesis. You can also see it in many of the comments in the comments section of the Post and Independent stories.

      Delete
    5. Consider many of the people who can't accept the achievements of indigenous people, they must be 'the lost tribes of israel', or were put there by 'ancient aliens' etc. etc.

      Delete
    6. Of course, North American and South American indigenous people haven't been indigenous "forever." They have to have come from somewhere. Ultimately Africa. The real question is the route.

      Delete
    7. not as extrreme as the afrocentric excitement for the falso bogus out-of-africa hypothesis lie

      Delete
    8. I just made a comment and now realize that you weren't necessarily calling the Solutrean Hypothesis racist. Rather, you may simply have been decrying racists who've latched onto this theory like blood-sucking leeches. If this is the case, I apologize.

      Delete
    9. Hardly a superiority issue. Just sick and tired of being called invaders of the Continent we discovered and were probably wiped out by the Olmecs or the Pre Clovis.

      Paybacks a biatch!

      Delete
  2. Heck, worrying about who achieved what first... I read this as "soul train" first. Go, me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Human genetics supports the idea that American Indians are descended from Asians...

    http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-01-genetic-footprints-africa.html

    -Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, human genetics support the idea that American Indians are descended from Asians, but that does not mean that they were first onto the Continent. IIRC, the latest ideas have it that the Solutrean's WERE first onto the North American continent, and they were the ancestors of the Clovis People, but they (along with most of the larger native animals, horses, camels, mastodons, mammoths, rhinos, among others) were killed off by an asteroid strike which hit the glaciers which covered most of the continent at the time, hence the reason for no archaeological evidence found, as of yet, and extensively scientifically studied.

      Delete
  4. Myths are exploded when facts are gathered. I'm willing to bet that there are just as many Native American elders and traditionalist who feel threatened by the possibility of other groups settling in North America before their ancestors as there are white supremacists who claim that there were "white" people in North America "first."

    Just because a group of people were "the first inhabitants," that does not automatically make them superior, regardless of the color of their skin, the shape of their faces or the texture of their hair. What I find interesting to contemplate is the belief there were no humans in North America before Native Americans came to it, considering how hospitable it was to humans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't understand what it is you think:

      "What I find interesting to contemplate is the belief there were no humans in North America before Native Americans came to it..."

      Do you think there was a second evolution of humans apart from the African one? On continents without apes?

      And what do you mean by "Native Americans came to it?" They weren't "Native Americans" before they got here. Who were they?

      Not hassling you. Just wondering what you think.

      Delete
  5. I believe all men were dark and orignated in modern day Iraq, going out from in various directions with body shapes and styles as well as skin color changing and acclimating according to environmental conditions. We areall descended from group so all the racial ques are moot.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's worth noting that the map shows the glaciations, but the shorelines of the continental landmasses don't reflect the 300- to 400-foot lower sea levels that resulted from the water being tied up in the glacier ice. These lower sea levels would have put the beaches of North America (at the very least) out as far as the edges of the continental shelves. This is an important detail but it seems to have been overlooked by the map artists and editors.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 20 years ago, when I first read about Solutreans, it was said then that the Solutrean points were sufficiently like Clovis points to make everyone consider the connection, but everyone said< "Ah, but those intervening 4,000 years (or 2,500 or whichever it was at THAT time) it means there was no connection.

    I could never comprehend at all why no one said - as I did at the time - well, let us just see what happens to the 4,000 year gap as time goes on. I 100% expected the gap to shrink to zero, and for there to be some overlap.

    THE CONNECTION WAS OBVIOUS. And yet not ONE person stepped up and said it out loud, that Clovis points derived from the Solutreans; it was the Clovis Barrier, über alles. Clovis was INVENTED HERE, out of a clear blue sky. It is HOGWASH, and it always WAS hogwash.

    The conservatism in archeology, anthropology, geology, astronomy - all of them will NOT even consider that a present state of knowledge can ever change.

    - Rocks falling from the sky? Impossible, till it was later proven. Tunguska can't be a meteor. Until it turns out that comets also hit planets - but then all impacts have to have meteors in the bottom. NOT.

    ALL evidence of pre-Clovis humans in the Americas was denounced as fraudulent or mistaken, until it couldn't be denied at Monte Verde, Chile in 1997. At which time some Clovis site chief arkies actually looked UNDER Clovis layers and found human artifacts.

    They haven't found Solutrean boats? Gee, do you think it MIGHT be because they haven't ever LOOKED for them? . . ./snarc

    Besides which, the OTHER find in that article was by an oyster fisherman, who found an artifact under like 200 feet of water, down where the coast was 25,000 years ago. So, it is obvious that any Solutrean boat would be down there, too.

    But their conservatism only lets them admit what has ALREADY been found - AND NOT ONE THING MORE. So, every step of the way is like pulling hen's teeth.

    And there isn't a ONE of them who will do like real scientists do - make predictions, like I did 20 years ago. ANYBODY can do archeology if all you do is look at what already has been found. 20-20 hindsight - real great scientists there, I tell you...

    And the alternate researchers have been saying for probably 50+ years that Clovis was NOT the first here. And the alternate researchers were right - but the arkies say, "Oh, lucky guesses. They don't know what they are talking about. And, besides, where are their peer-reviewed papers?"

    If alternate researchers had the funding of academics, they would set science on its ear.

    BTW, I have concluded that arkies are not even scientists, just archivists. The only science involved -like C14 testing - is actually done by real scientific labs. And then the arkies toss a lot of the resultant datings, because "it was obviously contaminated." (read: It didn't fit the time period we were expecting) So, much of the real science goes down the toilet, while they pad their paradigms with cherry-picked data.

    Arkies are 1% method and 99% trying to fit everything into the existing paradigm (so they don't lose their funding, which is extremely hard to come by and distorts everything, because the funding committees fund only the most conservative digs. The entire science gets progressively more and more narrowed down into a smaller and smaller box.

    You can always tell when an arkie has no clue, because they label the confusing stuff, "ceremonial" or "ritualistic," and then they weave the same old same old silly scenarios about the mumbo jumbo stupid ancients peoples and their witch doctors/astrologers/shamans and sacrifices.

    Bah freaking humbug.

    That's my 2 cents, and I am sticking to it.

    Steve Garcia

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you know about the Ancient Waterways Society? -

      http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ancient_waterways_society/

      It's a site for sharing diffusionist ideas and info. The participation is of mixed quality, but some posts are excellent. The Yahoo Group format is an awkward vehicle, but it was the easiest thing to do when I was setting the site up.

      Delete
  8. Very interesting concept. I just came across it the other day and think it is fascinating. My sister-in-law lives in Albuquerque, N Mex., a hot-bed of 'Clovis' stuff and, having visited several museums there, always wondered who the Clovis people were. Even the 'experts' don't have very good answers and the whole subject is almost more mythology than science. I won't even get into the petroglyphs....

    ReplyDelete
  9. Europe and Americas were both populated by a common sourc ein the Atlantic.. ATLANTIS!

    ReplyDelete
  10. When i think of all the possabilities of what could of happend when the earths
    continents broke up.
    Atlantis fell down under. And land pieces moved. In Sweden we have Gorland an Island outon the eastcoast who has a fauna and genetics like they have in the mediteranian sea.
    That is also been proven to be accurat.
    And Oue natives Samer also have connections with indians.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Remember that geologic time is on a much larger scale. The continents stopped moving apart about a hundred million years ago. The earliest modern humans appeared less than one million years ago.

      Delete
  11. Minnesotan,
    The Continental Drift may be rather more recent that you may think and may also have occurred rather faster than than we might think.
    At about the time that Charles Darwin'S book on The Origins of the Species, another British scientist called Phillip Sclater looked at the distribution of the small primate called a lemur and concluded that there had been a now-drowned continent stretching across the Indian Ocean from Madagascar to Malaysia.This he called Lemuria.
    The Theosophists of a little later in the 19th c. latched on to this but regarded Lemuria as somewhere in the Pacific with an alter ego called Mu.
    Given that it is surmised Continental Drift took hundreds of milions of years to happen, the shift of Lemuria from the Indian to Pacific Ocean seems an unseemly haste.
    For me, this has a bearing on the belief in the one-time existence of Atlantis.
    In any case, a look at a map showing both sides of the Atlantic quickly reveals just how snugly the Bulge of Africa and the shoulder of South America fit. Moreover, the Atlantic Ocean was never large enough to have contained a continent that was equal in size to the whole of Asia and Africa combined (as Plato). This surely is more than enough to remove Atlantis from our thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I just found this site when looking for information about the Solutrean hypothesis.

    I love it! I'll be back for more soon.
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  13. In Europe, Solutrean industry was found in the South of France not in Spain and the Solutrean men were not White Europeans but paleo-Inuits. (The rock of Solutré is in Burgundy. It is an hill over the plain. ( comment from France)

    ReplyDelete
  14. I want to cry at this article and all the discussion posts. It's helping me so much with my Anthropology assignment. I'm not very good at this class and so reading all this is REALLY helping a lot. Thank you guys so much.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good. Glad we could help. Come back some time and browse the other stuff for fun.

      :.)

      Delete
  15. Searching haplogroup x led me to a Wiki page indicating an inordinate percentage of haplogroup x markers being present in the extreme Northeast of North America via a vis Western and Southwestern North America. Looking at the literature regarding the explanation for haplogroup x's presence in the Native American gene pool, I don't see any justification why such a geographic concentration of a given haplogroup should occur. Moreover, the coincidence of proximity to European concetrations of haplogroup x can not be overlooked.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Amazing when people start quoting the Southern Poverty Law Center then I know this Soultrean Hypothesis must be on the right track.

    Joe
    CCFIILE.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My thoughts exactly, Joe. Anything that might invalidate the Zionist/Marxists' narrative to wit universal White guilt is as central as maintaining their own monopoly on victimhood will undoubtedly set the propaganda machine into overdrive without fail. As far as I'm concerned, one would be hard pressed to find a more viable means of lending credibility to a theory than that which merits such an effort on behalf of the S.P.L.C..

      Delete
  17. I wonder if the politically correct folks realize that they are acting just like the Catholic church supressing science.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. this should keep you busy reading

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_Catholic_cleric%E2%80%93scientists

      Delete
  18. It was what it was regardless of how anyone feels about it, so lets find out and quit being a bunch of emotional babies about it.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...