Does the Fan Base of the Solutrean Hypothesis Change if Upper Paleolithic Europeans Weren't White?

4/5/2015

The Solutrean hypothesis is the idea that Upper Paleolithic peoples from western Europe colonized eastern North America sometime during the period 21,000 to 17,000 years ago. The idea is based largely on the purported similarities between Solutrean chipped stone technologies and those related to the later Clovis horizon in North America. The idea does not enjoy widespread support among professional archaeologists for a variety of reasons (see this 2014 exchange for summary arguments).

While most archaeologists aren't impressed, the Solutrean hypothesis does have fans outside of the academic community. Predictably, it is very popular among white supremacists, who are fond of the idea of the original settlers of the continent being of European rather than Asian heritage. The Solutrean hypothesis is part of the white supremacist fantasy presented in the novel White Apocalypse by Kyle Bristow. The Solutrean foundation of America is also a key component in the rhetoric of neo-Nazi John de Nugent:

"The enemy of truth has a big problem with the issue of the Solutrean whites being here first and then the red man genociding him, for the whole story is didactic and instructive for white people today. It is the story of the first whites to build a great culture, and how they were crushed and died in slavery and agony after they became a minority in their own country." (source)

More discussion of the white supremacist embrace of the Solutrean hypothesis can be found in this blog post by Jason Colavito.

But what if those Solutrean people weren't actually white? Some new research that was presented at the American Association of Physical Anthropologists conference in St. Louis last week suggests just that:

"The modern humans who came out of Africa to originally settle Europe about 40,000 years are presumed to have had dark skin, which is advantageous in sunny latitudes. And the new data confirm that about 8500 years ago, early hunter-gatherers in Spain, Luxembourg, and Hungary also had darker skin: They lacked versions of two genes--SLC24A5 and SLC45A2--that lead to depigmentation and, therefore, pale skin in Europeans today."

If correct, that would mean that the Upper Paleolithic peoples of Spain and France - our friends the Solutreans - had dark skin. Does that put a chill on the love affair that white supremacists and neo-Nazis seem to have with the Solutrean hypothesis?

The quote above is from a news story on the Science website -- I'm not aware that the primary work has been published yet. I'll look forward to reading it when it is.

Greg Little

4/6/2015 12:32:17 am

There is some mainstream support for the Solutrean Hypothesis, mainly based on mtDNA: http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/2014/11/the-solutrean-hypothesis-meets-mainstream-science-a-false-response-to-a-real-problem-vs-a-real-response-to-a-false-problem/

Andy White

4/6/2015 12:43:35 am

Yes, there's some support for it among mainstream archaeologists. I would say the large majority of professionals, however, don't see it as a strong hypothesis (or even one worthy of a whole lot of consideration at this point). I haven't taken a poll - that's just my feeling based on what I see and hear when I talk to people.

My point in this post is to highlight one source of the non-academic support it receives. That support is not based on anything having to do with the nitty-gritty of the evidence presented for the Solutrean hypothesis (which is being debated in the professional arena), but rather the appeal to white supremacist groups of the notion that white Europeans made it to the New World before Native Americans. I'm just curious what happens to that support if you take away the whiteness.

duane wirdel

5/19/2016 06:29:06 am

The Solutrean Theory is being taught in many collegiate anthropology courses. Profs Stanford and Bradley are not racists and there is some very convincing evidence out there, especially in DNA studies. The problem is that the white neo Nazi element have given it a bad name with the drivel they right and there is now a politically correct leftist backlash against it. Dig in and do some heavy duty research though and the evidence is amazing.

Bob Jase

4/6/2015 03:40:31 am

Doesn't matter to me what skin color the Solutreans had, the evidence is what it is - a slight possiblity exist that some Solutreans reached NA in the timeframe you cited.

As they apparently failed to thrive, if they were here, it doesn't say much for their superiority.

Andy White

4/6/2015 03:43:56 am

Ah, but that's where it gets "interesting" in the context of the white supremacist narrative: de Nugent's story is that they were wiped out by an inferior people that were superior in number only. Thus it becomes a cautionary tale in a white supremacist fantasy.

beatrice de la garza

11/6/2015 09:44:27 am

I agreed with you. who care what color. It would be better to check their accomplishments

Greg Little

4/6/2015 04:04:52 am

The "alternative" crowd I interact with doesn't think of Solutrean as "white" but from my many decades-long involvement in this I'd guess that a bit over half of the non academic group would lose interest if the terms "white" and "European" were removed. If you consider the mtDNA Haplogroup X2a hypothesis to be the Solutrean trace in both modern Native tribes and from some skeletal remains, then they did survive. When I first wrote about X back in 1999 I never considered that they were white.

Andy White

4/6/2015 04:29:14 am

I'm no expert on the details of the genetics, but the idea of a "trace" of DNA leftover from some Solutreans doesn't make much sense to me in terms of the lithic technology. Post-Clovis projectile point forms grade into one another over time and across space in ways that make it clear they are historically related. In other words, you can trace out continuous change following Clovis (Clovis doesn't mysteriously "vanish" - that idea is a load of baloney). That continuity is coupled with all kinds of signs of population growth over thousands of years: those Clovis populations were foundational, not a people that disappeared. So if they came from Solutreans . . . why is there only a "trace" of DNA?

Greg Little

4/6/2015 05:14:10 am

A bit over half actually. But the actual number of people who are really into this actually isn't as large as most think. By the word "trace," I was not being precise and quite saying what I meant. I mean that of all the mtDNA testing on modern tribes, about 3-5% show mtDNA Haplogroup X. Of course some tribes show higher levels while others lower, and there are huge regional differences. Haplogroups A, C, D, from Asia, and B from different parts of Asia clearly dominate both modern tribes and ancient remains that have been tested. That's what I meant by trace--but I have no expertise whatsoever about lithics.

Geoffrey Sea

12/19/2015 12:58:22 pm

The idea that X2a came from Solutreans was disproved over a decade ago. The X variant present at very low levels among Basques -- who do not descend from Solutreans -- is an X1 variant. Meanwhile, X2 and X2b variants have been found in the Tungusic population of northeast Siberia, and these are close relatives of X2a. It is now assumed that X2a came from the proto-Tungusic population.

Normandie Kent

12/21/2015 07:44:51 pm

Solutrian proponents always offer x2a as evidence for Solutrians in America, but the version of the haplogroup in Europe is x2b which split with x2a in the beggining of its expansion 35,000 yrs ago in the Middle East. Also, X2b didn't arrive in Western Europe until mid to late Neolithic (3,000-2000 yrs ago) there's a good chance it arrived with the R1a, R1b Ydna haplogroups from western Eurasia . Since the Solutrian Culture was in Spain 22,000-17,000 yrs ago with mtdna haplogroups H. There is zero chance X2a was a Solutrian Haplogroup. X is a widely spread out Mtdna, with only 2 percent of the population of Europe having it,

Steve Timmermans

9/17/2016 05:37:14 am

Normandie - Are you able to provide proof to support your statement: "There is zero chance X2a was a Solutrean Haplogroup"? And I note that previous statements in your comment here do not at all prove your 'zero chance' statement to be correct.

Normandie Kent

1/2/2017 10:52:04 pm

For god sake do they have the genome of a Solutrean to compare it to Native Americanx2a?! No they don't, that doesn't stop you or the Solutrean proponents from make a scenario where these intrepid Solutreans crossing the Atlantic Ocean In Seal skin boats like the Inuit! Like the Inuit?! Give me a break. You have no proof, lets leave it at that.

Andy White

4/6/2015 12:49:42 pm

Greg, your estimate of "half" is interesting - that's a lot, but I guess it doesn't surprise me much.

know your sources

10/24/2015 02:25:14 pm

Jason Colavito is an anti-white.

Normandie Keny

12/21/2015 07:54:34 pm

No, he is just Anti-Delusional and Anti-Pseudo history.

Geoffrey Sea

12/19/2015 12:43:01 pm

I disagree that there is any professional support for the Solutrean Hypothesis from geneticists, archaeologists, or linguists (the last of who are often neglected). The claimed support comes from the same white supremacist sources or strong subconscious biases and misinterprets the actual science.

For years it was claimed that the presence of mitochondrial X haplotype in Central Algonquians and some Basques and Welsh was evidence supporting a Solutrian migration. But additional genetic work found that North American X and European X lie at opposite ends of the X lineage tree. Additionally, X closer to the North American variation was found among the Tungusic population of northeast Siberia, settling the matter. Further, it turns out that the Basques do not descend from the Solutreans but represent a separate migration from the Caucasus.

Claimed archaeological linkages follow the same pattern.

It's important to realize that Dennis Stanford did not invent the hypothesis. He took it wholesale from an archaeologist named Emerson Greenman who proposed the same theory in 1963, receiving a thorough trashing from all kinds of professionals at that time.

Greenman had been a principal looter of Ohio mounds in his early years, and so was schooled in the racist ideology that portrayed the misnamed "Hopewell" as a "white race" from Europe. The Solutrean Hypothesis was really a repackaging of this 19th-century racist idea.

Anon Academia

12/20/2015 06:26:51 pm

Its not a matter for your personal 'opinion' to determine whether or not there is some degree of support for Solutrean. There is, whether you like it or not. Perhaps you just lack adequate enough exposure to have a worthwhile opinion.

The genetic debate is a tangent at best. Nobody is claiming that if Solutrean is valid, they are some kind of proto genetic basis for modern day NAs. Its not an inherently invalid leap to assume that if they (Solutreans) were influential enough to shape eventual Clovis lithic technologies then certainly they must have made at least some genetic contribution, but extremely isolated populations and/or temporary cultural contacts are a very interesting thing. Their technologies can resonate among other cultures far, far further and longer than their genetics do, if they make any genetic contribution at all.

The rest of your post was just typical foot-stomping, squealing 'racist' a lot, etc. It's old-hat. There's a very good chance that if Solutrean is valid, it may involve peoples who weren't even "European" in origin, at not at least how we think of them today.

Try not being intellectually dishonest.

Normandie Kent

12/21/2015 08:22:36 pm

The Native Americans made their own tools with out the help or genetics of some mythical Solutrians. X2 Mtdna wasn't in Western Europe until the Mid to late Neolithic neither was ydna R. The Solutrians probably died out with no descendants. Why are you accusing people of being intellectually dishonest, when its you who is I D. You obviously haven't been keeping up with the genetic breakthroughs, like The Clovis burial of the Anzick-1 child who was d4h3a who was closely related to all Modern Native Americans. Or the supposed caucasoid K man at 9.000 yrs old. Y dna Q and mtdna x2a, or The other so called caucasoid remains called Naia at 13,000 hrs old mtdna D1. The Native American. There is a much simpler explanation for Eurasian Caucasoid skull shapes, it is because Native Americans and Western Europeans descend from the same ANE ancestors. Who split up in the group that went to the Americas, and the other group who went on to Europe. Except the Native Americans got to the Americas way before the Asiain ancestors of the Europeans got to Europe.

Anon Academia

8/10/2016 10:15:17 pm

@ NormandieKent

Absolutely nothing you cited disproves Solutrean no more than the absence of European DNA in isolated populations of Canadian First Nations peoples somehow 'disproves' the presence of European originated persons in Canada.

There comes a point in this debate where your side gets so caught up in tangential data that you lose track of basic data. To put it another way, how does Anzick-1 (in Montana) "disprove" SH which never (at any point) claims to be provident genetic basis for NA's?

Normandie Kent

2/9/2017 11:06:43 pm

Oh, so in other words no DNA transfer is required to help prove this hypothesis ?! How convenient, your scientist don't have to show proof of any tangible evidence, just some unfalsifiable Lithic resemblance. How convenient. And they still get to steal the Clovis lithic tech for the white Solutreans and Europe. Nice!

Bill Wagner

2/14/2016 07:30:26 pm

How intellectually dishonest is it to attempt to discredit an idea because "the wrong sort of people" find it appealing ?

Smear X 1,000,000 = 0.

Andy White

2/16/2016 07:44:52 am

I don't think the Solutrean Hypothesis is "discredited" simply because white supremacists like it. I think it's an interesting part of the story, however, and one worth talking about. There's no doubt that many interest groups around the world latch on to ideas about the past that they think support their agendas, whether those ideas have scientific merit or not. Archaeology is not done in a vacuum. Even if the null hypothesis of "no Solutrean voyage to the New World" cannot be falsified with a good site, and even if it turns out that Solutrean peoples weren't actually "white," I'll bet white supremacists will never let go of their love for the idea.

Normandie Kent

1/2/2017 11:09:37 pm

My proof is that your Solutrean gift givers were cavemen who hunted mammoth, who had nothing to do with the ocean. Is that to hard for you to fathom? They were not capable of seafaring across the Atlantic? Also they are not the only ones making bi facial spear points. They have found them in South Africa and the Middle East, obviously they arose thru convergent evolution. It's not rocket science!

Bill Wagner

2/16/2016 09:31:52 am

As you're outlined it, you're right (IMO), of course.

But how often have you seen this couched as the theory itself conflated with the enhusiasts' preoccupation, as if the latter discredited the former. (Even here). Enter emotion, exit reason.

10/18/2016 12:55:51 pm

We need to get off this nonsense about the solutrean hypothesis being only supported by "white supremacists" or "neo-nazis".John DeNugent is not a neo-Nazi either.I think there is a need to reexamine the history of north American settlement which the left has used,along with a number of other historical periods,to demonize and guilt-trip white people.As long as this is the case,there will always be a need to question the official narrative,since it is so often distorted and leaves out many relevant facts of the context of the period.This does not mean inventing hypotheses,as the afrocentrics customarily do,but rather to check the facts before we assign yet another historical indictment to the white man.Mr.White talks about latching on to ideas to support agendas.Well,the ideological left is a far better example of this than "white supremacists".Whites defending themselves from this assault on their race and culture by questioning the official dogma on history and race doesn't have anything to do with "white supremacy".

Normandie Kent

1/2/2017 11:15:19 pm

It must be your guilty conscience that makes you feel that way, it's pathetic that you people have to latch on to the typical mound builders myth that makes you feel better about yourselves. Frankly I don't give a Shit !

Surly old anthropologist

2/5/2019 07:38:26 pm

Clearly you give a shit. You give many noisy shrill shits in fact.

And all couched in your own racist terms, of course. "You people," indeed. Pot calls kettle a cooking vessel of color...

Charles PATRICK Wilson

12/26/2018 02:44:44 pm

Why is the "no gray area", "absolutist" attitude so common in professional and lay people on this subject?
Postulatizing is a no go?
There is no open mind to migration from diverse places?
There is no open mind to Soltrean or Clovis lithic crafting being somehow exchanged between hunters meeting on the Great Plains.
We have to have solid evidence or its ruled out as a possibility?
There is no open thought to a few Soltrean migrants just dying out and being so rare and low in population we just havent found their DNA yet.
The Clovis Boy DNA is the final answer?
We cant progress?
What if there were Polynesian, Chinese, Siberian, African, European, Japanese and other migrant "visitors" to South and North America?
Woulda shoulda coulda?
Why do people have to draw a line in the proverbial sand of the origin theory that goes across only Beringia because the one needle we found so far in the huge haystack points to the Clovis Boy DNA?
Could several boats tied together filled with primitive fishermen or seagoing people who came from the Northern Japanese islands have gotten lost in a windy storm and landed in the Aleutian Islands?
What if a tribe or group of 50 Soltreans came by boat following the North Atlantic ice cap? And the warm areas they finally found to stay awhile may have been in current Virginia? So some of their fluted spear and arrow points got lost then found?
Then settled there and mixed with other Chinese or Polynesian people and traveled down the Western Seaboard?
The story is not over, the next chapters yet to be written the end will not be written while investigation.continues.

Bob Jase

12/26/2018 03:55:24 pm

Well said!

Nytowl223 link

8/12/2020 08:13:10 pm

You (and others I see here) seem so desperate to pretend this hypothesis (not nearly enough evidence to call it a theory) is true that you've decided that no evidence at all is plenty of evidence to believe it is true. How, exactly, does the scientific method work in your little bubble world?

A few spear tips that can easily be something developed by the Clovis people, themselves, and many identical tips that are found around the world show that convergent evolution works in working with spear points as well as living species. There is no other evidence that backs up this "theory" (why it is called a theory is beyond me - it is a hypothesis, at best), especially not genetic evidence. There are no other actual bits of evidence at all. This hypothesis is a "nothing sandwich," and seems to draw people that don't need (or seemingly want) any proof at all to back it up. Perhaps for fear that more proof against it will be found? What a sad, anti-scientific argument this hypothesis has in its favor.

African Don

7/24/2021 09:15:01 pm

I’ve learned so much the past few weeks about Clovis, Admixtures, Statistical terms, and, yes, Solutrean hypotheses. Personally the latter seems too far fetched. Discussion seems exactly what has been happening here. Opinions have been challenged and views expressed. If you can’t back up your point clearly with a defined defense, don’t get mad when someone does. There are plenty strong arguments that challenges Clovis, I for one is one of them. But I do so with facts and peer tested studies and discoveries. That said history is changing and needs to be discussed, but not assumptions based on thin air and people’s political persuasion. I heard political talk here and there is no room for that junk.

Charles Wilson

7/25/2021 05:33:34 am

I do believe the ice sheets on both Beringian side and the North Atlantic side provided a navigation route to the Western Hemisphere.
In fact it was a clear line of sight route for ancient sea travel. As small boats traveled sling the ice sheet fish, birds, eggs and other game were an option for food.
I definitely think we should take race and skin color out of the discussion.
However the Soultreans were very likely dark skinned. Suposedly they did not possess the needed genes of future light skinned Europeans.
Next we should think of location, logistics, human invention, travel and exploration as a global human endeavor.
Africans island hopped and traveled as far as Australia. This was between as far back as 50,000 years ago.

Why wouldn't humans across the Earth travel over water, over land, accross ice sheets and along ice sheets to find new setlling hunting and gathering locations?

As time has progressed new evidence comes to light showing the pan global migration.

Adrián

8/13/2021 02:26:04 am

Do you mean if they hadn't white skin? Nah, they the ancestors of white people so no problem.

Comments are closed.

Does the Fan Base of the Solutrean Hypothesis Change if Upper Paleolithic Europeans Weren't White?

Archives

Categories