Johnson 1

Jaren Johnson
Professor Nathan Cole
English 2810
19FEB2014
Exam 1; Question 2: Bering Strait Verses Alternative Theories
According to my life experience, including high school and college, when it comes to the
discussion of the first inhabitants of the American continents, there is a singular theory that
passes without question The Beringia Theory. While a host of other theories are tossed around,
the Beringia Theory remains as an absolute maintaining a significant representation of the
inhabitation puzzle amidst an ever progressing pile of alternate theories, questions, and evidence.
While the Beringia Theory is interesting, it still leaves much to be desired. It doesnt
answer all of the questions that we have concerning this continent and its native inhabitants
currently and prehistorically. For example if the last major ice age ended circa 12000 years
ago, providing for a newly opened glacial corridor, then how does the Beringia Theory account
for archeological sites that are claimed to be over 20,000 years old? How does the Beringia
Theory account for discrepancies in archaeological evidence which suggests that earlier
inhabitation may have occurred? Does DNA analysis, in conjunction with the Beringia Theory,
really tell the whole story? How does the Beringia Theory account for the exceptional diversity
amongst Amerindian languages? How does the Beringia Theory correlate with Native American
inhabitation stories? How do inhabitation theories in general impact Native Americans and their
lives today? Is the inhabitation of the Americas a giant puzzle which needs to be assembled a
piece at a time? I propose that it is time for the Beringia Theory to assume a more modest
position as one piece amongst many and, as modern-day Native Americans hold their
Johnson 2

collective piece of the puzzle before the world, we may all discover that theirs is the only piece
that is truly relevant.
One of the challenges of the Beringia Theory is the opening of the glacial mass
believed to have opened up circa 12000 years ago. Sites from British Colombia to Chile are
revealing populations that occupied the Americas 14000 - 20000 years ago, and longer. That
being the case, the first inhabitants could not have arrived via an open-glacier corridor. There is
some speculation that Asian peoples and European peoples could have navigated small water
craft from their respective continents, along the glaciers edge, until they reached the Americas.
The late explorer/adventurer, Thor Heyerdahl successfully navigated rudimentary water craft
over many thousands of miles. By engaging in a handful of successful expeditions, he
demonstrated that by using oceanic currents, small, rudimentary rafts and boats could most
certainly have been used to carry people over great distances from one land mass to another.
Anthropologists Dennis Stanford (Smithsonian Institute) and Bruce Bradley (University
of Exeter) are proponents of inhabitation via small water craft. They have determined that there
are very few Clovis sites in the interior of the United States. This is significant, because early
inhabitants migrating through newly opened glacial passages would have entered the United
States in this region. However, the greatest concentrations of Clovis sites are located within the
eastern and northeastern regions of the United States. The Clovis point (spearhead) is a key
component of a Clovis site. In all the time Dr. Stanford spent in Siberia and Alaska, he could
never find satisfactory evidence of a Clovis point. After consulting with Dr. Bradley, they
looked into the ancient Solutrean culture of Stone Age France and Spain. Dr. Bradley, an expert
in Stone Age tools, determined that the Solutreans are the only known ancient civilization in the
world to make a spearhead, and other tools, that are so nearly identical to the Clovis people. It is
Johnson 3

believed that key Clovis/Solutrean sites are now buried at sea the next step is to begin dredging
strategic points on the continental shelf. Doctors Stanford and Bradley have received a great
deal of criticism from their peers over the Solutrean theory. Many alternative theories are
viewed as radical, anecdotal and lacking sufficient evidence, such as DNA analysis.
DNA and anthropological analysis go hand in hand with the Beringia Theory, by
demonstrating that modern-day Native Americans share both DNA and physical characteristics
with Mongoloid peoples from northern Asia. However, these results dont explain aberrations,
such as Kennewick Man, Spirit Cave Man, and other Caucasoid remains that have been found.
These results also provide little insight into Native American inhabitation stories which suggest
that there were even earlier inhabitants that possessed the land. In the October 2007 issue of
Science, Deborah Bolnick, Ph.D. (University of Texas in Austin) reminds us of just how many
ancestors exist within just ten generations. A complete ten generation family tree would
comprise of 2,047 people. The tenth generation alone contains 1,024 people. So, at most, a ten
generation DNA test would identify 10 of 2047 people. Kennewick Man and Spirit Cave Man
both reveal extremely harsh and violent lifestyles. Does DNA testing tell the whole story or
does it only reveal who the most dominant, victorious inhabitants were?
One of the most fascinating questions of American inhabitation comes through the eyes
of the linguist. John McWhorter, Ph.D. (Columbia University; Stanford) is a noted linguist,
author, and scholar. In a lecture series sponsored by the Teaching Company, entitled Story of
Human Language, Dr. McWhorter addressed Amerindian languages in contrast to the Proto-
Indo-European languages. Despite covering a large geographical area with many different
cultures, the languages of Europe (excluding Finnish), India, and Eastern Asia are all traceable to
a parent language known as Proto-Indo-European. The Amerindian languages are a different
Johnson 4

story they dont really seem to make sense in the same way the Indo-European languages make
sense. The Amerindian languages dont appear to have a singular parent language. In fact, it is
claimed that there are more indigenous languages spoken in the Americas than any other region
of the world. Pre-Columbus, it is estimated that more than 2000 different languages were
spoken. Linguists argue that this should be taken into account when considering the inhabitation
of the Americas. If there was one massive movement of Asian peoples into the Americas, then
the languages should reflect that but, they dont. Despite DNA and anthropological analysis,
from a linguistical perspective, it makes more sense that the Americas were inhabited by many
different people, from many different regions, over a large span of time.
If the Beringia Theory is stubbornly held to as the only plausible theory, then what are
the consequences of that? Will such a rigid and narrow perspective only allow researchers to see
what they want to see? Which questions arent being asked when such a narrow view is taken?
As an example, there was a potential archeological site that a colleague of Dr. Stanford chose to
pass over. Why? Because the site didnt fit the model (it didnt fit the model timeframe of the
Clovis people). When Dr. Stanford excavated the area, he found what he believed to be the first
authentic Solutrean site on the American continent. What else is being passed-over - just
because it doesnt fit the model?
After all of the debate, conjecture, and speculation, how does this research impact us
today? What is the significance of Europeans being the first inhabitants? What is the
significance of Asians being the first inhabitants? What about the proponents of Africans being
the first American inhabitants? Are we all trying to stake our claim to the Americas through
modern-day inhabitation theories? Or are we genuinely trying to solve a grand mystery? What
Johnson 5

about the Native Americans who have been in the Americas for a near eternity how do they
feel about the theorized inhabitation of the Americas?
As a purely general observation, a consistent theme appears to be that Native Americans
are content with the idea that the Americas represent their land by the hand of the creator
rather than coming from some other place of origin. Many are content with the concept that they
are a unique people, separate from all other worlds and cultures. Even if they did originate from
Africa, Asia, or Europe Native Americans are not African, Asian, or European not in culture,
practice, belief, history, or language. Native Americans are simply The People of the land -
unique in their culture and development - from Alaska to Chile, from Washington to Maine,
from Peru to Brazil. In Mexico, as the people remember their heritage, they recognize
themselves as El Pueblo Ungido or the anointed people; and they recognize that they live upon
and belong to La Tierra Unigda, or the anointed land. Ultimately, it doesnt matter if one
skeletal remain is Caucasoid, Mongoloid, or Negroid, or if it is one hundred years old, or twenty
thousand years old. What matters is that they are a part of the sacred earth of the Americas; the
ancient ones deserve to be left in peace rather than to be put on display or continuously examined
by researchers.
As we consider a region of the world that claims to be the most diverse of all regions and
civilizations does a single, narrow-minded theory really fit? Or is the story of American
inhabitation as complex and diverse as the people that have occupied it for tens of thousands of
years? For Native Americans, they have always understood their story, and their collective piece
of the puzzle has always fit its the varied and jumbled mess of ideas, hypotheses, and theories
that are struggling with all of their might to find a place in the complex puzzle of American
inhabitation.
Johnson 6









Works Cited
Bolnick, Deborah A. "The Science and Business of Genetic Ancestry Testing." Science. American
Association for the Advancement of Science, 19 Oct. 2007. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.
Bonnichsen, Robson, and Robert Lassen. "Explore Pre-Clovis Sites." PBS. PBS, 09 Nov. 2004.
Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
"Encyclopedia: Native American Languages." Native American Languages. Columbia University
Press, n.d. Web.
Fiore, Kristina. "Ancestry Testing Has Limitations, Genetics Society Warns." Ancestry Testing Has
Limitations, Genetics Society Warns. Ed. Zalman S. Agus, MD. MedPage Today, LLC, 17
Nov. 2008. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.
<http://www.medpagetoday.com/Genetics/GeneticTesting/11800>.
"First Americans Were Black Aborigines." YouTube. YouTube, 09 May 2012. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6IrMjfbh6E>.
Johnson 7

Glassman, Gary, and Nigel Levy, prods. "America's Stone Age Explorers." NOVA. PBS. N.d.
Http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/stoneage/. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nyfw-kmI-pE>.
Harmon, Katherine. "People Were Chipping Stone Tools in Texas More Than 15,000 Years Ago."
Scientific American Global RSS. Scientific American, a Division of Nature America, Inc., 24
Mar. 2011. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
Hendrie, Nathan, prod. "Mystery of the First Americans." NOVA. PBS. N.d.
Http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/. WGBH Boston Video. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iklMcO2xrU>.
"Land Bridge Theory." Home. University of Texas at Austin, n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2014.
<http://ows.edb.utexas.edu/site/hight-kreitman/land-bridge-theory>.
Mapes, Lynda V. "Local News." The Seattle Times. The Seattle Times Company, 09 Oct. 2012.
Web. 20 Feb. 2014.
<http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019387577_bones10m.html>.
McWhorter, John, Ph.D. "Story of Human Language." Lecture.
"On the Trail of the First Americans [Interactive]." Scientific American Global RSS. Scientific
American, a Division of Nature America, Inc., n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
"Paleolithic Giants in America (Solutrean / Clovis)." YouTube. YouTube, 19 Feb. 2012. Web. 20
Feb. 2014. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLV9A8P00bw>.
Johnson 8

Rohter, Larry. "An Ancient Skull Challenges Long-Held Theories." The New York Times. The New
York Times, 25 Oct. 1999. Web.
"Solutreans Are Indigenous Americans." YouTube. YouTube, 15 Mar. 2012. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNTXCMYjwEk>.
Wong, Kate. "No Bones about It: Ancient DNA from Siberia Hints at Previously Unknown Human
Relative." Scientific American Global RSS. Scientific American, a Division of Nature
America, Inc., 24 Mar. 2010. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.