All  
DNA, land bridge, Beringia, Ice Age, Americas, genetics, South America, humans, Paleoamerican, Naia, Luzia, skeletons, archaeology

Did Paleoamericans Reach South America First?

Print

In “ Textbook Story of How Humans Populated America is Biologically Unviable, Study Finds , recently published in Ancient Origins, it was noted that DNA studies indicate that people could not have crossed the Beringia land bridge to enter the Americas 13,000 years ago because the “entry route was biologically unviable”. Although this finding by geneticists is surprising, it adds even more mystery to the archaeological evidence that anatomically modern humans were in South America tens of thousands of years before Ice Age people could have crossed a viable land bridge between Alaska and Siberia.

Bering land bridge.

Bering land bridge. ( Public Domain )

The earliest dates for habitation of the American continent to occur below Canada in South America are highly suggestive that the earliest settlers on the American continents came from Africa before the Ice melted at the Bering Strait and moved northward as the ice melted. An African origin for these people is a good fit because Ocean Currents would have carried migrants from Africa to the Americas, since there were no Ice Age sheets of ice to block passage across the southern Atlantic.

Important Archeological Sites

Dr. Bryan, in Natural History has noted many sites where PaleoAmericans have left us evidence of human habitation, including the pebble tools at Monte Verde in Chile (c.32,000 Before Present), rock paintings at Pedra Furada in Brazil (c.22,000 BP), and mastodon hunting in Venezuela and Colombia (c.13,000 BP). These discoveries have led some researchers to believe that the Americas were first settled from South America.

The main evidence from the ancient Americans are prehistoric tools and rock art, like those found by Dr. Nieda Guidon. Today archaeologists have found sites of human occupation from Canada to Chile that range between 20,000 and 100,000 years old. Guidon, in numerous articles claims that Africans were in Brazil between 65,000-100,000 years ago. Guidon also claims that man was at the Brazilian sites 65,000 years ago. She told the New York Times that her dating of human populations in Brazil 100,000 years ago was based on the presence of ancient fire and tools of human craftsmanship at habitation sites.

Martin and R. G. Klein, after discussing the evidence of mastodon hunting in Venezuela 13,000 years ago, observed that: "The thought that the fossil record of South America is much richer in evidence of early archaeological associations than many believed is indeed provocative.... Have the earliest hunters been overlooked in North America? “

Warwick Bray has pointed out that there are numerous sites in North and South America which are over 35,000 years old.  A.L. Bryan noted that these sites include, the Old Crow Basin (c.38,000 BC) in Canada; Orogrande Cave (c.36,000 BC) in the United States; and Pedra Furada (c.45,000 BC) in Brazil.

Stone arch at Pedra Furada, Brazil.

Stone arch at Pedra Furada, Brazil. ( Public Domain )

Using craniometric quantitative analysis and multivariate methods, Dr. Neves determined that Paleo Americans were either Australian, African or Melanesians. The research of Neves indicated that the ancient Americans represent two populations, PaleoAmericans who were phenotypically African, Australian or Melanesian and an Asiatic population that appears to have arrived in the Americas after 6000 BC. 

Melanesian Blond girl from Vanuatu.

Melanesian Blond girl from Vanuatu. ( CC BY-SA 2.0 )

Archaeologist have reconstructed the faces of ancient Americans from Brazil and Mexico. These faces are based on the skeletal remains dating back to 12,000BC. The PaleoAmericans resemble the first Europeans.

PaleoAmericans and First European

PaleoAmericans and First European

Researchers working on the prehistoric cultures of these ancient people note that they resemble the Black Variety of humanity, instead of contemporary Native Americans. The Black Variety include the Blacks of Africa, Australia, and the South Pacific.

Dr. Chatters, who found Naia's skeleton, told Smithsonian Magazine that: “The small number of early American specimens discovered so far have smaller and shorter faces and longer and narrower skulls than later Native Americans, more closely resembling the modern people of Africa, Australia, and the South Pacific. "This has led to speculation that perhaps the first Americans and Native Americans came from different homelands," Chatters continues, "or migrated from Asia at different stages in their evolution."

A cast of Luzia's skull at the National Museum of Natural History.

A cast of Luzia's skull at the National Museum of Natural History. (CC BY-SA 2.0 )

Although Dr. Chatters believes the PaleoAmericans came from Asia, this seems unlikely, because of the Ice sheet that blocked migration from Asia into the Americas. C. Vance Haynes noted that: "If people have been in South America for over 30,000 years, or even 20,000 years, why are there so few sites? [....]One possible answer is that they were so few in number; another is that South America was somehow initially populated from directions other than north until Clovis appeared".

The fact that the Beringia land bridge was unviable 15,000 years ago make it unlikely that during the Ice Age man would have been able to walk or to sail from Asia to South America at this time. As a result, these people were probably from Africa, as suggested by Dr. Guidon.

Prehistoric Sea Travel

In summary, the land bridge between Siberia and Alaska was unviable before 13,000 BC. Even though man could not enter the Americas until after 14,000 years ago, man was probably in South America as early 100,000 years ago, according to Dr. Guidon’s research in Brazil.

The first people in the Americas are called PaleoAmericans. The research of Chatters and Neves indicate that the PaleoAmericans were not Asiatic. These researchers claim the PaleoAmericans, “more closely resembl[ed] the modern people of Africa, Australia, and the South Pacific.”

The first Americans probably came to the Americas by sea, due to the unviable land route to the Americas before 13,000 BC. As a result, we must agree with Guidon that man probably traveled from Africa to settle prehistoric America.

The archaeological evidence indicates that PaleoAmericans settled South America before North America, and that these Americans did not belong to the Clovis culture. Africa is the most likely origin of the PaleoAmericans, because the Ice sheet along the Pacific shoreline of North America, Siberia and Alaska, would have made the sea route from Asia or Europe unviable 65,000 years ago. The Dufuna boat dating back to 8,000 BC, shows that Africans had boats at this early date. The culture associated with the Dufuna boat dates back to 20,000 years ago.

Dugout canoes hewn from wood at Lake Malawi, East African Rift system.

Dugout canoes hewn from wood at Lake Malawi, East African Rift system. ( CC BY-SA 2.0 )

--

Top Image: Rock paintings at Pedra Furada, Brazil ( CC BY-SA 4.0 )

By Clyde Winters

References

Bray, Warwick. 1988. "The Paleoindian debate". Nature 332, (10 March), p.107.

Bryan, A. L. 1987. "Points of Order". Natural History , pp.7-11.

Guidon, N. and Delibrias, G. 1986. “Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32,000 years ago.” Nature 321:769-771.

Guidon, N., and B. Arnaud. 1991. “The chronology of the New World: Two faces of one reality.” World Arch. 23(2):167-178.

Guidon, N., et al.1996.  "Nature and Age of the Deposits in Pedra Furada, Brazil: Reply to Meltzer, Adovasio & Dillehay," Antiquity, 70:408.

Haynes,Jr., C.V. 1988. "Geofacts and Fanny". Natural History ,(February)pp.4-12.

Kumar, Mohi. 2014. DNA From 12,000-Year-Old Skeleton Helps Answer the Question: Who Were the First Americans? [Online] Retrieved  16 August 2016 at : http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dna-12000-year-old-skeleton-helps-answer-question-who-were-first-americans-180951469/?no-ist

Martin, P. S. and R.G.Klein (eds.), Quarternary Extinctions: A Prehistoric Revolution , (Tucson:University of Arizona Press,1989) p.111.

Neves, W. A. and Pucciarelli, H. M. 1989. Extra-continental biological relationships of early South American human remains: a multivariate analysis. Cieˆncia e Cultura, 41: 566–75

Neves, W. A. and Pucciarelli, H. M. 1990. The origins of the first Americans: an analysis based onthe cranial morphology of early South American human remains. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 81: 247.

Neves, W. A. and Pucciarelli, H. M. 1991. Morphological affinities of the first Americans: an exploratory analysis based on early South American human remains. Journal of Human Evolution, 21: 261–73.

Neves, W. A. and Meyer, D. 1993. The contribution of the morphology of early South and Northamerican skeletal remains to the understanding of the peopling of the Americas. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 16 (Suppl): 150–1.

Neves, W. A., Powell, J. F., Prous, A. and Ozolins, E. G. 1998. Lapa Vermelha IV Hominid 1: morphologial affinities or the earliest known American. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 26(Suppl): 169.

Neves, W. A., Powell, J. F. and Ozolins, E. G. 1999a. Extra-continental morphological affinities of Palli Aike, southern Chile. Intercieˆncia, 24: 258–63.

Neves, W. A., Powell, J. F. and Ozolins, E. G. 1999b. Modern human origins as seen from the peripheries. Journal of Human Evolution, 37: 129–33.

Neves W.A . and Pucciarelli H.M. 1991. "Morphological Affinities of the First Americans: an exploratory analysis based on early South American human remains". Journal of Human Evolution 21:261-273. 

Neves W.A ., Powell J.F. and Ozolins E.G. 1999. "Extra-continental morphological affinities of Lapa Vermelha IV Hominid 1: A multivariate analysis with progressive numbers of variables. Homo 50:263-268

Neves W.A ., Powell J.F. and Ozolins E.G. 1999. "Extra-continental morphological affinities of Palli-Aike, Southern Chile". Interciencia 24:258-263. [Online] Available at:   http://www.interciencia.org/v24_04/neves.pdf 

Neves, W.A., Gonza´ lez-Jose´ , R., Hubbe, M., Kipnis, R., Araujo, A.G.M., Blasi, O., 2004. Early Holocene Human Skeletal Remains form Cerca Grande, Lagoa Santa, Central Brazil, and the origins of the first Americans. World Archaeology 36, 479-501

Neves, W. A., and M. Hubbe. 2005. Cranial morphology of early Americans from Lagoa Santa, Brazil: Implications for the settlement of the New World. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102:18,309–18,314.

NYT (New York Times). (2015) Human’s First Appearance in the Americas  [Online] Available at:   http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/world/americas/discoveries-challenge-beliefs-on-humans-arrival-in-the-americas.html?hp&_r=4 

Powell,J.F. (2005). First Americans:Races, Evolution  and the Origin of Native Americans. Cambridge University Press.

Winters,C. (2013). African Empires in Ancient America. [Online] Available at:   https://www.amazon.com/African-Empires-Ancient-America-Winters/dp/0615796583

Winters,C. (2015). THE PALEOAMERICANS CAME FROM AFRICA, jirr. Vol. 3 (3) July-September, pp.71-83/Winter. [Online] Available at:   https://www.academia.edu/17137182/THE_PALEOAMERICANS_CAME_FROM_AFRICA

Comments

Clyde Winters's picture

Yes, I did quote the researchers as claiming that “Kennewick Man’s pattern of craniometric affinity falls well within the range of affinity patterns evaluated for individual Native Americans" , but, I was talking about PaleoAmericans, not modern mongoloid Americans. There is no way you can claim that there were no Black Native Americans before 1492, because even the Spanish said the first Indians they met were Black  people like the Africans and people of South Indian. Neither genetic evidence nor craniometrics deny the existence of Black Native Americans. The Native Americans were called Indians because they were Black skinned like the Natives of South India. As I have noted above Quatrafages noted the numerous American tribes that were Negro Native Americans.

 Craniometric quantitative analysis and multivariate methods have determined the Native American populations. This research indicated that the ancient Americans represent two populations, paleoamericans who were phenotypically African, Australian or Melanesian and a mongoloid population that appears to have arrived in the Americas after 6000 BC.

The determination of the Paleoamericans as members of the Black Variety is not a new phenomena. Howells (1973, 1989, 1995) using multivariate analyses, determined that the Easter Island population was characterized as Australo-Melanesian, while other skeletons from South America were found to be related to Africans and Australians (Coon, 1962; Dixon, 2001; Howell, 1989, 1995; Lahr, 1996). The African-Australo-Melanesian morphology was widespread in North and South America. For example skeletal remains belonging to the Black Variety have been found in Brazil (Neves, Powell, Prous and Ozolins, 1998; Neves et al., 1998), Columbian Highlands (Neves et al., 1995; Powell, 2005), Mexico (Gonza’lez-Jose, 2012), Florida (Howells, 1995), and Southern Patazonia (Neves et al., 1999a, 1999b).

We don’t have to depend on just paintings to acknowledge the Negro/African presence in America before 1492, we also have the facial reconstructions of paleoAmericans that have resulted from craniometrics that show these people were Blacks. The bioanthropologist Walter Neves’s reconstruction of the first Americans evidenced Negroid features for the Paleoamerican we call Luzia. What made this finding startling was that Neves using the mahalanobis distance and principal component analysis, found that 75 other skulls from Lagos Santa, were also phenotypically African or Australian (Neves et al., 2004).So stop trying to claim there were no Blacks in America before 1492, Blacks had been in America 94,000 years according to Dr. Nieda Guidon   before the mongloid Native Americans found in America today arrived in the United States 6000 years ago.

References:

Coon CS (1962). The Origin of Races (New York: Knopf).

Dixon EJ (2001). Human colonization of the Americas: timing, chronology and process. Quaternary Science Review 20 277–99.

Gonza´lez-Jose´ R, Hernande´z M, Neves WA, Pucciarelli HM and Correal G (2002). Cra´neos del Pleistoceno tardio-Holoceno tempramo de Me´xico en relacio´n al patro´n morfolo´gico paleoamericano. Paper presented at the 7th Congress of the Latin American Association of Biological Anthropology, Mexico City.

Howells WW (1973). Cranial Variation in Man: A Study by Multivariate Analysis of Patterns of Difference among Recent Human Populations, Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University) 67.

Howells WW (1989). Skull Shapes and the Map: Craniometric Analyses in the Dispersion of Modern Homo, Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University) 79. Early Holocene human skeletal remains from Cerca Grande 497

Howells WW (1995). Who’s Who in Skulls: Ethnic Identification of Crania from Measurments, Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology (Cambridge. MA: Harvard University) 82.

Neves WA and Hubbe M (2005). Cranial morphology of early Americans from Lagoa Santa, Brazil: Implications for the settlement of the New World. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102(18) 309–18, 314.

Neves WA and Meyer D (1993). The contribution of the morphology of early South and Northamerican skeletal remains to the understanding of the peopling of the Americas. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 16(Suppl) 150–1.

Neves WA and Pucciarelli HM (1989). Extra-continental biological relationships of early South American human remains: a multivariate analysis. Cieˆncia e Cultura 41 566–75.

Neves WA and Pucciarelli HM (1990). The origins of the first Americans: an analysis based onthe cranial morphology of early South American human remains. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 81 247.

Neves WA and Pucciarelli HM (1991). Morphological affinities of the first Americans: an exploratory analysis based on early South American human remains. Journal of Human Evolution 21 261–73.

Neves WA and Pucciarelli HM (1991). Morphological Affinities of the First Americans: an exploratory analysis based on early South American human remains. Journal of Human Evolution 21 261-273.

Neves WA, Gonza´ lez-Jose´ R, Hubbe M, Kipnis R, Araujo AGM and Blasi O (2004). Early Holocene Human Skeletal Remains form Cerca Grande, Lagoa Santa, Central Brazil, and the origins of the first Americans. World Archaeology 36 479-501.

Neves WA, Powell JF and Ozolins EG (1999). Extra-continental morphological affinities of Lapa Vermelha IV Hominid 1: A multivariate analysis with progressive numbers of variables. Homo 50 263-268.

Neves WA, Powell JF and Ozolins EG (1999). Extra-continental morphological affinities of Palli-Aike, Southern Chile. Interciencia 24 258-263, Available: http://www.interciencia.org/v24_04/neves.pdf

Neves WA, Powell JF and Ozolins EG (1999a). Extra-continental morphological affinities of Palli Aike, southern Chile. Interciencia 24 258–63.

Neves WA, Powell JF and Ozolins EG (1999b). Modern human origins as seen from the peripheries. Journal of Human Evolution 37 129–33.

Neves WA, Powell JF, Prous A and Ozolins EG (1998). Lapa Vermelha IV Hominid 1: morphologial affinities or the earliest known American. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 26(Suppl) 169.

 

Guess I'll begin at the beginning. No, the Chukchi people are NOT Eskimos. They are in fact closely related to Native Americans, Kennewick Man, Naia and other Native Americans. Native Anericans are NOT closely related to Pacific Islanders, Australoids or Africans. Nor are all of these peoples "Negros" though they are sometimes referred to as "Negroid" i.e. Negro like. This is simply a non scientific term in reference to skin tone and some basic facial features. In point of fact, no two peoples are more distantly related that Africans and Native Americans as their last common ancestor lived 70-120 thousand years ago. As I mentioned before, the ONLY place in the Americas where there is any genetic overlap between these groups is along the western coast of South America and this is only very recently. It seems there was an interchange of women between Rapa Nui (Easter Island) and Native Americans. There is absolutely no genetic evidence of admixture between Africa and the Americas prior to 1492. Yes, Kennewick man is a Paleo American i.e. Paleo Indian but, that does not make him a "Negro" in any sense of the word.His genome shows no more affinities with Africans, Australians or Pacific Islanders that Western Europeans do. Once again, Craniometrics do not prove anything about his ancestry. Only genetics can do that and they exclude him from any of those groups.
Your paragraph on the affinities of Kennewick man to the Colville and SA/CA populations supports none of your arguements and is part of the reason I favor coastal California/Mexico as the major point of radiation for Native Americans.
Again, Pacific coast Indians show no genetic affinities to Pac Islanders or "Negros" (Africans?). Additionally, The Colville tribes you mentioned were from many Nations and Different Cultures and there simply are no "Black Native Americans" for then to mix with before the arrival of African slaves with the Spanish and French. These slaves were brought in expressly for sugar cultivation and were, before 1619 limited to The Crribean, Central, and South America. North American African slavery begins with the arrival of 20 N'doko men from Angola in VA in 1619. These are the ancestors of the Melungeons. Simply put, you can not rely upon drawings of native peoples to assign racial positioning. Believe it or not, Native Americans styled their hair in all sorts of ways and for all sorts of reasons. Curling hair was known to them as well as dying. When the Spanish came to Tenochtitlan they very quickly figured out that the bleach blonds were prostitutes. The paintings are simply not that reliable. And once again, Kennewick man is genetically Native American with no marcers from Melanesia at all and Melanesians are simply not "Negros". Your own post clearly states that the skull of Kennewick man falls well within the norms for Native Americans.

"Although our individual-based craniometric analyses confirm that Kennewick Man tends to be more similar to Polynesian and Ainu peoples than to Native Americans, Kennewick Man’s pattern of craniometric affinity falls well within the range of affinity patterns evaluated for individual Native Americans"

Clyde Winters's picture

Chukchi people are Eskimos. They are not related to Kenewick man. Chatters said that Kennewick man , Naia and Luzia were related to Pacific Islanders, Africans and Australoids, these people are called Negroes .

Morten Rasmussen, et al “The ancestry and affiliations of Kennewick Man” Nature ,523 :455–458 (23 July 2015) http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v523/n7561/full/nature14625.html , is recognized as a PaleoAmerican therefore he has negro ancestry. The researchers claim the Kennewick man’s DNA is mainly related to Native Americans living in South America, rather than North America except for the Colville people on the West Coast. The researchers wrote “Despite this similarity, Anzick-1 and Kennewick Man have dissimilar genetic affinities to contemporary Native Americans. In particular, we find that Anzick-1 is more closely related to Central/Southern Native Americans than is Kennewick Man (Extended Data Fig. 5). The pattern observed in Kennewick Man is mirrored in the Colville, who also show a high affinity with Southern populations (Fig. 2c), but are most closely related to a neighbouring population in the data set (Stswecem’c; Extended Data Fig. 4c).”
The authors also added that: “However, the genetic affinities of Kennewick Man reveal additional complexity in the population history of the Northern lineage. The finding that Kennewick is more closely related to Southern than many Northern Native Americans (Extended Data Fig. 4) suggests the presence of an additional Northern lineage that diverged from the common ancestral population of Anzick-1 and Southern Native Americans (Fig. 3). This branch would include both Colville and other tribes of the Pacific Northwest such as the Stswecem’c, who also appear symmetric to Kennewick with Southern Native Americans (Extended Data Fig. 4).”

The Pacific coast were a mixture of mongoloid and Pacific Island negro Native Americans. There is no such thing as a single population making up a Colville tribe. The so-called Colville tribe which is related to Kennewick man is a Confederation of Indians who did not die of diseases or murdered by whites so they could take their land.

The Colville tribe is the name given to various Christian Native American tribes that lived at Fort Colville. They include Native American groups that were not exterminated by the whites. The twelve bands are the Methow, Okanogan, Arrow Lakes, Sanpoil, Colville, Nespelem, Chelan, Entiat, Moses-Columbia, Wenatchi, Nez Perce, and Palus.

These remnants of Pacific coast tribes formerly mixed with the Black Native Americans this is obvious when we look at Ohlone people who lived in missions on the West Coast and other Black Native Americans.  See: http://www.missionscalifornia.com/sites/default/files/snjose-05-Ohlone-indians-dancing.jpg

http://www.books-about-california.com/Images/SF_100_Years_Ago/Indians_Hunting.jpg

https://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/images/california-native-indians.jpg

http://www.foundsf.org/images/7/77/Indians-at-the-Misson-brk00000869_24a.jpg

This means that the Colville tribe is admixed with the Black Native American tribes that formerly dominated the Pacific coast.

The multivariate analysis of Kennewick man’s skull show that he was a PaleoAmericans. The carniometric measurements confirm the negro origin of Kenewick man. The researchers wrote:
Although our individual-based craniometric analyses confirm that Kennewick Man tends to be more similar to Polynesian and Ainu peoples than to Native Americans, Kennewick Man’s pattern of craniometric affinity falls well within the range of affinity patterns evaluated for individual Native Americans (Supplementary Information 9). For example, the Arikara from North Dakota (the Native American tribe representing the geographically closest population in Howells’ data set to Kennewick), exhibit with high frequency closest affinities with Polynesians (Supplementary Information 9). See this picture of an Arikara , before most of this tribe was exterminated, https://www.nps.gov/knri/learn/historyculture/images/1985_66_125_1b.jpg

 In summary,  Kennewick man is more related to the South American tribes that are related to the Melanesians, than North American Native Americans. As you can see from the pictures of the Ohlone tribe above, they resemble Melanesians rather than the Mongoloid Native Americans who probably originated in Siberia.

The genome of Kennewick man shows an affinity to the Chukchi and Native Americans. craniometric analysis can only show generalized physical similarities between groups. It does not indicate a genetic relationship as Genomic analysis does. ALL Native Americans can trace their ancestry back to a hand full of pioneers (possibly as few as 20!) who settled in the Americas about 20,000 - 25,000 BP (Kennewick Man dates to 8.9-9 thousand years). There are no other genotypes present in Native Americans at all. This includes Kennewick man. This doesn't mean there were not earlier visitors or even residents. There may well have been but, they left no genetic trace in modern or Paleoindians.

Clyde Winters's picture

Wiley you are wrong ancient Americans are not related to the Chukchi. Morten Rasmussen et al (2015), on “The ancestry and affiliations of Kennewick Man”, at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vnfv/ncurrent/full/nature14625.html   , said that “While our individual-based craniometric analyses confirm that Kennewick Man tends to be more similar to Polynesian and Ainu peoples than to Native Americans”. These researchers point to a non-Chukchi origin for this PaleoAmerican.

 

Pages

Next article