History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedJared Diamond North-South axis thesis

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 456
Author
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jun-2009 at 19:02
Interesting.
What is its know so far (verified and blessed by the academics) is that the first humans in the Americas are from Monte Verde, Chile, around 12.000 years BP. There is nothing so far that makes people suspect they reached South America thousand of years after crossing the Bering strait. It seems more pausible that the spread was quite fast.
 
On the other hand, it is known that species like the american lion and the fox spread all the way from North America to Patagonia. If those animals could do why humans couldn't do as well, and very fast. We know early humans were hunters and fishermen, and that lifestyle didn't force them to stay where they were born during a lifetime.
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 07-May-2009
Location: denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 111
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jun-2009 at 21:23

The question of early migration and mobility can be seen as general human so I started a thread in archaeologĂ˝ forum.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2009 at 11:30
Good idea
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2009 at 11:58
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Interesting.
What is its know so far (verified and blessed by the academics) is that the first humans in the Americas are from Monte Verde, Chile, around 12.000 years BP. There is nothing so far that makes people suspect they reached South America thousand of years after crossing the Bering strait. It seems more pausible that the spread was quite fast.
Wikipedia at least has the Monte Verde site dated back to 14,500 BP, not 12,000 BP. Moreover you can't just dismiss how long it took for humans to reach as far south as Chile by saying  'It seems more plausible that it was quite fast'. There's just as much reason to suppose it was quite slow - in fact more, because of the disparity in environments  all the way down.
 
Also cf http://www.unl.edu/rhames/monte_verde/monte_verde1.htm for a possible 33,000 year old layer at Monte Verde.
Quote  
 On the other hand, it is known that species like the american lion and the fox spread all the way from North America to Patagonia. If those animals could do why humans couldn't do as well, and very fast. We know early humans were hunters and fishermen, and that lifestyle didn't force them to stay where they were born during a lifetime.
There is a strong case that cultures spread along seacoasts and along rivers, because of the similarity of environments. Indeed the fastest spread Diamond records is the spread through the Indonesian islands to New Guiinea, and the Polynesians spread quickly too.
 
But even moving along sea coast slows up when the temperature and diurnal/annual rhythms change. Evem fisherment have to know when and where to fish.  There's no great reason why the Kwakiutl should have moved down from the salmon-rich north-west down through California.
 
It's probably worth pointing out that such mogrations tend to occur in spurts rather than sreadily, but I agree with fantasus this is better taken out of the History of the Americas since Diamond's theses are not just relevant to America specially.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2009 at 23:54
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Wikipedia at least has the Monte Verde site dated back to 14,500 BP, not 12,000 BP. Moreover you can't just dismiss how long it took for humans to reach as far south as Chile by saying  'It seems more plausible that it was quite fast'. There's just as much reason to suppose it was quite slow - in fact more, because of the disparity in environments  all the way down.
 
This article also says round 14 000 years BP for Monte Verde:
 
 
It also says:
 
"Most scholars now believe that people first entered the new world through
the Bering land bridge more than 16,000 years ago. "
 


Edited by Carcharodon - 08-Jun-2009 at 23:55
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 07-May-2009
Location: denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 111
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2009 at 06:51
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

 
 
This article also says round 14 000 years BP for Monte Verde:
 
 
It also says:
 
"Most scholars now believe that people first entered the new world through
the Bering land bridge more than 16,000 years ago. "
 
The article mentions the low sea level at the time (old news confirmed).
That means there may be even very big surprises waiting at the bottom of the seas - of course if not it is destroyed! If people were to a large degree coastal we perhaps miss some of the most important sites.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 456
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.