![]() A 2020 study strongly questioned the premise of the paper as being based on outdated racial classifications. They dismissed a scenario of direct contact in prehistory between Polynesia and Brazil as "too unlikely to be seriously entertained." While B4a1a1 is also found among the Malagasy people of Madagascar (which experienced significant Austronesian settlement in prehistory), the authors described as "fanciful" suggestions that B4a1a1 among the Botocudo resulted from the African slave trade (which included Madagascar). The research team examined various scenarios, none of which they could say for certain were correct. Two belonged to B4a1a1, while twelve belonged to subclades of mtDNA haplogroup C1 (common among Native Americans). This was based on an analysis of fourteen skulls. Two remains of "Botocudo" people (a term used to refer to Native Americans who live in the interior of Brazil that speak Macro-Jê languages), were found in research published in 2013 to have been members of mtDNA haplogroup B4a1a1, which is normally found only among Polynesians and other subgroups of Austronesians. In 2017, a comprehensive genomes study found "no Native American admixture in pre- and post-European-contact individuals". In 2014, geneticist Anna-Sapfo Malaspinas of The Center for GeoGenetics at the University of Copenhagen published a study in Current Biology that found human genetic evidence of contact between the populations of Easter Island and South America, dating to approximately 600 years ago (i.e. Claims of Polynesian, Melanesian, and Austronesian contact Genetic studies īetween 20, geneticist Erik Thorsby and colleagues published two studies in Tissue Antigens that evidence an Amerindian genetic contribution to human populations on Easter Island, determining that it was probably introduced before European discovery of the island. They have been dismissed as fringe science, pseudoarchaeology, or pseudohistory. ![]() Many others are based only on circumstantial or ambiguous interpretations of archaeological evidence, the discovery of alleged out-of-place artifacts, superficial cultural comparisons, comments in historical documents, or narrative accounts. Some of these claims are examined in reputable peer-reviewed sources. Scientific and scholarly responses to other claims of post-prehistory, pre-Columbian transoceanic contact have varied. Recent genetic studies have also suggested that some eastern Polynesian populations have admixture from coastal western South American peoples, with an estimated date of contact around 1200 CE. Maritime explorations by Norse peoples from Scandinavia during the late 10th century led to the Norse colonization of Greenland and a base camp L'Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland, which preceded Columbus's arrival in the Americas by some 500 years. ![]() Yup'ik and Aleut peoples residing on both sides of the Bering Strait had frequent contact with each other, and Eurasian trade goods have been discovered in archaeological sites in Alaska. Only a few cases of pre-Columbian contact are widely accepted by mainstream scientists and scholars. Whether transoceanic travel occurred during the historic period, resulting in pre-Columbian contact between the settled American peoples and voyagers from other continents, is vigorously debated. Studies between 20 suggest the possibility that the earliest human migrations to the Americas may have been made by boat from Beringia and travel down the Pacific coast, contemporary with and possibly predating land migrations over the Beringia land bridge, which during the glacial period joined what today are Siberia and Alaska. Pre-Columbian transoceanic contact theories are speculative theories which propose that possible visits to the Americas, possible interactions with the Indigenous peoples of the Americas-or both-were made by people from Africa, Asia, Europe, or Oceania prior to Christopher Columbus's first voyage to the Caribbean in 1492 (i.e., during any part of the pre-Columbian era). Reenactment of a Viking landing in L'Anse aux Meadows
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |