Dating Systems<\/h4>\nThere are several dating systems and conventions used by historians. The one most widely used in Europe and the Western Hemisphere is based on the Christian dating system of marking years based on\u00a0the year of Christ's birth: BC, meaning \"before Christ\" and AD,<\/strong> meaning anno domini<\/em>, or \"in the year of our Lord.\"\n\nAnother is\u00a0before the Present Era (BPE), <\/strong>which arose from the use of radiocarbon dating and uses\u00a0January 1, 1950, as its baseline. Therefore, 10,000 years BPE equals 10,000 years before New Year's Day, 1950.\n\nRecently the\u00a0Common Era (CE)<\/strong> and before the Common Era (BCE)\u00a0<\/strong>have\u00a0become more widely used.\u00a0These two terms\u00a0align exactly with the Christian system, dividing time approximately 2,000 years ago.\n\nSome Christians object to the BCE\/CE system as an attempt to secularize the use of BC and AD; some non-Christians retort that BCE\/CE is just the Western and Christian system in disguise, imposing itself on other cultures for further generations. This debate makes it clear that\u00a0dating is neither scientific nor especially logical -- it is cultural.\n\nIt is perhaps worth mentioning that the most precise calendrical system in the Western Hemisphere originated\u00a0with the Zapotec and Olmec societies and was subsequently refined\u00a0by the Mayan culture. It consists in part of a\u00a0long count that begins on\u00a0August 11, 3114, BCE.\n\nFor convenience, BPE is used in this text\u00a0when referring to events occurring more than 4,000 years ago; it is most commonly used by archaeologists in conjunction with radiocarbon dating --\u00a0a means of determining the age of organic materials by measuring the amount of radioactive decay of carbon-14 in the material. Otherwise,\u00a0BCE and\u00a0CE are used\u00a0as\u00a0they are most likely to\u00a0correlate with what you will read elsewhere.\n\n<\/div>\nScientists and archaeologists hold several theories regarding the origins of Aboriginal peoples\u00a0in the Americas. By far the oldest and most widely accepted of these theories is the Bering land bridge<\/strong> migration model. This theory posits that during the last ice age (approximately 50,000-10,000 BPE), humans were able to migrate from Siberia to Alaska over land. Evidence suggests strongly that for as many as 100,000 years, sea levels were much lower than they currently are and the Bering Strait -- the body of water that separates Siberia from Alaska -- was an open plain of land and glaciers (which scholars call\u00a0Beringia<\/strong>). During a period of several millennia,\u00a0about 10,000-14,000 BPE, as many as four distinct migrations are thought to have occurred over the land bridge. People migrated from Siberia, Eurasia, and coastal Asia, following the megafauna of the Pleistocene (to about 12,000-11,000 BPE).\n\n[caption id=\"attachment_2547\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"300\"]![\"Rising](\"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2016\/10\/Beringia_land_bridge-noaagov-300x196.gif\")
<\/a> Figure 2.5 The separation of Siberia from Alaska about 10,000 years ago can be seen in this short GIF from the American National Climatic Data Center. (Click on the map if using web version of book.)[\/caption]\n\nThe greatest supporting evidence of the Bering land bridge\u00a0theory is the extensive homogeneity of the North American Clovis<\/strong> culture, so named for the archaeological site in New Mexico where\u00a0it was first identified. The Clovis people were long considered to be the first to inhabit the Americas. Archaeologists theorize that the Clovis came over the land bridge and down a glacier pass to the east of the Rocky Mountains sometime between 12,000 and 11,000 BCE, eventually spreading through much of North America and into South America. Everywhere they went, Clovis people littered their camps and settlements with stone tools and weapons that bear some trademark features and suggest close cultural links.\n\nA second theory focuses on Pacific sea travel. The coastal migration theory<\/strong>\u00a0suggests that some people arrived in the Americas by\u00a0following the coast of Asia and Beringia, down the western shore\u00a0of North America, all the way to South America. The coastal migration theory is bolstered by the fact that the rich marine environment would have supported maritime people well. Travel by boat would also be much faster and easier than the route overland, thus allowing people to spread throughout the Americas much more quickly. The most compelling evidence supporting this\u00a0model\u00a0comes from archaeological sites in South America that predate the North American Clovis sites. Sites like Monte Verde in Chile date to 14,800-12,500 BCE; Taima-Taima in western Venezuela dates to 13,000 BCE. These two sites\u00a0contradict the notion of \u201cClovis first.\u201d However, there are far fewer archaeological sites that support the coastal migration theory compared to the\u00a0Clovis sites; there may be more but, due to rising sea levels in the intervening millennia, the coastline of the Pleistocene era now lies under the Pacific Ocean. Barring breakthroughs in submarine archaeology, further evidence of earlier coastal migration at the source\u00a0is lost to us.\n\nAlthough the two theories might seem to be at odds with each other, most historians and archaeologists now accept that both are probably correct, and that human migration to the Americas occurred over a very long span of time, over land and by sea. It is, however, important to note that conclusive evidence in support of either theory continues to elude us;\u00a0these are still hypotheses <\/strong>only.\n\nWhat is almost certain is that -- however they got here -- the original human inhabitants of\u00a0the Americas came from Asia. Genetic evidence strongly supports this:\u00a0mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and DNA haplogroups show evidence of multiple migrations from Asia, starting at about 30,000 BPE.[footnote]Jason A. Eshleman, Ripan S. Malhi, and David Glenn Smith, \u201cMitochondrial DNA Studies of Native Americans: Conceptions and Misconceptions of the Population Prehistory of the Americas,\u201d Evolutionary Anthropology<\/em> 12 (2003): 7-18.[\/footnote] There are two important points to note in this regard:\n- There is currently\u00a0no conclusive archeological proof of human existence in the Americas before about 20,000 years ago, but\u00a0the DNA evidence points to a considerably earlier period of settlement.<\/li>\n \t
- There is no genetic indication of migration from Europe or Africa, so the suggestion (which has been around since the late 15th century) that the Aboriginal peoples must have some roots on the other side of the Atlantic is utterly unproven. This point is important\u00a0because for\u00a0hundreds of years after the arrival of Europeans, efforts were made to explain the presence of Aboriginal people as the \"Lost Tribes of Israel,\" wayward Welshmen, or some other European offshoot. DNA studies have exploded this thesis: not one\u00a0study has shown conclusive proof of European genetic markers among the Native American population before 1492.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n[caption id=\"attachment_100\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"300\"]
![\"""\"](\"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2016\/10\/Map-of-human-migrations-300x214.jpg\")
<\/a> Figure 2.6 World map of human migrations based on studies of mitochondrial (matrilinear) DNA. Dashed lines are hypothetical migrations. Numbers represent thousand years before present (BPE). The blue line represents area covered in ice or tundra during the last great ice age. The letters are the mitochondrial DNA haplogroups (pure motherly lineages); haplogroups can be used to define genetic populations and are often geographically oriented.[\/caption]\n\nIndigenous people throughout the Western Hemisphere talk of their origins\u00a0in oral histories, stories, and myths that link them intimately to the places they inhabit. The land, the stories commonly assert, was made for \u201cthe people,\u201d and they were made to inhabit the land. Every group has an origin story, and they vary widely while having elements of consistency. Sometimes, groups have multiple origin stories that tell differing versions of creation and the founding of the group. Origin stories often begin with a \u201cFirst Person\u201d (or First Peoples), a mythical man or woman who founded the group. These First People often are created from, or emerge from, the natural world itself. For example, the first Iroquois and Wendat\/Huron fell from the sky. An elderly couple of great virtue survive various trials to give birth to the peoples of the Earth, according to the Mi'kmaq. Animals play important roles in these stories as well. In the creation story of the Haida, Raven arranges things nicely and then releases the first humans from a clamshell; the Cree tell of the Earth mother's offspring\/agent Wisakedjak (a shape-changing and benign trickster whose name is widely mispronounced as\u00a0\"Whiskey-Jack\") who\u00a0peoples the world. And there are stories that involve a singular creator, such as the Blackfoot figure\u00a0Napi, who moulds the world and everything in it from a lump of mud.\u00a0The oral traditions of the Lenape\/Delaware and Iroquoian peoples, along with records from the Anishinaabe Midewiwin scrolls, refer to \u201cTurtle Island,\u201d a useful convergence of origin tales that has acquired broad acceptance among Aboriginal peoples since the 1970s.\n\nThese origin stories encapsulated and shaped the worldview of each group, establishing their people\u2019s purpose in this world as well as their relationship to the spirits\u00a0and the world around them. In other words, origin stories are key to establishing a group identity and a deep connection with the region the people inhabit. It is also the case that these stories are invoked by Aboriginal peoples as sufficient to their needs as regards history. Whether ancient peoples crossed Beringia or paddled in proto-kayaks along the west coast is perhaps interesting but no more proven and demonstrable than an allegory of cultural birth on an island of mud.\nThe Paleo-Indian Period<\/h2>\nThe time between the arrival of\u00a0humans in\u00a0the Americas until 10000-9000 years BPE is known as the Paleo-Indian<\/strong> period. During this time, humans spread throughout the Western Hemisphere, supporting themselves with similar subsistence patterns and technologies. Paleo-Indians were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They moved as frequently as once or twice a week, hunting the big game of the Paleolithic<\/strong>: the megafauna. These included now-extinct creatures such as\u00a0the mammoth, mastodon, short-faced bear, enormous versions of the\u00a0modern-day sloth, the very muscular dire wolf, and upsized editions of moose and beaver.\n\nPaleo-Indian technology included knapped, or chipped, stone tools such as scrapers, knives, and projectile points, such as the Clovis point. These were made from a variety of materials including bone and antler, obsidian, quartz, chert, and flint. Throughout the Paleo-Indian era, the spear was the most common weapon. At first, humans used spears as thrusting weapons, which\u00a0required very close engagement\u00a0between the hunter and game, a dangerous prospect when dealing with giant prey and predators. Sometime during the Paleo-Indian era, humans developed new kinds of technology, including a lighter throwing spear and an implement to propel this spear much farther: the atlatl. The atlatl, or spear thrower, was one of the most important items in the late Paleo-Indian tool kit. It was a long, thin piece of wood with a notch at the end. This notch was designed to receive the end of a spear or dart. The atlatl acted as an extension of the throwing arm, enabling the spear thrower to greatly increase the velocity\u00a0and range of the cast.\n\nPaleo-Indians probably lived in groups that anthropologists call bands, small groups of related individuals, typically no bigger than 100 to 150 people. This setup allowed for a simple leadership structure, probably with one individual at the head of the group. It also allowed for easy mobility, and\u00a0hunter-gatherers such as Paleo-Indians lived with only transportable and reproducible possessions. One of the greatest problems of living in such a small group, however, was finding a suitable mate. Anthropologists think\u00a0that regional Paleo-Indian bands\u00a0came together yearly in the summer months to celebrate religious rituals, pass along\u00a0news, and exchange young women and men\u00a0to ensure genetic diversity among their groups.\nThe Archaic and Woodland Periods<\/h2>\nFrom 10000 to 9000 BPE, Earth\u2019s climate began to warm, and the North American environment changed. A warming world created opportunities for plants to thrive and diversify; it also created large bodies of water as glaciers and ice caps melted.\u00a0Over the next 6,000 to 7,000 years, native cultures developed and diversified during the Archaic<\/strong> and the Woodland periods<\/strong>, 10000-3000 BPE and 3000-1000 BPE\u00a0respectively.\n\nPaleo-Indians adapted to the world around them, learning to rely more on a diet rich in plant materials. For reasons as yet unknown, megafauna began to die out, and Aboriginal people had to rely more on bison and other relatively smaller game animals for meat. It was near the start of\u00a0this period, around 9000\u00a0to\u00a07000 BPE, that West Coast societies started\u00a0organizing\u00a0themselves around salmon fishing.\u00a0The\u00a0Nuu-chah-nulth\u00a0of\u00a0Vancouver Island, for example,\u00a0began whaling with advanced long spears.\n\nThe\u00a0Maritime Archaic<\/strong>\u00a0is another\u00a0expression\u00a0of North America's\u00a0Archaic\u00a0culture of sea-mammal hunters in the\u00a0subarctic. They prospered from approximately 7000\u00a0BCE\u00a0to\u00a01500\u00a0BCE (9,000-3,500 years ago) along the\u00a0Atlantic coast\u00a0of North America.\u00a0Their settlements included\u00a0longhouses<\/strong>\u00a0and boat-topped temporary or seasonal houses. They engaged in long-distance trade, using as currency white\u00a0chert, a rock quarried from northern Labrador to Maine.\n\nIt was, as well, during the Archaic and Woodland periods that\u00a0the peoples of the Americas also began to domesticate plants, leading\u00a0to one of the most important transformations in human history: the development of agriculture.\u00a0The Archaic\u00a0agricultural revolution<\/strong>\u00a0got underway in Mesoamerica\u00a0(the area between Central Mexico and Costa Rica) and in coastal Peru by the Caral-Supe (also called Norte Chico) civilization. In Oaxaca, Mexico, people tended squash vines\u00a0in order to use the hard fruit\u00a0as containers. Eventually, more tender forms of squash became a food source. Following the domestication of beans, around 6000 BPE, Mesoamerican peoples became more sedentary. Finally, maize<\/strong> (or corn) was domesticated sometime around 5500 BPE. Over thousands of years, the tiny teosinte<\/strong> seed pod, measuring about four centimetres long, was transformed though cultivation into much larger, nutritionally rich ears of corn.\n\nThe domestication of maize completed the Mesoamerican triad<\/strong>: corn, beans, and squash. The \"three sisters\" provided an ideal diet. Aboriginal\u00a0agriculturalists all over the hemisphere grew these crops\u00a0as their principal foods until many years after European contact. This combination of plants proved ideal as they supported one another in growth. The corn grew tall and provided a \u201cpole\u201d for the beans to grow up and around, and the large squash leaves provided shade that retained moisture and inhibited the growth of weeds. As well, beans, which are \u201cnitrogen fixers,\u201d returned\u00a0nitrogen back into the soil that the corn crops stripped out during growth.\n\n[caption align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"263\"]![\"Generations](\"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2016\/10\/Maize-teosinte_fmt.jpeg\")
<\/a> Figure 2.7 Teosinte, the ancestor of corn, is shown on the left. In the middle is a teosinte-maize hybrid. Modern corn is on the right. [Long Description]<\/a>[\/caption]It was a diet\u00a0that served the Mayan civilization exceedingly well. Agricultural societies, where they are successful, witness significant population growth and a degree of urbanization. The farming societies of Mesoamerica produced some of the largest and most elaborate city states in the Americas, comparable to European, African, and Asian civilizations in many respects. Architectural styles were elaborate, city layouts were complex and aesthetically stunning, and artistic and scientific knowledge was peerless, especially in the field of\u00a0astronomy.\n\nFurther,\u00a0from about 200\u00a0to\u00a0900 CE the Mayan civilization crested on the strength of an\u00a0infrastructure of priesthoods that was the underpinning of the whole culture. Although the Mayan Empire declined sharply in the eighth and ninth centuries CE, the Aztec Triple Alliance followed with another,\u00a0more militarized,\u00a0iteration of Mesoamerican power from the 1300s to the 1500s.\u00a0The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was, in the late 1400s, one of the largest cities on the planet and possibly the most beautiful, a fact that tells us a great deal about the administrative, creative, technological, and cultural sophistication of these pre-contact civilizations.\n\nAgricultural knowledge and techniques spread from Mesoamerica throughout the temperate parts of the Western Hemisphere in a process called diffusion<\/strong>. Although corn and beans probably came from Mesoamerica,\u00a0other peoples throughout\u00a0North America\u00a0contributed to the body of agricultural knowledge and accomplishment across the continent.\n\nLess successful was the\u00a0domestication of animals. There weren't a lot of suitable species available for experiments in domesticated rearing, although turkeys and dogs were notable exceptions. Horses, which may have originated in the Americas, disappeared along with the megafauna some 8,000 years ago. Mountain goats and bighorn sheep are fiercely recalcitrant creatures and almost impossible to contain, let alone domesticate. There was no equivalent of the African cattle to turn into a placid source of milk, meat, and hides.\u00a0Most significantly, perhaps, there were no pigs or even boars to pen up and dine on.\n\nThe ramifications of having few domestic animals was significant to the history of Aboriginal peoples.\u00a0The absence of large draught animals meant that land had to be cleared and prepared by human energy alone.\u00a0Soil exhaustion could\u00a0be postponed to\u00a0some degree by\u00a0composting or using fallow field practices, but Aboriginal farmers lacked access to the sort of fertilizers that\u00a0cattle- and chicken-rearing peoples could exploit. Turkeys, which were domesticated, have the advantage of size and ease of capture, but they do not produce as many eggs and thus offspring as prodigiously as chickens. The inability to secure a household source of protein\u00a0meant that Aboriginal diets necessarily relied\u00a0more heavily on wild game and fish than was the case in much of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This resulted in\u00a0a more nomadic or semi-nomadic life for many societies, and that constraint worked against\u00a0large-scale and concentrated populations.\u00a0Even the farming communities\u00a0were obliged to augment their agrarian economy with wild meat and fish, which is much more time-consuming than slaughtering hogs. Further, the lack of\u00a0dairy animals precluded women from\u00a0weaning their\u00a0infants onto cow,\u00a0goat, or sheep milk, which\u00a0meant that Aboriginal infants were breastfed longer, which in turn\u00a0limited population fertility. Finally, the absence of domesticated animals meant that Aboriginal peoples were not exposed to cross-species infections and epidemics. For 10,000\u00a0years or so\u00a0this proved to be beneficial, but after 1492\u00a0it was\u00a0disastrous, the reasons for which are explored in Chapter 5<\/a>.\n\nKey Points<\/h2>\n- Two theories currently explain the arrival of humans in the Americas: the Bering Strait land bridge theory and the coastal migration theory.<\/li>\n \t
- The timing of early human occupation of the Americas is uncertain and archaeological evidence keeps pushing back the arrival dates.<\/li>\n \t
- Aboriginal peoples' traditions point to occupation of \"Turtle Island\" since time immemorial.<\/li>\n \t
- Agricultural societies appeared about\u00a06000 BPE\u00a0and complex communities arose throughout Mesoamerica, spreading into the interior of North America.<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n
Attributions<\/h2>\nFigure 2.5<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.\n\nFigure 2.6<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.\n\nFigure 2.7<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.\n\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>","rendered":"The telling of\u00a0Aboriginal history in Canada often begins with a discussion of human migration routes into the Americas, which reflects the long-standing misperception that was held by Europeans that Aboriginal societies were primitive, usually migratory, and unlikely to have been in the Americas for very long before the 15th century. This misperception, of course, served European empires in the Americas very well because it justified the\u00a0dispossession of native peoples from their lands.<\/p>\n
Twentieth-century historians and archaeologists worked hard to remedy this situation and to magnify the many Aboriginal voices that said, in chorus, that they had been\u00a0here “since time immemorial.”\n<\/p>\n
Occupying the Americas<\/h2>\n
Human occupation of the Americas is itself a complicated tale. However, there is general agreement among scholars that modern hominids were hereabouts some 12,000 to\u00a014,000 years before the Present Era (BPE).<\/p>\n
\nDating Systems<\/h4>\n
There are several dating systems and conventions used by historians. The one most widely used in Europe and the Western Hemisphere is based on the Christian dating system of marking years based on\u00a0the year of Christ’s birth: BC, meaning “before Christ” and AD,<\/strong> meaning anno domini<\/em>, or “in the year of our Lord.”<\/p>\nAnother is\u00a0before the Present Era (BPE), <\/strong>which arose from the use of radiocarbon dating and uses\u00a0January 1, 1950, as its baseline. Therefore, 10,000 years BPE equals 10,000 years before New Year’s Day, 1950.<\/p>\nRecently the\u00a0Common Era (CE)<\/strong> and before the Common Era (BCE)\u00a0<\/strong>have\u00a0become more widely used.\u00a0These two terms\u00a0align exactly with the Christian system, dividing time approximately 2,000 years ago.<\/p>\nSome Christians object to the BCE\/CE system as an attempt to secularize the use of BC and AD; some non-Christians retort that BCE\/CE is just the Western and Christian system in disguise, imposing itself on other cultures for further generations. This debate makes it clear that\u00a0dating is neither scientific nor especially logical — it is cultural.<\/p>\n
It is perhaps worth mentioning that the most precise calendrical system in the Western Hemisphere originated\u00a0with the Zapotec and Olmec societies and was subsequently refined\u00a0by the Mayan culture. It consists in part of a\u00a0long count that begins on\u00a0August 11, 3114, BCE.<\/p>\n
For convenience, BPE is used in this text\u00a0when referring to events occurring more than 4,000 years ago; it is most commonly used by archaeologists in conjunction with radiocarbon dating —\u00a0a means of determining the age of organic materials by measuring the amount of radioactive decay of carbon-14 in the material. Otherwise,\u00a0BCE and\u00a0CE are used\u00a0as\u00a0they are most likely to\u00a0correlate with what you will read elsewhere.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Scientists and archaeologists hold several theories regarding the origins of Aboriginal peoples\u00a0in the Americas. By far the oldest and most widely accepted of these theories is the Bering land bridge<\/strong> migration model. This theory posits that during the last ice age (approximately 50,000-10,000 BPE), humans were able to migrate from Siberia to Alaska over land. Evidence suggests strongly that for as many as 100,000 years, sea levels were much lower than they currently are and the Bering Strait — the body of water that separates Siberia from Alaska — was an open plain of land and glaciers (which scholars call\u00a0Beringia<\/strong>). During a period of several millennia,\u00a0about 10,000-14,000 BPE, as many as four distinct migrations are thought to have occurred over the land bridge. People migrated from Siberia, Eurasia, and coastal Asia, following the megafauna of the Pleistocene (to about 12,000-11,000 BPE).<\/p>\n<\/a>Figure 2.5 The separation of Siberia from Alaska about 10,000 years ago can be seen in this short GIF from the American National Climatic Data Center. (Click on the map if using web version of book.)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nThe greatest supporting evidence of the Bering land bridge\u00a0theory is the extensive homogeneity of the North American Clovis<\/strong> culture, so named for the archaeological site in New Mexico where\u00a0it was first identified. The Clovis people were long considered to be the first to inhabit the Americas. Archaeologists theorize that the Clovis came over the land bridge and down a glacier pass to the east of the Rocky Mountains sometime between 12,000 and 11,000 BCE, eventually spreading through much of North America and into South America. Everywhere they went, Clovis people littered their camps and settlements with stone tools and weapons that bear some trademark features and suggest close cultural links.<\/p>\nA second theory focuses on Pacific sea travel. The coastal migration theory<\/strong>\u00a0suggests that some people arrived in the Americas by\u00a0following the coast of Asia and Beringia, down the western shore\u00a0of North America, all the way to South America. The coastal migration theory is bolstered by the fact that the rich marine environment would have supported maritime people well. Travel by boat would also be much faster and easier than the route overland, thus allowing people to spread throughout the Americas much more quickly. The most compelling evidence supporting this\u00a0model\u00a0comes from archaeological sites in South America that predate the North American Clovis sites. Sites like Monte Verde in Chile date to 14,800-12,500 BCE; Taima-Taima in western Venezuela dates to 13,000 BCE. These two sites\u00a0contradict the notion of \u201cClovis first.\u201d However, there are far fewer archaeological sites that support the coastal migration theory compared to the\u00a0Clovis sites; there may be more but, due to rising sea levels in the intervening millennia, the coastline of the Pleistocene era now lies under the Pacific Ocean. Barring breakthroughs in submarine archaeology, further evidence of earlier coastal migration at the source\u00a0is lost to us.<\/p>\nAlthough the two theories might seem to be at odds with each other, most historians and archaeologists now accept that both are probably correct, and that human migration to the Americas occurred over a very long span of time, over land and by sea. It is, however, important to note that conclusive evidence in support of either theory continues to elude us;\u00a0these are still hypotheses <\/strong>only.<\/p>\nWhat is almost certain is that — however they got here — the original human inhabitants of\u00a0the Americas came from Asia. Genetic evidence strongly supports this:\u00a0mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and DNA haplogroups show evidence of multiple migrations from Asia, starting at about 30,000 BPE.[1]<\/sup><\/a> There are two important points to note in this regard:<\/p>\n\n- There is currently\u00a0no conclusive archeological proof of human existence in the Americas before about 20,000 years ago, but\u00a0the DNA evidence points to a considerably earlier period of settlement.<\/li>\n
- There is no genetic indication of migration from Europe or Africa, so the suggestion (which has been around since the late 15th century) that the Aboriginal peoples must have some roots on the other side of the Atlantic is utterly unproven. This point is important\u00a0because for\u00a0hundreds of years after the arrival of Europeans, efforts were made to explain the presence of Aboriginal people as the “Lost Tribes of Israel,” wayward Welshmen, or some other European offshoot. DNA studies have exploded this thesis: not one\u00a0study has shown conclusive proof of European genetic markers among the Native American population before 1492.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
<\/a>Figure 2.6 World map of human migrations based on studies of mitochondrial (matrilinear) DNA. Dashed lines are hypothetical migrations. Numbers represent thousand years before present (BPE). The blue line represents area covered in ice or tundra during the last great ice age. The letters are the mitochondrial DNA haplogroups (pure motherly lineages); haplogroups can be used to define genetic populations and are often geographically oriented.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nIndigenous people throughout the Western Hemisphere talk of their origins\u00a0in oral histories, stories, and myths that link them intimately to the places they inhabit. The land, the stories commonly assert, was made for \u201cthe people,\u201d and they were made to inhabit the land. Every group has an origin story, and they vary widely while having elements of consistency. Sometimes, groups have multiple origin stories that tell differing versions of creation and the founding of the group. Origin stories often begin with a \u201cFirst Person\u201d (or First Peoples), a mythical man or woman who founded the group. These First People often are created from, or emerge from, the natural world itself. For example, the first Iroquois and Wendat\/Huron fell from the sky. An elderly couple of great virtue survive various trials to give birth to the peoples of the Earth, according to the Mi’kmaq. Animals play important roles in these stories as well. In the creation story of the Haida, Raven arranges things nicely and then releases the first humans from a clamshell; the Cree tell of the Earth mother’s offspring\/agent Wisakedjak (a shape-changing and benign trickster whose name is widely mispronounced as\u00a0“Whiskey-Jack”) who\u00a0peoples the world. And there are stories that involve a singular creator, such as the Blackfoot figure\u00a0Napi, who moulds the world and everything in it from a lump of mud.\u00a0The oral traditions of the Lenape\/Delaware and Iroquoian peoples, along with records from the Anishinaabe Midewiwin scrolls, refer to \u201cTurtle Island,\u201d a useful convergence of origin tales that has acquired broad acceptance among Aboriginal peoples since the 1970s.<\/p>\n
These origin stories encapsulated and shaped the worldview of each group, establishing their people\u2019s purpose in this world as well as their relationship to the spirits\u00a0and the world around them. In other words, origin stories are key to establishing a group identity and a deep connection with the region the people inhabit. It is also the case that these stories are invoked by Aboriginal peoples as sufficient to their needs as regards history. Whether ancient peoples crossed Beringia or paddled in proto-kayaks along the west coast is perhaps interesting but no more proven and demonstrable than an allegory of cultural birth on an island of mud.<\/p>\n
The Paleo-Indian Period<\/h2>\n
The time between the arrival of\u00a0humans in\u00a0the Americas until 10000-9000 years BPE is known as the Paleo-Indian<\/strong> period. During this time, humans spread throughout the Western Hemisphere, supporting themselves with similar subsistence patterns and technologies. Paleo-Indians were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They moved as frequently as once or twice a week, hunting the big game of the Paleolithic<\/strong>: the megafauna. These included now-extinct creatures such as\u00a0the mammoth, mastodon, short-faced bear, enormous versions of the\u00a0modern-day sloth, the very muscular dire wolf, and upsized editions of moose and beaver.<\/p>\nPaleo-Indian technology included knapped, or chipped, stone tools such as scrapers, knives, and projectile points, such as the Clovis point. These were made from a variety of materials including bone and antler, obsidian, quartz, chert, and flint. Throughout the Paleo-Indian era, the spear was the most common weapon. At first, humans used spears as thrusting weapons, which\u00a0required very close engagement\u00a0between the hunter and game, a dangerous prospect when dealing with giant prey and predators. Sometime during the Paleo-Indian era, humans developed new kinds of technology, including a lighter throwing spear and an implement to propel this spear much farther: the atlatl. The atlatl, or spear thrower, was one of the most important items in the late Paleo-Indian tool kit. It was a long, thin piece of wood with a notch at the end. This notch was designed to receive the end of a spear or dart. The atlatl acted as an extension of the throwing arm, enabling the spear thrower to greatly increase the velocity\u00a0and range of the cast.<\/p>\n
Paleo-Indians probably lived in groups that anthropologists call bands, small groups of related individuals, typically no bigger than 100 to 150 people. This setup allowed for a simple leadership structure, probably with one individual at the head of the group. It also allowed for easy mobility, and\u00a0hunter-gatherers such as Paleo-Indians lived with only transportable and reproducible possessions. One of the greatest problems of living in such a small group, however, was finding a suitable mate. Anthropologists think\u00a0that regional Paleo-Indian bands\u00a0came together yearly in the summer months to celebrate religious rituals, pass along\u00a0news, and exchange young women and men\u00a0to ensure genetic diversity among their groups.<\/p>\n
The Archaic and Woodland Periods<\/h2>\n
From 10000 to 9000 BPE, Earth\u2019s climate began to warm, and the North American environment changed. A warming world created opportunities for plants to thrive and diversify; it also created large bodies of water as glaciers and ice caps melted.\u00a0Over the next 6,000 to 7,000 years, native cultures developed and diversified during the Archaic<\/strong> and the Woodland periods<\/strong>, 10000-3000 BPE and 3000-1000 BPE\u00a0respectively.<\/p>\nPaleo-Indians adapted to the world around them, learning to rely more on a diet rich in plant materials. For reasons as yet unknown, megafauna began to die out, and Aboriginal people had to rely more on bison and other relatively smaller game animals for meat. It was near the start of\u00a0this period, around 9000\u00a0to\u00a07000 BPE, that West Coast societies started\u00a0organizing\u00a0themselves around salmon fishing.\u00a0The\u00a0Nuu-chah-nulth\u00a0of\u00a0Vancouver Island, for example,\u00a0began whaling with advanced long spears.<\/p>\n
The\u00a0Maritime Archaic<\/strong>\u00a0is another\u00a0expression\u00a0of North America’s\u00a0Archaic\u00a0culture of sea-mammal hunters in the\u00a0subarctic. They prospered from approximately 7000\u00a0BCE\u00a0to\u00a01500\u00a0BCE (9,000-3,500 years ago) along the\u00a0Atlantic coast\u00a0of North America.\u00a0Their settlements included\u00a0longhouses<\/strong>\u00a0and boat-topped temporary or seasonal houses. They engaged in long-distance trade, using as currency white\u00a0chert, a rock quarried from northern Labrador to Maine.<\/p>\nIt was, as well, during the Archaic and Woodland periods that\u00a0the peoples of the Americas also began to domesticate plants, leading\u00a0to one of the most important transformations in human history: the development of agriculture.\u00a0The Archaic\u00a0agricultural revolution<\/strong>\u00a0got underway in Mesoamerica\u00a0(the area between Central Mexico and Costa Rica) and in coastal Peru by the Caral-Supe (also called Norte Chico) civilization. In Oaxaca, Mexico, people tended squash vines\u00a0in order to use the hard fruit\u00a0as containers. Eventually, more tender forms of squash became a food source. Following the domestication of beans, around 6000 BPE, Mesoamerican peoples became more sedentary. Finally, maize<\/strong> (or corn) was domesticated sometime around 5500 BPE. Over thousands of years, the tiny teosinte<\/strong> seed pod, measuring about four centimetres long, was transformed though cultivation into much larger, nutritionally rich ears of corn.<\/p>\nThe domestication of maize completed the Mesoamerican triad<\/strong>: corn, beans, and squash. The “three sisters” provided an ideal diet. Aboriginal\u00a0agriculturalists all over the hemisphere grew these crops\u00a0as their principal foods until many years after European contact. This combination of plants proved ideal as they supported one another in growth. The corn grew tall and provided a \u201cpole\u201d for the beans to grow up and around, and the large squash leaves provided shade that retained moisture and inhibited the growth of weeds. As well, beans, which are \u201cnitrogen fixers,\u201d returned\u00a0nitrogen back into the soil that the corn crops stripped out during growth.<\/p>\n<\/a>Figure 2.7 Teosinte, the ancestor of corn, is shown on the left. In the middle is a teosinte-maize hybrid. Modern corn is on the right. [Long Description]<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\nIt was a diet\u00a0that served the Mayan civilization exceedingly well. Agricultural societies, where they are successful, witness significant population growth and a degree of urbanization. The farming societies of Mesoamerica produced some of the largest and most elaborate city states in the Americas, comparable to European, African, and Asian civilizations in many respects. Architectural styles were elaborate, city layouts were complex and aesthetically stunning, and artistic and scientific knowledge was peerless, especially in the field of\u00a0astronomy.<\/p>\n
Further,\u00a0from about 200\u00a0to\u00a0900 CE the Mayan civilization crested on the strength of an\u00a0infrastructure of priesthoods that was the underpinning of the whole culture. Although the Mayan Empire declined sharply in the eighth and ninth centuries CE, the Aztec Triple Alliance followed with another,\u00a0more militarized,\u00a0iteration of Mesoamerican power from the 1300s to the 1500s.\u00a0The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was, in the late 1400s, one of the largest cities on the planet and possibly the most beautiful, a fact that tells us a great deal about the administrative, creative, technological, and cultural sophistication of these pre-contact civilizations.<\/p>\n
Agricultural knowledge and techniques spread from Mesoamerica throughout the temperate parts of the Western Hemisphere in a process called diffusion<\/strong>. Although corn and beans probably came from Mesoamerica,\u00a0other peoples throughout\u00a0North America\u00a0contributed to the body of agricultural knowledge and accomplishment across the continent.<\/p>\nLess successful was the\u00a0domestication of animals. There weren’t a lot of suitable species available for experiments in domesticated rearing, although turkeys and dogs were notable exceptions. Horses, which may have originated in the Americas, disappeared along with the megafauna some 8,000 years ago. Mountain goats and bighorn sheep are fiercely recalcitrant creatures and almost impossible to contain, let alone domesticate. There was no equivalent of the African cattle to turn into a placid source of milk, meat, and hides.\u00a0Most significantly, perhaps, there were no pigs or even boars to pen up and dine on.<\/p>\n
The ramifications of having few domestic animals was significant to the history of Aboriginal peoples.\u00a0The absence of large draught animals meant that land had to be cleared and prepared by human energy alone.\u00a0Soil exhaustion could\u00a0be postponed to\u00a0some degree by\u00a0composting or using fallow field practices, but Aboriginal farmers lacked access to the sort of fertilizers that\u00a0cattle- and chicken-rearing peoples could exploit. Turkeys, which were domesticated, have the advantage of size and ease of capture, but they do not produce as many eggs and thus offspring as prodigiously as chickens. The inability to secure a household source of protein\u00a0meant that Aboriginal diets necessarily relied\u00a0more heavily on wild game and fish than was the case in much of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This resulted in\u00a0a more nomadic or semi-nomadic life for many societies, and that constraint worked against\u00a0large-scale and concentrated populations.\u00a0Even the farming communities\u00a0were obliged to augment their agrarian economy with wild meat and fish, which is much more time-consuming than slaughtering hogs. Further, the lack of\u00a0dairy animals precluded women from\u00a0weaning their\u00a0infants onto cow,\u00a0goat, or sheep milk, which\u00a0meant that Aboriginal infants were breastfed longer, which in turn\u00a0limited population fertility. Finally, the absence of domesticated animals meant that Aboriginal peoples were not exposed to cross-species infections and epidemics. For 10,000\u00a0years or so\u00a0this proved to be beneficial, but after 1492\u00a0it was\u00a0disastrous, the reasons for which are explored in Chapter 5<\/a>.<\/p>\n\nKey Points<\/h2>\n\n- Two theories currently explain the arrival of humans in the Americas: the Bering Strait land bridge theory and the coastal migration theory.<\/li>\n
- The timing of early human occupation of the Americas is uncertain and archaeological evidence keeps pushing back the arrival dates.<\/li>\n
- Aboriginal peoples’ traditions point to occupation of “Turtle Island” since time immemorial.<\/li>\n
- Agricultural societies appeared about\u00a06000 BPE\u00a0and complex communities arose throughout Mesoamerica, spreading into the interior of North America.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
Attributions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.5<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.<\/p>\nFigure 2.6<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nFigure 2.7<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>\n
- Jason A. Eshleman, Ripan S. Malhi, and David Glenn Smith, \u201cMitochondrial DNA Studies of Native Americans: Conceptions and Misconceptions of the Population Prehistory of the Americas,\u201d Evolutionary Anthropology<\/em> 12 (2003): 7-18. ↵<\/a><\/li><\/ol><\/div>","protected":false},"author":90,"menu_order":3,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":"cc-by-nc-sa"},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[65],"class_list":["post-6377","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","license-cc-by-nc-sa"],"part":6367,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/90"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6740,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/revisions\/6740"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/6367"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=6377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"""\"](\"http:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2015\/01\/Beringia_land_bridge-noaagov.gif\")
<\/a> Figure 2.6 World map of human migrations based on studies of mitochondrial (matrilinear) DNA. Dashed lines are hypothetical migrations. Numbers represent thousand years before present (BPE). The blue line represents area covered in ice or tundra during the last great ice age. The letters are the mitochondrial DNA haplogroups (pure motherly lineages); haplogroups can be used to define genetic populations and are often geographically oriented.[\/caption]\n\nIndigenous people throughout the Western Hemisphere talk of their origins\u00a0in oral histories, stories, and myths that link them intimately to the places they inhabit. The land, the stories commonly assert, was made for \u201cthe people,\u201d and they were made to inhabit the land. Every group has an origin story, and they vary widely while having elements of consistency. Sometimes, groups have multiple origin stories that tell differing versions of creation and the founding of the group. Origin stories often begin with a \u201cFirst Person\u201d (or First Peoples), a mythical man or woman who founded the group. These First People often are created from, or emerge from, the natural world itself. For example, the first Iroquois and Wendat\/Huron fell from the sky. An elderly couple of great virtue survive various trials to give birth to the peoples of the Earth, according to the Mi'kmaq. Animals play important roles in these stories as well. In the creation story of the Haida, Raven arranges things nicely and then releases the first humans from a clamshell; the Cree tell of the Earth mother's offspring\/agent Wisakedjak (a shape-changing and benign trickster whose name is widely mispronounced as\u00a0\"Whiskey-Jack\") who\u00a0peoples the world. And there are stories that involve a singular creator, such as the Blackfoot figure\u00a0Napi, who moulds the world and everything in it from a lump of mud.\u00a0The oral traditions of the Lenape\/Delaware and Iroquoian peoples, along with records from the Anishinaabe Midewiwin scrolls, refer to \u201cTurtle Island,\u201d a useful convergence of origin tales that has acquired broad acceptance among Aboriginal peoples since the 1970s.\n\nThese origin stories encapsulated and shaped the worldview of each group, establishing their people\u2019s purpose in this world as well as their relationship to the spirits\u00a0and the world around them. In other words, origin stories are key to establishing a group identity and a deep connection with the region the people inhabit. It is also the case that these stories are invoked by Aboriginal peoples as sufficient to their needs as regards history. Whether ancient peoples crossed Beringia or paddled in proto-kayaks along the west coast is perhaps interesting but no more proven and demonstrable than an allegory of cultural birth on an island of mud.\nThe Paleo-Indian Period<\/h2>\nThe time between the arrival of\u00a0humans in\u00a0the Americas until 10000-9000 years BPE is known as the Paleo-Indian<\/strong> period. During this time, humans spread throughout the Western Hemisphere, supporting themselves with similar subsistence patterns and technologies. Paleo-Indians were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They moved as frequently as once or twice a week, hunting the big game of the Paleolithic<\/strong>: the megafauna. These included now-extinct creatures such as\u00a0the mammoth, mastodon, short-faced bear, enormous versions of the\u00a0modern-day sloth, the very muscular dire wolf, and upsized editions of moose and beaver.\n\nPaleo-Indian technology included knapped, or chipped, stone tools such as scrapers, knives, and projectile points, such as the Clovis point. These were made from a variety of materials including bone and antler, obsidian, quartz, chert, and flint. Throughout the Paleo-Indian era, the spear was the most common weapon. At first, humans used spears as thrusting weapons, which\u00a0required very close engagement\u00a0between the hunter and game, a dangerous prospect when dealing with giant prey and predators. Sometime during the Paleo-Indian era, humans developed new kinds of technology, including a lighter throwing spear and an implement to propel this spear much farther: the atlatl. The atlatl, or spear thrower, was one of the most important items in the late Paleo-Indian tool kit. It was a long, thin piece of wood with a notch at the end. This notch was designed to receive the end of a spear or dart. The atlatl acted as an extension of the throwing arm, enabling the spear thrower to greatly increase the velocity\u00a0and range of the cast.\n\nPaleo-Indians probably lived in groups that anthropologists call bands, small groups of related individuals, typically no bigger than 100 to 150 people. This setup allowed for a simple leadership structure, probably with one individual at the head of the group. It also allowed for easy mobility, and\u00a0hunter-gatherers such as Paleo-Indians lived with only transportable and reproducible possessions. One of the greatest problems of living in such a small group, however, was finding a suitable mate. Anthropologists think\u00a0that regional Paleo-Indian bands\u00a0came together yearly in the summer months to celebrate religious rituals, pass along\u00a0news, and exchange young women and men\u00a0to ensure genetic diversity among their groups.\nThe Archaic and Woodland Periods<\/h2>\nFrom 10000 to 9000 BPE, Earth\u2019s climate began to warm, and the North American environment changed. A warming world created opportunities for plants to thrive and diversify; it also created large bodies of water as glaciers and ice caps melted.\u00a0Over the next 6,000 to 7,000 years, native cultures developed and diversified during the Archaic<\/strong> and the Woodland periods<\/strong>, 10000-3000 BPE and 3000-1000 BPE\u00a0respectively.\n\nPaleo-Indians adapted to the world around them, learning to rely more on a diet rich in plant materials. For reasons as yet unknown, megafauna began to die out, and Aboriginal people had to rely more on bison and other relatively smaller game animals for meat. It was near the start of\u00a0this period, around 9000\u00a0to\u00a07000 BPE, that West Coast societies started\u00a0organizing\u00a0themselves around salmon fishing.\u00a0The\u00a0Nuu-chah-nulth\u00a0of\u00a0Vancouver Island, for example,\u00a0began whaling with advanced long spears.\n\nThe\u00a0Maritime Archaic<\/strong>\u00a0is another\u00a0expression\u00a0of North America's\u00a0Archaic\u00a0culture of sea-mammal hunters in the\u00a0subarctic. They prospered from approximately 7000\u00a0BCE\u00a0to\u00a01500\u00a0BCE (9,000-3,500 years ago) along the\u00a0Atlantic coast\u00a0of North America.\u00a0Their settlements included\u00a0longhouses<\/strong>\u00a0and boat-topped temporary or seasonal houses. They engaged in long-distance trade, using as currency white\u00a0chert, a rock quarried from northern Labrador to Maine.\n\nIt was, as well, during the Archaic and Woodland periods that\u00a0the peoples of the Americas also began to domesticate plants, leading\u00a0to one of the most important transformations in human history: the development of agriculture.\u00a0The Archaic\u00a0agricultural revolution<\/strong>\u00a0got underway in Mesoamerica\u00a0(the area between Central Mexico and Costa Rica) and in coastal Peru by the Caral-Supe (also called Norte Chico) civilization. In Oaxaca, Mexico, people tended squash vines\u00a0in order to use the hard fruit\u00a0as containers. Eventually, more tender forms of squash became a food source. Following the domestication of beans, around 6000 BPE, Mesoamerican peoples became more sedentary. Finally, maize<\/strong> (or corn) was domesticated sometime around 5500 BPE. Over thousands of years, the tiny teosinte<\/strong> seed pod, measuring about four centimetres long, was transformed though cultivation into much larger, nutritionally rich ears of corn.\n\nThe domestication of maize completed the Mesoamerican triad<\/strong>: corn, beans, and squash. The \"three sisters\" provided an ideal diet. Aboriginal\u00a0agriculturalists all over the hemisphere grew these crops\u00a0as their principal foods until many years after European contact. This combination of plants proved ideal as they supported one another in growth. The corn grew tall and provided a \u201cpole\u201d for the beans to grow up and around, and the large squash leaves provided shade that retained moisture and inhibited the growth of weeds. As well, beans, which are \u201cnitrogen fixers,\u201d returned\u00a0nitrogen back into the soil that the corn crops stripped out during growth.\n\n[caption align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"263\"]<\/a> Figure 2.7 Teosinte, the ancestor of corn, is shown on the left. In the middle is a teosinte-maize hybrid. Modern corn is on the right. [Long Description]<\/a>[\/caption]It was a diet\u00a0that served the Mayan civilization exceedingly well. Agricultural societies, where they are successful, witness significant population growth and a degree of urbanization. The farming societies of Mesoamerica produced some of the largest and most elaborate city states in the Americas, comparable to European, African, and Asian civilizations in many respects. Architectural styles were elaborate, city layouts were complex and aesthetically stunning, and artistic and scientific knowledge was peerless, especially in the field of\u00a0astronomy.\n\nFurther,\u00a0from about 200\u00a0to\u00a0900 CE the Mayan civilization crested on the strength of an\u00a0infrastructure of priesthoods that was the underpinning of the whole culture. Although the Mayan Empire declined sharply in the eighth and ninth centuries CE, the Aztec Triple Alliance followed with another,\u00a0more militarized,\u00a0iteration of Mesoamerican power from the 1300s to the 1500s.\u00a0The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was, in the late 1400s, one of the largest cities on the planet and possibly the most beautiful, a fact that tells us a great deal about the administrative, creative, technological, and cultural sophistication of these pre-contact civilizations.\n\nAgricultural knowledge and techniques spread from Mesoamerica throughout the temperate parts of the Western Hemisphere in a process called diffusion<\/strong>. Although corn and beans probably came from Mesoamerica,\u00a0other peoples throughout\u00a0North America\u00a0contributed to the body of agricultural knowledge and accomplishment across the continent.\n\nLess successful was the\u00a0domestication of animals. There weren't a lot of suitable species available for experiments in domesticated rearing, although turkeys and dogs were notable exceptions. Horses, which may have originated in the Americas, disappeared along with the megafauna some 8,000 years ago. Mountain goats and bighorn sheep are fiercely recalcitrant creatures and almost impossible to contain, let alone domesticate. There was no equivalent of the African cattle to turn into a placid source of milk, meat, and hides.\u00a0Most significantly, perhaps, there were no pigs or even boars to pen up and dine on.\n\nThe ramifications of having few domestic animals was significant to the history of Aboriginal peoples.\u00a0The absence of large draught animals meant that land had to be cleared and prepared by human energy alone.\u00a0Soil exhaustion could\u00a0be postponed to\u00a0some degree by\u00a0composting or using fallow field practices, but Aboriginal farmers lacked access to the sort of fertilizers that\u00a0cattle- and chicken-rearing peoples could exploit. Turkeys, which were domesticated, have the advantage of size and ease of capture, but they do not produce as many eggs and thus offspring as prodigiously as chickens. The inability to secure a household source of protein\u00a0meant that Aboriginal diets necessarily relied\u00a0more heavily on wild game and fish than was the case in much of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This resulted in\u00a0a more nomadic or semi-nomadic life for many societies, and that constraint worked against\u00a0large-scale and concentrated populations.\u00a0Even the farming communities\u00a0were obliged to augment their agrarian economy with wild meat and fish, which is much more time-consuming than slaughtering hogs. Further, the lack of\u00a0dairy animals precluded women from\u00a0weaning their\u00a0infants onto cow,\u00a0goat, or sheep milk, which\u00a0meant that Aboriginal infants were breastfed longer, which in turn\u00a0limited population fertility. Finally, the absence of domesticated animals meant that Aboriginal peoples were not exposed to cross-species infections and epidemics. For 10,000\u00a0years or so\u00a0this proved to be beneficial, but after 1492\u00a0it was\u00a0disastrous, the reasons for which are explored in Chapter 5<\/a>.\n\nKey Points<\/h2>\n- Two theories currently explain the arrival of humans in the Americas: the Bering Strait land bridge theory and the coastal migration theory.<\/li>\n \t
- The timing of early human occupation of the Americas is uncertain and archaeological evidence keeps pushing back the arrival dates.<\/li>\n \t
- Aboriginal peoples' traditions point to occupation of \"Turtle Island\" since time immemorial.<\/li>\n \t
- Agricultural societies appeared about\u00a06000 BPE\u00a0and complex communities arose throughout Mesoamerica, spreading into the interior of North America.<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n
Attributions<\/h2>\nFigure 2.5<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.\n\nFigure 2.6<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.\n\nFigure 2.7<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.\n\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>","rendered":"The telling of\u00a0Aboriginal history in Canada often begins with a discussion of human migration routes into the Americas, which reflects the long-standing misperception that was held by Europeans that Aboriginal societies were primitive, usually migratory, and unlikely to have been in the Americas for very long before the 15th century. This misperception, of course, served European empires in the Americas very well because it justified the\u00a0dispossession of native peoples from their lands.<\/p>\n
Twentieth-century historians and archaeologists worked hard to remedy this situation and to magnify the many Aboriginal voices that said, in chorus, that they had been\u00a0here “since time immemorial.”\n<\/p>\n
Occupying the Americas<\/h2>\n
Human occupation of the Americas is itself a complicated tale. However, there is general agreement among scholars that modern hominids were hereabouts some 12,000 to\u00a014,000 years before the Present Era (BPE).<\/p>\n
\nDating Systems<\/h4>\n
There are several dating systems and conventions used by historians. The one most widely used in Europe and the Western Hemisphere is based on the Christian dating system of marking years based on\u00a0the year of Christ’s birth: BC, meaning “before Christ” and AD,<\/strong> meaning anno domini<\/em>, or “in the year of our Lord.”<\/p>\nAnother is\u00a0before the Present Era (BPE), <\/strong>which arose from the use of radiocarbon dating and uses\u00a0January 1, 1950, as its baseline. Therefore, 10,000 years BPE equals 10,000 years before New Year’s Day, 1950.<\/p>\nRecently the\u00a0Common Era (CE)<\/strong> and before the Common Era (BCE)\u00a0<\/strong>have\u00a0become more widely used.\u00a0These two terms\u00a0align exactly with the Christian system, dividing time approximately 2,000 years ago.<\/p>\nSome Christians object to the BCE\/CE system as an attempt to secularize the use of BC and AD; some non-Christians retort that BCE\/CE is just the Western and Christian system in disguise, imposing itself on other cultures for further generations. This debate makes it clear that\u00a0dating is neither scientific nor especially logical — it is cultural.<\/p>\n
It is perhaps worth mentioning that the most precise calendrical system in the Western Hemisphere originated\u00a0with the Zapotec and Olmec societies and was subsequently refined\u00a0by the Mayan culture. It consists in part of a\u00a0long count that begins on\u00a0August 11, 3114, BCE.<\/p>\n
For convenience, BPE is used in this text\u00a0when referring to events occurring more than 4,000 years ago; it is most commonly used by archaeologists in conjunction with radiocarbon dating —\u00a0a means of determining the age of organic materials by measuring the amount of radioactive decay of carbon-14 in the material. Otherwise,\u00a0BCE and\u00a0CE are used\u00a0as\u00a0they are most likely to\u00a0correlate with what you will read elsewhere.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Scientists and archaeologists hold several theories regarding the origins of Aboriginal peoples\u00a0in the Americas. By far the oldest and most widely accepted of these theories is the Bering land bridge<\/strong> migration model. This theory posits that during the last ice age (approximately 50,000-10,000 BPE), humans were able to migrate from Siberia to Alaska over land. Evidence suggests strongly that for as many as 100,000 years, sea levels were much lower than they currently are and the Bering Strait — the body of water that separates Siberia from Alaska — was an open plain of land and glaciers (which scholars call\u00a0Beringia<\/strong>). During a period of several millennia,\u00a0about 10,000-14,000 BPE, as many as four distinct migrations are thought to have occurred over the land bridge. People migrated from Siberia, Eurasia, and coastal Asia, following the megafauna of the Pleistocene (to about 12,000-11,000 BPE).<\/p>\n<\/a>Figure 2.5 The separation of Siberia from Alaska about 10,000 years ago can be seen in this short GIF from the American National Climatic Data Center. (Click on the map if using web version of book.)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nThe greatest supporting evidence of the Bering land bridge\u00a0theory is the extensive homogeneity of the North American Clovis<\/strong> culture, so named for the archaeological site in New Mexico where\u00a0it was first identified. The Clovis people were long considered to be the first to inhabit the Americas. Archaeologists theorize that the Clovis came over the land bridge and down a glacier pass to the east of the Rocky Mountains sometime between 12,000 and 11,000 BCE, eventually spreading through much of North America and into South America. Everywhere they went, Clovis people littered their camps and settlements with stone tools and weapons that bear some trademark features and suggest close cultural links.<\/p>\nA second theory focuses on Pacific sea travel. The coastal migration theory<\/strong>\u00a0suggests that some people arrived in the Americas by\u00a0following the coast of Asia and Beringia, down the western shore\u00a0of North America, all the way to South America. The coastal migration theory is bolstered by the fact that the rich marine environment would have supported maritime people well. Travel by boat would also be much faster and easier than the route overland, thus allowing people to spread throughout the Americas much more quickly. The most compelling evidence supporting this\u00a0model\u00a0comes from archaeological sites in South America that predate the North American Clovis sites. Sites like Monte Verde in Chile date to 14,800-12,500 BCE; Taima-Taima in western Venezuela dates to 13,000 BCE. These two sites\u00a0contradict the notion of \u201cClovis first.\u201d However, there are far fewer archaeological sites that support the coastal migration theory compared to the\u00a0Clovis sites; there may be more but, due to rising sea levels in the intervening millennia, the coastline of the Pleistocene era now lies under the Pacific Ocean. Barring breakthroughs in submarine archaeology, further evidence of earlier coastal migration at the source\u00a0is lost to us.<\/p>\nAlthough the two theories might seem to be at odds with each other, most historians and archaeologists now accept that both are probably correct, and that human migration to the Americas occurred over a very long span of time, over land and by sea. It is, however, important to note that conclusive evidence in support of either theory continues to elude us;\u00a0these are still hypotheses <\/strong>only.<\/p>\nWhat is almost certain is that — however they got here — the original human inhabitants of\u00a0the Americas came from Asia. Genetic evidence strongly supports this:\u00a0mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and DNA haplogroups show evidence of multiple migrations from Asia, starting at about 30,000 BPE.[1]<\/sup><\/a> There are two important points to note in this regard:<\/p>\n\n- There is currently\u00a0no conclusive archeological proof of human existence in the Americas before about 20,000 years ago, but\u00a0the DNA evidence points to a considerably earlier period of settlement.<\/li>\n
- There is no genetic indication of migration from Europe or Africa, so the suggestion (which has been around since the late 15th century) that the Aboriginal peoples must have some roots on the other side of the Atlantic is utterly unproven. This point is important\u00a0because for\u00a0hundreds of years after the arrival of Europeans, efforts were made to explain the presence of Aboriginal people as the “Lost Tribes of Israel,” wayward Welshmen, or some other European offshoot. DNA studies have exploded this thesis: not one\u00a0study has shown conclusive proof of European genetic markers among the Native American population before 1492.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
<\/a>Figure 2.6 World map of human migrations based on studies of mitochondrial (matrilinear) DNA. Dashed lines are hypothetical migrations. Numbers represent thousand years before present (BPE). The blue line represents area covered in ice or tundra during the last great ice age. The letters are the mitochondrial DNA haplogroups (pure motherly lineages); haplogroups can be used to define genetic populations and are often geographically oriented.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nIndigenous people throughout the Western Hemisphere talk of their origins\u00a0in oral histories, stories, and myths that link them intimately to the places they inhabit. The land, the stories commonly assert, was made for \u201cthe people,\u201d and they were made to inhabit the land. Every group has an origin story, and they vary widely while having elements of consistency. Sometimes, groups have multiple origin stories that tell differing versions of creation and the founding of the group. Origin stories often begin with a \u201cFirst Person\u201d (or First Peoples), a mythical man or woman who founded the group. These First People often are created from, or emerge from, the natural world itself. For example, the first Iroquois and Wendat\/Huron fell from the sky. An elderly couple of great virtue survive various trials to give birth to the peoples of the Earth, according to the Mi’kmaq. Animals play important roles in these stories as well. In the creation story of the Haida, Raven arranges things nicely and then releases the first humans from a clamshell; the Cree tell of the Earth mother’s offspring\/agent Wisakedjak (a shape-changing and benign trickster whose name is widely mispronounced as\u00a0“Whiskey-Jack”) who\u00a0peoples the world. And there are stories that involve a singular creator, such as the Blackfoot figure\u00a0Napi, who moulds the world and everything in it from a lump of mud.\u00a0The oral traditions of the Lenape\/Delaware and Iroquoian peoples, along with records from the Anishinaabe Midewiwin scrolls, refer to \u201cTurtle Island,\u201d a useful convergence of origin tales that has acquired broad acceptance among Aboriginal peoples since the 1970s.<\/p>\n
These origin stories encapsulated and shaped the worldview of each group, establishing their people\u2019s purpose in this world as well as their relationship to the spirits\u00a0and the world around them. In other words, origin stories are key to establishing a group identity and a deep connection with the region the people inhabit. It is also the case that these stories are invoked by Aboriginal peoples as sufficient to their needs as regards history. Whether ancient peoples crossed Beringia or paddled in proto-kayaks along the west coast is perhaps interesting but no more proven and demonstrable than an allegory of cultural birth on an island of mud.<\/p>\n
The Paleo-Indian Period<\/h2>\n
The time between the arrival of\u00a0humans in\u00a0the Americas until 10000-9000 years BPE is known as the Paleo-Indian<\/strong> period. During this time, humans spread throughout the Western Hemisphere, supporting themselves with similar subsistence patterns and technologies. Paleo-Indians were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They moved as frequently as once or twice a week, hunting the big game of the Paleolithic<\/strong>: the megafauna. These included now-extinct creatures such as\u00a0the mammoth, mastodon, short-faced bear, enormous versions of the\u00a0modern-day sloth, the very muscular dire wolf, and upsized editions of moose and beaver.<\/p>\nPaleo-Indian technology included knapped, or chipped, stone tools such as scrapers, knives, and projectile points, such as the Clovis point. These were made from a variety of materials including bone and antler, obsidian, quartz, chert, and flint. Throughout the Paleo-Indian era, the spear was the most common weapon. At first, humans used spears as thrusting weapons, which\u00a0required very close engagement\u00a0between the hunter and game, a dangerous prospect when dealing with giant prey and predators. Sometime during the Paleo-Indian era, humans developed new kinds of technology, including a lighter throwing spear and an implement to propel this spear much farther: the atlatl. The atlatl, or spear thrower, was one of the most important items in the late Paleo-Indian tool kit. It was a long, thin piece of wood with a notch at the end. This notch was designed to receive the end of a spear or dart. The atlatl acted as an extension of the throwing arm, enabling the spear thrower to greatly increase the velocity\u00a0and range of the cast.<\/p>\n
Paleo-Indians probably lived in groups that anthropologists call bands, small groups of related individuals, typically no bigger than 100 to 150 people. This setup allowed for a simple leadership structure, probably with one individual at the head of the group. It also allowed for easy mobility, and\u00a0hunter-gatherers such as Paleo-Indians lived with only transportable and reproducible possessions. One of the greatest problems of living in such a small group, however, was finding a suitable mate. Anthropologists think\u00a0that regional Paleo-Indian bands\u00a0came together yearly in the summer months to celebrate religious rituals, pass along\u00a0news, and exchange young women and men\u00a0to ensure genetic diversity among their groups.<\/p>\n
The Archaic and Woodland Periods<\/h2>\n
From 10000 to 9000 BPE, Earth\u2019s climate began to warm, and the North American environment changed. A warming world created opportunities for plants to thrive and diversify; it also created large bodies of water as glaciers and ice caps melted.\u00a0Over the next 6,000 to 7,000 years, native cultures developed and diversified during the Archaic<\/strong> and the Woodland periods<\/strong>, 10000-3000 BPE and 3000-1000 BPE\u00a0respectively.<\/p>\nPaleo-Indians adapted to the world around them, learning to rely more on a diet rich in plant materials. For reasons as yet unknown, megafauna began to die out, and Aboriginal people had to rely more on bison and other relatively smaller game animals for meat. It was near the start of\u00a0this period, around 9000\u00a0to\u00a07000 BPE, that West Coast societies started\u00a0organizing\u00a0themselves around salmon fishing.\u00a0The\u00a0Nuu-chah-nulth\u00a0of\u00a0Vancouver Island, for example,\u00a0began whaling with advanced long spears.<\/p>\n
The\u00a0Maritime Archaic<\/strong>\u00a0is another\u00a0expression\u00a0of North America’s\u00a0Archaic\u00a0culture of sea-mammal hunters in the\u00a0subarctic. They prospered from approximately 7000\u00a0BCE\u00a0to\u00a01500\u00a0BCE (9,000-3,500 years ago) along the\u00a0Atlantic coast\u00a0of North America.\u00a0Their settlements included\u00a0longhouses<\/strong>\u00a0and boat-topped temporary or seasonal houses. They engaged in long-distance trade, using as currency white\u00a0chert, a rock quarried from northern Labrador to Maine.<\/p>\nIt was, as well, during the Archaic and Woodland periods that\u00a0the peoples of the Americas also began to domesticate plants, leading\u00a0to one of the most important transformations in human history: the development of agriculture.\u00a0The Archaic\u00a0agricultural revolution<\/strong>\u00a0got underway in Mesoamerica\u00a0(the area between Central Mexico and Costa Rica) and in coastal Peru by the Caral-Supe (also called Norte Chico) civilization. In Oaxaca, Mexico, people tended squash vines\u00a0in order to use the hard fruit\u00a0as containers. Eventually, more tender forms of squash became a food source. Following the domestication of beans, around 6000 BPE, Mesoamerican peoples became more sedentary. Finally, maize<\/strong> (or corn) was domesticated sometime around 5500 BPE. Over thousands of years, the tiny teosinte<\/strong> seed pod, measuring about four centimetres long, was transformed though cultivation into much larger, nutritionally rich ears of corn.<\/p>\nThe domestication of maize completed the Mesoamerican triad<\/strong>: corn, beans, and squash. The “three sisters” provided an ideal diet. Aboriginal\u00a0agriculturalists all over the hemisphere grew these crops\u00a0as their principal foods until many years after European contact. This combination of plants proved ideal as they supported one another in growth. The corn grew tall and provided a \u201cpole\u201d for the beans to grow up and around, and the large squash leaves provided shade that retained moisture and inhibited the growth of weeds. As well, beans, which are \u201cnitrogen fixers,\u201d returned\u00a0nitrogen back into the soil that the corn crops stripped out during growth.<\/p>\n<\/a>Figure 2.7 Teosinte, the ancestor of corn, is shown on the left. In the middle is a teosinte-maize hybrid. Modern corn is on the right. [Long Description]<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\nIt was a diet\u00a0that served the Mayan civilization exceedingly well. Agricultural societies, where they are successful, witness significant population growth and a degree of urbanization. The farming societies of Mesoamerica produced some of the largest and most elaborate city states in the Americas, comparable to European, African, and Asian civilizations in many respects. Architectural styles were elaborate, city layouts were complex and aesthetically stunning, and artistic and scientific knowledge was peerless, especially in the field of\u00a0astronomy.<\/p>\n
Further,\u00a0from about 200\u00a0to\u00a0900 CE the Mayan civilization crested on the strength of an\u00a0infrastructure of priesthoods that was the underpinning of the whole culture. Although the Mayan Empire declined sharply in the eighth and ninth centuries CE, the Aztec Triple Alliance followed with another,\u00a0more militarized,\u00a0iteration of Mesoamerican power from the 1300s to the 1500s.\u00a0The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was, in the late 1400s, one of the largest cities on the planet and possibly the most beautiful, a fact that tells us a great deal about the administrative, creative, technological, and cultural sophistication of these pre-contact civilizations.<\/p>\n
Agricultural knowledge and techniques spread from Mesoamerica throughout the temperate parts of the Western Hemisphere in a process called diffusion<\/strong>. Although corn and beans probably came from Mesoamerica,\u00a0other peoples throughout\u00a0North America\u00a0contributed to the body of agricultural knowledge and accomplishment across the continent.<\/p>\nLess successful was the\u00a0domestication of animals. There weren’t a lot of suitable species available for experiments in domesticated rearing, although turkeys and dogs were notable exceptions. Horses, which may have originated in the Americas, disappeared along with the megafauna some 8,000 years ago. Mountain goats and bighorn sheep are fiercely recalcitrant creatures and almost impossible to contain, let alone domesticate. There was no equivalent of the African cattle to turn into a placid source of milk, meat, and hides.\u00a0Most significantly, perhaps, there were no pigs or even boars to pen up and dine on.<\/p>\n
The ramifications of having few domestic animals was significant to the history of Aboriginal peoples.\u00a0The absence of large draught animals meant that land had to be cleared and prepared by human energy alone.\u00a0Soil exhaustion could\u00a0be postponed to\u00a0some degree by\u00a0composting or using fallow field practices, but Aboriginal farmers lacked access to the sort of fertilizers that\u00a0cattle- and chicken-rearing peoples could exploit. Turkeys, which were domesticated, have the advantage of size and ease of capture, but they do not produce as many eggs and thus offspring as prodigiously as chickens. The inability to secure a household source of protein\u00a0meant that Aboriginal diets necessarily relied\u00a0more heavily on wild game and fish than was the case in much of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This resulted in\u00a0a more nomadic or semi-nomadic life for many societies, and that constraint worked against\u00a0large-scale and concentrated populations.\u00a0Even the farming communities\u00a0were obliged to augment their agrarian economy with wild meat and fish, which is much more time-consuming than slaughtering hogs. Further, the lack of\u00a0dairy animals precluded women from\u00a0weaning their\u00a0infants onto cow,\u00a0goat, or sheep milk, which\u00a0meant that Aboriginal infants were breastfed longer, which in turn\u00a0limited population fertility. Finally, the absence of domesticated animals meant that Aboriginal peoples were not exposed to cross-species infections and epidemics. For 10,000\u00a0years or so\u00a0this proved to be beneficial, but after 1492\u00a0it was\u00a0disastrous, the reasons for which are explored in Chapter 5<\/a>.<\/p>\n\nKey Points<\/h2>\n\n- Two theories currently explain the arrival of humans in the Americas: the Bering Strait land bridge theory and the coastal migration theory.<\/li>\n
- The timing of early human occupation of the Americas is uncertain and archaeological evidence keeps pushing back the arrival dates.<\/li>\n
- Aboriginal peoples’ traditions point to occupation of “Turtle Island” since time immemorial.<\/li>\n
- Agricultural societies appeared about\u00a06000 BPE\u00a0and complex communities arose throughout Mesoamerica, spreading into the interior of North America.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
Attributions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.5<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.<\/p>\nFigure 2.6<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nFigure 2.7<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>\n
- Jason A. Eshleman, Ripan S. Malhi, and David Glenn Smith, \u201cMitochondrial DNA Studies of Native Americans: Conceptions and Misconceptions of the Population Prehistory of the Americas,\u201d Evolutionary Anthropology<\/em> 12 (2003): 7-18. ↵<\/a><\/li><\/ol><\/div>","protected":false},"author":90,"menu_order":3,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":"cc-by-nc-sa"},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[65],"class_list":["post-6377","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","license-cc-by-nc-sa"],"part":6367,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/90"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6740,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/revisions\/6740"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/6367"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=6377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
<\/a> Figure 2.7 Teosinte, the ancestor of corn, is shown on the left. In the middle is a teosinte-maize hybrid. Modern corn is on the right. [Long Description]<\/a>[\/caption]It was a diet\u00a0that served the Mayan civilization exceedingly well. Agricultural societies, where they are successful, witness significant population growth and a degree of urbanization. The farming societies of Mesoamerica produced some of the largest and most elaborate city states in the Americas, comparable to European, African, and Asian civilizations in many respects. Architectural styles were elaborate, city layouts were complex and aesthetically stunning, and artistic and scientific knowledge was peerless, especially in the field of\u00a0astronomy.\n\nFurther,\u00a0from about 200\u00a0to\u00a0900 CE the Mayan civilization crested on the strength of an\u00a0infrastructure of priesthoods that was the underpinning of the whole culture. Although the Mayan Empire declined sharply in the eighth and ninth centuries CE, the Aztec Triple Alliance followed with another,\u00a0more militarized,\u00a0iteration of Mesoamerican power from the 1300s to the 1500s.\u00a0The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was, in the late 1400s, one of the largest cities on the planet and possibly the most beautiful, a fact that tells us a great deal about the administrative, creative, technological, and cultural sophistication of these pre-contact civilizations.\n\nAgricultural knowledge and techniques spread from Mesoamerica throughout the temperate parts of the Western Hemisphere in a process called diffusion<\/strong>. Although corn and beans probably came from Mesoamerica,\u00a0other peoples throughout\u00a0North America\u00a0contributed to the body of agricultural knowledge and accomplishment across the continent.\n\nLess successful was the\u00a0domestication of animals. There weren't a lot of suitable species available for experiments in domesticated rearing, although turkeys and dogs were notable exceptions. Horses, which may have originated in the Americas, disappeared along with the megafauna some 8,000 years ago. Mountain goats and bighorn sheep are fiercely recalcitrant creatures and almost impossible to contain, let alone domesticate. There was no equivalent of the African cattle to turn into a placid source of milk, meat, and hides.\u00a0Most significantly, perhaps, there were no pigs or even boars to pen up and dine on.\n\nThe ramifications of having few domestic animals was significant to the history of Aboriginal peoples.\u00a0The absence of large draught animals meant that land had to be cleared and prepared by human energy alone.\u00a0Soil exhaustion could\u00a0be postponed to\u00a0some degree by\u00a0composting or using fallow field practices, but Aboriginal farmers lacked access to the sort of fertilizers that\u00a0cattle- and chicken-rearing peoples could exploit. Turkeys, which were domesticated, have the advantage of size and ease of capture, but they do not produce as many eggs and thus offspring as prodigiously as chickens. The inability to secure a household source of protein\u00a0meant that Aboriginal diets necessarily relied\u00a0more heavily on wild game and fish than was the case in much of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This resulted in\u00a0a more nomadic or semi-nomadic life for many societies, and that constraint worked against\u00a0large-scale and concentrated populations.\u00a0Even the farming communities\u00a0were obliged to augment their agrarian economy with wild meat and fish, which is much more time-consuming than slaughtering hogs. Further, the lack of\u00a0dairy animals precluded women from\u00a0weaning their\u00a0infants onto cow,\u00a0goat, or sheep milk, which\u00a0meant that Aboriginal infants were breastfed longer, which in turn\u00a0limited population fertility. Finally, the absence of domesticated animals meant that Aboriginal peoples were not exposed to cross-species infections and epidemics. For 10,000\u00a0years or so\u00a0this proved to be beneficial, but after 1492\u00a0it was\u00a0disastrous, the reasons for which are explored in Chapter 5<\/a>.\nKey Points<\/h2>\n- Two theories currently explain the arrival of humans in the Americas: the Bering Strait land bridge theory and the coastal migration theory.<\/li>\n \t
- The timing of early human occupation of the Americas is uncertain and archaeological evidence keeps pushing back the arrival dates.<\/li>\n \t
- Aboriginal peoples' traditions point to occupation of \"Turtle Island\" since time immemorial.<\/li>\n \t
- Agricultural societies appeared about\u00a06000 BPE\u00a0and complex communities arose throughout Mesoamerica, spreading into the interior of North America.<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n
Attributions<\/h2>\nFigure 2.5<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.\n\nFigure 2.6<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.\n\nFigure 2.7<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.\n\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>","rendered":"The telling of\u00a0Aboriginal history in Canada often begins with a discussion of human migration routes into the Americas, which reflects the long-standing misperception that was held by Europeans that Aboriginal societies were primitive, usually migratory, and unlikely to have been in the Americas for very long before the 15th century. This misperception, of course, served European empires in the Americas very well because it justified the\u00a0dispossession of native peoples from their lands.<\/p>\n
Twentieth-century historians and archaeologists worked hard to remedy this situation and to magnify the many Aboriginal voices that said, in chorus, that they had been\u00a0here “since time immemorial.”\n<\/p>\n
Occupying the Americas<\/h2>\n
Human occupation of the Americas is itself a complicated tale. However, there is general agreement among scholars that modern hominids were hereabouts some 12,000 to\u00a014,000 years before the Present Era (BPE).<\/p>\n
\nDating Systems<\/h4>\n
There are several dating systems and conventions used by historians. The one most widely used in Europe and the Western Hemisphere is based on the Christian dating system of marking years based on\u00a0the year of Christ’s birth: BC, meaning “before Christ” and AD,<\/strong> meaning anno domini<\/em>, or “in the year of our Lord.”<\/p>\nAnother is\u00a0before the Present Era (BPE), <\/strong>which arose from the use of radiocarbon dating and uses\u00a0January 1, 1950, as its baseline. Therefore, 10,000 years BPE equals 10,000 years before New Year’s Day, 1950.<\/p>\nRecently the\u00a0Common Era (CE)<\/strong> and before the Common Era (BCE)\u00a0<\/strong>have\u00a0become more widely used.\u00a0These two terms\u00a0align exactly with the Christian system, dividing time approximately 2,000 years ago.<\/p>\nSome Christians object to the BCE\/CE system as an attempt to secularize the use of BC and AD; some non-Christians retort that BCE\/CE is just the Western and Christian system in disguise, imposing itself on other cultures for further generations. This debate makes it clear that\u00a0dating is neither scientific nor especially logical — it is cultural.<\/p>\n
It is perhaps worth mentioning that the most precise calendrical system in the Western Hemisphere originated\u00a0with the Zapotec and Olmec societies and was subsequently refined\u00a0by the Mayan culture. It consists in part of a\u00a0long count that begins on\u00a0August 11, 3114, BCE.<\/p>\n
For convenience, BPE is used in this text\u00a0when referring to events occurring more than 4,000 years ago; it is most commonly used by archaeologists in conjunction with radiocarbon dating —\u00a0a means of determining the age of organic materials by measuring the amount of radioactive decay of carbon-14 in the material. Otherwise,\u00a0BCE and\u00a0CE are used\u00a0as\u00a0they are most likely to\u00a0correlate with what you will read elsewhere.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Scientists and archaeologists hold several theories regarding the origins of Aboriginal peoples\u00a0in the Americas. By far the oldest and most widely accepted of these theories is the Bering land bridge<\/strong> migration model. This theory posits that during the last ice age (approximately 50,000-10,000 BPE), humans were able to migrate from Siberia to Alaska over land. Evidence suggests strongly that for as many as 100,000 years, sea levels were much lower than they currently are and the Bering Strait — the body of water that separates Siberia from Alaska — was an open plain of land and glaciers (which scholars call\u00a0Beringia<\/strong>). During a period of several millennia,\u00a0about 10,000-14,000 BPE, as many as four distinct migrations are thought to have occurred over the land bridge. People migrated from Siberia, Eurasia, and coastal Asia, following the megafauna of the Pleistocene (to about 12,000-11,000 BPE).<\/p>\n<\/a>Figure 2.5 The separation of Siberia from Alaska about 10,000 years ago can be seen in this short GIF from the American National Climatic Data Center. (Click on the map if using web version of book.)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nThe greatest supporting evidence of the Bering land bridge\u00a0theory is the extensive homogeneity of the North American Clovis<\/strong> culture, so named for the archaeological site in New Mexico where\u00a0it was first identified. The Clovis people were long considered to be the first to inhabit the Americas. Archaeologists theorize that the Clovis came over the land bridge and down a glacier pass to the east of the Rocky Mountains sometime between 12,000 and 11,000 BCE, eventually spreading through much of North America and into South America. Everywhere they went, Clovis people littered their camps and settlements with stone tools and weapons that bear some trademark features and suggest close cultural links.<\/p>\nA second theory focuses on Pacific sea travel. The coastal migration theory<\/strong>\u00a0suggests that some people arrived in the Americas by\u00a0following the coast of Asia and Beringia, down the western shore\u00a0of North America, all the way to South America. The coastal migration theory is bolstered by the fact that the rich marine environment would have supported maritime people well. Travel by boat would also be much faster and easier than the route overland, thus allowing people to spread throughout the Americas much more quickly. The most compelling evidence supporting this\u00a0model\u00a0comes from archaeological sites in South America that predate the North American Clovis sites. Sites like Monte Verde in Chile date to 14,800-12,500 BCE; Taima-Taima in western Venezuela dates to 13,000 BCE. These two sites\u00a0contradict the notion of \u201cClovis first.\u201d However, there are far fewer archaeological sites that support the coastal migration theory compared to the\u00a0Clovis sites; there may be more but, due to rising sea levels in the intervening millennia, the coastline of the Pleistocene era now lies under the Pacific Ocean. Barring breakthroughs in submarine archaeology, further evidence of earlier coastal migration at the source\u00a0is lost to us.<\/p>\nAlthough the two theories might seem to be at odds with each other, most historians and archaeologists now accept that both are probably correct, and that human migration to the Americas occurred over a very long span of time, over land and by sea. It is, however, important to note that conclusive evidence in support of either theory continues to elude us;\u00a0these are still hypotheses <\/strong>only.<\/p>\nWhat is almost certain is that — however they got here — the original human inhabitants of\u00a0the Americas came from Asia. Genetic evidence strongly supports this:\u00a0mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and DNA haplogroups show evidence of multiple migrations from Asia, starting at about 30,000 BPE.[1]<\/sup><\/a> There are two important points to note in this regard:<\/p>\n\n- There is currently\u00a0no conclusive archeological proof of human existence in the Americas before about 20,000 years ago, but\u00a0the DNA evidence points to a considerably earlier period of settlement.<\/li>\n
- There is no genetic indication of migration from Europe or Africa, so the suggestion (which has been around since the late 15th century) that the Aboriginal peoples must have some roots on the other side of the Atlantic is utterly unproven. This point is important\u00a0because for\u00a0hundreds of years after the arrival of Europeans, efforts were made to explain the presence of Aboriginal people as the “Lost Tribes of Israel,” wayward Welshmen, or some other European offshoot. DNA studies have exploded this thesis: not one\u00a0study has shown conclusive proof of European genetic markers among the Native American population before 1492.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
<\/a>Figure 2.6 World map of human migrations based on studies of mitochondrial (matrilinear) DNA. Dashed lines are hypothetical migrations. Numbers represent thousand years before present (BPE). The blue line represents area covered in ice or tundra during the last great ice age. The letters are the mitochondrial DNA haplogroups (pure motherly lineages); haplogroups can be used to define genetic populations and are often geographically oriented.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nIndigenous people throughout the Western Hemisphere talk of their origins\u00a0in oral histories, stories, and myths that link them intimately to the places they inhabit. The land, the stories commonly assert, was made for \u201cthe people,\u201d and they were made to inhabit the land. Every group has an origin story, and they vary widely while having elements of consistency. Sometimes, groups have multiple origin stories that tell differing versions of creation and the founding of the group. Origin stories often begin with a \u201cFirst Person\u201d (or First Peoples), a mythical man or woman who founded the group. These First People often are created from, or emerge from, the natural world itself. For example, the first Iroquois and Wendat\/Huron fell from the sky. An elderly couple of great virtue survive various trials to give birth to the peoples of the Earth, according to the Mi’kmaq. Animals play important roles in these stories as well. In the creation story of the Haida, Raven arranges things nicely and then releases the first humans from a clamshell; the Cree tell of the Earth mother’s offspring\/agent Wisakedjak (a shape-changing and benign trickster whose name is widely mispronounced as\u00a0“Whiskey-Jack”) who\u00a0peoples the world. And there are stories that involve a singular creator, such as the Blackfoot figure\u00a0Napi, who moulds the world and everything in it from a lump of mud.\u00a0The oral traditions of the Lenape\/Delaware and Iroquoian peoples, along with records from the Anishinaabe Midewiwin scrolls, refer to \u201cTurtle Island,\u201d a useful convergence of origin tales that has acquired broad acceptance among Aboriginal peoples since the 1970s.<\/p>\n
These origin stories encapsulated and shaped the worldview of each group, establishing their people\u2019s purpose in this world as well as their relationship to the spirits\u00a0and the world around them. In other words, origin stories are key to establishing a group identity and a deep connection with the region the people inhabit. It is also the case that these stories are invoked by Aboriginal peoples as sufficient to their needs as regards history. Whether ancient peoples crossed Beringia or paddled in proto-kayaks along the west coast is perhaps interesting but no more proven and demonstrable than an allegory of cultural birth on an island of mud.<\/p>\n
The Paleo-Indian Period<\/h2>\n
The time between the arrival of\u00a0humans in\u00a0the Americas until 10000-9000 years BPE is known as the Paleo-Indian<\/strong> period. During this time, humans spread throughout the Western Hemisphere, supporting themselves with similar subsistence patterns and technologies. Paleo-Indians were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They moved as frequently as once or twice a week, hunting the big game of the Paleolithic<\/strong>: the megafauna. These included now-extinct creatures such as\u00a0the mammoth, mastodon, short-faced bear, enormous versions of the\u00a0modern-day sloth, the very muscular dire wolf, and upsized editions of moose and beaver.<\/p>\nPaleo-Indian technology included knapped, or chipped, stone tools such as scrapers, knives, and projectile points, such as the Clovis point. These were made from a variety of materials including bone and antler, obsidian, quartz, chert, and flint. Throughout the Paleo-Indian era, the spear was the most common weapon. At first, humans used spears as thrusting weapons, which\u00a0required very close engagement\u00a0between the hunter and game, a dangerous prospect when dealing with giant prey and predators. Sometime during the Paleo-Indian era, humans developed new kinds of technology, including a lighter throwing spear and an implement to propel this spear much farther: the atlatl. The atlatl, or spear thrower, was one of the most important items in the late Paleo-Indian tool kit. It was a long, thin piece of wood with a notch at the end. This notch was designed to receive the end of a spear or dart. The atlatl acted as an extension of the throwing arm, enabling the spear thrower to greatly increase the velocity\u00a0and range of the cast.<\/p>\n
Paleo-Indians probably lived in groups that anthropologists call bands, small groups of related individuals, typically no bigger than 100 to 150 people. This setup allowed for a simple leadership structure, probably with one individual at the head of the group. It also allowed for easy mobility, and\u00a0hunter-gatherers such as Paleo-Indians lived with only transportable and reproducible possessions. One of the greatest problems of living in such a small group, however, was finding a suitable mate. Anthropologists think\u00a0that regional Paleo-Indian bands\u00a0came together yearly in the summer months to celebrate religious rituals, pass along\u00a0news, and exchange young women and men\u00a0to ensure genetic diversity among their groups.<\/p>\n
The Archaic and Woodland Periods<\/h2>\n
From 10000 to 9000 BPE, Earth\u2019s climate began to warm, and the North American environment changed. A warming world created opportunities for plants to thrive and diversify; it also created large bodies of water as glaciers and ice caps melted.\u00a0Over the next 6,000 to 7,000 years, native cultures developed and diversified during the Archaic<\/strong> and the Woodland periods<\/strong>, 10000-3000 BPE and 3000-1000 BPE\u00a0respectively.<\/p>\nPaleo-Indians adapted to the world around them, learning to rely more on a diet rich in plant materials. For reasons as yet unknown, megafauna began to die out, and Aboriginal people had to rely more on bison and other relatively smaller game animals for meat. It was near the start of\u00a0this period, around 9000\u00a0to\u00a07000 BPE, that West Coast societies started\u00a0organizing\u00a0themselves around salmon fishing.\u00a0The\u00a0Nuu-chah-nulth\u00a0of\u00a0Vancouver Island, for example,\u00a0began whaling with advanced long spears.<\/p>\n
The\u00a0Maritime Archaic<\/strong>\u00a0is another\u00a0expression\u00a0of North America’s\u00a0Archaic\u00a0culture of sea-mammal hunters in the\u00a0subarctic. They prospered from approximately 7000\u00a0BCE\u00a0to\u00a01500\u00a0BCE (9,000-3,500 years ago) along the\u00a0Atlantic coast\u00a0of North America.\u00a0Their settlements included\u00a0longhouses<\/strong>\u00a0and boat-topped temporary or seasonal houses. They engaged in long-distance trade, using as currency white\u00a0chert, a rock quarried from northern Labrador to Maine.<\/p>\nIt was, as well, during the Archaic and Woodland periods that\u00a0the peoples of the Americas also began to domesticate plants, leading\u00a0to one of the most important transformations in human history: the development of agriculture.\u00a0The Archaic\u00a0agricultural revolution<\/strong>\u00a0got underway in Mesoamerica\u00a0(the area between Central Mexico and Costa Rica) and in coastal Peru by the Caral-Supe (also called Norte Chico) civilization. In Oaxaca, Mexico, people tended squash vines\u00a0in order to use the hard fruit\u00a0as containers. Eventually, more tender forms of squash became a food source. Following the domestication of beans, around 6000 BPE, Mesoamerican peoples became more sedentary. Finally, maize<\/strong> (or corn) was domesticated sometime around 5500 BPE. Over thousands of years, the tiny teosinte<\/strong> seed pod, measuring about four centimetres long, was transformed though cultivation into much larger, nutritionally rich ears of corn.<\/p>\nThe domestication of maize completed the Mesoamerican triad<\/strong>: corn, beans, and squash. The “three sisters” provided an ideal diet. Aboriginal\u00a0agriculturalists all over the hemisphere grew these crops\u00a0as their principal foods until many years after European contact. This combination of plants proved ideal as they supported one another in growth. The corn grew tall and provided a \u201cpole\u201d for the beans to grow up and around, and the large squash leaves provided shade that retained moisture and inhibited the growth of weeds. As well, beans, which are \u201cnitrogen fixers,\u201d returned\u00a0nitrogen back into the soil that the corn crops stripped out during growth.<\/p>\n<\/a>Figure 2.7 Teosinte, the ancestor of corn, is shown on the left. In the middle is a teosinte-maize hybrid. Modern corn is on the right. [Long Description]<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\nIt was a diet\u00a0that served the Mayan civilization exceedingly well. Agricultural societies, where they are successful, witness significant population growth and a degree of urbanization. The farming societies of Mesoamerica produced some of the largest and most elaborate city states in the Americas, comparable to European, African, and Asian civilizations in many respects. Architectural styles were elaborate, city layouts were complex and aesthetically stunning, and artistic and scientific knowledge was peerless, especially in the field of\u00a0astronomy.<\/p>\n
Further,\u00a0from about 200\u00a0to\u00a0900 CE the Mayan civilization crested on the strength of an\u00a0infrastructure of priesthoods that was the underpinning of the whole culture. Although the Mayan Empire declined sharply in the eighth and ninth centuries CE, the Aztec Triple Alliance followed with another,\u00a0more militarized,\u00a0iteration of Mesoamerican power from the 1300s to the 1500s.\u00a0The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was, in the late 1400s, one of the largest cities on the planet and possibly the most beautiful, a fact that tells us a great deal about the administrative, creative, technological, and cultural sophistication of these pre-contact civilizations.<\/p>\n
Agricultural knowledge and techniques spread from Mesoamerica throughout the temperate parts of the Western Hemisphere in a process called diffusion<\/strong>. Although corn and beans probably came from Mesoamerica,\u00a0other peoples throughout\u00a0North America\u00a0contributed to the body of agricultural knowledge and accomplishment across the continent.<\/p>\nLess successful was the\u00a0domestication of animals. There weren’t a lot of suitable species available for experiments in domesticated rearing, although turkeys and dogs were notable exceptions. Horses, which may have originated in the Americas, disappeared along with the megafauna some 8,000 years ago. Mountain goats and bighorn sheep are fiercely recalcitrant creatures and almost impossible to contain, let alone domesticate. There was no equivalent of the African cattle to turn into a placid source of milk, meat, and hides.\u00a0Most significantly, perhaps, there were no pigs or even boars to pen up and dine on.<\/p>\n
The ramifications of having few domestic animals was significant to the history of Aboriginal peoples.\u00a0The absence of large draught animals meant that land had to be cleared and prepared by human energy alone.\u00a0Soil exhaustion could\u00a0be postponed to\u00a0some degree by\u00a0composting or using fallow field practices, but Aboriginal farmers lacked access to the sort of fertilizers that\u00a0cattle- and chicken-rearing peoples could exploit. Turkeys, which were domesticated, have the advantage of size and ease of capture, but they do not produce as many eggs and thus offspring as prodigiously as chickens. The inability to secure a household source of protein\u00a0meant that Aboriginal diets necessarily relied\u00a0more heavily on wild game and fish than was the case in much of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This resulted in\u00a0a more nomadic or semi-nomadic life for many societies, and that constraint worked against\u00a0large-scale and concentrated populations.\u00a0Even the farming communities\u00a0were obliged to augment their agrarian economy with wild meat and fish, which is much more time-consuming than slaughtering hogs. Further, the lack of\u00a0dairy animals precluded women from\u00a0weaning their\u00a0infants onto cow,\u00a0goat, or sheep milk, which\u00a0meant that Aboriginal infants were breastfed longer, which in turn\u00a0limited population fertility. Finally, the absence of domesticated animals meant that Aboriginal peoples were not exposed to cross-species infections and epidemics. For 10,000\u00a0years or so\u00a0this proved to be beneficial, but after 1492\u00a0it was\u00a0disastrous, the reasons for which are explored in Chapter 5<\/a>.<\/p>\n\nKey Points<\/h2>\n\n- Two theories currently explain the arrival of humans in the Americas: the Bering Strait land bridge theory and the coastal migration theory.<\/li>\n
- The timing of early human occupation of the Americas is uncertain and archaeological evidence keeps pushing back the arrival dates.<\/li>\n
- Aboriginal peoples’ traditions point to occupation of “Turtle Island” since time immemorial.<\/li>\n
- Agricultural societies appeared about\u00a06000 BPE\u00a0and complex communities arose throughout Mesoamerica, spreading into the interior of North America.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
Attributions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.5<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.<\/p>\nFigure 2.6<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nFigure 2.7<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>\n
- Jason A. Eshleman, Ripan S. Malhi, and David Glenn Smith, \u201cMitochondrial DNA Studies of Native Americans: Conceptions and Misconceptions of the Population Prehistory of the Americas,\u201d Evolutionary Anthropology<\/em> 12 (2003): 7-18. ↵<\/a><\/li><\/ol><\/div>","protected":false},"author":90,"menu_order":3,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":"cc-by-nc-sa"},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[65],"class_list":["post-6377","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","license-cc-by-nc-sa"],"part":6367,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/90"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6740,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/revisions\/6740"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/6367"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=6377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Attributions<\/h2>\nFigure 2.5<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.\n\nFigure 2.6<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.\n\nFigure 2.7<\/strong>\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.\n\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>","rendered":"The telling of\u00a0Aboriginal history in Canada often begins with a discussion of human migration routes into the Americas, which reflects the long-standing misperception that was held by Europeans that Aboriginal societies were primitive, usually migratory, and unlikely to have been in the Americas for very long before the 15th century. This misperception, of course, served European empires in the Americas very well because it justified the\u00a0dispossession of native peoples from their lands.<\/p>\n
Twentieth-century historians and archaeologists worked hard to remedy this situation and to magnify the many Aboriginal voices that said, in chorus, that they had been\u00a0here “since time immemorial.”\n<\/p>\n
Occupying the Americas<\/h2>\n
Human occupation of the Americas is itself a complicated tale. However, there is general agreement among scholars that modern hominids were hereabouts some 12,000 to\u00a014,000 years before the Present Era (BPE).<\/p>\n
\nDating Systems<\/h4>\n
There are several dating systems and conventions used by historians. The one most widely used in Europe and the Western Hemisphere is based on the Christian dating system of marking years based on\u00a0the year of Christ’s birth: BC, meaning “before Christ” and AD,<\/strong> meaning anno domini<\/em>, or “in the year of our Lord.”<\/p>\nAnother is\u00a0before the Present Era (BPE), <\/strong>which arose from the use of radiocarbon dating and uses\u00a0January 1, 1950, as its baseline. Therefore, 10,000 years BPE equals 10,000 years before New Year’s Day, 1950.<\/p>\nRecently the\u00a0Common Era (CE)<\/strong> and before the Common Era (BCE)\u00a0<\/strong>have\u00a0become more widely used.\u00a0These two terms\u00a0align exactly with the Christian system, dividing time approximately 2,000 years ago.<\/p>\nSome Christians object to the BCE\/CE system as an attempt to secularize the use of BC and AD; some non-Christians retort that BCE\/CE is just the Western and Christian system in disguise, imposing itself on other cultures for further generations. This debate makes it clear that\u00a0dating is neither scientific nor especially logical — it is cultural.<\/p>\n
It is perhaps worth mentioning that the most precise calendrical system in the Western Hemisphere originated\u00a0with the Zapotec and Olmec societies and was subsequently refined\u00a0by the Mayan culture. It consists in part of a\u00a0long count that begins on\u00a0August 11, 3114, BCE.<\/p>\n
For convenience, BPE is used in this text\u00a0when referring to events occurring more than 4,000 years ago; it is most commonly used by archaeologists in conjunction with radiocarbon dating —\u00a0a means of determining the age of organic materials by measuring the amount of radioactive decay of carbon-14 in the material. Otherwise,\u00a0BCE and\u00a0CE are used\u00a0as\u00a0they are most likely to\u00a0correlate with what you will read elsewhere.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Scientists and archaeologists hold several theories regarding the origins of Aboriginal peoples\u00a0in the Americas. By far the oldest and most widely accepted of these theories is the Bering land bridge<\/strong> migration model. This theory posits that during the last ice age (approximately 50,000-10,000 BPE), humans were able to migrate from Siberia to Alaska over land. Evidence suggests strongly that for as many as 100,000 years, sea levels were much lower than they currently are and the Bering Strait — the body of water that separates Siberia from Alaska — was an open plain of land and glaciers (which scholars call\u00a0Beringia<\/strong>). During a period of several millennia,\u00a0about 10,000-14,000 BPE, as many as four distinct migrations are thought to have occurred over the land bridge. People migrated from Siberia, Eurasia, and coastal Asia, following the megafauna of the Pleistocene (to about 12,000-11,000 BPE).<\/p>\n<\/a>Figure 2.5 The separation of Siberia from Alaska about 10,000 years ago can be seen in this short GIF from the American National Climatic Data Center. (Click on the map if using web version of book.)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nThe greatest supporting evidence of the Bering land bridge\u00a0theory is the extensive homogeneity of the North American Clovis<\/strong> culture, so named for the archaeological site in New Mexico where\u00a0it was first identified. The Clovis people were long considered to be the first to inhabit the Americas. Archaeologists theorize that the Clovis came over the land bridge and down a glacier pass to the east of the Rocky Mountains sometime between 12,000 and 11,000 BCE, eventually spreading through much of North America and into South America. Everywhere they went, Clovis people littered their camps and settlements with stone tools and weapons that bear some trademark features and suggest close cultural links.<\/p>\nA second theory focuses on Pacific sea travel. The coastal migration theory<\/strong>\u00a0suggests that some people arrived in the Americas by\u00a0following the coast of Asia and Beringia, down the western shore\u00a0of North America, all the way to South America. The coastal migration theory is bolstered by the fact that the rich marine environment would have supported maritime people well. Travel by boat would also be much faster and easier than the route overland, thus allowing people to spread throughout the Americas much more quickly. The most compelling evidence supporting this\u00a0model\u00a0comes from archaeological sites in South America that predate the North American Clovis sites. Sites like Monte Verde in Chile date to 14,800-12,500 BCE; Taima-Taima in western Venezuela dates to 13,000 BCE. These two sites\u00a0contradict the notion of \u201cClovis first.\u201d However, there are far fewer archaeological sites that support the coastal migration theory compared to the\u00a0Clovis sites; there may be more but, due to rising sea levels in the intervening millennia, the coastline of the Pleistocene era now lies under the Pacific Ocean. Barring breakthroughs in submarine archaeology, further evidence of earlier coastal migration at the source\u00a0is lost to us.<\/p>\nAlthough the two theories might seem to be at odds with each other, most historians and archaeologists now accept that both are probably correct, and that human migration to the Americas occurred over a very long span of time, over land and by sea. It is, however, important to note that conclusive evidence in support of either theory continues to elude us;\u00a0these are still hypotheses <\/strong>only.<\/p>\nWhat is almost certain is that — however they got here — the original human inhabitants of\u00a0the Americas came from Asia. Genetic evidence strongly supports this:\u00a0mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and DNA haplogroups show evidence of multiple migrations from Asia, starting at about 30,000 BPE.[1]<\/sup><\/a> There are two important points to note in this regard:<\/p>\n\n- There is currently\u00a0no conclusive archeological proof of human existence in the Americas before about 20,000 years ago, but\u00a0the DNA evidence points to a considerably earlier period of settlement.<\/li>\n
- There is no genetic indication of migration from Europe or Africa, so the suggestion (which has been around since the late 15th century) that the Aboriginal peoples must have some roots on the other side of the Atlantic is utterly unproven. This point is important\u00a0because for\u00a0hundreds of years after the arrival of Europeans, efforts were made to explain the presence of Aboriginal people as the “Lost Tribes of Israel,” wayward Welshmen, or some other European offshoot. DNA studies have exploded this thesis: not one\u00a0study has shown conclusive proof of European genetic markers among the Native American population before 1492.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
<\/a>Figure 2.6 World map of human migrations based on studies of mitochondrial (matrilinear) DNA. Dashed lines are hypothetical migrations. Numbers represent thousand years before present (BPE). The blue line represents area covered in ice or tundra during the last great ice age. The letters are the mitochondrial DNA haplogroups (pure motherly lineages); haplogroups can be used to define genetic populations and are often geographically oriented.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\nIndigenous people throughout the Western Hemisphere talk of their origins\u00a0in oral histories, stories, and myths that link them intimately to the places they inhabit. The land, the stories commonly assert, was made for \u201cthe people,\u201d and they were made to inhabit the land. Every group has an origin story, and they vary widely while having elements of consistency. Sometimes, groups have multiple origin stories that tell differing versions of creation and the founding of the group. Origin stories often begin with a \u201cFirst Person\u201d (or First Peoples), a mythical man or woman who founded the group. These First People often are created from, or emerge from, the natural world itself. For example, the first Iroquois and Wendat\/Huron fell from the sky. An elderly couple of great virtue survive various trials to give birth to the peoples of the Earth, according to the Mi’kmaq. Animals play important roles in these stories as well. In the creation story of the Haida, Raven arranges things nicely and then releases the first humans from a clamshell; the Cree tell of the Earth mother’s offspring\/agent Wisakedjak (a shape-changing and benign trickster whose name is widely mispronounced as\u00a0“Whiskey-Jack”) who\u00a0peoples the world. And there are stories that involve a singular creator, such as the Blackfoot figure\u00a0Napi, who moulds the world and everything in it from a lump of mud.\u00a0The oral traditions of the Lenape\/Delaware and Iroquoian peoples, along with records from the Anishinaabe Midewiwin scrolls, refer to \u201cTurtle Island,\u201d a useful convergence of origin tales that has acquired broad acceptance among Aboriginal peoples since the 1970s.<\/p>\n
These origin stories encapsulated and shaped the worldview of each group, establishing their people\u2019s purpose in this world as well as their relationship to the spirits\u00a0and the world around them. In other words, origin stories are key to establishing a group identity and a deep connection with the region the people inhabit. It is also the case that these stories are invoked by Aboriginal peoples as sufficient to their needs as regards history. Whether ancient peoples crossed Beringia or paddled in proto-kayaks along the west coast is perhaps interesting but no more proven and demonstrable than an allegory of cultural birth on an island of mud.<\/p>\n
The Paleo-Indian Period<\/h2>\n
The time between the arrival of\u00a0humans in\u00a0the Americas until 10000-9000 years BPE is known as the Paleo-Indian<\/strong> period. During this time, humans spread throughout the Western Hemisphere, supporting themselves with similar subsistence patterns and technologies. Paleo-Indians were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They moved as frequently as once or twice a week, hunting the big game of the Paleolithic<\/strong>: the megafauna. These included now-extinct creatures such as\u00a0the mammoth, mastodon, short-faced bear, enormous versions of the\u00a0modern-day sloth, the very muscular dire wolf, and upsized editions of moose and beaver.<\/p>\nPaleo-Indian technology included knapped, or chipped, stone tools such as scrapers, knives, and projectile points, such as the Clovis point. These were made from a variety of materials including bone and antler, obsidian, quartz, chert, and flint. Throughout the Paleo-Indian era, the spear was the most common weapon. At first, humans used spears as thrusting weapons, which\u00a0required very close engagement\u00a0between the hunter and game, a dangerous prospect when dealing with giant prey and predators. Sometime during the Paleo-Indian era, humans developed new kinds of technology, including a lighter throwing spear and an implement to propel this spear much farther: the atlatl. The atlatl, or spear thrower, was one of the most important items in the late Paleo-Indian tool kit. It was a long, thin piece of wood with a notch at the end. This notch was designed to receive the end of a spear or dart. The atlatl acted as an extension of the throwing arm, enabling the spear thrower to greatly increase the velocity\u00a0and range of the cast.<\/p>\n
Paleo-Indians probably lived in groups that anthropologists call bands, small groups of related individuals, typically no bigger than 100 to 150 people. This setup allowed for a simple leadership structure, probably with one individual at the head of the group. It also allowed for easy mobility, and\u00a0hunter-gatherers such as Paleo-Indians lived with only transportable and reproducible possessions. One of the greatest problems of living in such a small group, however, was finding a suitable mate. Anthropologists think\u00a0that regional Paleo-Indian bands\u00a0came together yearly in the summer months to celebrate religious rituals, pass along\u00a0news, and exchange young women and men\u00a0to ensure genetic diversity among their groups.<\/p>\n
The Archaic and Woodland Periods<\/h2>\n
From 10000 to 9000 BPE, Earth\u2019s climate began to warm, and the North American environment changed. A warming world created opportunities for plants to thrive and diversify; it also created large bodies of water as glaciers and ice caps melted.\u00a0Over the next 6,000 to 7,000 years, native cultures developed and diversified during the Archaic<\/strong> and the Woodland periods<\/strong>, 10000-3000 BPE and 3000-1000 BPE\u00a0respectively.<\/p>\nPaleo-Indians adapted to the world around them, learning to rely more on a diet rich in plant materials. For reasons as yet unknown, megafauna began to die out, and Aboriginal people had to rely more on bison and other relatively smaller game animals for meat. It was near the start of\u00a0this period, around 9000\u00a0to\u00a07000 BPE, that West Coast societies started\u00a0organizing\u00a0themselves around salmon fishing.\u00a0The\u00a0Nuu-chah-nulth\u00a0of\u00a0Vancouver Island, for example,\u00a0began whaling with advanced long spears.<\/p>\n
The\u00a0Maritime Archaic<\/strong>\u00a0is another\u00a0expression\u00a0of North America’s\u00a0Archaic\u00a0culture of sea-mammal hunters in the\u00a0subarctic. They prospered from approximately 7000\u00a0BCE\u00a0to\u00a01500\u00a0BCE (9,000-3,500 years ago) along the\u00a0Atlantic coast\u00a0of North America.\u00a0Their settlements included\u00a0longhouses<\/strong>\u00a0and boat-topped temporary or seasonal houses. They engaged in long-distance trade, using as currency white\u00a0chert, a rock quarried from northern Labrador to Maine.<\/p>\nIt was, as well, during the Archaic and Woodland periods that\u00a0the peoples of the Americas also began to domesticate plants, leading\u00a0to one of the most important transformations in human history: the development of agriculture.\u00a0The Archaic\u00a0agricultural revolution<\/strong>\u00a0got underway in Mesoamerica\u00a0(the area between Central Mexico and Costa Rica) and in coastal Peru by the Caral-Supe (also called Norte Chico) civilization. In Oaxaca, Mexico, people tended squash vines\u00a0in order to use the hard fruit\u00a0as containers. Eventually, more tender forms of squash became a food source. Following the domestication of beans, around 6000 BPE, Mesoamerican peoples became more sedentary. Finally, maize<\/strong> (or corn) was domesticated sometime around 5500 BPE. Over thousands of years, the tiny teosinte<\/strong> seed pod, measuring about four centimetres long, was transformed though cultivation into much larger, nutritionally rich ears of corn.<\/p>\nThe domestication of maize completed the Mesoamerican triad<\/strong>: corn, beans, and squash. The “three sisters” provided an ideal diet. Aboriginal\u00a0agriculturalists all over the hemisphere grew these crops\u00a0as their principal foods until many years after European contact. This combination of plants proved ideal as they supported one another in growth. The corn grew tall and provided a \u201cpole\u201d for the beans to grow up and around, and the large squash leaves provided shade that retained moisture and inhibited the growth of weeds. As well, beans, which are \u201cnitrogen fixers,\u201d returned\u00a0nitrogen back into the soil that the corn crops stripped out during growth.<\/p>\n<\/a>Figure 2.7 Teosinte, the ancestor of corn, is shown on the left. In the middle is a teosinte-maize hybrid. Modern corn is on the right. [Long Description]<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\nIt was a diet\u00a0that served the Mayan civilization exceedingly well. Agricultural societies, where they are successful, witness significant population growth and a degree of urbanization. The farming societies of Mesoamerica produced some of the largest and most elaborate city states in the Americas, comparable to European, African, and Asian civilizations in many respects. Architectural styles were elaborate, city layouts were complex and aesthetically stunning, and artistic and scientific knowledge was peerless, especially in the field of\u00a0astronomy.<\/p>\n
Further,\u00a0from about 200\u00a0to\u00a0900 CE the Mayan civilization crested on the strength of an\u00a0infrastructure of priesthoods that was the underpinning of the whole culture. Although the Mayan Empire declined sharply in the eighth and ninth centuries CE, the Aztec Triple Alliance followed with another,\u00a0more militarized,\u00a0iteration of Mesoamerican power from the 1300s to the 1500s.\u00a0The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was, in the late 1400s, one of the largest cities on the planet and possibly the most beautiful, a fact that tells us a great deal about the administrative, creative, technological, and cultural sophistication of these pre-contact civilizations.<\/p>\n
Agricultural knowledge and techniques spread from Mesoamerica throughout the temperate parts of the Western Hemisphere in a process called diffusion<\/strong>. Although corn and beans probably came from Mesoamerica,\u00a0other peoples throughout\u00a0North America\u00a0contributed to the body of agricultural knowledge and accomplishment across the continent.<\/p>\nLess successful was the\u00a0domestication of animals. There weren’t a lot of suitable species available for experiments in domesticated rearing, although turkeys and dogs were notable exceptions. Horses, which may have originated in the Americas, disappeared along with the megafauna some 8,000 years ago. Mountain goats and bighorn sheep are fiercely recalcitrant creatures and almost impossible to contain, let alone domesticate. There was no equivalent of the African cattle to turn into a placid source of milk, meat, and hides.\u00a0Most significantly, perhaps, there were no pigs or even boars to pen up and dine on.<\/p>\n
The ramifications of having few domestic animals was significant to the history of Aboriginal peoples.\u00a0The absence of large draught animals meant that land had to be cleared and prepared by human energy alone.\u00a0Soil exhaustion could\u00a0be postponed to\u00a0some degree by\u00a0composting or using fallow field practices, but Aboriginal farmers lacked access to the sort of fertilizers that\u00a0cattle- and chicken-rearing peoples could exploit. Turkeys, which were domesticated, have the advantage of size and ease of capture, but they do not produce as many eggs and thus offspring as prodigiously as chickens. The inability to secure a household source of protein\u00a0meant that Aboriginal diets necessarily relied\u00a0more heavily on wild game and fish than was the case in much of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This resulted in\u00a0a more nomadic or semi-nomadic life for many societies, and that constraint worked against\u00a0large-scale and concentrated populations.\u00a0Even the farming communities\u00a0were obliged to augment their agrarian economy with wild meat and fish, which is much more time-consuming than slaughtering hogs. Further, the lack of\u00a0dairy animals precluded women from\u00a0weaning their\u00a0infants onto cow,\u00a0goat, or sheep milk, which\u00a0meant that Aboriginal infants were breastfed longer, which in turn\u00a0limited population fertility. Finally, the absence of domesticated animals meant that Aboriginal peoples were not exposed to cross-species infections and epidemics. For 10,000\u00a0years or so\u00a0this proved to be beneficial, but after 1492\u00a0it was\u00a0disastrous, the reasons for which are explored in Chapter 5<\/a>.<\/p>\n\nKey Points<\/h2>\n\n- Two theories currently explain the arrival of humans in the Americas: the Bering Strait land bridge theory and the coastal migration theory.<\/li>\n
- The timing of early human occupation of the Americas is uncertain and archaeological evidence keeps pushing back the arrival dates.<\/li>\n
- Aboriginal peoples’ traditions point to occupation of “Turtle Island” since time immemorial.<\/li>\n
- Agricultural societies appeared about\u00a06000 BPE\u00a0and complex communities arose throughout Mesoamerica, spreading into the interior of North America.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n
Attributions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.5<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.<\/p>\nFigure 2.6<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nFigure 2.7<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n
Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>\n
- Jason A. Eshleman, Ripan S. Malhi, and David Glenn Smith, \u201cMitochondrial DNA Studies of Native Americans: Conceptions and Misconceptions of the Population Prehistory of the Americas,\u201d Evolutionary Anthropology<\/em> 12 (2003): 7-18. ↵<\/a><\/li><\/ol><\/div>","protected":false},"author":90,"menu_order":3,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":"cc-by-nc-sa"},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[65],"class_list":["post-6377","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","license-cc-by-nc-sa"],"part":6367,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/90"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6740,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/revisions\/6740"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/6367"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/6377\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=6377"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/opentextbc.ca\/preconfederation\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=6377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0](\"https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:Map-of-human-migrations.jpg\"){kind=link}
![Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0](\"http:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File:Maize-teosinte.jpg\"){kind=link}
The telling of\u00a0Aboriginal history in Canada often begins with a discussion of human migration routes into the Americas, which reflects the long-standing misperception that was held by Europeans that Aboriginal societies were primitive, usually migratory, and unlikely to have been in the Americas for very long before the 15th century. This misperception, of course, served European empires in the Americas very well because it justified the\u00a0dispossession of native peoples from their lands.<\/p>\n
Twentieth-century historians and archaeologists worked hard to remedy this situation and to magnify the many Aboriginal voices that said, in chorus, that they had been\u00a0here “since time immemorial.”\n<\/p>\n
Occupying the Americas<\/h2>\n
Human occupation of the Americas is itself a complicated tale. However, there is general agreement among scholars that modern hominids were hereabouts some 12,000 to\u00a014,000 years before the Present Era (BPE).<\/p>\n
Dating Systems<\/h4>\n
There are several dating systems and conventions used by historians. The one most widely used in Europe and the Western Hemisphere is based on the Christian dating system of marking years based on\u00a0the year of Christ’s birth: BC, meaning “before Christ” and AD,<\/strong> meaning anno domini<\/em>, or “in the year of our Lord.”<\/p>\n Another is\u00a0before the Present Era (BPE), <\/strong>which arose from the use of radiocarbon dating and uses\u00a0January 1, 1950, as its baseline. Therefore, 10,000 years BPE equals 10,000 years before New Year’s Day, 1950.<\/p>\n Recently the\u00a0Common Era (CE)<\/strong> and before the Common Era (BCE)\u00a0<\/strong>have\u00a0become more widely used.\u00a0These two terms\u00a0align exactly with the Christian system, dividing time approximately 2,000 years ago.<\/p>\n Some Christians object to the BCE\/CE system as an attempt to secularize the use of BC and AD; some non-Christians retort that BCE\/CE is just the Western and Christian system in disguise, imposing itself on other cultures for further generations. This debate makes it clear that\u00a0dating is neither scientific nor especially logical — it is cultural.<\/p>\n It is perhaps worth mentioning that the most precise calendrical system in the Western Hemisphere originated\u00a0with the Zapotec and Olmec societies and was subsequently refined\u00a0by the Mayan culture. It consists in part of a\u00a0long count that begins on\u00a0August 11, 3114, BCE.<\/p>\n For convenience, BPE is used in this text\u00a0when referring to events occurring more than 4,000 years ago; it is most commonly used by archaeologists in conjunction with radiocarbon dating —\u00a0a means of determining the age of organic materials by measuring the amount of radioactive decay of carbon-14 in the material. Otherwise,\u00a0BCE and\u00a0CE are used\u00a0as\u00a0they are most likely to\u00a0correlate with what you will read elsewhere.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Scientists and archaeologists hold several theories regarding the origins of Aboriginal peoples\u00a0in the Americas. By far the oldest and most widely accepted of these theories is the Bering land bridge<\/strong> migration model. This theory posits that during the last ice age (approximately 50,000-10,000 BPE), humans were able to migrate from Siberia to Alaska over land. Evidence suggests strongly that for as many as 100,000 years, sea levels were much lower than they currently are and the Bering Strait — the body of water that separates Siberia from Alaska — was an open plain of land and glaciers (which scholars call\u00a0Beringia<\/strong>). During a period of several millennia,\u00a0about 10,000-14,000 BPE, as many as four distinct migrations are thought to have occurred over the land bridge. People migrated from Siberia, Eurasia, and coastal Asia, following the megafauna of the Pleistocene (to about 12,000-11,000 BPE).<\/p>\n The greatest supporting evidence of the Bering land bridge\u00a0theory is the extensive homogeneity of the North American Clovis<\/strong> culture, so named for the archaeological site in New Mexico where\u00a0it was first identified. The Clovis people were long considered to be the first to inhabit the Americas. Archaeologists theorize that the Clovis came over the land bridge and down a glacier pass to the east of the Rocky Mountains sometime between 12,000 and 11,000 BCE, eventually spreading through much of North America and into South America. Everywhere they went, Clovis people littered their camps and settlements with stone tools and weapons that bear some trademark features and suggest close cultural links.<\/p>\n A second theory focuses on Pacific sea travel. The coastal migration theory<\/strong>\u00a0suggests that some people arrived in the Americas by\u00a0following the coast of Asia and Beringia, down the western shore\u00a0of North America, all the way to South America. The coastal migration theory is bolstered by the fact that the rich marine environment would have supported maritime people well. Travel by boat would also be much faster and easier than the route overland, thus allowing people to spread throughout the Americas much more quickly. The most compelling evidence supporting this\u00a0model\u00a0comes from archaeological sites in South America that predate the North American Clovis sites. Sites like Monte Verde in Chile date to 14,800-12,500 BCE; Taima-Taima in western Venezuela dates to 13,000 BCE. These two sites\u00a0contradict the notion of \u201cClovis first.\u201d However, there are far fewer archaeological sites that support the coastal migration theory compared to the\u00a0Clovis sites; there may be more but, due to rising sea levels in the intervening millennia, the coastline of the Pleistocene era now lies under the Pacific Ocean. Barring breakthroughs in submarine archaeology, further evidence of earlier coastal migration at the source\u00a0is lost to us.<\/p>\n Although the two theories might seem to be at odds with each other, most historians and archaeologists now accept that both are probably correct, and that human migration to the Americas occurred over a very long span of time, over land and by sea. It is, however, important to note that conclusive evidence in support of either theory continues to elude us;\u00a0these are still hypotheses <\/strong>only.<\/p>\n What is almost certain is that — however they got here — the original human inhabitants of\u00a0the Americas came from Asia. Genetic evidence strongly supports this:\u00a0mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and DNA haplogroups show evidence of multiple migrations from Asia, starting at about 30,000 BPE.[1]<\/sup><\/a> There are two important points to note in this regard:<\/p>\n Indigenous people throughout the Western Hemisphere talk of their origins\u00a0in oral histories, stories, and myths that link them intimately to the places they inhabit. The land, the stories commonly assert, was made for \u201cthe people,\u201d and they were made to inhabit the land. Every group has an origin story, and they vary widely while having elements of consistency. Sometimes, groups have multiple origin stories that tell differing versions of creation and the founding of the group. Origin stories often begin with a \u201cFirst Person\u201d (or First Peoples), a mythical man or woman who founded the group. These First People often are created from, or emerge from, the natural world itself. For example, the first Iroquois and Wendat\/Huron fell from the sky. An elderly couple of great virtue survive various trials to give birth to the peoples of the Earth, according to the Mi’kmaq. Animals play important roles in these stories as well. In the creation story of the Haida, Raven arranges things nicely and then releases the first humans from a clamshell; the Cree tell of the Earth mother’s offspring\/agent Wisakedjak (a shape-changing and benign trickster whose name is widely mispronounced as\u00a0“Whiskey-Jack”) who\u00a0peoples the world. And there are stories that involve a singular creator, such as the Blackfoot figure\u00a0Napi, who moulds the world and everything in it from a lump of mud.\u00a0The oral traditions of the Lenape\/Delaware and Iroquoian peoples, along with records from the Anishinaabe Midewiwin scrolls, refer to \u201cTurtle Island,\u201d a useful convergence of origin tales that has acquired broad acceptance among Aboriginal peoples since the 1970s.<\/p>\n These origin stories encapsulated and shaped the worldview of each group, establishing their people\u2019s purpose in this world as well as their relationship to the spirits\u00a0and the world around them. In other words, origin stories are key to establishing a group identity and a deep connection with the region the people inhabit. It is also the case that these stories are invoked by Aboriginal peoples as sufficient to their needs as regards history. Whether ancient peoples crossed Beringia or paddled in proto-kayaks along the west coast is perhaps interesting but no more proven and demonstrable than an allegory of cultural birth on an island of mud.<\/p>\n The time between the arrival of\u00a0humans in\u00a0the Americas until 10000-9000 years BPE is known as the Paleo-Indian<\/strong> period. During this time, humans spread throughout the Western Hemisphere, supporting themselves with similar subsistence patterns and technologies. Paleo-Indians were nomadic hunter-gatherers. They moved as frequently as once or twice a week, hunting the big game of the Paleolithic<\/strong>: the megafauna. These included now-extinct creatures such as\u00a0the mammoth, mastodon, short-faced bear, enormous versions of the\u00a0modern-day sloth, the very muscular dire wolf, and upsized editions of moose and beaver.<\/p>\n Paleo-Indian technology included knapped, or chipped, stone tools such as scrapers, knives, and projectile points, such as the Clovis point. These were made from a variety of materials including bone and antler, obsidian, quartz, chert, and flint. Throughout the Paleo-Indian era, the spear was the most common weapon. At first, humans used spears as thrusting weapons, which\u00a0required very close engagement\u00a0between the hunter and game, a dangerous prospect when dealing with giant prey and predators. Sometime during the Paleo-Indian era, humans developed new kinds of technology, including a lighter throwing spear and an implement to propel this spear much farther: the atlatl. The atlatl, or spear thrower, was one of the most important items in the late Paleo-Indian tool kit. It was a long, thin piece of wood with a notch at the end. This notch was designed to receive the end of a spear or dart. The atlatl acted as an extension of the throwing arm, enabling the spear thrower to greatly increase the velocity\u00a0and range of the cast.<\/p>\n Paleo-Indians probably lived in groups that anthropologists call bands, small groups of related individuals, typically no bigger than 100 to 150 people. This setup allowed for a simple leadership structure, probably with one individual at the head of the group. It also allowed for easy mobility, and\u00a0hunter-gatherers such as Paleo-Indians lived with only transportable and reproducible possessions. One of the greatest problems of living in such a small group, however, was finding a suitable mate. Anthropologists think\u00a0that regional Paleo-Indian bands\u00a0came together yearly in the summer months to celebrate religious rituals, pass along\u00a0news, and exchange young women and men\u00a0to ensure genetic diversity among their groups.<\/p>\n From 10000 to 9000 BPE, Earth\u2019s climate began to warm, and the North American environment changed. A warming world created opportunities for plants to thrive and diversify; it also created large bodies of water as glaciers and ice caps melted.\u00a0Over the next 6,000 to 7,000 years, native cultures developed and diversified during the Archaic<\/strong> and the Woodland periods<\/strong>, 10000-3000 BPE and 3000-1000 BPE\u00a0respectively.<\/p>\n Paleo-Indians adapted to the world around them, learning to rely more on a diet rich in plant materials. For reasons as yet unknown, megafauna began to die out, and Aboriginal people had to rely more on bison and other relatively smaller game animals for meat. It was near the start of\u00a0this period, around 9000\u00a0to\u00a07000 BPE, that West Coast societies started\u00a0organizing\u00a0themselves around salmon fishing.\u00a0The\u00a0Nuu-chah-nulth\u00a0of\u00a0Vancouver Island, for example,\u00a0began whaling with advanced long spears.<\/p>\n The\u00a0Maritime Archaic<\/strong>\u00a0is another\u00a0expression\u00a0of North America’s\u00a0Archaic\u00a0culture of sea-mammal hunters in the\u00a0subarctic. They prospered from approximately 7000\u00a0BCE\u00a0to\u00a01500\u00a0BCE (9,000-3,500 years ago) along the\u00a0Atlantic coast\u00a0of North America.\u00a0Their settlements included\u00a0longhouses<\/strong>\u00a0and boat-topped temporary or seasonal houses. They engaged in long-distance trade, using as currency white\u00a0chert, a rock quarried from northern Labrador to Maine.<\/p>\n It was, as well, during the Archaic and Woodland periods that\u00a0the peoples of the Americas also began to domesticate plants, leading\u00a0to one of the most important transformations in human history: the development of agriculture.\u00a0The Archaic\u00a0agricultural revolution<\/strong>\u00a0got underway in Mesoamerica\u00a0(the area between Central Mexico and Costa Rica) and in coastal Peru by the Caral-Supe (also called Norte Chico) civilization. In Oaxaca, Mexico, people tended squash vines\u00a0in order to use the hard fruit\u00a0as containers. Eventually, more tender forms of squash became a food source. Following the domestication of beans, around 6000 BPE, Mesoamerican peoples became more sedentary. Finally, maize<\/strong> (or corn) was domesticated sometime around 5500 BPE. Over thousands of years, the tiny teosinte<\/strong> seed pod, measuring about four centimetres long, was transformed though cultivation into much larger, nutritionally rich ears of corn.<\/p>\n The domestication of maize completed the Mesoamerican triad<\/strong>: corn, beans, and squash. The “three sisters” provided an ideal diet. Aboriginal\u00a0agriculturalists all over the hemisphere grew these crops\u00a0as their principal foods until many years after European contact. This combination of plants proved ideal as they supported one another in growth. The corn grew tall and provided a \u201cpole\u201d for the beans to grow up and around, and the large squash leaves provided shade that retained moisture and inhibited the growth of weeds. As well, beans, which are \u201cnitrogen fixers,\u201d returned\u00a0nitrogen back into the soil that the corn crops stripped out during growth.<\/p>\n It was a diet\u00a0that served the Mayan civilization exceedingly well. Agricultural societies, where they are successful, witness significant population growth and a degree of urbanization. The farming societies of Mesoamerica produced some of the largest and most elaborate city states in the Americas, comparable to European, African, and Asian civilizations in many respects. Architectural styles were elaborate, city layouts were complex and aesthetically stunning, and artistic and scientific knowledge was peerless, especially in the field of\u00a0astronomy.<\/p>\n Further,\u00a0from about 200\u00a0to\u00a0900 CE the Mayan civilization crested on the strength of an\u00a0infrastructure of priesthoods that was the underpinning of the whole culture. Although the Mayan Empire declined sharply in the eighth and ninth centuries CE, the Aztec Triple Alliance followed with another,\u00a0more militarized,\u00a0iteration of Mesoamerican power from the 1300s to the 1500s.\u00a0The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was, in the late 1400s, one of the largest cities on the planet and possibly the most beautiful, a fact that tells us a great deal about the administrative, creative, technological, and cultural sophistication of these pre-contact civilizations.<\/p>\n Agricultural knowledge and techniques spread from Mesoamerica throughout the temperate parts of the Western Hemisphere in a process called diffusion<\/strong>. Although corn and beans probably came from Mesoamerica,\u00a0other peoples throughout\u00a0North America\u00a0contributed to the body of agricultural knowledge and accomplishment across the continent.<\/p>\n Less successful was the\u00a0domestication of animals. There weren’t a lot of suitable species available for experiments in domesticated rearing, although turkeys and dogs were notable exceptions. Horses, which may have originated in the Americas, disappeared along with the megafauna some 8,000 years ago. Mountain goats and bighorn sheep are fiercely recalcitrant creatures and almost impossible to contain, let alone domesticate. There was no equivalent of the African cattle to turn into a placid source of milk, meat, and hides.\u00a0Most significantly, perhaps, there were no pigs or even boars to pen up and dine on.<\/p>\n The ramifications of having few domestic animals was significant to the history of Aboriginal peoples.\u00a0The absence of large draught animals meant that land had to be cleared and prepared by human energy alone.\u00a0Soil exhaustion could\u00a0be postponed to\u00a0some degree by\u00a0composting or using fallow field practices, but Aboriginal farmers lacked access to the sort of fertilizers that\u00a0cattle- and chicken-rearing peoples could exploit. Turkeys, which were domesticated, have the advantage of size and ease of capture, but they do not produce as many eggs and thus offspring as prodigiously as chickens. The inability to secure a household source of protein\u00a0meant that Aboriginal diets necessarily relied\u00a0more heavily on wild game and fish than was the case in much of Europe, Asia, and Africa. This resulted in\u00a0a more nomadic or semi-nomadic life for many societies, and that constraint worked against\u00a0large-scale and concentrated populations.\u00a0Even the farming communities\u00a0were obliged to augment their agrarian economy with wild meat and fish, which is much more time-consuming than slaughtering hogs. Further, the lack of\u00a0dairy animals precluded women from\u00a0weaning their\u00a0infants onto cow,\u00a0goat, or sheep milk, which\u00a0meant that Aboriginal infants were breastfed longer, which in turn\u00a0limited population fertility. Finally, the absence of domesticated animals meant that Aboriginal peoples were not exposed to cross-species infections and epidemics. For 10,000\u00a0years or so\u00a0this proved to be beneficial, but after 1492\u00a0it was\u00a0disastrous, the reasons for which are explored in Chapter 5<\/a>.<\/p>\n Figure 2.5<\/strong> Figure 2.6<\/strong> Figure 2.7<\/strong> Figure 2.7 long description:<\/strong> Teosinte is small and green with only 12 kernels. The teosinte-maize has many more kernels but is still only an 8th of the size of modern corn. [Return to Figure 2.7]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a>\n
<\/a>The Paleo-Indian Period<\/h2>\n
The Archaic and Woodland Periods<\/h2>\n
<\/a>Key Points<\/h2>\n
\n
Attributions<\/h2>\n
\n<\/strong>Bering Land Bridge<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration<\/a>\u00a0is in the\u00a0public domain<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>Map-of-human-migrations<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a084User<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY-SA 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>Maize-teosinte<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0Gauravm1312<\/a>\u00a0is used under a\u00a0CC-BY 3.0<\/a>\u00a0license.<\/p>\nLong Descriptions<\/h2>\n