New Study On Peopling Of Americas Confirms Some Theories, Unsettles Others

CSFA ^ | 9-2001 | Loring Brace

[blam]

New Study on Peopling of Americas Confirms Some Theories, Unsettles Others

The New World was populated in at least two migrations, according to a paper presented by C. Loring Brace to the National Academy of Sciences. The settlers in the first wave, who walked across the Bering Land Bridge 15,000 years ago, were the forebears of present-day inhabitants south of the U.S.-Canadian border. The ancestors of linguistically distinct peoples including the Inuit, Aleut, and Na-Dene speakers made the watery crossing from Asia about 5,000 years ago.(The people are todays American Indian/Native Americans)

The new study by Dr. Brace, professor of anthropology and curator of biological anthropology at the University of Michigan, also finds that members of the first group are only distantly related to present-day populations on the Asia mainland, but are closely linked genetically to the Ainu (the aboriginal people of the Japanese island of Hokkaido), to their prehistoric Jomon predecessors, and to today's Polynesians.(Kennewick Man, Spirit Cave Man...others)

Descendants of the second-wave migrants, on the other hand, are closely related to current mainland populations of East Asia.(Today's American Indians/Native Americans)

Brace's findings are immense in scope. He cites artifacts that date back to the Acheulean age, more than 200,000 years ago, and he traces population movements from human origins in Africa to Europe, Asia, Australia-Melanesia, and ultimately to North America. Following are just a few of the noteworthy points of his study.

Although Brace supports his theory with archaeological evidence, he bases his findings principally on statistical analysis of craniofacial metrics. These are inherited characteristics, thus indicators of genetic links, and are unaffected by environmental pressures.

Neanderthals fashioned characteristic tools in northwestern Europe toward 200,000 years ago. Use of their tools can be traced eastward to Mongolia and Siberia, but not to China or Japan or towards Southeast Asia. Although no conclusive skeletal evidence of Neanderthals has been found in Siberia, cultural continuity implies their presence.

Brace finds evidence of a continuum of late-Pleistocene humans across the northern fringe of Europe and Asia. These are the ancestors of the first migrants to North America, who are closely linked to the Jomon, Ainu, and modern Polynesians. Thus all these people can be described as Eurasian.

Brace's study is sure to cause a stir among archaeologists and anthropologists. The announcement came too late for us to cover it in depth this issue. In the next Mammoth Trumpet we hope to explore it in detail with Brace and with other authorities whose work is affected by his findings.

[blam]

The EuroAsians mentioned in the article (first-wave) are Paleo-Americans...the second wave of migrants are Paleo-Indians who arrived in the Americas less than 6,000 years ago.

Skeletons discovered in the Americas that are older than 6,000 years are not American Indian/Native American and should not be subject to their heritage claims.

I believe there were more than two waves, there are probably at least two waves that came down the Atlantic coast too.

[Burkeman1]

Then the remains of the "Kenniwick" man can be studied after all?

[blam]

"Then the remains of the "Kenniwick" man can be studied after all?"

Judge John Jelderks has ruled that they may...The Indians have appealed this ruling and I'm expecting another ruling any day on the appeal.

[John H K]

The settlers in the first wave, who walked across the Bering Land Bridge 15,000 years ago, were the forebears of present-day inhabitants south of the U.S.-Canadian border. The ancestors of linguistically distinct peoples including the Inuit, Aleut, and Na-Dene speakers made the watery crossing from Asia about 5,000 years ago.
(The people are todays American Indian/Native Americans)

I assume that the parenthentical material was inserted yourself?

If so, you TOTALLY misunderstood the article and actually the parenthetical inserts are COMPETELY contradictory to the immediately preceeding text.

The Inuit and Aleut are Eskimos. Na-Dene peoples are a small portion of current American Indians (Navajos are the largest group, I believe.) The author is ACTUALLY saying MOST of the current American Indians, based on his study, came here 15,000 years ago and are more closely related to the Ainu, etc.

[Steve Eisenberg]

I believe there were more than two waves, there are probably at least two waves that came down the Atlantic coast too.

Sounds reasonable. It should be remembered that over even a hundred years of history, let alone thousands, an awful lot happens. A large group of people who were living in a certain place in 2800 BC might have been living 3,000 miles away in 2700 BC, then been almost wiped out by 2600 BC, and then come to dominate a continent by 2500 BC. Sometimes there was little intermarriage, sometimes lots. If anything, lack of a stable government like we have in the US today would have made for greater instability than we see today. Sadly, the study of preliterate people can only result in the crudest appoximations of what was really happenning.

[RightWhale]

The settlers in the first wave, who walked across the Bering Land Bridge 15,000 years ago, were the forebears of present-day inhabitants south of the U.S.-Canadian border

Does this say that Mexicans of Indian ancestry aren't Indians but from a variety of other Asian groups?

[elbucko]

I believe there were more than two waves,..

I believe you're right, IMHO. I have been around a lot of "Oriental Asians" (?), Native Americans and Latin Americans of limited European ancestry when they are infants. In a nursery, only their mothers could tell them apart. The common genetic relationship of these peoples is remarkable. I would guess that the Eastern NA Indian Tribes were a migration on their own. Perhaps related to the other two, but distantly.

Nevertheless, it's an interesting subject that has future implications. Especially for education.

[Steve Eisenberg]

Does this say that Mexicans of Indian ancestry aren't Indians but from a variety of other Asian groups?

Back up. According to statistical geneology, everyone living today is probably a decendent of every person living just 1,500 years ago (except for those people living 1,500 years ago who have no decendents today living). Have people live apart from others for a few hundred years, and the separated groups will soon having distinctive language, appearance, etc. Appearance will be related to predominent genetic backgrounds. But to say that today's this or that group of people is descended from some group living thousands of years ago is way overstated.

[RightWhale]

It is confusing. The Eskimos are clearly different physically and socially from the Athabascan. Did the Athabascan come over first-wave or second-wave?

[tracer]

btt

[blam]

"I assume that the parenthentical material was inserted yourself?"

Yes.

The article is a little consfusing and I admit I have a pre-disposition to read it the way I've described it...based on loads of other articles I've read.

"The ancestors of linguistically distinct peoples including the Inuit, Aleut, and Na-Dene speakers made the watery crossing from Asia about 5,000 years ago."

Doesn't this statement confirm my 'reading' of the article? If I'm wrong...I'll be the first to admit it. I don't presently think I'm wrong.

[elbucko]

Does this say that Mexicans of Indian ancestry aren't Indians but from a variety of other Asian groups?

Indians, of the North American kind, are Asians that moved at some time to North America. Mexicans have no excuse to do poorly in mathematics.

[blam]

"According to statistical geneology, everyone living today is probably a decendent of every person living just 1,500 years ago (except for those people living 1,500 years ago who have no decendents today living)."

I don't believe this statement...

[RightWhale]

Maybe if they add the six degrees of relation so cousins are included.

[Map Kernow]

Give America BACK to the Eurasians!!!

[genefromjersey]

For whatever it is worth, there is a "cultural" link (seemingly) between the Ainu, living on the offshore islands of Japan, and the "Iroquois" in NY state.

Both have/had a New Year's tradition involving the ritual sacrifice of a household pet. With the Ainu, it was a bear cub; with the Iroquois, a white dog.Both would strangle the pet, and burn the carcass,for the same reason: the spirit of the sacrificed animal was supposed to tell the other animals how well it had been treated by its human hosts; thus insuring a good hunting season.

There was a secondary item, having to do with the fletching
of arrows, and the carving of a spiral around arrow shafts.
(Presumably it was believed this would impart a slight spin to the arrows, making them more accurate.) This was practiced by the Ainu,the woodland "Sioux", and the Iroquois.

ps: Although we use the names Iroquois and Sioux these days,both names were originally uncomplimentary nicknames bestowed by other tribes.If memory serves, both names suggest they were thought of as "dangerous vipers".

[Map Kernow]

The Inuit and Aleut are Eskimos. Na-Dene peoples are a small portion of current American Indians (Navajos are the largest group, I believe.) The author is ACTUALLY saying MOST of the current American Indians, based on his study, came here 15,000 years ago and are more closely related to the Ainu, etc.

Seriously, folks, see the thesis of the late Joseph H. Greenberg's "Indo-European and its Closest Relatives," positing a Eurasiatic super-language family, encompassing Indo-European, Finno-Ugric (Uralic), Altaic (Turkic etc.), Nivkh (Gilyak), Chukchi-Koryak-Kamchadal, Japanese-Korean, and Eskimo-Aleut. The Amerind languages (first wave of migrants as opposed to second) are in turn the languages most closely related to the languages of this "Eurasiatic superfamily," according to Greenberg.

[blam]

"Indians, of the North American kind, are Asians that moved at some time to North America. Mexicans have no excuse to do poorly in mathematics."

Australian?

First Americans Were Australian

[RightWhale]

Eurasiatic super-language family, encompassing Indo-European, Finno-Ugric (Uralic), Altaic (Turkic etc.), Nivkh (Gilyak), Chukchi-Koryak-Kamchadal, Japanese-Korean, and Eskimo-Aleut.

Sounds like an early split between cold-climate groups and warm-climate groups.