Interesting article

[eppingera]

Yahoo!


interesting article on Clovis and pre-Clovis culture, hope the link works.

 

[mamabear]

You're right, it is a very interesting article. & yes, the link worked. I saw a show recently which delved into the possibility of Europeans coming to America long before we thought. They even had a clovis blade found here that was made from flint from France. I question everything, & I wonder what tests they did to prove it was from France, but I think it is a strong possibility. Just as strong as 1st people coming over link from Russia to North America. Gosh I love history, especially when old ideas are challenged!

 

[Charl]

However, this study doesn't really favor the Solutrean Hypothesis at all. Rather, this study, and the study of the Mal'ta child, a 24,000 year old burial from southern Siberia near Lake Baikal, prove beyond any doubt that 14-38% of all Native Ametican ancestry derives from this Mal'ta population, which itself was in part descendent from Western Eurasians, from as far west as Germany. It is now known that Western Eurasians made it to Far Eastern Asia, and mixed with the people there. And became the founding population of the Americas. As a result of these studies we can now know with certainty that Western European genetic markers found in today's Native Americans derive, not simply from post-Contact times, but from 10's of thousands of years ago. Native Americans are in part descendent from Upper Paleolithic hunters from Western Eurasia, but the route of entry for those people was still from Asia to Western America and not from Europe via the Atlantic.

Here is a good summary:


http://news.sciencemag.org/archaeology/2014/02/native-americans-descend-ancient-montana-boy

From which, this quote:

".... The data also undermine contentions that today’s Native Americans descend from later migrants to the Americas, rather than from the earlier Paleoindians. And that could help tribes that want to claim and rebury ancient American skeletons such as that of the 9400-year-old Kennewick Man from Washington state. “This is proof that Kennewick Man was Native American,” says archaeologist Dennis Jenkins of the University of Oregon, Eugene. Sarah Anzick, whose family is in possession of the infant, says that it is likely to be reburied in May."

What is said above is a very important consequence of this finding. It will become more difficult in the future for scientists to study early remains when found. At least it sets up that way. This has been an issue between Paleo archaeologists and Native Americans for awhile now.

And here:

http://www.latimes.com/science/scie...ricans-20140212,0,1136422.story#axzz2t9y90PW7

And from the above link, an archaeologist laments:

"While conducting research, senior study author Eske Willerslev, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Copenhagen, met with a number of Native American tribes in Montana to discuss the research. He said scientists and Native American groups haven't always gotten along well, so he wasn't sure what to expect at first."They showed a lot of interest in the study, but all of them said that now is the time for the skeleton to go back into the ground," Willerslev told a documentary film crew. "This was a heart blow, because being a scientist, reburying probably the most important skeleton in the history of the Americas, it's hard."
But Willerslev said it was a sacrifice that science had to make.
"I realized that if scientists and Native Americans want to pursue their past together, there needs to be compromises on both sides. Therefore, we need to respect that they feel very strongly about this issue."




So, a very, very important consequence beyond the very exciting new discoveries regarding Native American origins.

BTW, mamabear, there are now 2 blades made of French flint found in the Delmarva. The one you refer to(it was NOT a Clovis blade) was found beneath the chimney foundation of a colonial homestead, and a colonial origin could not be ruled out.