North American Neanderthals

[oldarchystudent]

Doing OK thanks. Doing a little volunteering here and there - looking forward to digging at Cahokia this summer and thinking about Gault next year. Being Grandpa to my beautiful new Granddaughter, celebrating the 25th anniversary in 2 weeks, and hoping to retire someday. Still fascinated by archaeology and finding myself drawn slightly left of centre on some of the more controversial subjects since I became interested in pre-Clovis, which sort of opened the door for asking "what else might be wrong in how we see the world?" Getting wierd in my old age, I guess....

How about you? Hoping everyone here is well.

[Minimalist]

Congrats on the grand daughter.

Retirement is a wonderful thing....I can assure you of that!

[Digit]

Retirement is a wonderful thing....I can assure you of that!

Yep! Should be a legal a requirement once you attain 21!

Roy.

[Minimalist]

Hell, yeah.

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi OAS -

If you're interested in Pre-Clovis, then the likely spot is the Mammoth Kill site just south of St. Louis.

There are a lot of people trying to explain Solutrean overstrike by the hypothesis of early people, whether Neanderthal or Sapien, crossing the North Atlantic while feeding on the extinct auk sea-bird.

With apologies to uniface, it doesn't work, at least in terms of the surviving population.

A scattered few Neanderthal earlier, who didn't survive Sapien arrival? Who knows... BUT there is no evidence of Neanderthal maritime technologies that I know of.

A very early crossing from the Sahara River region of Africa to South America with a later crossing to North America does work very, very, very well.

As far as the X mt DNA haplogroup you mention, it is also found among the Druze in Lebanon.
The location of their origin appears to have been the Black Sea, with the flooding following the rise in Sea Level due to the melting caused by the YD impacts leading to their migration. (whew! there's a mouthful)

For much more on the Copper Trading Giants, its in my book. You can PM me for a low cost signed copy.

Good digging,
Ed

[kbs2244]

E P brings up an interesting question.
What evidence, if any, do we have, for or against, Neanderthal water navigation?

We have ever increasing evidence of their abilities.
Why not long range water transportation?

[Minimalist]

We don't even have direct evidence of HSS' navigation abilities or HE's navigation abilities. Yet, we know they crossed water barriers. Direct evidence, in the form of an actual boat is something we are not likely to ever find.

Sadly.

[E.P. Grondine]

min,

The population movement over open water is direct evidence, for HSS.

What I was trying to point out, is that if you look at HSS toolkits, you find marine harvesting tools. None for HN.

[Minimalist]

I disagree, E.P. Direct evidence would be finding a 50,000 year old boat in Mexico made from a tree that grew in Japan or China. The fact that HSS got to islands is circumstantial evidence of such an ability...and compelling circumstantial evidence at that. However, we have equally valid circumstantial evidence for HE making such journeys.

As for HNS - here's a chart showing their range.



Forgetting the Dardanelles and the Straits of Gibraltar for a moment we can see that the area is cut by major rivers: The Rhine, The Danube, The Elbe, The Volga, The Tigris and Euphrates. I submit that if they had the ability to cross these (and smaller) rivers (which they must have) then they had the ability to navigate on them. These people were not stupid. They survived in a harsh land for longer than we have survived thusfar.

[Digit]

Yep! Thank Mich that RS isn't here!

Roy.

[Minimalist]

Yeah....they walked across the bottom of the ocean using very ( very!) long reeds to breathe.

[E.P. Grondine]

I disagree, E.P. Direct evidence would be finding a 50,000 year old boat in Mexico made from a tree that grew in Japan or China. The fact that HSS got to islands is circumstantial evidence of such an ability...and compelling circumstantial evidence at that. However, we have equally valid circumstantial evidence for HE making such journeys.

As for HNS - here's a chart showing their range.



Forgetting the Dardanelles and the Straits of Gibraltar for a moment we can see that the area is cut by major rivers: The Rhine, The Danube, The Elbe, The Volga, The Tigris and Euphrates. I submit that if they had the ability to cross these (and smaller) rivers (which they must have) then they had the ability to navigate on them. These people were not stupid. They survived in a harsh land for longer than we have survived thus far.

Thanks for the HN range map. Though is is too bad that they showed modern national boundaries instead of rivers and mountains.

We'll simply have to disagree on what comprises compelling evidence versus circumstantial evidence. I think we can both agree that aliens using flying saucers did not pick up and move hominid populations. Leaving the other alternatives, walking versus boating depends on the geological setting to get a "when". But in my view "when" an island has been an island at all the relevant "whens", the case is closed, particularly if you have a toolkit for maritime foods.

In my opinion, maritime technologies and the lack thereof were what differentiated HH into HSS and HN. The two populations were separated by the Zamanshan impact.

(You may object to my use of the HH term. From my point of view I just wish the physical anthropologists would agree on their taxonomic terms. There's a fellow in Malaysia having similar problems describing the finds there.)

Keep in mind that river crossings may be accomplished via fords at very low water, and by ice when a river freezes over. Or you can cross upstream where the river is shallower. By the way, these are all good techniques for finding early remains.

I do think that the straits to the Black Sea were closed until the rise in sea levels following the YD impacts.

I really like the Edit function here, as it allows one to improve their response.

[Digit]

Maritime foods? Why?
English sailors of the 15-19 C weren't exactly renowned for their consumption of sea foods EP.

Roy.

[Minimalist]

Thanks for the HN range map. Though is is too bad that they showed modern national boundaries instead of rivers and mountains.

One takes what one can get. Beggars - choosers, you know?

We'll simply have to disagree on what comprises compelling evidence versus circumstantial evidence. I think we can both agree that aliens using flying saucers did not pick up and move hominid populations. Leaving the other alternatives, walking versus boating depends on the geological setting to get a "when". But in my view "when" an island has been an island at all the relevant "whens", the case is closed, particularly if you have a toolkit for maritime foods.

Yes, we agree although let's not kid ourselves...the ancient alien crowd is alive and well out there.
I tend to go with legal definitions of evidence in which "direct evidence" requires a witness as opposed to "circumstantial" which requires some reasoning. The cops know that eye-witness testimony is notoriously unreliable.

In my opinion, maritime technologies and the lack thereof were what differentiated HH into HSS and HN. The two populations were separated by the Zamanshan impact.

A quick search for the Zamanshan impact revealed 4 hits....all either written by you or people commenting on your posts. Clearly, you have a long way to go to get this idea into general acceptance.

(You may object to my use of the HH term. From my point of view I just wish the physical anthropologists would agree on their taxonomic terms. There's a fellow in Malaysia having similar problems describing the finds there.)

Object? No. I prefer Homo Erectus but I won't quibble.

Keep in mind that river crossings may be accomplished via fords at very low water, and by ice when a river freezes over. Or you can cross upstream where the river is shallower. By the way, these are all good techniques for finding early remains.

How far upstream on the Danube would you have to go in order to find a ford? I had this discussion with R/S a few times. Overland travel through a wilderness is not a piece of cake. Even moving upstream along a river means that you will come to tributaries that have to be crossed not to mention the marshes along many rivers. Boats were the preferred means of transportation until the 19th century. I just don't think our ancestors were too stupid to overlook this method and obviously neither do you.

I do think that the straits to the Black Sea were closed until the rise in sea levels following the YD impacts.

Once again, the YD impact is not without its critics

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/cli ... -2009.html

We were unable to reproduce any results of the Firestone et al. study and find no support for Younger Dryas extraterrestrial impact.

[kbs2244]

One may also have to concider the ability to see the other shore.
Even with a wide river you can see the other bank.
(I think 30 miles is the horizon for a 6 foot man. Lake Michagan is 80 miles wide and I know you can be out of sight of land on it.)
It may take some imagination to wounder about what you cannot see.