> Hi Charlie -
> Last time I visited with the Five Nations, they were sapien. I don't think they'll lend you
> any of their skeletons. Last time I visited with the Shawnee, they were also sapien, and
> I am certain that they will not lend you any of their skeletons.
Correct. I’m referring to ancient populations, not modern ones. Most of the ancient skeletons found in the Americas don't look Shawnee. BTW, I love this: Two preClovis advocates debating. I so frickin’ tired of the “PreClovis vs. Clovis-first Debate”.
> But I don't think that's what you wanted to ask. You probably meant human skeletal
>remains in a bound archaeological context. Well, how about DNA? As in "mt DNA >haplogroup remains"?
>I can state with some certainty that Iroquoian people are on the Saint Lawrence at
>10,900 BCE, and around Big Bone Lick at the same date. This implies to some degree,
>along with the C mt DNA haplogroup distribution, that the mammoth hunters of Florida
>and points south were also Iroquoian, so take the field results and work a rate of
>travel.... A GUESS (estimate) would be the oldest would be about say 40,000 BCE.
Agreed. Big guess: a 29,000-year guess (not that I can do any better). What about this so called “Private allele ubiquitous in the Americas”:
“…The three-wave migration hypothesis of Greenberg
et al. has permeated the genetic literature
on the peopling of the Americas. Greenberg
et al. proposed that Na-Dene, Aleut-Eskimo and
Amerind are language phyla which represent
separate migrations from Asia to the Americas.
We show that a unique allele at autosomal
microsatellite locus D9S1120 is present in all
sampled North and South American populations,
including the Na-Dene and Aleut-
Eskimo, and in related Western Beringian
groups, at an average frequency of 31.7%. This
allele was not observed in any sampled putative
Asian source populations or in other worldwide
populations. Neither selection nor admixture
explains the distribution of this regionally
specific marker. The simplest explanation for
the ubiquity of this allele across the Americas is
that the same founding population contributed a
large fraction of ancestry to all modern Native
American populations…”
“…The presence of 9RA in the Koryaks and Chukchi
is consistent with other genetic evidence of shared
ancestry between Western Beringians and Native
Americans (e.g. Karafet et al. 1997; Lell et al. 1997;
Schurr et al. 1999). The observed geographical
distribution of 9RA is quite similar to that of two
other alleles that descend from unique mutational
events, the 16111T and DYS199T transitions which
define Native American mtDNA lineage A2 and
Y-chromosome lineage Q-M3 (Underhill et al. 1996),
respectively. Hence, three independent lines of
genetic evidence support the claim (Shields et al.
1993) of an ancient gene pool that included the
ancestors of the modern inhabitants of Western
Beringia and the Americas…”
http://www2.ku.edu/~lba/Publications/PDF%20files/2007/Private_allele.pdf A private allele ubiquitous in the Americas K. B. Schroeder et al.
19 January 2007 Biol. Lett.
American Haplogroup A seems to be closely related to this “Private allele ubiquitous in the Americas”. Some guess Haplogroup A, as a whole, originated in China. Interestingly, American Haplogroup A seems to have originated in the Americas and then migrated North and West to Beringia and into Siberia.
>So where does one place C/A mt DNA haplogroup divergence and the C/A migrations?
>The divergence perhaps occurred earlier, when people moved into different ecological
>niches in Asia, one hunting and one fishing.
Seems the divergence was earlier and further west: Africa or the Near East, when Groups M and N split from L3. For those following along, Group N contains Haplogroups A, B and X while Group M contains C and D.
>As for the broken Iroquoian migration (apparently they don't move into the northern
>coastal niche(?)), the 32,500 BCE impact be be a good punctuation point.
>But again, that's simply the best guess I can make, and the metal of science is forged in
>the flames of discarded notions.
Hey, I hear you. Speaking of, what’s your take on the really old sites: Hueyatlaco; Calico; Pedra Furada; Topper; and other possible preWisconsin sites?
Charlie
