Nearly half an hour long, yet before I knew it the video was over and now I'm left wanting more. This could definitely be a series. Fascinating episode!
@@cherylbutler3241 while I certainly wouldn’t call Hancock a failed novelist given how many followers he has and how rich he’s become off of selling his idea, I’d still call his ideas incorrect. Hancocks publications are actually lacking much in science. They are published for profit. They can’t divulge sources nor is much of their supposed “research,” testable. Convenient for those wishing to push a narrative for profit. Most people never consider how globalization and the spread commerce has changed the world. The ideas of Hancock, who believes there was an ancient maritime power that spread knowledge, culture and much more through out the world, fails to see the differences and how that globalization didn’t truly begin until the arrival of Columbus. Why didn’t they spread foods around the world? Or genetic material? Or animals? Or animal husbandry? Or agriculture? Or disease? How about words that would have been exchanged in a sharing of knowledge? What about that they completely disappeared without leaving even a tool behind, while Stone Age people were able to survive and thrive, leaving behind signs of their existence? I know, they sank beneath the waves? A sea faring people, who were across the globe, yet all died off and apparently destroyed their material culture before doing so? Why wouldn’t they sail up river as well? His argument that their sites are all under water makes one wonder why stick to the shores? If they practiced agriculture and animal husbandry, why do paleobotanists nor biologists not find evidence of any genetic alterations as a result of people selecting plants and animals for beneficial traits? So many things to ponder
Dude....this is an amazing channel... This video's explanation of the complicated issue of the name native peoples go by/are referred to as, was a fantastic and perfect way to introduce the topic, by pointing out that native peoples' own history has been robbed from them and degraded by being basically called all sorts of names that have nothing to do with them/their language/their culture. And I appreciate immensely that in other video's you do the same, making note that the names of cultures/places didn't come from the peoples themselves and explaining where it did come from.
The naming conventions are even more complicated than he suggests! Here in Canada, in 2024, I believe that most tribes prefer the term "First Nations People." I also hear the term "Aboriginal People" quite a lot; it's not just for Australians any more! :)
We were fortunate enough to visit New Zealand and spent a couple days at their National Museum. The Maori and other Polynesian cultures were so skilled in open ocean navigation that they could tell the distance from land by the pattern of waves hitting their canoes. They had woven stick "maps" with differently bent twigs to compare with the wave patterns. Absolutely amazing.
Polynesian migration is so fascinating! I actually once did a presentation (not on RUclips) on it and I loved researching it. I'd like to do a video at some point about Polynesian-American contact at some point because there is very good evidence that it occurred before Columbus (but only in the last 1000 years.)
Excellent video!! Quick comment - I believe that homo sapiens moved here and there depending upon the abundance of prey animals and eatable vegetation etc. They never thought, "Oh, we're leaving a certain continent etc." such as moving from Siberia into North America - or leaving Africa... As far the the Polynesians etc. I believe they made a conscience decision to go elsewhere due to their knowledge of currents and wave patterns. What courage they had! I'm a fan of the Coastal Route for at least part of the migration to the Americans.
Yes, you are correct. Other groups did enter into the americas at different times. This episode is just focused on the initial migration though. We'll discuss later migrations in future episodes.
The first time we visited Canada from the u s, we heard the term first people’s and immediately thought it conveyed respect as well as needed no translation. I believe it is the official descriptor in Canada. Nice
You’re absolutely amazing. I legit wondered “oh what does BP mean?” And you answered immediately. I love how you don’t assume that we’re already knowledgeable about this topic. Thanks a lot, you’re def going places.
You're too kind! I didn't know any of this stuff a few years ago so I know what it's like learning all this for the first time. I try to keep things as accessible as possible.
@@AncientAmericas some constructive criticism on that point. While it was great of you to point out how to figure out the time, I think it would be better if you presented it in the time phrasing most people know. If people are doing math to figure out what the time is, they're not listening to what you're saying and miss out on that information. Very good and informative. Look forward to listening to more from you.
@@doop6769 I appreciate the criticism. I'm honestly torn on this because part of me does want to make the material as easy to consume as possible but the other part of me wants to stay true to the scholarly literature that uses BP in these situations in case people want to do more research on their own. At the end of the day, it's a trade off. Thanks for the input and feedback!
@@AncientAmericas fair enough. I'm just thinking if you're trying to reach out to a larger audience. You could still explain the time, just the opposite way. It breaks the fluidity in listening when you have to do math. Someone who is sitting doing research, has the time to do the addition. Just my thoughts. But then, I don't have an educational channel either. Lol. I love this stuff so keep it up.
@@AncientAmericas So let me get this straight, 13,500 BP = roughly 11,500 BCe... and that date is about the time all the mega fauna were wiped out in North America and around the world. The Mammoths, Sabre Tooths, Short Faced Bear and Giant Sloth, ect went extinct...presumably due to comet strikes to the North American Ice Shelf, according to geological evidence, which led to the Younger Dryas period, also called the Mini Ice Age. This is about the time Gobleki Tepe was constructed, coming off a global cataclysm. I think Gobleki Tepe was in use from 11,000 BC to 7000 BC, but I could be off a bit, because these academics keep changing the timeline denotations. I think a simple solution to clarify the timelines in peoples minds, since this is all about information exchange and learning, would be to give both the BP and BC dates for a given subject, to provide context and cross reference with other known archaeological and historical events. Academia, if they can make something complicated they will.
More and more evidence is leading that way. The aforementioned stemmed points were also found in Hokkaido, Japan. Also the similar pottery in Valdivia, Ecuador and C2 ydna among the Kichwa and Waorani people.
Yes. Island hopping from Siberia, especially when sea level is low enough to erase the Bering sea, is not a stretch at all. Even from Japan via Siberia.
In college, for a political philosophy class I had to read Stephen Ambrose’s (also wrote Band of Brothers) famous 1996 book, “Undaunted Courage” detailing how Thomas Jefferson became great friends with Meriwether Lewis, and how the two decided to explore the North American continent on behalf of the newly formed country. Before Jefferson sent off what’s now the famous ‘Lewis and Clark Expedition’, the book detailed Jefferson’s beliefs he relayed to Lewis on the Native American’s origins on the continent and it’s fascinating, he for all his brilliance in the natural sciences and comprehensive view of history, absolutely was convinced Natives were also the “lost children of Israel”. You were spot on in this video saying that theory was all the rage. He failed spectacularly in preparing Lewis and Clark for a realistic view of each tribe’s temperament and core values & motivations.
Thank you.... such an interesting and open minded video!!! Make you feel quite small and insignificant when you consider all the countless people who have lived, loved, worked, fought and then died before us!!
I favor the idea of several migrations, starting before that glacial period. It would always be a one-way trip, as these were hunter-gatherers, and access to hunting grounds was probably very competitive. The winners got to stay. The losers had to leave forever. And the amount of such people a given amount of land could sustain probably varied greatly over the centuries. At their low points, more people would have to leave.
I'm going with non stop migration. I think all peoples made it over until I hear otherwise. So far indigenous Asiatic and Polynesian are checked off. Across Atlantic Ice says Europeans did so. I'm betting evidence of Middle Eastern and African travelers is out there.
@@clarencebeeks2787 the DNA trail is pretty solid. There are several ancient human fossils of the Americas first inhabitants. The first footprints r from Asia, Eurasia, some came by water, some from Siberia by land. ALL ancient ppl leave footprints. The Vikings came in a small group and left, they left footprints. That's about it until AFTER the ships of horror came, after that, lots of diversity. It's documented on paper and DNA trail.
I like the coastal route myself. Various Inits & Siberian peoples have lived handily in harsh Arctic regions. Starting there and traveling along the coast would be easy. At least until other people moved in a blocked your southern progress.
I am 100% for this migration as well. Mostly because I grew up in the Chimikuan and Salish culture. Coastal Salish and Chimikuan were masters of our coasts from Alaska down to Northern California. Our name literally means, "sea people". This is why we have totem poles. They were meant to stand tall and direct water traffic in our vast and complicated water ways. Those totems resemble quite a few tiki totems. We had massive boats like some Polynesians eventually that we used for whale hunting. Quileute, Makah and a few more tribes still celebrate "Whaling days". It's pivotal to our peoples. We have very old words for these marine life and legends of HUGE turtles when there is no sea turtles in the PNW now. It's not hard for me to imagine that we could have followed whale routes. Some Orca pods have routes that are very close to land. Idk... I do also know that my peoples closest genetic link out of the America's are paleo-Siberians. Our languages are so damn unique too. Some that have no contemporary.
Why can’t most of the migration theories be right? People came to America before the glacier, following the coast after the glacier formed, and after the glacier opened up. It would explain the diversity of languages.
And, it’s entirely possible for several of the theories to be viable, either as (1) separate migrations, (2) separate migrations that merged, (3) single migrations that split and later merged with others or (4) rejoined with their original group. Several migrations, or (5) dribble along group migrations are all viable, and it seems to me that several groups makes a lot more sense than a single group. Actually, only one group seems much less likely. Genetics, joined with languages, seem to be the best research tools today. There are probably descendants living in the Americas with ties back to old homelands. THAT seems a rich source of research to me. In the future, more techniques will probably emerge. Courtesy of Half Vast Flying
José de Acosta's Natural and Moral History of the Indies is a tough read, specially for people not used to chronicles, but it is a very amazing text. The way he logically picks apart the various theories of his time so he can arrive to the conclusion of an unknown land bridge is amazing.
A recent interpretation of a petroglyph in Australia showing a canoe or boat dating to 50,000 BCE not only is the first known depiction of a boat but the boat as shown has a high curved bow very much like the Polynesian ocean-going canoe!
@@KateeAngel He didn't say they did, only that the rock depiction was "very much like" the bow of the Polynesian canoe we are familiar with today. What people made the the pictured boat is anybody's guess.
I remember as a kid in the early 90s specifically asking my history teacher if it was possible that people were in the americas for longer than the currently accepted date and we just haven’t found the evidence. The teacher told me no obviously not and then the class laughed at me lol. That’s why I always challenge people who are so stuck on what the currently accepted truth is. Every couple decades we look back and laugh at what used to be “the truth” only a couple decades ago.
I remember when I was in 3rd grade (back in the 1950s) and was looking at a globe. I told the teacher that Europe/Africa and North/South America looked like they all "fit together" like they used to be connected. She -- and subsequently the whole class -- got a huge laugh out of it and I learned to STFU about such ridiculous notions. Well...I only made it through the 8th grade. I did, however go on to teach Computer Science for 30+ years. While I'm no rocket scientist...a lot of my students were. He he he. Just sane... :^) Saint
@@eugenesaint1231 you should be able to find that validation for your early statement of South America fitting with Africa etc check out a smaller Earth, or expanding Earth, one of those should show you that not only do the continents fit together on the Atlantic side but they fit together on the Pacific as well so you were dead on at least as far as you went.
My family is from Mexico City and Cuentepec, Morelos Mexico. When i took my DNA test i was shocked asf seeing that i have DNA matches up in the far north, from Barrow Alaska, Winnipeg Canada, Michigan, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas down to Mexico and Guatemala. I got 94% Native American, 2% Irish,1% Spanish, 3% Italian. My mother got 97% Native American.
@@godofthisshit i got some matches on the east coast but they're all due to recent Mexican migration. The matches that i got from Alaska, Canada, Michigan and Arizona and some from Oklahoma are all members of federally recognized tribes. Inupiaq, Ojibway, White Mountain Apache, Navajo and Ute of Oklahoma. My haplogroup is A2 which is mostly found in Athabascan tribes. How the hell my family migrate down to central Mexico, who knows. Both of my grandmothers spoke Nahuatl. I do know the Aztecs migrated across North America for hundreds of years until their god Huitzilopochtli told them to settle in Lake Texcoco and so they founded the great city of Tenochtitlan.
don't be surprised if your DNA profile is updated and the results much closer to what you expected - my profile changed significantly - so much - it almost seems like they sent someone else's profile - except for the presence of some expected groups - that stayed while the weirder groups disappeared the DNA tests are skewed towards european testing cuz they bought most of the testing early on - other groups - such as asians & american indians are expected to become more refined as more of those people get the test
Fantastic job.. Well done!!! As a European I'm really fascinated on how fast Homo Sapiens conquered the world and how rapid they migrate from North to South America.. I congratulate you your presentation was very comprehensive..!! 👏👏
Rapidly you say?.....But if the Earth is 4.5 billion years old then what's so rapid about an immigration that occured in the last 3,000 years? Do you realize how much time 3,000 subtracted from 4.5 billion is?.....simple! 4.5 billion.
"inuit" are the eskimos of canada and greenland - the eskimo in alaska call themselves "yupik" or "innupiaq" - to call them "inuit" would be calling them by another name - like calling a canadian "american" - you know they love that
@@johneyon5257 They hate the name Eskimo even more. It was a pejorative exonym used by their Native enemies meaning “eaters of raw meat.” It’s like calling all Asians “Orientals” or Chinese.
@@johneyon5257 . Like calling the Savior by a Greek word when the truth is He came as a Hebrew speaking Hebrew to Hebrews, and His Father's name is a Hebrew name. The Most High Almighty Creator's name is Yehovah. His Son the Savior's name is a Hebrew name. Yeshua. HalleluYah!!
Amazing how the dates of the first arrivals keeps getting moved back. I can remember when the dates were only 5,000 years ago. New tech and dna have revolutionized things. Love it!
Glaciation only extended to present day Missouri and Tennessee. So lands south of there could've been populated during the last glaciation. I heard that Mohawk culture has uncovered archaeological evidence that dates back over a 100,000 years since they inhabited the area in Canada BEFORE the last glaciation which occured some 20,000 years ago. An attempt to present a false narrative concerning migrations timelines is permeating our historical accounts. Why can't the historians simply take the words the "oral traditions" give that cover hundreds of thousands of years? The answer is,....because they keep ending up in black cultures thousands of years old.
@@raymondgaines4315 don't mind the children, people want to ignore that our brains and bodies have been anatomically unchanged since 250,000 (save some hight changes) yet we didn't learn to do anything but not doe untill 10000 BCE? Bullshit, you keep on looking for the truth dude, cuz everyone else is content to live in lala land, where the rules are made up and the points don't matter.
A lot of Natives form the US don’t get offended by the term “Indian” because its not used as a derogatory term like it is used in some Latin American countries like Mexico where many of us Indigenous peoples are referred to as “Indios” in a derogatory manner.
I am from California Have you heard or studied the Chumash people who live here on the west coast. They has ancestral sea capable boats called a Tomol. The thumbnail for this video is one and you showed it a few times while explaining the Coastal Migration Theory 🤙🏽
Check some videos on First Americans and the Channel Islands. Seems the kelp forests were a main staple in food and in construction, and they wrapped around from Asia to NA. Seals + Kelp + flightless ducks + seabird eggs. Not the worst food choices.
@@dffndjdjd Migration by boat would be far easier and more likely than walking. Simply follow the coastline. Much of the evidence for coastal migration is now under water.
Studying Archaeology in the early 90s, I was taught that no one was here until the glaciers cleared. The dated sites that seemingly disagreed with the theory we're completely discounted. It seemed obvious to me that the people who made it to south America first must have been a seafaring culture, and the sites to prove it were out along the continental shelf. Loved the video, and reading through the comments.
Coastal migration was the theory championed by my archaeology professor. She also mentioned the Beringia standstill. I think she may have mentioned the split between the two branches of Beringia Amerindians being due to a later group who eventually DID traverse the new land passageway post-LGM, but I might have just dreamed that. Regardless, I remember her mentioning the split at the very least. I should dig up my class notes from two years ago and flip through them
@@TheNachoOne Except that the inland route was open before the LGM at 22,000. It was closed from 22,000 to 13,500. The kelp highway was open continually, it seems.
IMHO, the coastal route seems most probable due to the food. If the ice sheets made more dry land, then more dry coasts were available. The warmer breezes off the ocean toward the coasts may have provided enough land for people to migrate. Simple boats may have been available to get around ice or from island to island and back to mainland shore. That’s my guess. Texas
You may be on to something. Boats of animal skin (like walrus ) over wood frames would work very well, like kayaks.They would be able to paddle down the coast living off the sea life.
Boats (or water craft of some kind) have been around a long time. There is some evidence of Neanderthal presence on Cyprus. And with the topography of the Mediterranean Basin they sure didn't walk there. There is also some evidence of possibly Homo Erectus in the Phillippines. It may have been possible to walk from Borneo to either Mindanao along the arc of islands that extend between the two or from Borneo via Palawan. But there's a stretch of deep water between Palawan and Mindaro. Another possible route is from Sulawesi along but it features a number of deep water gaps. Several of them fairly long.
My wife and I volunteer at Mesa Verde NP and part of our fascination with the park is how the thinking has evolved just in the 42 years I have lived in the region. The studies being done and the evidence being found keeps the theories fluid. Thanks for your research. Are you aware of the Mammoth kill found in the Chesapeake region with European spear points that is fairly new? Please keep this moving forward. I’m a captive.
"Across Atlantic Ice" by Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley discusses the relic (called Cinmar laurel leaf biface). It is 188 mm long and 55mm wide, found off the Virginia coast 100 km, and in 75 meters of water. It was not necessarily a kill site, but it was dredged up in 1970 with a mastodon tooth and bones dated to 23,000 BP. The material came from a rhyolite deposit at the MD/PA near Emmitsburg. On a side note, Virginia has at least 3 pre-Clovis sites known.
There are artifacts at the Pedra Furada site in Northern Brazil that date back 48,000 years ago. It's probably the case that there were many groups that made their way to the Americas at different times; and as you said, some of those groups may have died out.
@Jesse Marcel exactly. One of the issues I have with some of these videos from different sources, is they keep using the word Theory. The word theory is so much implicating a vast knowledge of I don't know LOL. I like facts. If it's not facts, then to me it's just guessing. Definitely like your statement :-)
@@70stunes71 Do you know what "theory" means in science? It is not a synonym of "hypothesis". Theory can be proven, disproven or neither. General relativity is also a "theory", yet try telling physicists it is not true
A new paper studying ancient DNA from the Caribbean, posted this week on bioRxiv, explains that the Caribbean has one of the most culturally diverse mixes of human beings on the planet, but it was one of the last places in the Americas to be occupied by people between 8000 and 5000 years ago. Where these early migrants came from has always been a mystery until this study of ancient DNA probed into the deep history of the Caribbean and the story discovered by the researchers is one of “migration and cultural mingling” revealing how descendants of the first inhabitants interacted with new waves of migrants who arrived about 2800 years ago.
For an amateur in the area, you are very well informed. Amazing video ! Recently, cave paintings have also been found on plateaus in the Colombian Amazon dated some 20 milennia ago. There is much older evidence for campfires in hinterland of Brazil, but there is still no consensus as to whether such campfires are the result of human activity, or whether they are the result of natural fire from lightnings.
@@AncientAmericas look into toca da tira peia in brazil for possible dating back to 22000 years ago. Also see “genetic evidence of two foundating populations of the americas” for possible australasian dna in this earlier brazilian population.
One more comment: When I was a boy in the early 60’s I read in H.G. Wells history, “The Outline Of History” ,that the Atlantic Ocean was so great as to preclude migration from Europe. Later in the same work I read that the early Polynesians were navigating the vast distances of the Pacific Ocean as early as 50,000 years ago! From an early age I came to believe that early man not hindered by the ignorance and superstitions of modern man were capable of amazing feats that should not be underestimated.
Columbus found a bell from a Spanish galleon in a hut in the Carribean...storms blew them there and they made it back to Columbus' home island...Santa Palo...Columbus was finally funded by Queen Isabella when he produced a map of what he thought were the outer islands 🏝of India...took the explorers quite a few years before they realized they had actually discovered North and South America not the Orient...indigenous people are called Indians from then on...as from India...lol
Polynesia was settled only 5 k years ago, before that there were only Melanesians, and they settled only some islands very close to New Guinea and Australia
@@dffndjdjd Yeah, the oldest sites are inland because no one is looking at the obvious place where most ancient sites would be. On the original shoreline during the ice age. It is far more likely that the first Americans came over in boats following the coastline.
I love this video- takes me back to my Archeology of the Americas Uni class! Definitely would love to see a series on this. Oh! And in Canada we typically say “Indigenous” (as you say, trendy and concise) or “Aboriginal,” (less colloquial and more of a political or government term). Indigenous is sort of an umbrella term for the three groups: First Nations, Metis and Inuit.
Definitely coastal migration. It's the only one that truly makes sense, and it's the most efficient in terms of energy for a population of people to move around and gain ground for food and growing their tribes.
Like early homosapien evolutionary theory, which the pendulum of science is swinging away from both extremes into a nuanced multiregionalism and multi-migration position; I think the populating of America will be explained in a similar manner.
I agree, although the genetics strongly point to a single or (at least) main ancestor group. I can imagine how population pressures might encourage some of the more adventurous to head off to find new lands-even if contact was later broken, there might have been an oral tradition of these sons and daughters who went east and south, and then others might follow when there was again population pressures.
I have recently found your channel and I love it! I am kind of aware of the Precolumbian America since I have read many books concerning this topic but I'm not a pro and I'm always delighted to see and hear e.g. about new discoveries, theories or just the good old topics because there's always something interesting in it! :-)
Take a pack weighing 60lbs. Put it on your back and carry it a mile. Using a calorie counter compare putting that same weight in a small sail boat and travel a mile. Shore lines have food, fuel and distinct features to help keep on tract. Going from river to river would provide fresh water and places to camp. Equally important was the ability to back track to inform the source population of exploration expedition's findings, making exploring new places efficient and lowering the risk factor to the group in finding new lands.
You are correct but remember that a glacier covered shoreline makes fresh water and landing much more difficult. Not impossible by any means but not easy.
While I don't consider the Solutrian hypothesis to be very likely, I think many unfairly dismiss it. Many discard it as impossible based on half hearted arguments. This was the case in my university where only a strawman of the hypothesis was presented and argued against and then it was implied that only bad people with bad intentions would support that hypothesis. Luckily I had already learned about the hypothesis and what it actually entailed. I think that sort of thing does a great disservice to finding out the truth about the past
I'm personally not a fan of the hypothesis. I think that there would be much stronger evidence if it were true. That said, I think it's fine to entertain and speculate on the idea as long as you aren't trying to incorporate it into some white supremacy nonsense, which I'm sure you aren't but some people unfortunately do.
That's liberal influence on education. The term for it is "Lysenkoism" and it's been growing in America for decades. Now anything that contradicts the global warming hypothesis or that might possibly offend the Alphabet People is actively suppressed.
@@nonyadamnbusiness9887 What if the Solutreans took the Columbus route to the Americas and the book No Stone Unturned in1958 brought up the Solutreans and I found out about that book from the book They All Discovered America in 1963.
According to professor William W. Crook 20% of Native Americans in the US and Canada have some European DNA. Nearly all of them in Eastern Canada have some.
@@michaelfoulkes9502 the question is how old is the DNA. If the Solutrian hypothesis is true, then the European dna that they have should be the same as the dna Europeans have from the Mesolithic Western Hunter Gatherer population and they shouldn't have any Anatolian Farmer or Steppe pastoralist related Dna. If they have all three, then it's almost impossible for any of that Dna to have gotten there before 2500bc
I just found this channel, I sat all weekend seeing the videos and doing some side research on related topics. I would like to suggest making a small episode about the lost city of Colombia "Ciudad Perdida" [800CE-until the late 14th century] and Tairona tribe. Ciudad Perdida was probably the region's political and manufacturing center on the Buritaca River and may have housed 2,000-8,000 individuals. Interesting information can be found on the documentary about Kogi, "From the Heart of the World The Elder Brother's Warning", made 1990. According to the Kogi people, some of the last preserved indigenous descendants of the Tairona, The Tairona lived for thousands of years, up until the age of the conquistadors. The story of Kogi is also very interesting, how they managed to live secretly from the outside world in the mountains of Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, which they found refuge when conquistadors came, and continue to live up to this day preserving their culture intact.
It is amazing how cleverly it was built into deep jungle with heavy rainfall, with great hydraulic knowledge of how to drain water out and remains still there after centuries.
I found a knife blade and many cobble mortars at a depth of 108 ft just off the "ancient sea cliffs" of San Diego's Point Loma and the site has my name.
Very interesting video. Hopefully as new evidence becomes available we can derive a conclusive theory of how and when the Americas were populated. Once again thank you for the video
Thank you, very well done, your enthusiasm is noted in the telling. I have always believed that the first nations arrived way before 13k years ago. My logic; the first Australians arrived on their large island 30-60k years ago so why couldn't the first Americans accomplished what the Australians did. I must say and I'm biased, I have learned through DNA that my Haplo-group C1b2 was the Haplo-group group of 2 infants found in Alaska dated back at least 13k years ago! I take great pride in that fact! My DNA has been in America for thousands of years and I am decendant of the first Americans. Thank you again, keep up the great work! Knowledge is king!
That is so crazy, I have a coprolite that I found when I was younger, somewhere out towards Paisley or Fossil, Oregon. Not sure where since it was back in 1988 or 89. But I was honestly not aware that Paisley was a Clovis site! Now I want to go back for pictures. Maybe see if they have a museum. I do not live too far up the road.
@@dffndjdjd I dunno. Every history of the Americas I read back in the 70's, every NOVA I saw about the ancient archeology of the Americas, and every article in Scientific American I read about this topic said "Clovis Clovis Clovis". Ditto the textbooks. Science is a human activity. Scientists are human. Yes yes yes. I've heard that these are "just theories" a "things change with new observations" etc etc. But humans are attached to their ideas. Often so much so, that they reject new information, or discount it. At any rate, I'm glad that that's changing at least in this arena.
@@johnmanno2052 well, popular explanation, including books, documentaries etc. always oversimplified a lot. Even press releases from universities can be inaccurate. I have seen it myself in my own field
@@KateeAngel Interesting. I certainly understand that. And it's disappointing. However, one also does hear about various political issues in the sciences that get in the way of research. For example, Robert Bakker in the 80s had a terrible time, because he promoted the idea that dinosaurs were warm blooded. And many of the people who excavated pre Clovis sites had to deal with a great amount of criticism and resistance to their findings. Please don't think I'm saying that science is nonsense, because it's not. However, I do think that scientists are just as human as anyone else.
@@dffndjdjd WHOA!!! I had absolutely no idea about H. Naledi and its anatomical issues! Given everything I've seen about it, including lectures, TED talks, etc, I had imagined it was another "side branch" of Homo, NOT Australopithecus. Very very interesting information. That changes quite a lot of my perspectives on Naledi. Though I still think the whole burial thing is very odd. I guess I wonder how one differentiates between a "real scientist" and a "scientific showman". Or a "real scientist" and a "scientific curmudgeon". Ernst Mach did not accept atoms, for example, because they could not be observed. Was Mach not a "real scientist" then? Or how about all those geologists who rejected tectonic plates, because of some very cogent objections to the theory. Were they all "curmudgeons"? In my opinion, there are various kinds of knowledge with varying levels of certainty. And, unfortunately, that means that there's enough ambiguity in our knowledge in certain arenas of science that there's enough doubt that a consensus is always difficult, and an absolute conclusion completely impossible. This tends to engage other, less rational, sides of our human nature, and the issues get ever more muddled.
I got a kick when a geneticist showed a group of Navajo adults photos of northern Mongolians genetics hinted they were related to. One man said, "Hey this one guy in front of this little delivery truck, he looks like my cousin Ed over in Sante Fe. Ed drives a delivery truck too.
@Ricky Barber No as this is YT! The comment does indicate humor as much as it’s critical of genetic science. It’s vague to say the least. Still if the best contribution you have to this discourse is a question about a joke it says a great deal about your educational background.
@@DrSteveJ-gd3gn still even genetics doesn’t prove anything but inter-relations between two completely different people. To say the least about someone’s educational background as a put down really puts into Perspective how much of a Diva Punk you really are..aside from that, that only 13 thousand years ago when “Mongolians” did arrive. Though there was already an Indigenous people culture here. The land bridge and kelp beds is just a theory not fact. Indigenous peoples are there own people dna studies provide that fact. 9RA ya fool.
The likeliness of the americas being populated only by crossing this icey landbridge is so much harder to grasp than just accepting the fact that ship builders have existed all throughout the world for thousands of years, and people have been arriving, whether it was by choice or accident, but that they've been arriving at different points in time is so much easier to accept.
Regarding what to call Natives Americans; the main thing to keep in mind is to not use terms that separate ancient remains from modern Natives; genetics have shown that we descend from those first people regardless of differences in cranial shape and others.
Sort of, skeletons from the last glacial maximum and before are almost non existent in the archeological record and to my knowledge, nothing older than Kennewick man has been genetically tested. Even the Kennewick man fiasco was highly suspect. To make a claim as definite as "we are descended from the first" when we don't actually have almost any examples of "the first" is a bit of a stretch.
@@duxarchiteuthis by "the fiasco" I meant the whole ordeal surrounding the skeleton. The thing is just showing that he was "genetically closer to modern native Americans than Europeans", which is what I heard does not tell the whole story of who this person was.
It's actually a pretty weak statement which suggests that he was an example of someone who was at least halfway between the common ancestor of natives and Europeans and modern natives
Have you seen anything on pre-Clovis arrowheads found here in the Americas which are similar to those from Southern France and north Spain. Think one of them as Eastern or Western I forget.
Humans have been good at covering long distances, quickly, by land and coastline, for tens of millennia, but that is different from being able to sustainably settle all those areas. I'm surprised there isn't more consideration of the difference between a large settled population and mobile, much smaller scattered groups around the fringes, potentially in climatically more difficult times. Then, when climate improved, we finally see population growth , spread across wider areas, and long-term settlements. Stated another way, sporadic human presence in the Americas 20-40K BP does not disprove the idea that large populations did not exist pre-Clovis, nor vice versa.
not really i just liked walking and there was tons of insects to eat. i found that killing larger animals attracted other large animals so i rarely did that. most of the time animals left me alone cause they didn't think of me as food. after all i was the first human they had ever seen for 13,157 years. i do miss the big cat.
Mummies found in the Atacama desert in Ecuador show a very rare strain of leucemia that is prevelant in a southern Japanese island. The mummies are older than 3k years old. Nothing like the Clovis or Folsom points have ever been found anywhere in Asia. The Chumash people of coastal California made similar boats, and fishing hooks similar to Polynesian people's. Similar words for house and boat. There was a people in southern Patagonia who were black, spoke Australian aboriginal dialect, had creation stories of the rainbow serpent. The last 3 survivors of the people were filmed in the early 1900s The Zuni language is a language group all its own. It is not related to any language group in the world. Dr Leakey, who made the discovery of "Lucy" worked on a site in southern California. His opinion of the age of the artifacts found was around 250,000 years old. A site near the mouth of the Amazon river has been dated to around 45,000 years ago As for the genetics. It is a very small study group used in the study. There were Iver 500 nations when Columbus landed in Hispaniola. . One must remember any theory that does not fall in line with "accepted" theories is discounted and ridiculed. Science is supposed to be the elimination of possiblities. It seems modern science is about eliminating competing theories.
I saw a video about the Solutran migration I thought was interesting. They sailed in small boats along the edge of the ice sheet, hunting and fishing as they went. Perhaps your Pacific Coast group did something similar.
What if the people that came 30-40k years ago all died out- leaving no evidence in genetics? I like the coastal migration theory. This channel is my new favorite!
This is really a well-done series of presentations; well done, oh mysterious amateur pre-historian!! One thing that needs to be remembered when raising this kind of question is that we're really asking two questions, which may or may not have a common answer. The two questions are: 1) who were the first hominids to visit and reside in the western hemisphere; and 2) who were the ancestors of the later surviving and flourishing western hemisphere populations. As we have come to realize when looking into the similar "first out of Africa" question, the two sub-questions need not have the same answer. Indeed, it's possible that there were many independent routes of the "first people in America", and many first projects may have failed immediately, survived for a while before dying out, and so forth. Archaeology by itself may not be able to distinguish populations doomed to dying out and populations ancestral to modern indigenous groups. Ancient DNA, however, as it may be recovered in the future, can help us learn more about the likelihood of other, non-beringian colonization attempts at whatever time in pre-history may be determined. As things stand, though, the answer to question #2 above seems much clearer: DNA evidence, linguistic evidence, archaeological evidence, and reasonable assumptions about what it would take for people to get to the Western Hemisphere from the source of their DNA and language indicate ever more compellingly that the "kelp route" must have been the path of at least the main waves of those people whose descendants were finally successful in populated the Western Hemisphere.
I would expect that people came to the Americas using all these migration routes at some point in time and perhaps even some were not aware of after all we are talking about tens of thousands of years here. I find it stubborn to think that there can only be one event or one way of migration.
If there's one thing I've noticed about prehistorical migration evidence, it's that migrations happened in waves and, occasionally, from different directions.
@@NefariousKoel How about the idea of movements too small to be regarded as migrations. Consider the Solutrean Hypothesis. Exactly how many people would be required to drop a Solutrean point, here and there? 10? 15? Extinction of that many people does not seem unrealistic.
@@warringtonfaust1088 - Another good point you have. The smaller ones often disappear to assimilation or, perhaps, destruction. The much later Viking settlements in North America are good examples of what can happen in such cases.
@@warringtonfaust1088 Agreed, of all of them the Solutrean is the one I find the most unlikely(because of the glaciers+directions of ocean currents+ genetics and tool evidence) but even for that one I wouldn't dismiss an earlier version of vikings, or a ship blown off course a couple times over the last 10,000 years
You mispronounced Oregon (laugh) yet all-in-all, this is an excellent presentation on your part. I enjoyed it and learned from it, thus subscribing. And yes, the coastal migration theory sits well with me. Thx.
what a nice treat. I find myself rewinding the video often because of the boldness of the topic. god bless the exploration of America past, and its proud and righteous peoples
my great grandfather was cherokee. ( the real, not liz warren kind) some of us since look european, some like cherokees. one of the latter went once on a tour of russia . her guide was showing her around and people would come up and speak to her. she knew it wasn't russian. the guide talked to them and laughed. "they think you are from siberia and are asking which tribe you are." the connection sort of shows after all these ages.
Coastal migration is a very real theory. As Brian Forrester pointed out in one of his videos, the early south Americans of the western coast, travelled by water craft to the Easter Islands.
@@dffndjdjd To me both theories are empiricals ! The migration by the coast could to be the cause for the more fastest exploration of the territory ! Imagine... From 24,000 years b.P. in Alaska to 14.500 years b.P. to Patagonia, almost 10 milennia using canoes. Homo Sapiens needed 30 millennia to go from East Africa to Sundaland. Imagine how long time it would take for the peoples since Alaska to Patagonia if walking through the wetlands of Lake Agassiz, the arid lands of Mexico and the tropical forests!
I love this stuff! I've certainly noticed language similarities just as an occasional history nerd & Michigander. Like many others, my recent interest is tracing lineage on the eastern side. However, my lineage suggests coming from America, not discovering it. I was revisiting Clan MacFie History, like this topic, many hypothesis have value in exploring. They were an original 7 clan, who were possibly remaining ancient inhabitants, or not. If they were not Norse, Viking, or Picts then I'll keep exploring. Who were these "Dark men of Peace"? Is it possible that they were in one of these northern pockets of civ?
Great video, thanks! Archaeological work done in Haida Gwaii found in 2019 evidence for occupation going back 13.000 years BP. I don't know why folks think we have to subscribe a SINGLE migration theory. It makes more sense to allow that many migrations occurred in many ways over time - coastal routes (both east and west) and overland routes. Certainly, the stone tool styles seem to indicate multiple groups with different traditions.
Yes, there definitely were multiple migrations, not just one. I should have probably made it clearer in the video that I was discussing the earliest and first of these migrations.
@@tpxchallenger the tools and spears found in the 250,000 year old stratum layer and the 250,000 year old mastodon pelvis that had a mastodon carved into it arent a prank there have been a lot of scientists who criticized the evidence, but it has stayed solid.
@@21LAZgoo The bone carving has disappeared, AFIK. The tools themselves can't be dated as such so it was the strata that was dated. Hueyatlaco is subject to flooding, and humans did dig hunting pits there, so there are plausible explanations for the tools being found in a much older strata. If Steen-McIntyre is right and some tool using hominid making sophisticated spearpoints was in North America 250K years ago then we should be finding more evidence of this, but we have not.
This goes without saying as they all descend from small groups of people migrating out of northeastern Asia into North America and then spreading throughout the New World.
I'm sure you're aware of the most recent developments in this controversy. Human footprints at White Sands in New Mexico have been proven to be 23,000 years old. This is a seismic finding that will eventually (when accepted) necessitate an alteration to our fundamental understanding of the peopling of the Americas. The coastal migration theory stands out, in my mind, as the most likely scenario. It has been posited that Homo Erectus, a close relative to our Homo Sapiens, were sea-farers. Travel by boat, therefore, has almost always existed and is the most likely means by which America was reached. This channel is stupendous! Ancient America is underrated and fascinating. Thank you.
It is intriguing for me to remember picking tobacco with my great-grandfather in North Carolina. He was an elder in the Tuscarora tribe and he sternly warned me to not think that we had migrated into North America.It is impossible for me to forget the sincere and serious tone in his voice. He told me that this was our Home and that we belonged to the Earth. We are truly indigenous in the highest sense. We did not come here from somewhere else. We have always been here. And this is the belief of almost all of the India's people. And why not? If there were flora and fauna here,and there was,then why is some great migration necessary. We were already living on the continent as it broke away from Africa and have been sailing on it for thousands of years! There is nothing impossible with this idea. I guess it depends on your presuppositions. The Europeans are the immigrants,but not us.Why should we be when this is our true home.All of the Indians have an incredibly strong bond to this continent as our Mother. Just think about it. Ask an Indian!
Sounds like your having a similar issue to Christians and other religious people. Many christians have also been like NOOOO Science is wrong about our origins.
I recently watched part of a presentation that suggested that there were other land bridge features on the other, northern Greenland, Baffin Island etc, side of the arctic. These might also have had ocean going boats for part of the journey. They posit that there were possibly two or three other entries, on the other side, that were part of the same genetic group that entered on the Asian side. They started in the same region of, what is now, Siberia. The two groups were genetically isolated long enough that they developed distinct genetic markers and resulted, possibly in the two major groups that have come to be identified in the Americas. Sorry I'm just winging this here...I know the lecture is on you tube, I just can't find it in my history. It's quite likely that our ancient past will always have much that is unexplained. I cherish the work of those whose aim it is to further illuminate the lives of those who first populated this quarter of the landmass of our globe.
When referring two the two major groups is incorrect. There where not two major groups. There where humans that came to the americas from not Asia but Africa. The diversity is in genetics coincides with the wide genetic and languages of africa. Also south America and and even in today's north america most if the indians where dark skinned. They earth was very different when they came. Also the old methods used by racists have been disproved. The very diverse genetic diversity leads to africa. And farther back to bvb the giai period when the land masses where not disconnected. Most of the reports from from the Spanish conquistadors reported dark skinned people not like today's natives. Which seem to be only light fair skinned today. The historical narrative most history books is of fair skinned people. Unfortunately this is due to the racialized world. Research into the peoples of the americas has shown they are dark skinned peoples. Not Asians from Mongolia, Though not dis claiming some of those peoples did not find thier way here.
@@Mocha69A Three major groups and none of them are from Africa. Also every Native tribe has their own creation story and that they were created in the exact location that was perfect for them.
@@fishinwidow35 So the Olmec Culture of southern Mexico is a myth? That belief is only held by Europeans who desperately want to believe that they came first even though the land was already populated by tens of millions of people. America's hatred of the "northern triangle" Guatemala, Honduras and Belize is due to the fact that these are and have ALWAYS been dark brown skinned people and they were there BEFORE the slave trade so clearly dark brown and black skinned people have ALWAYS been here!
From what I hear "Native American" is mostly used by people who live far away from reservations and don't interact with any indigenous people, and that indigenous people themselves predominantly use the term "Indian", at least in the United States, with the term "Indian" also being more common closer to reservations as a result.
Great work! I kinda doubt the first people to cross over the coastal route stopped and contemplated the event. Siberia and Alaska have very similar flora, fauna, and topography. They likely just followed opportunities to hunt/gather farther East/South, never realizing the future significance. That they "lived" their way into the Americas, would fit the nomatic lifestyle of primative peoples. The "primative" Pacific Islanders, developed amazingly fast/stable sailboats that took them EVERYWHERE. With no metal fasteners, no charts/maps, no compass, nor even a written language, these prehistoric people discovered (and settled), basically every speck of land, with fresh water, on 1/3 of the surfaces of the Earth (including South America).
They do have kind of maps. Made of bamboo, showing changes in streams, fauna, waves, islands. Not many left who can read them and navigate. You know they also found and populated Madagaskar. The female madagaskar population goes probably back to app 30 to 40 females from indonesia/malaysia most of the men too, but there are some africans and arabic mixed in. The language is Austronesian. About 2017 there was an attempt to navigate a polynesian ship around the world with no modern instruments so as gps, compass, clock or such. They did study currents and weather system and all that before starting and also changing the crew in some ports. Worked quite well.
There was a recent discovery of a 15000-year-old site in the Haida Gwaii archipelago in what is now Canada. It is strong evidence for the coastal migration theory. My problem with the Solutrean hypothesis is the intention behind it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and so far most evidence supports a Pacific migration, not Atlantic. The intention behind the Solutrean hypothesis seems to be more about racism and wishful thinking than anything else. It is used to discredit Indigenous land claims and cultural heritage, while supporting people of European descent. It is a descendant of the previous theories that ancient European (or other respected Old World) peoples built the monuments and cities in the Americas. FWIW, “Native American” is not very concise, which is why Indigenous is more common outside of the US. The term “native” is too closely related to “natal” or “native-born”, so it can be liberally applied to anyone born in the Americas.
It's amazing our understanding the topic has become more clear since your video came out, only a year later and now we know there were peoples in the Americas pre-Beringia thanks to some ancient footprint preserved in New Mexico.
On the terminology, the designation “native American” has a major problem not mentioned here. Anyone born in the United States is considered legally to be a “native-born American”. That makes even me, of Irish-Italian heritage (like a zillion other Americans) born in Michigan, therefore a “Native American”. American Indian is best since it is widely understood and it being a misnomer is hardly unusual. “German” is something from Julius Caesar and it’s unclear where he got it, certainly not what they call themselves. Many of the tribal names used today are also exonyms, some not so benign as “Indian”. The term “Apache” actually means “enemy”, and the name “Sioux” means “little snakes” in one attestation.
Love this video thank you! I too am a coastal migration fan. It all boils down to how intelligent were these people? I know if you dropped me off on an island with enough resources to build a boat and my only choice was to build a boat or die I would find a way to build one and sail away. Skin on frame boats are not that difficult to build and are very seaworthy even in icy waters.
@@janetprice85 Exactly. I think we don't give them enough. I have an even "bigger idea" about their ability to traverse the ocean. Eurocentric history simply assumes that pre-medieval culture couldn't sail across oceans, but ... the Polynesians did. You cannot get to Hawaii by accident, it turns out: People had to WANT to come here. The art of how they did so was very nearly lost to us completely, but now that I know what it was ... I see the whole Pacific Rim as fair game for oceanic travel even 10's of thousands of years ago.
@@zaq_hack4987 There is some indication Polynesians reached S.America. They were master sailors. As a child I was fascinated with emigration to the Americas and felt the theories did not add up. The empires built in Central and South America on top of previous civilizations could not have occured in a mere 5,000 years as was the time frame back then. My love of prehistory and history began with a trip to Mammoth Cave at age eight. Lol!
@@janetprice85 A friend and I are tying to test a theory that I have recently had. We think the "star maps" used by their methods are misunderstood. Things that Europeans didn't understand when excavating the ancient world were ascribed to "religion," but from another perspective, they could just as easily be stories about navigation: A mnemonic that stargazers could use to map the ancient world. We were about one man away from losing this technique, but the question keeps coming up in my mind, "How old could this technique be? There's no reason to believe it STARTED with the Polynesians - only that they kept it alive because they didn't have access to lodestones and chronometers. ruclips.net/video/m8bDCaPhOek/видео.html
The problem with the term “Indigenous People” is that the term has also been used for other tribal based people anywhere in the world considering that there are others such as but not limited to the North Sentinel Islands, if I correctly spelled the word.
Of course but I still think it's a good term. All areas of the world (except Antarctica I suppose) have indigenous people. When I say indigenous people, it's clearly referring to a specific geographic area so I think it's pretty clear that I'm referencing indigenous American peoples and not people of other continents.
@@AncientAmericas Indigenous means that is where the species originated, Human originated in East Africa. Everybody else is a migrant. Native means where you were born--I'm a native American; but my ancestry goes back to Magna Carta in England so I'm an European-American. If you use African-American to mean black people you can't have it both ways....
I vote for the water route. Boats have been around a long time. But who ever reached the Americas first it wasn't like they just packed their bags and decided to settle somewhere new. Any migration was likely a slow process that saw family groups split off when their numbers grew too large to be supported by their normal range. But there is one thing that may have speeded migrations along the way. If hunters were following seals or walrus into their summer feeding grounds then they could have noticed one population headed back the other way in fall. I suspect that a lot of the evidence of early human inhabitation of the Americas is under anywhere from 100 meters to 130 meters of water. Also there could have been early groups that died out for one reason or another. Where did the these people come from? The obvious answer of course is Northeast Siberia. The supposed genetic evidence for a southern route across the Pacific. I don't buy it. It's too far and any landfalls along the way are simply too tough of an environment. One possible route I could see having taken place by accident is from West Africa if there were coastal people that were fishing off shore and got swept out to sea due to bad weather. It's a long shot. Plus it would have to be a breeding population. The third possibility is along the fringe of the sea ice in the North Atlantic. The only way this could happen IMO is if a population in Western Eurasia was habitually hunting seals seasonally and wound up following the sea life down into the Maritimes or along the East Coast. The similarity between Clovis and Solutrean lithic point technology is intriqueing but not totally convincing
The coastal migration theory also suggests origins beyond eastern Siberia. Recent genetic and archaeological findings suggest there was a coastal migration route that went along the prehistoric Asian coastline from southern and eastern China through Japan (then part of the Eurasian continent) and Beringia, all the way into North America. People could have expanded fairly quickly into the Americas in contrast to land migration. A study suggests that before the mainstream American Indians entered the Americas, there were already people living there, and they are linked to the Red Deer Cave people of southern China and Melanesians through genetic studies, and are considered distinct from later waves of migrations. It also suggests that several migrations could have happened (and very likely did happen) well after the initial settlings. I believe I've read a study that suggests a 2000 BC coastal migration into the Americas from Northeast Asia. Cultural heritages of pacific coast peoples also suggest the existence of a prehistoric coastal cultural continuum, the natural expansion of maritime hunter-gatherers from coastal Asia into coastal Americas based on watercraft (and towards the other direction, into the Pacific islands).
Very well done and entertaining summary of this topic. One factual correction I would make is that George McJunkin did not find Folsom points among the bison antiquus bones at the Folsom type site in NE New Mexico (known as Wild Horse Arroyo). McJunkin deserves an immense amount of credit for his recognition of the significance of the prehistoric bones which he came upon after were exposed by a big flood in 1908. He was a former slave, cowboy and self-taught naturalist, apparently. He spent several years trying to get attention to his find but died before the points were discovered embedded between rib bones in situ in 1926. McJunkin died in 1922 and there is no evidence any points were found at the site during his lifetime. His story is amazing and should be more widely told. Somehow, his alleged discovery of the point itself, as is told in this video, has become a very common mistold mashup of the real history of the Folsom point discovery. Not trying to be critical but facts are facts.
I'm Hunkpapa Lakota and most Native people refer to themselves as what tribal nation and band they are from. It's difficult to have a blank term for everyone who has been on these continents for 25,000+ years. Indigenous people is popular but then many other people from other continents have started claiming that they are "displaced" indigenous people ex. descendants of slaves, etc. So imo that's not a good term because it gets easily hijacked and then turns into something else. paleoindian is a good term or Indigenous Native people.
@@gnostic268 As if myths are a substitute for actual research. By that logic we are not descended from primates as there are stories that we started with 2 people that some god created. Remember this lesson in epistemology.
![Twenty One Pilots - “The Line” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E2Rj2gQAyPA/mqdefault.jpg)
Nearly half an hour long, yet before I knew it the video was over and now I'm left wanting more. This could definitely be a series. Fascinating episode!
Thank you!
@@AncientAmericas
You did an excellent job with the info
Pretty much my favorite channel. I learn so much.
This is such an interesting topic!
I would love to see an entire series on this topic.
There's certainly plenty to talk about!
See "America Before" by Graham Hancock
@@cherylbutler3241 Cool yeah heard of him, is there a specific video or would you recommend the book?
@Derek Jackson how?
@@cherylbutler3241 while I certainly wouldn’t call Hancock a failed novelist given how many followers he has and how rich he’s become off of selling his idea, I’d still call his ideas incorrect.
Hancocks publications are actually lacking much in science. They are published for profit. They can’t divulge sources nor is much of their supposed “research,” testable. Convenient for those wishing to push a narrative for profit.
Most people never consider how globalization and the spread commerce has changed the world. The ideas of Hancock, who believes there was an ancient maritime power that spread knowledge, culture and much more through out the world, fails to see the differences and how that globalization didn’t truly begin until the arrival of Columbus. Why didn’t they spread foods around the world? Or genetic material? Or animals? Or animal husbandry? Or agriculture? Or disease? How about words that would have been exchanged in a sharing of knowledge? What about that they completely disappeared without leaving even a tool behind, while Stone Age people were able to survive and thrive, leaving behind signs of their existence? I know, they sank beneath the waves? A sea faring people, who were across the globe, yet all died off and apparently destroyed their material culture before doing so? Why wouldn’t they sail up river as well? His argument that their sites are all under water makes one wonder why stick to the shores? If they practiced agriculture and animal husbandry, why do paleobotanists nor biologists not find evidence of any genetic alterations as a result of people selecting plants and animals for beneficial traits? So many things to ponder
Dude....this is an amazing channel... This video's explanation of the complicated issue of the name native peoples go by/are referred to as, was a fantastic and perfect way to introduce the topic, by pointing out that native peoples' own history has been robbed from them and degraded by being basically called all sorts of names that have nothing to do with them/their language/their culture. And I appreciate immensely that in other video's you do the same, making note that the names of cultures/places didn't come from the peoples themselves and explaining where it did come from.
Thank you!
The naming conventions are even more complicated than he suggests! Here in Canada, in 2024, I believe that most tribes prefer the term "First Nations People." I also hear the term "Aboriginal People" quite a lot; it's not just for Australians any more! :)
We were fortunate enough to visit New Zealand and spent a couple days at their National Museum. The Maori and other Polynesian cultures were so skilled in open ocean navigation that they could tell the distance from land by the pattern of waves hitting their canoes. They had woven stick "maps" with differently bent twigs to compare with the wave patterns. Absolutely amazing.
Polynesian migration is so fascinating! I actually once did a presentation (not on RUclips) on it and I loved researching it. I'd like to do a video at some point about Polynesian-American contact at some point because there is very good evidence that it occurred before Columbus (but only in the last 1000 years.)
Excellent video!! Quick comment - I believe that homo sapiens moved here and there depending upon the abundance of prey animals and eatable vegetation etc. They never thought, "Oh, we're leaving a certain continent etc." such as moving from Siberia into North America - or leaving Africa... As far the the Polynesians etc. I believe they made a conscience decision to go elsewhere due to their knowledge of currents and wave patterns. What courage they had! I'm a fan of the Coastal Route for at least part of the migration to the Americans.
There were likely several groups that entered the Americas over a long timeline. It is a mistake to assume only one group came here.
Yes, you are correct. Other groups did enter into the americas at different times. This episode is just focused on the initial migration though. We'll discuss later migrations in future episodes.
I must agree
@@AncientAmericas I'm so excited.
@@dffndjdjd how passive aggressive! The author of the channel never implied that experts in the field are "dumber" or anything like it
I got the book of records man's records illumadummie records want a copy it's digital I send it to you if want
Here in “Canada” the term First Nations is used quite often. I’m not indigenous, but from what I understand this term is pretty well accepted
It makes the most sense.
Native American is mostly used outside of US so ignore him when he says it’s not. He got it completely wrong
indeed! it is how I prefer to be referred to as well.
The first time we visited Canada from the u s, we heard the term first people’s and immediately thought it conveyed respect as well as needed no translation. I believe it is the official descriptor in Canada. Nice
Food for thought, ty
You’re absolutely amazing. I legit wondered “oh what does BP mean?” And you answered immediately.
I love how you don’t assume that we’re already knowledgeable about this topic.
Thanks a lot, you’re def going places.
You're too kind! I didn't know any of this stuff a few years ago so I know what it's like learning all this for the first time. I try to keep things as accessible as possible.
@@AncientAmericas some constructive criticism on that point. While it was great of you to point out how to figure out the time, I think it would be better if you presented it in the time phrasing most people know. If people are doing math to figure out what the time is, they're not listening to what you're saying and miss out on that information. Very good and informative. Look forward to listening to more from you.
@@doop6769 I appreciate the criticism. I'm honestly torn on this because part of me does want to make the material as easy to consume as possible but the other part of me wants to stay true to the scholarly literature that uses BP in these situations in case people want to do more research on their own. At the end of the day, it's a trade off. Thanks for the input and feedback!
@@AncientAmericas fair enough. I'm just thinking if you're trying to reach out to a larger audience. You could still explain the time, just the opposite way. It breaks the fluidity in listening when you have to do math. Someone who is sitting doing research, has the time to do the addition. Just my thoughts. But then, I don't have an educational channel either. Lol. I love this stuff so keep it up.
@@AncientAmericas So let me get this straight, 13,500 BP = roughly 11,500 BCe... and that date is about the time all the mega fauna were wiped out in North America and around the world. The Mammoths, Sabre Tooths, Short Faced Bear and Giant Sloth, ect went extinct...presumably due to comet strikes to the North American Ice Shelf, according to geological evidence, which led to the Younger Dryas period, also called the Mini Ice Age. This is about the time Gobleki Tepe was constructed, coming off a global cataclysm. I think Gobleki Tepe was in use from 11,000 BC to 7000 BC, but I could be off a bit, because these academics keep changing the timeline denotations.
I think a simple solution to clarify the timelines in peoples minds, since this is all about information exchange and learning, would be to give both the BP and BC dates for a given subject, to provide context and cross reference with other known archaeological and historical events. Academia, if they can make something complicated they will.
Coastal migration theory is much more likely than overland.
I personally think so too but who knows?
More and more evidence is leading that way. The aforementioned stemmed points were also found in Hokkaido, Japan.
Also the similar pottery in Valdivia, Ecuador and C2 ydna among the Kichwa and Waorani people.
Yes. Island hopping from Siberia, especially when sea level is low enough to erase the Bering sea, is not a stretch at all. Even from Japan via Siberia.
Some of them likely island hopped coming from Europe. They could do stopovers in Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland.
Could they have entered to the americas through the aleutian islands? Is there any archeological evidence in those islands?
In college, for a political philosophy class I had to read Stephen Ambrose’s (also wrote Band of Brothers) famous 1996 book, “Undaunted Courage” detailing how Thomas Jefferson became great friends with Meriwether Lewis, and how the two decided to explore the North American continent on behalf of the newly formed country.
Before Jefferson sent off what’s now the famous ‘Lewis and Clark Expedition’, the book detailed Jefferson’s beliefs he relayed to Lewis on the Native American’s origins on the continent and it’s fascinating, he for all his brilliance in the natural sciences and comprehensive view of history, absolutely was convinced Natives were also the “lost children of Israel”. You were spot on in this video saying that theory was all the rage. He failed spectacularly in preparing Lewis and Clark for a realistic view of each tribe’s temperament and core values & motivations.
Thought that was a fascinating read. Sad ending to Lewis’ life.
Thank you.... such an interesting and open minded video!!! Make you feel quite small and insignificant when you consider all the countless people who have lived, loved, worked, fought and then died before us!!
I favor the idea of several migrations, starting before that glacial period. It would always be a one-way trip, as these were hunter-gatherers, and access to hunting grounds was probably very competitive. The winners got to stay. The losers had to leave forever. And the amount of such people a given amount of land could sustain probably varied greatly over the centuries. At their low points, more people would have to leave.
probably, in my opinion the first one of those migrations was when humans reached hueyatlaco 250,000 years ago
I'm going with non stop migration. I think all peoples made it over until I hear otherwise. So far indigenous Asiatic and Polynesian are checked off. Across Atlantic Ice says Europeans did so. I'm betting evidence of Middle Eastern and African travelers is out there.
@@clarencebeeks2787 You must stop this white men where here first BS 😑😐😑
@@clarencebeeks2787 the DNA trail is pretty solid. There are several ancient human fossils of the Americas first inhabitants. The first footprints r from Asia, Eurasia, some came by water, some from Siberia by land. ALL ancient ppl leave footprints. The Vikings came in a small group and left, they left footprints. That's about it until AFTER the ships of horror came, after that, lots of diversity. It's documented on paper and DNA trail.
Well this is officially one of the best channels on RUclips. Absolutely freaking fascinating you’re up there with Fall of Civilizations in my mind
Thank you! It's very flattering to be compared with the fall of civilizations podcast. Those episodes are masterpieces.
I like the coastal route myself. Various Inits & Siberian peoples have lived handily in harsh Arctic regions. Starting there and traveling along the coast would be easy. At least until other people moved in a blocked your southern progress.
Yakuts of Siberia are in my wifes DNA, also Neanderthal.
The use of boats of some kind is now even believed to have been used by our predecessors,eg Neanderthals.
I am 100% for this migration as well. Mostly because I grew up in the Chimikuan and Salish culture. Coastal Salish and Chimikuan were masters of our coasts from Alaska down to Northern California. Our name literally means, "sea people". This is why we have totem poles. They were meant to stand tall and direct water traffic in our vast and complicated water ways. Those totems resemble quite a few tiki totems. We had massive boats like some Polynesians eventually that we used for whale hunting. Quileute, Makah and a few more tribes still celebrate "Whaling days". It's pivotal to our peoples. We have very old words for these marine life and legends of HUGE turtles when there is no sea turtles in the PNW now. It's not hard for me to imagine that we could have followed whale routes. Some Orca pods have routes that are very close to land. Idk...
I do also know that my peoples closest genetic link out of the America's are paleo-Siberians.
Our languages are so damn unique too. Some that have no contemporary.
Why can’t most of the migration theories be right? People came to America before the glacier, following the coast after the glacier formed, and after the glacier opened up. It would explain the diversity of languages.
That very well could be the case!
The diversity of tribes and languages requiring many millenia of evolution point to a pre-Mammoth Steppe hypothesis migration -- +56,000 BP
And, it’s entirely possible for several of the theories to be viable, either as (1) separate migrations, (2) separate migrations that merged, (3) single migrations that split and later merged with others or (4) rejoined with their original group. Several migrations, or (5) dribble along group migrations are all viable, and it seems to me that several groups makes a lot more sense than a single group. Actually, only one group seems much less likely.
Genetics, joined with languages, seem to be the best research tools today. There are probably descendants living in the Americas with ties back to old homelands. THAT seems a rich source of research to me. In the future, more techniques will probably emerge.
Courtesy of Half Vast Flying
José de Acosta's Natural and Moral History of the Indies is a tough read, specially for people not used to chronicles, but it is a very amazing text. The way he logically picks apart the various theories of his time so he can arrive to the conclusion of an unknown land bridge is amazing.
A recent interpretation of a petroglyph in Australia showing a canoe or boat dating to 50,000 BCE not only is the first known depiction of a boat but the boat as shown has a high curved bow very much like the Polynesian ocean-going canoe!
Polynesians didn't exist that long ago! Obviously, other people before them also used canoes
@@KateeAngel yup ancestor of polynesia the proto-austronesia still in taiwan and southern china at that time
@@KateeAngel He didn't say they did, only that the rock depiction was "very much like" the bow of the Polynesian canoe we are familiar with today. What people made the the pictured boat is anybody's guess.
@Kazumaf context,we talking about Polynesia
I remember as a kid in the early 90s specifically asking my history teacher if it was possible that people were in the americas for longer than the currently accepted date and we just haven’t found the evidence. The teacher told me no obviously not and then the class laughed at me lol. That’s why I always challenge people who are so stuck on what the currently accepted truth is. Every couple decades we look back and laugh at what used to be “the truth” only a couple decades ago.
Exactly! The picture is continually changing and this video is already outdated thanks to the white sands footprints.
I remember when I was in 3rd grade (back in the 1950s) and was looking at a globe. I told the teacher that Europe/Africa and North/South America looked like they all "fit together" like they used to be connected. She -- and subsequently the whole class -- got a huge laugh out of it and I learned to STFU about such ridiculous notions.
Well...I only made it through the 8th grade. I did, however go on to teach Computer Science for 30+ years. While I'm no rocket scientist...a lot of my students were. He he he.
Just sane... :^) Saint
@@eugenesaint1231 you should be able to find that validation for your early statement of South America fitting with Africa etc check out a smaller Earth, or expanding Earth, one of those should show you that not only do the continents fit together on the Atlantic side but they fit together on the Pacific as well so you were dead on at least as far as you went.
This is an example of child abuse by female authority figures. You DID NOT deserve to be laughed at!!!
Hugs and love.
@@eugenesaint1231 that happened to me at about the same time, and we were not alone there were thousands of us.
I would love to see a several hour version of this honestly. I love this shit.
Thank you!
Then you would also love the fossilized shit
My family is from Mexico City and Cuentepec, Morelos Mexico. When i took my DNA test i was shocked asf seeing that i have DNA matches up in the far north, from Barrow Alaska, Winnipeg Canada, Michigan, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas down to Mexico and Guatemala. I got 94% Native American, 2% Irish,1% Spanish, 3% Italian. My mother got 97% Native American.
Nobody on the East Coast(US)?
@@godofthisshit i got some matches on the east coast but they're all due to recent Mexican migration. The matches that i got from Alaska, Canada, Michigan and Arizona and some from Oklahoma are all members of federally recognized tribes. Inupiaq, Ojibway, White Mountain Apache, Navajo and Ute of Oklahoma. My haplogroup is A2 which is mostly found in Athabascan tribes. How the hell my family migrate down to central Mexico, who knows. Both of my grandmothers spoke Nahuatl. I do know the Aztecs migrated across North America for hundreds of years until their god Huitzilopochtli told them to settle in Lake Texcoco and so they founded the great city of Tenochtitlan.
very cool!
I always joke with my friends from Michigan that it was really North Michoacan all along! LOL
don't be surprised if your DNA profile is updated and the results much closer to what you expected - my profile changed significantly - so much - it almost seems like they sent someone else's profile - except for the presence of some expected groups - that stayed while the weirder groups disappeared
the DNA tests are skewed towards european testing cuz they bought most of the testing early on - other groups - such as asians & american indians are expected to become more refined as more of those people get the test
I love your videos about the Americas. You have an open mind and no agenda. You just talk about facts.
Thank you! I try my best!
Fantastic job.. Well done!!!
As a European I'm really fascinated on how fast Homo Sapiens conquered the world and how rapid they migrate from North to South America..
I congratulate you your presentation was very comprehensive..!! 👏👏
Thank you!
Rapidly you say?.....But if the Earth is 4.5 billion years old then what's so rapid about an immigration that occured in the last 3,000 years? Do you realize how much time 3,000 subtracted from 4.5 billion is?.....simple! 4.5 billion.
@@raymondgaines4315 isn't that exactly the proof that it is rapid?
The Lakota share a lot of language similarities to some Inuit tribes in and around Alaska. I always thought that was kinda neat
"inuit" are the eskimos of canada and greenland - the eskimo in alaska call themselves "yupik" or "innupiaq" - to call them "inuit" would be calling them by another name - like calling a canadian "american" - you know they love that
@@johneyon5257 They hate the name Eskimo even more. It was a pejorative exonym used by their Native enemies meaning “eaters of raw meat.” It’s like calling all Asians “Orientals” or Chinese.
The Dene language of the Northwest Territories in Canada is very closely related to Navaho.
@@daron6616 would frost back be considered pejorative?
@@johneyon5257 . Like calling the Savior by a Greek word when the truth is He came as a Hebrew speaking Hebrew to Hebrews, and His Father's name is a Hebrew name.
The Most High Almighty Creator's name is Yehovah.
His Son the Savior's name is a Hebrew name.
Yeshua.
HalleluYah!!
Amazing how the dates of the first arrivals keeps getting moved back. I can remember when the dates were only 5,000 years ago. New tech and dna have revolutionized things. Love it!
The first Americans most likely lived along the coasts when sea levels were lower. The bodies of the dead are under water
Glaciation only extended to present day Missouri and Tennessee. So lands south of there could've been populated during the last glaciation. I heard that Mohawk culture has uncovered archaeological evidence that dates back over a 100,000 years since they inhabited the area in Canada BEFORE the last glaciation which occured some 20,000 years ago. An attempt to present a false narrative concerning migrations timelines is permeating our historical accounts. Why can't the historians simply take the words the "oral traditions" give that cover hundreds of thousands of years? The answer is,....because they keep ending up in black cultures thousands of years old.
@@dffndjdjd that theory already been debunked too. Try again
@@raymondgaines4315 how much weed do you smoke?
@@raymondgaines4315 don't mind the children, people want to ignore that our brains and bodies have been anatomically unchanged since 250,000 (save some hight changes) yet we didn't learn to do anything but not doe untill 10000 BCE? Bullshit, you keep on looking for the truth dude, cuz everyone else is content to live in lala land, where the rules are made up and the points don't matter.
Never, AL RACES SETTLED BY RIVERS AND LAGOONS. WE NEEED FRESH Water and fertile water. its so obvious.
I just found your channel. Very well done, unbiased, and informative. Thanks for all the time and effort you put into it!
Thank you!
A lot of Natives form the US don’t get offended by the term “Indian” because its not used as a derogatory term like it is used in some Latin American countries like Mexico where many of us Indigenous peoples are referred to as “Indios” in a derogatory manner.
I am from California
Have you heard or studied the Chumash people who live here on the west coast. They has ancestral sea capable boats called a Tomol. The thumbnail for this video is one and you showed it a few times while explaining the Coastal Migration Theory 🤙🏽
.bmmr
Vvv
At minute 19:18 you'll notice a migration route by Sea. I can picture people in boats following seals, etc. along the coastline west and South.
Check some videos on First Americans and the Channel Islands.
Seems the kelp forests were a main staple in food and in construction, and they wrapped around from Asia to NA.
Seals + Kelp + flightless ducks + seabird eggs. Not the worst food choices.
@@dffndjdjd
Don't talk about theories that people in the field talk about! That's a science no no.
@@dffndjdjd because all sea people sites are under hundred meters of water maybe?
@@dffndjdjd Migration by boat would be far easier and more likely than walking. Simply follow the coastline. Much of the evidence for coastal migration is now under water.
Studying Archaeology in the early 90s, I was taught that no one was here until the glaciers cleared. The dated sites that seemingly disagreed with the theory we're completely discounted. It seemed obvious to me that the people who made it to south America first must have been a seafaring culture, and the sites to prove it were out along the continental shelf. Loved the video, and reading through the comments.
Thank you!
Coastal migration was the theory championed by my archaeology professor. She also mentioned the Beringia standstill. I think she may have mentioned the split between the two branches of Beringia Amerindians being due to a later group who eventually DID traverse the new land passageway post-LGM, but I might have just dreamed that. Regardless, I remember her mentioning the split at the very least. I should dig up my class notes from two years ago and flip through them
If the 30,000+ years old remains of Monte Verde are proven to be legitimate, the Coastal Migration theory is the most likely correct one.
@@TheNachoOne Except that the inland route was open before the LGM at 22,000. It was closed from 22,000 to 13,500. The kelp highway was open continually, it seems.
to be clear I like the theory you mention. Very interesting.
IMHO, the coastal route seems most probable due to the food. If the ice sheets made more dry land, then more dry coasts were available. The warmer breezes off the ocean toward the coasts may have provided enough land for people to migrate. Simple boats may have been available to get around ice or from island to island and back to mainland shore. That’s my guess. Texas
You may be on to something. Boats of animal skin (like walrus ) over wood frames would work very well, like kayaks.They would be able to paddle down the coast living off the sea life.
Boats (or water craft of some kind) have been around a long time. There is some evidence of Neanderthal presence on Cyprus. And with the topography of the Mediterranean Basin they sure didn't walk there. There is also some evidence of possibly Homo Erectus in the Phillippines. It may have been possible to walk from Borneo to either Mindanao along the arc of islands that extend between the two or from Borneo via Palawan. But there's a stretch of deep water between Palawan and Mindaro. Another possible route is from Sulawesi along but it features a number of deep water gaps. Several of them fairly long.
My wife and I volunteer at Mesa Verde NP and part of our fascination with the park is how the thinking has evolved just in the 42 years I have lived in the region. The studies being done and the evidence being found keeps the theories fluid. Thanks for your research. Are you aware of the Mammoth kill found in the Chesapeake region with European spear points that is fairly new? Please keep this moving forward. I’m a captive.
Thank you. I was not aware of that! Do you remember the name of the site or have an article about it?
@@AncientAmericas “Rethinking the First Americans” by Wilson “Dub” Crook on You Tube.
"Across Atlantic Ice" by Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley discusses the relic (called Cinmar laurel leaf biface). It is 188 mm long and 55mm wide, found off the Virginia coast 100 km, and in 75 meters of water. It was not necessarily a kill site, but it was dredged up in 1970 with a mastodon tooth and bones dated to 23,000 BP. The material came from a rhyolite deposit at the MD/PA near Emmitsburg. On a side note, Virginia has at least 3 pre-Clovis sites known.
@@steveparker8785 Read "Across Atlantic Ice" by Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley.
@@AncientAmericas see my comments below! There is much info on that Paleo relic and much more on paleo Indians in the reference I noted.
There are artifacts at the Pedra Furada site in Northern Brazil that date back 48,000 years ago. It's probably the case that there were many groups that made their way to the Americas at different times; and as you said, some of those groups may have died out.
All my relatives in northern alberta and saskatchewan speak dene.
My buddy Denny doesn't even speak Dene' 😅😆✌️
The Dene were the last group to arrive from Asia. Their language is considered to be related to Chinese.
Nice
@Jesse Marcel exactly. One of the issues I have with some of these videos from different sources, is they keep using the word Theory. The word theory is so much implicating a vast knowledge of I don't know LOL. I like facts. If it's not facts, then to me it's just guessing. Definitely like your statement :-)
@@70stunes71 Do you know what "theory" means in science? It is not a synonym of "hypothesis". Theory can be proven, disproven or neither. General relativity is also a "theory", yet try telling physicists it is not true
A new paper studying ancient DNA from the Caribbean, posted this week on bioRxiv, explains that the Caribbean has one of the most culturally diverse mixes of human beings on the planet, but it was one of the last places in the Americas to be occupied by people between 8000 and 5000 years ago. Where these early migrants came from has always been a mystery until this study of ancient DNA probed into the deep history of the Caribbean and the story discovered by the researchers is one of “migration and cultural mingling” revealing how descendants of the first inhabitants interacted with new waves of migrants who arrived about 2800 years ago.
For an amateur in the area, you are very well informed. Amazing video !
Recently, cave paintings have also been found on plateaus in the Colombian Amazon dated some 20 milennia ago. There is much older evidence for campfires in hinterland of Brazil, but there is still no consensus as to whether such campfires are the result of human activity, or whether they are the result of natural fire from lightnings.
Interesting. Do you know how they dated those paintings? Was there other material at the site?
@@AncientAmericas look into toca da tira peia in brazil for possible dating back to 22000 years ago. Also see “genetic evidence of two foundating populations of the americas” for possible australasian dna in this earlier brazilian population.
I liked your intro,didn't ruffle any feathers.Native American Indian Of the Iroquois People.
I favour the coastal migratian hypothis as this could explain several periods of migration. Great video!
I agree the first settlement came by boat. But when your talking thousands of years, to say it's the only way they came would be unlikely.
One more comment: When I was a boy in the early 60’s I read in H.G. Wells history, “The Outline Of History” ,that the Atlantic Ocean was so great as to preclude migration from Europe. Later in the same work I read that the early Polynesians were navigating the vast distances of the Pacific Ocean as early as 50,000 years ago! From an early age I came to believe that early man not hindered by the ignorance and superstitions of modern man were capable of amazing feats that should not be underestimated.
Columbus found a bell from a Spanish galleon in a hut in the Carribean...storms blew them there and they made it back to Columbus' home island...Santa Palo...Columbus was finally funded by Queen Isabella when he produced a map of what he thought were the outer islands 🏝of India...took the explorers quite a few years before they realized they had actually discovered North and South America not the Orient...indigenous people are called Indians from then on...as from India...lol
Polynesia was settled only 5 k years ago, before that there were only Melanesians, and they settled only some islands very close to New Guinea and Australia
@@dffndjdjd Yeah, the oldest sites are inland because no one is looking at the obvious place where most ancient sites would be. On the original shoreline during the ice age. It is far more likely that the first Americans came over in boats following the coastline.
Very good, humble and honest presentation.
Thank you!
I love this video- takes me back to my Archeology of the Americas Uni class! Definitely would love to see a series on this. Oh! And in Canada we typically say “Indigenous” (as you say, trendy and concise) or “Aboriginal,” (less colloquial and more of a political or government term). Indigenous is sort of an umbrella term for the three groups: First Nations, Metis and Inuit.
I like the closing inviting us to imagine them. Nice video
Definitely coastal migration. It's the only one that truly makes sense, and it's the most efficient in terms of energy for a population of people to move around and gain ground for food and growing their tribes.
So excited to hear about these latest theories of the earliest Americans... living on the west coast of Canada it makes sooooo much sense.
Like early homosapien evolutionary theory, which the pendulum of science is swinging away from both extremes into a nuanced multiregionalism and multi-migration position; I think the populating of America will be explained in a similar manner.
I agree, although the genetics strongly point to a single or (at least) main ancestor group. I can imagine how population pressures might encourage some of the more adventurous to head off to find new lands-even if contact was later broken, there might have been an oral tradition of these sons and daughters who went east and south, and then others might follow when there was again population pressures.
I'd give just the delivery of this video a thumbs up. And then the content comes bam! Good stuff !!
And I give this comment a thumbs up!
I have recently found your channel and I love it! I am kind of aware of the Precolumbian America since I have read many books concerning this topic but I'm not a pro and I'm always delighted to see and hear e.g. about new discoveries, theories or just the good old topics because there's always something interesting in it! :-)
Thank you!
Take a pack weighing 60lbs. Put it on your back and carry it a mile. Using a calorie counter compare putting that same weight in a small sail boat and travel a mile. Shore lines have food, fuel and distinct features to help keep on tract. Going from river to river would provide fresh water and places to camp. Equally important was the ability to back track to inform the source population of exploration expedition's findings, making exploring new places efficient and lowering the risk factor to the group in finding new lands.
You are correct but remember that a glacier covered shoreline makes fresh water and landing much more difficult. Not impossible by any means but not easy.
@@AncientAmericas ice is a supply of fresh water
While I don't consider the Solutrian hypothesis to be very likely, I think many unfairly dismiss it. Many discard it as impossible based on half hearted arguments. This was the case in my university where only a strawman of the hypothesis was presented and argued against and then it was implied that only bad people with bad intentions would support that hypothesis. Luckily I had already learned about the hypothesis and what it actually entailed. I think that sort of thing does a great disservice to finding out the truth about the past
I'm personally not a fan of the hypothesis. I think that there would be much stronger evidence if it were true. That said, I think it's fine to entertain and speculate on the idea as long as you aren't trying to incorporate it into some white supremacy nonsense, which I'm sure you aren't but some people unfortunately do.
That's liberal influence on education. The term for it is "Lysenkoism" and it's been growing in America for decades. Now anything that contradicts the global warming hypothesis or that might possibly offend the Alphabet People is actively suppressed.
@@nonyadamnbusiness9887 What if the Solutreans took the Columbus route to the Americas and the book No Stone Unturned in1958 brought up the Solutreans and I found out about that book from the book They All Discovered America in 1963.
According to professor William W. Crook 20% of Native Americans in the US and Canada have some European DNA. Nearly all of them in Eastern Canada have some.
@@michaelfoulkes9502 the question is how old is the DNA. If the Solutrian hypothesis is true, then the European dna that they have should be the same as the dna Europeans have from the Mesolithic Western Hunter Gatherer population and they shouldn't have any Anatolian Farmer or Steppe pastoralist related Dna. If they have all three, then it's almost impossible for any of that Dna to have gotten there before 2500bc
I just found this channel, I sat all weekend seeing the videos and doing some side research on related topics. I would like to suggest making a small episode about the lost city of Colombia "Ciudad Perdida" [800CE-until the late 14th century] and Tairona tribe. Ciudad Perdida was probably the region's political and manufacturing center on the Buritaca River and may have housed 2,000-8,000 individuals. Interesting information can be found on the documentary about Kogi, "From the Heart of the World The Elder Brother's Warning", made 1990. According to the Kogi people, some of the last preserved indigenous descendants of the Tairona, The Tairona lived for thousands of years, up until the age of the conquistadors. The story of Kogi is also very interesting, how they managed to live secretly from the outside world in the mountains of Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, which they found refuge when conquistadors came, and continue to live up to this day preserving their culture intact.
Thank you! I'll have to check that out.
It is amazing how cleverly it was built into deep jungle with heavy rainfall, with great hydraulic knowledge of how to drain water out and remains still there after centuries.
Humbly thank u for imparting this knowledge to everyone in a concise and engaging manner 👍🏽💯
Thank you!
I love how your channel is a LOT less eurocentric than most of the other sources I've found.
Thank you! We prefer Amerocentrism round these parts.
@@AncientAmericas As it should be.
I call it whitewashed.
I'm going to binge watch your entire channel at this point.
Thanks for making such a concise video. I’m an archaeology major and I’m going to use some of your bib references in one of my finals.
Thank you! I highly recommend getting a copy of the book Paleoamerican Odyssey. It's a FANTASTIC resource.
I found a knife blade and many cobble mortars at a depth of 108 ft just off the "ancient sea cliffs" of San Diego's Point Loma and the site has my name.
This is a topic missing from this story, as controversial as it is.
Very interesting video. Hopefully as new evidence becomes available we can derive a conclusive theory of how and when the Americas were populated. Once again thank you for the video
You're welcome!
Thank you, very well done, your enthusiasm is noted in the telling. I have always believed that the first nations arrived way before 13k years ago. My logic; the first Australians arrived on their large island 30-60k years ago so why couldn't the first Americans accomplished what the Australians did. I must say and I'm biased, I have learned through DNA that my Haplo-group C1b2 was the Haplo-group group of 2 infants found in Alaska dated back at least 13k years ago! I take great pride in that fact! My DNA has been in America for thousands of years and I am decendant of the first Americans. Thank you again, keep up the great work! Knowledge is king!
You're welcome!
first australians arrived there at least 65,000 years ago
That is so crazy, I have a coprolite that I found when I was younger, somewhere out towards Paisley or Fossil, Oregon. Not sure where since it was back in 1988 or 89. But I was honestly not aware that Paisley was a Clovis site!
Now I want to go back for pictures. Maybe see if they have a museum.
I do not live too far up the road.
Humans every where, even in remote islands. It is interesting to know how it happened.
Great work, keep it up.
Thank you!
THANK YOU SOOOOO MUCH!!! I'm so sick of the "Clovis First" theory I can't even say! I'm glad that it's fading away
@@dffndjdjd I dunno. Every history of the Americas I read back in the 70's, every NOVA I saw about the ancient archeology of the Americas, and every article in Scientific American I read about this topic said "Clovis Clovis Clovis". Ditto the textbooks.
Science is a human activity. Scientists are human. Yes yes yes. I've heard that these are "just theories" a "things change with new observations" etc etc. But humans are attached to their ideas. Often so much so, that they reject new information, or discount it.
At any rate, I'm glad that that's changing at least in this arena.
@@johnmanno2052 well, popular explanation, including books, documentaries etc. always oversimplified a lot. Even press releases from universities can be inaccurate. I have seen it myself in my own field
@@KateeAngel Interesting. I certainly understand that. And it's disappointing. However, one also does hear about various political issues in the sciences that get in the way of research. For example, Robert Bakker in the 80s had a terrible time, because he promoted the idea that dinosaurs were warm blooded. And many of the people who excavated pre Clovis sites had to deal with a great amount of criticism and resistance to their findings.
Please don't think I'm saying that science is nonsense, because it's not. However, I do think that scientists are just as human as anyone else.
@@dffndjdjd WHOA!!! I had absolutely no idea about H. Naledi and its anatomical issues! Given everything I've seen about it, including lectures, TED talks, etc, I had imagined it was another "side branch" of Homo, NOT Australopithecus. Very very interesting information. That changes quite a lot of my perspectives on Naledi. Though I still think the whole burial thing is very odd.
I guess I wonder how one differentiates between a "real scientist" and a "scientific showman". Or a "real scientist" and a "scientific curmudgeon". Ernst Mach did not accept atoms, for example, because they could not be observed. Was Mach not a "real scientist" then? Or how about all those geologists who rejected tectonic plates, because of some very cogent objections to the theory. Were they all "curmudgeons"?
In my opinion, there are various kinds of knowledge with varying levels of certainty. And, unfortunately, that means that there's enough ambiguity in our knowledge in certain arenas of science that there's enough doubt that a consensus is always difficult, and an absolute conclusion completely impossible. This tends to engage other, less rational, sides of our human nature, and the issues get ever more muddled.
I got a kick when a geneticist showed a group of Navajo adults photos of northern Mongolians genetics hinted they were related to.
One man said, "Hey this one guy in front of this little delivery truck, he looks like my cousin Ed over in Sante Fe. Ed drives a delivery truck too.
The genetics links them not pictures!
@Ricky Barber
No as this is YT! The comment does indicate humor as much as it’s critical of genetic science. It’s vague to say the least.
Still if the best contribution you have to this discourse is a question about a joke it says a great deal about your educational background.
@@DrSteveJ-gd3gn still even genetics doesn’t prove anything but inter-relations between two completely different people. To say the least about someone’s educational background as a put down really puts into Perspective how much of a Diva Punk you really are..aside from that, that only 13 thousand years ago when “Mongolians” did arrive. Though there was already an Indigenous people culture here. The land bridge and kelp beds is just a theory not fact. Indigenous peoples are there own people dna studies provide that fact. 9RA ya fool.
The Dene people, which the Navaho are a part of, were the last group to immigrate from Asia. Their language is considered to be related to Chinese.
Haaaaaa!
The likeliness of the americas being populated only by crossing this icey landbridge is so much harder to grasp than just accepting the fact that ship builders have existed all throughout the world for thousands of years, and people have been arriving, whether it was by choice or accident, but that they've been arriving at different points in time is so much easier to accept.
Regarding what to call Natives Americans; the main thing to keep in mind is to not use terms that separate ancient remains from modern Natives; genetics have shown that we descend from those first people regardless of differences in cranial shape and others.
Agreed!
Sort of, skeletons from the last glacial maximum and before are almost non existent in the archeological record and to my knowledge, nothing older than Kennewick man has been genetically tested. Even the Kennewick man fiasco was highly suspect. To make a claim as definite as "we are descended from the first" when we don't actually have almost any examples of "the first" is a bit of a stretch.
@@someguy8732 there's no fiasco with Kennewick man; it was proved genetically that he was Native to the Americas.
@@duxarchiteuthis by "the fiasco" I meant the whole ordeal surrounding the skeleton. The thing is just showing that he was "genetically closer to modern native Americans than Europeans", which is what I heard does not tell the whole story of who this person was.
It's actually a pretty weak statement which suggests that he was an example of someone who was at least halfway between the common ancestor of natives and Europeans and modern natives
Have you seen anything on pre-Clovis arrowheads found here in the Americas which are similar to those from Southern France and north Spain. Think one of them as Eastern or Western I forget.
Humans have been good at covering long distances, quickly, by land and coastline, for tens of millennia, but that is different from being able to sustainably settle all those areas. I'm surprised there isn't more consideration of the difference between a large settled population and mobile, much smaller scattered groups around the fringes, potentially in climatically more difficult times. Then, when climate improved, we finally see population growth , spread across wider areas, and long-term settlements. Stated another way, sporadic human presence in the Americas 20-40K BP does not disprove the idea that large populations did not exist pre-Clovis, nor vice versa.
Those first one probably thought “ I wonder if there’s good hunting over there”
Eh, you're probably right.
And -- since Siberia and North America were one giant continent -- they didn't even know they were entering the "New World".
not really i just liked walking and there was tons of insects to eat. i found that killing larger animals attracted other large animals so i rarely did that. most of the time animals left me alone cause they didn't think of me as food. after all i was the first human they had ever seen for 13,157 years. i do miss the big cat.
Mummies found in the Atacama desert in Ecuador show a very rare strain of leucemia that is prevelant in a southern Japanese island. The mummies are older than 3k years old.
Nothing like the Clovis or Folsom points have ever been found anywhere in Asia.
The Chumash people of coastal California made similar boats, and fishing hooks similar to Polynesian people's. Similar words for house and boat.
There was a people in southern Patagonia who were black, spoke Australian aboriginal dialect, had creation stories of the rainbow serpent. The last 3 survivors of the people were filmed in the early 1900s
The Zuni language is a language group all its own. It is not related to any language group in the world.
Dr Leakey, who made the discovery of "Lucy" worked on a site in southern California. His opinion of the age of the artifacts found was around 250,000 years old.
A site near the mouth of the Amazon river has been dated to around 45,000 years ago
As for the genetics. It is a very small study group used in the study. There were Iver 500 nations when Columbus landed in Hispaniola. .
One must remember any theory that does not fall in line with "accepted" theories is discounted and ridiculed. Science is supposed to be the elimination of possiblities. It seems modern science is about eliminating competing theories.
I saw a video about the Solutran migration I thought was interesting. They sailed in small boats along the edge of the ice sheet, hunting and fishing as they went. Perhaps your Pacific Coast group did something similar.
Are you familiar with the paleo burial at warm mineral Springs in Florida
What if the people that came 30-40k years ago all died out- leaving no evidence in genetics? I like the coastal migration theory. This channel is my new favorite!
That is definitely possible.
They were from africa
@@st4r444
😂 so sad
This is really a well-done series of presentations; well done, oh mysterious amateur pre-historian!!
One thing that needs to be remembered when raising this kind of question is that we're really asking two questions, which may or may not have a common answer. The two questions are: 1) who were the first hominids to visit and reside in the western hemisphere; and 2) who were the ancestors of the later surviving and flourishing western hemisphere populations. As we have come to realize when looking into the similar "first out of Africa" question, the two sub-questions need not have the same answer. Indeed, it's possible that there were many independent routes of the "first people in America", and many first projects may have failed immediately, survived for a while before dying out, and so forth. Archaeology by itself may not be able to distinguish populations doomed to dying out and populations ancestral to modern indigenous groups. Ancient DNA, however, as it may be recovered in the future, can help us learn more about the likelihood of other, non-beringian colonization attempts at whatever time in pre-history may be determined. As things stand, though, the answer to question #2 above seems much clearer: DNA evidence, linguistic evidence, archaeological evidence, and reasonable assumptions about what it would take for people to get to the Western Hemisphere from the source of their DNA and language indicate ever more compellingly that the "kelp route" must have been the path of at least the main waves of those people whose descendants were finally successful in populated the Western Hemisphere.
I would expect that people came to the Americas using all these migration routes at some point in time and perhaps even some were not aware of after all we are talking about tens of thousands of years here. I find it stubborn to think that there can only be one event or one way of migration.
A very good observation!
If there's one thing I've noticed about prehistorical migration evidence, it's that migrations happened in waves and, occasionally, from different directions.
@@NefariousKoel How about the idea of movements too small to be regarded as migrations. Consider the Solutrean Hypothesis. Exactly how many people would be required to drop a Solutrean point, here and there? 10? 15? Extinction of that many people does not seem unrealistic.
@@warringtonfaust1088 - Another good point you have. The smaller ones often disappear to assimilation or, perhaps, destruction.
The much later Viking settlements in North America are good examples of what can happen in such cases.
@@warringtonfaust1088 Agreed, of all of them the Solutrean is the one I find the most unlikely(because of the glaciers+directions of ocean currents+ genetics and tool evidence) but even for that one I wouldn't dismiss an earlier version of vikings, or a ship blown off course a couple times over the last 10,000 years
You mispronounced Oregon (laugh) yet all-in-all, this is an excellent presentation on your part. I enjoyed it and learned from it, thus subscribing. And yes, the coastal migration theory sits well with me. Thx.
what a nice treat. I find myself rewinding the video often because of the boldness of the topic. god bless the exploration of America past, and its proud and righteous peoples
Thank you!
I’d be ok with multiple episodes for this
This is something I'd like to revisit in the future. Maybe someday
Ancient Americas: (bored in class)
Teacher: I want all of you to write an informative essay.
Ancient Americas: (perks up)
Haha! You're not too far off the mark.
Really, really excellent video. Like, surprisingly high-quality, no fluff, very succinct, no remarks on contemporary politics, thank you.
Thank you!
my great grandfather was cherokee. ( the real, not liz warren kind) some of us since look european, some like cherokees. one of the latter went once on a tour of russia . her guide was showing her around and people would come up and speak to her. she knew it wasn't russian. the guide talked to them and laughed. "they think you are from siberia and are asking which tribe you are." the connection sort of shows after all these ages.
N1a1a female haplogroup.
He was mixed.
My mom is 3/4 Choctaw and nor her or anyone in her family looks remotely Asian or Siberian.
Coastal migration is a very real theory. As Brian Forrester pointed out in one of his videos, the early south Americans of the western coast, travelled by water craft to the Easter Islands.
@@dffndjdjd To me both theories are empiricals ! The migration by the coast could to be the cause for the more fastest exploration of the territory ! Imagine... From 24,000 years b.P. in Alaska to 14.500 years b.P. to Patagonia, almost 10 milennia using canoes. Homo Sapiens needed 30 millennia to go from East Africa to Sundaland. Imagine how long time it would take for the peoples since Alaska to Patagonia if walking through the wetlands of Lake Agassiz, the arid lands of Mexico and the tropical forests!
@@dffndjdjd Very good questions ! Thank you, by the informations and perspective. Are you professional in this area ?
That, or Polynesians did round trips
I love this stuff! I've certainly noticed language similarities just as an occasional history nerd & Michigander. Like many others, my recent interest is tracing lineage on the eastern side. However, my lineage suggests coming from America, not discovering it.
I was revisiting Clan MacFie History, like this topic, many hypothesis have value in exploring.
They were an original 7 clan, who were possibly remaining ancient inhabitants, or not. If they were not Norse, Viking, or Picts then I'll keep exploring. Who were these "Dark men of Peace"? Is it possible that they were in one of these northern pockets of civ?
Great video, thanks! Archaeological work done in Haida Gwaii found in 2019 evidence for occupation going back 13.000 years BP. I don't know why folks think we have to subscribe a SINGLE migration theory. It makes more sense to allow that many migrations occurred in many ways over time - coastal routes (both east and west) and overland routes. Certainly, the stone tool styles seem to indicate multiple groups with different traditions.
Yes, there definitely were multiple migrations, not just one. I should have probably made it clearer in the video that I was discussing the earliest and first of these migrations.
what about evidence of people in mexico 250,000 years ago
@@21LAZgoo Other than Steen-McIntyre's 1960s find, there hasn't been any evidence of it, including at Hueycatlco.
I think she was pranked.
@@tpxchallenger the tools and spears found in the 250,000 year old stratum layer and the 250,000 year old mastodon pelvis that had a mastodon carved into it arent a prank
there have been a lot of scientists who criticized the evidence, but it has stayed solid.
@@21LAZgoo The bone carving has disappeared, AFIK. The tools themselves can't be dated as such so it was the strata that was dated. Hueyatlaco is subject to flooding, and humans did dig hunting pits there, so there are plausible explanations for the tools being found in a much older strata.
If Steen-McIntyre is right and some tool using hominid making sophisticated spearpoints was in North America 250K years ago then we should be finding more evidence of this, but we have not.
The truth is that all modern day Indigenous Americans share a high level of DNA. Mexica or Cherokee still share a common ancestor.
This goes without saying as they all descend from small groups of people migrating out of northeastern Asia into North America and then spreading throughout the New World.
I'm sure you're aware of the most recent developments in this controversy. Human footprints at White Sands in New Mexico have been proven to be 23,000 years old. This is a seismic finding that will eventually (when accepted) necessitate an alteration to our fundamental understanding of the peopling of the Americas. The coastal migration theory stands out, in my mind, as the most likely scenario. It has been posited that Homo Erectus, a close relative to our Homo Sapiens, were sea-farers. Travel by boat, therefore, has almost always existed and is the most likely means by which America was reached. This channel is stupendous! Ancient America is underrated and fascinating. Thank you.
Thank you. This episode was made before the dating of those footprints was published and that discovery has basically made this outdated.
It is intriguing for me to remember picking tobacco with my great-grandfather in North Carolina. He was an elder in the Tuscarora tribe and he sternly warned me to not think that we had migrated into North America.It is impossible for me to forget the sincere and serious tone in his voice. He told me that this was our Home and that we belonged to the Earth. We are truly indigenous in the highest sense. We did not come here from somewhere else. We have always been here. And this is the belief of almost all of the India's people. And why not? If there were flora and fauna here,and there was,then why is some great migration necessary. We were already living on the continent as it broke away from Africa and have been sailing on it for thousands of years! There is nothing impossible with this idea. I guess it depends on your presuppositions. The Europeans are the immigrants,but not us.Why should we be when this is our true home.All of the Indians have an incredibly strong bond to this continent as our Mother. Just think about it. Ask an Indian!
Africa and America split 140 million years ago.
Human life only evolved in Africa 300,000 years ago.
Sounds like your having a similar issue to Christians and other religious people. Many christians have also been like NOOOO Science is wrong about our origins.
I recently watched part of a presentation that suggested that there were other land bridge features on the other, northern Greenland, Baffin Island etc, side of the arctic. These might also have had ocean going boats for part of the journey. They posit that there were possibly two or three other entries, on the other side, that were part of the same genetic group that entered on the Asian side. They started in the same region of, what is now, Siberia. The two groups were genetically isolated long enough that they developed distinct genetic markers and resulted, possibly in the two major groups that have come to be identified in the Americas. Sorry I'm just winging this here...I know the lecture is on you tube, I just can't find it in my history.
It's quite likely that our ancient past will always have much that is unexplained. I cherish the work of those whose aim it is to further illuminate the lives of those who first populated this quarter of the landmass of our globe.
Going by my own genetics I think there may have been a migration from Siberia to Greenland to New England
When referring two the two major groups is incorrect. There where not two major groups. There where humans that came to the americas from not Asia but Africa. The diversity is in genetics coincides with the wide genetic and languages of africa. Also south America and and even in today's north america most if the indians where dark skinned. They earth was very different when they came. Also the old methods used by racists have been disproved. The very diverse genetic diversity leads to africa. And farther back to bvb the giai period when the land masses where not disconnected. Most of the reports from from the Spanish conquistadors reported dark skinned people not like today's natives. Which seem to be only light fair skinned today. The historical narrative most history books is of fair skinned people. Unfortunately this is due to the racialized world. Research into the peoples of the americas has shown they are dark skinned peoples. Not Asians from Mongolia, Though not dis claiming some of those peoples did not find thier way here.
@@Mocha69A Three major groups and none of them are from Africa. Also every Native tribe has their own creation story and that they were created in the exact location that was perfect for them.
A land bridge to Greenland,......from where, the north pole?
@@fishinwidow35 So the Olmec Culture of southern Mexico is a myth? That belief is only held by Europeans who desperately want to believe that they came first even though the land was already populated by tens of millions of people. America's hatred of the "northern triangle" Guatemala, Honduras and Belize is due to the fact that these are and have ALWAYS been dark brown skinned people and they were there BEFORE the slave trade so clearly dark brown and black skinned people have ALWAYS been here!
From what I hear "Native American" is mostly used by people who live far away from reservations and don't interact with any indigenous people, and that indigenous people themselves predominantly use the term "Indian", at least in the United States, with the term "Indian" also being more common closer to reservations as a result.
Great work!
I kinda doubt the first people to cross over the coastal route stopped and contemplated the event. Siberia and Alaska have very similar flora, fauna, and topography. They likely just followed opportunities to hunt/gather farther East/South, never realizing the future significance. That they "lived" their way into the Americas, would fit the nomatic lifestyle of primative peoples.
The "primative" Pacific Islanders, developed amazingly fast/stable sailboats that took them EVERYWHERE. With no metal fasteners, no charts/maps, no compass, nor even a written language, these prehistoric people discovered (and settled), basically every speck of land, with fresh water, on 1/3 of the surfaces of the Earth (including South America).
Eh, you're probably right.
They do have kind of maps. Made of bamboo, showing changes in streams, fauna, waves, islands. Not many left who can read them and navigate. You know they also found and populated Madagaskar. The female madagaskar population goes probably back to app 30 to 40 females from indonesia/malaysia most of the men too, but there are some africans and arabic mixed in. The language is Austronesian.
About 2017 there was an attempt to navigate a polynesian ship around the world with no modern instruments so as gps, compass, clock or such. They did study currents and weather system and all that before starting and also changing the crew in some ports. Worked quite well.
@@mweskamppp
Fascinating!
Kinda puts our arrogant assumptions on the shelf.
Prehistoric people were way more mobile than once believed.
There was a recent discovery of a 15000-year-old site in the Haida Gwaii archipelago in what is now Canada. It is strong evidence for the coastal migration theory.
My problem with the Solutrean hypothesis is the intention behind it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and so far most evidence supports a Pacific migration, not Atlantic. The intention behind the Solutrean hypothesis seems to be more about racism and wishful thinking than anything else. It is used to discredit Indigenous land claims and cultural heritage, while supporting people of European descent. It is a descendant of the previous theories that ancient European (or other respected Old World) peoples built the monuments and cities in the Americas.
FWIW, “Native American” is not very concise, which is why Indigenous is more common outside of the US. The term “native” is too closely related to “natal” or “native-born”, so it can be liberally applied to anyone born in the Americas.
It's amazing our understanding the topic has become more clear since your video came out, only a year later and now we know there were peoples in the Americas pre-Beringia thanks to some ancient footprint preserved in New Mexico.
There's a site on the Pacific Coast of Canada that has been preserved (it is believed) for around 14,000 years due to isostatic rebound.
Awesome.
Cool! Do you remember the name of the site?
@@AncientAmericas Calvert Island, BC Canada.
Also see the paper Archaeology and Sea Level Change on the British Columbia Coast by Mackie 2018
@ 00:38 "...people of the West Indies." Columbus thought he had reached the _East Indies._
On the terminology, the designation “native American” has a major problem not mentioned here. Anyone born in the United States is considered legally to be a “native-born American”. That makes even me, of Irish-Italian heritage (like a zillion other Americans) born in Michigan, therefore a “Native American”. American Indian is best since it is widely understood and it being a misnomer is hardly unusual. “German” is something from Julius Caesar and it’s unclear where he got it, certainly not what they call themselves. Many of the tribal names used today are also exonyms, some not so benign as “Indian”. The term “Apache” actually means “enemy”, and the name “Sioux” means “little snakes” in one attestation.
This channel is so professional. Can't wait to see what's next
We will have a new video before the month is out!
Truly educational! Thank you!
@@MarcoMalfario thanks!
Love this video thank you! I too am a coastal migration fan. It all boils down to how intelligent were these people? I know if you dropped me off on an island with enough resources to build a boat and my only choice was to build a boat or die I would find a way to build one and sail away. Skin on frame boats are not that difficult to build and are very seaworthy even in icy waters.
Thank you!
They were fully modern homo sapiens intellectually.
@@janetprice85 Exactly. I think we don't give them enough. I have an even "bigger idea" about their ability to traverse the ocean. Eurocentric history simply assumes that pre-medieval culture couldn't sail across oceans, but ... the Polynesians did. You cannot get to Hawaii by accident, it turns out: People had to WANT to come here. The art of how they did so was very nearly lost to us completely, but now that I know what it was ... I see the whole Pacific Rim as fair game for oceanic travel even 10's of thousands of years ago.
@@zaq_hack4987 There is some indication Polynesians reached S.America. They were master sailors. As a child I was fascinated with emigration to the Americas and felt the theories did not add up. The empires built in Central and South America on top of previous civilizations could not have occured in a mere 5,000 years as was the time frame back then. My love of prehistory and history began with a trip to Mammoth Cave at age eight. Lol!
@@janetprice85 A friend and I are tying to test a theory that I have recently had. We think the "star maps" used by their methods are misunderstood. Things that Europeans didn't understand when excavating the ancient world were ascribed to "religion," but from another perspective, they could just as easily be stories about navigation: A mnemonic that stargazers could use to map the ancient world. We were about one man away from losing this technique, but the question keeps coming up in my mind, "How old could this technique be? There's no reason to believe it STARTED with the Polynesians - only that they kept it alive because they didn't have access to lodestones and chronometers. ruclips.net/video/m8bDCaPhOek/видео.html
Thank you for making this video- I've watched it three times today... very well done, informative and entertaining.
You're welcome!
@@AncientAmericas You have a cool voice too. =)
@@onetransatmiddleage1966 glad you think so because I can't stand the sound of it.
@@AncientAmericas Gotcha- I think most people don't like the way they sound- you are not alone. I think you sound awesome. =)
@@onetransatmiddleage1966 thank you!
The problem with the term “Indigenous People” is that the term has also been used for other tribal based people anywhere in the world considering that there are others such as but not limited to the North Sentinel Islands, if I correctly spelled the word.
Of course but I still think it's a good term. All areas of the world (except Antarctica I suppose) have indigenous people. When I say indigenous people, it's clearly referring to a specific geographic area so I think it's pretty clear that I'm referencing indigenous American peoples and not people of other continents.
@@AncientAmericas, okay, cool! I normally put both “Native American” and “Indian” together, as an “Native American Indian”.
That definitely works too.
@@AncientAmericas Indigenous means that is where the species originated, Human originated in East Africa. Everybody else is a migrant. Native means where you were born--I'm a native American; but my ancestry goes back to Magna Carta in England so I'm an European-American. If you use African-American to mean black people you can't have it both ways....
I vote for the water route. Boats have been around a long time. But who ever reached the Americas first it wasn't like they just packed their bags and decided to settle somewhere new. Any migration was likely a slow process that saw family groups split off when their numbers grew too large to be supported by their normal range. But there is one thing that may have speeded migrations along the way. If hunters were following seals or walrus into their summer feeding grounds then they could have noticed one population headed back the other way in fall. I suspect that a lot of the evidence of early human inhabitation of the Americas is under anywhere from 100 meters to 130 meters of water. Also there could have been early groups that died out for one reason or another.
Where did the these people come from? The obvious answer of course is Northeast Siberia. The supposed genetic evidence for a southern route across the Pacific. I don't buy it. It's too far and any landfalls along the way are simply too tough of an environment. One possible route I could see having taken place by accident is from West Africa if there were coastal people that were fishing off shore and got swept out to sea due to bad weather. It's a long shot. Plus it would have to be a breeding population. The third possibility is along the fringe of the sea ice in the North Atlantic. The only way this could happen IMO is if a population in Western Eurasia was habitually hunting seals seasonally and wound up following the sea life down into the Maritimes or along the East Coast. The similarity between Clovis and Solutrean lithic point technology is intriqueing but not totally convincing
The coastal migration theory also suggests origins beyond eastern Siberia. Recent genetic and archaeological findings suggest there was a coastal migration route that went along the prehistoric Asian coastline from southern and eastern China through Japan (then part of the Eurasian continent) and Beringia, all the way into North America. People could have expanded fairly quickly into the Americas in contrast to land migration. A study suggests that before the mainstream American Indians entered the Americas, there were already people living there, and they are linked to the Red Deer Cave people of southern China and Melanesians through genetic studies, and are considered distinct from later waves of migrations.
It also suggests that several migrations could have happened (and very likely did happen) well after the initial settlings. I believe I've read a study that suggests a 2000 BC coastal migration into the Americas from Northeast Asia. Cultural heritages of pacific coast peoples also suggest the existence of a prehistoric coastal cultural continuum, the natural expansion of maritime hunter-gatherers from coastal Asia into coastal Americas based on watercraft (and towards the other direction, into the Pacific islands).
Very well done and entertaining summary of this topic. One factual correction I would make is that George McJunkin did not find Folsom points among the bison antiquus bones at the Folsom type site in NE New Mexico (known as Wild Horse Arroyo). McJunkin deserves an immense amount of credit for his recognition of the significance of the prehistoric bones which he came upon after were exposed by a big flood in 1908. He was a former slave, cowboy and self-taught naturalist, apparently. He spent several years trying to get attention to his find but died before the points were discovered embedded between rib bones in situ in 1926. McJunkin died in 1922 and there is no evidence any points were found at the site during his lifetime. His story is amazing and should be more widely told. Somehow, his alleged discovery of the point itself, as is told in this video, has become a very common mistold mashup of the real history of the Folsom point discovery. Not trying to be critical but facts are facts.
Thank you! Appreciate you pointing that out.
I'm Hunkpapa Lakota and most Native people refer to themselves as what tribal nation and band they are from. It's difficult to have a blank term for everyone who has been on these continents for 25,000+ years. Indigenous people is popular but then many other people from other continents have started claiming that they are "displaced" indigenous people ex. descendants of slaves, etc. So imo that's not a good term because it gets easily hijacked and then turns into something else. paleoindian is a good term or Indigenous Native people.
I appreciate your insight. Thank you!
Not according to the facts or the research.
@@DrSteveJ-gd3gn Okay go ahead and rely on facts and research instead of listening to a Native person 🙄 don't be ridiculous
@@gnostic268
As if myths are a substitute for actual research. By that logic we are not descended from primates as there are stories that we started with 2 people that some god created. Remember this lesson in epistemology.
@@DrSteveJ-gd3gn Try to stay on topic. 🙄