The Solutrean hypothesis is a theory that suggests the first people to reach the Americas came from Europe during the Solutrean Period. These people are believed to have traveled on floating ice in the Atlantic Ocean. This idea is different from the widely accepted belief that early humans reached the Americas by walking across land that connected Asia and Alaska during the Last Glacial Period or by sailing along the Pacific coast from Asia.
According to the Solutrean hypothesis, about 21,000 years ago, people from the Solutré region of France, known for their special stone tool-making methods, may have traveled to North America on ice in the Atlantic. Around 13,000 years ago, their stone tool techniques spread across the continent, possibly influencing the later development of Clovis stone tools. The theory suggests that the similarities between Clovis and Solutrean stone tools prove that the Solutreans were the first to reach the Americas, long before other scientific theories about how the Americas were populated.
The Solutrean hypothesis was introduced in 2004 by Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian Institution and Bruce Bradley of the University of Exeter. However, many scientists, including David Meltzer, do not support this idea. Evidence for the theory is weak, as there is a large time gap between the Solutrean and Clovis periods, and the two stone tool styles share only minor similarities. No proof of Solutrean seafaring or technology capable of crossing the Atlantic during an ice age has been found. Genetic studies also support the idea that the first people in the Americas came from Asia, not Europe.
Origin of Solutrean culture
The Solutrean culture began in what are now France, Spain, and Portugal around 21,000 to 17,000 years ago. It was a period of tool-making that came after earlier innovations, such as small stone tools and tools made from multiple materials during the Aurignacian and Gravettian times. It followed the large stone tools of the Middle Paleolithic and preceded the finely made bone tools of the Magdalenian period. During the Last Glacial Maximum, there was a short period called the Badegoulian, when tools were specialized for working with bones and wood. Solutrean tools used methods that were not seen before and were not used again for thousands of years, making them very advanced for their time. Around 17,000 years ago, Solutrean tools were replaced in Europe by the Magdalenian tools, which used bone and flint, and the Epigravettian tools, which were smaller and more practical. Solutrean technology revived and improved techniques for shaping tools from both sides, which had mostly been abandoned during the Gravettian and Pavlovian periods.
Characteristics of Solutrean lithic techniques
The most important feature of Solutrean tools is the use of bifacial percussion-flaked points, which are found in many Solutrean artifacts. This feature is key to a theory that suggests a connection between Solutrean and Clovis points, as both types of tools share similar traits. The Clovis culture is a prehistoric group of people in North America, named after unique stone tools discovered near Clovis, New Mexico. When compared, these tools have similar visual features, leading some to believe that Clovis points may have been influenced by Solutrean techniques.
Clovis tools are known for a specific type of spear point called the Clovis point. Both Solutrean and Clovis points have similarities: they are thin, shaped on both sides, and use a method called "outrepassé," or overshot flaking, which quickly thins a tool without changing its width. However, Clovis points differ from Solutrean tools in that some have bifacial fluting, which is a long groove carved on the bottom edge of the point to help attach it to a spear. Bifacial fluting refers to this feature appearing on both sides of a tool.
Clovis toolmaking appears in North American archaeological records between 12,800 and 13,500 years ago. No older tools with this feature have been found in Asia or Alaska. The idea that Clovis and Solutrean tools are connected remains debated. This theory is challenged by the large time gap between the two cultures, the lack of evidence showing Solutrean people traveled by sea, the absence of clear Solutrean tools in Clovis technology, the difficulty of the proposed travel route, and other issues.
Archeological issues
Supporters of the Solutrean hypothesis pointed out the presence of haplogroup X2, which is most commonly found in Anatolia and the northeast of America. They say this pattern supports their position. In a 1998 article, Michael Brown suggested this could indicate a group of early Americans from the northeast coast of the Caucasus region. However, a 2008 study in the American Journal of Human Genetics by Brazilian researchers argued against the Solutrean hypothesis. They stated that their findings strongly support the idea that haplogroup X, along with other main mtDNA haplogroups, was part of the gene pool of a single Native American founding population. This means they do not support theories that suggest haplogroup-independent migrations, such as the European migration proposed by the Solutrean hypothesis.
An article in the January 2012 issue of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology also argued against the Solutrean theory based on genetic evidence. Researchers in Italy noted that the Asian haplogroup C4c and the disputed X2a had "parallel genetic histories." The article’s abstract stated that the similarities in ages and geographical distributions of C4c and X2a support the idea of a dual origin for Paleo-Indians. Since C4c is deeply rooted in the Asian part of the mtDNA family tree and clearly of Asian origin, the finding that C4c and X2a share similar genetic histories strongly rejects the Solutrean hypothesis of an Atlantic glacial entry route into North America.
In 2014, scientists sequenced the autosomal DNA of a 12,500-year-old infant from Montana, known as Anzick-1, found near Clovis artifacts. Comparisons showed strong genetic links to DNA from Siberian sites. The study confirmed that the infant’s DNA matches all existing Native American populations, suggesting they all descended from an ancient group that lived near Siberia, the Upper Palaeolithic Mal’ta population. The infant’s Y-haplogroup is Q. Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley responded by pointing out that some artifacts at the site were dated to between 56 and 483 years before the infant’s death, which might mean the Clovis points did not belong to the infant’s community.
A 2014 genetic study in the journal Nature reported that DNA from a 24,000-year-old skeleton in Eastern Siberia showed evidence that 14 to 38% of Native American ancestry comes from an ancient Western Eurasian population. The Mal’ta boy’s mitochondrial DNA belonged to haplogroup U, which is also common among Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers. The researchers noted that their findings suggest a possibility that some non-East Asian physical traits in the first Americans may have come from the Old World through Beringia, rather than from a trans-Atlantic journey from Iberia as proposed by the Solutrean hypothesis.
Oceanographic analysis
A 2008 study of ocean and environmental data from that time, written by Kieran Westley and Justin Dix, found that the Last Glacial Maximum in the North Atlantic does not match the descriptions given by supporters of the Solutrean Atlantic Hypothesis. The study noted that while ice use and hunting sea mammals were important in other situations, the conditions at that time made it unlikely for a group of people from Europe who followed the edge of the ice to reach the Americas. The researchers questioned whether a journey across the Atlantic Ocean, even with the use of glaciers and floating ice as temporary stops and sources of water, would have been possible during the Solutrean era.
In 2012, Stanford and Bradley published a book titled Across Atlantic Ice: The Origin of America's Clovis Culture, which updated and changed earlier ideas about the Solutrean Hypothesis. The book received a lot of media attention, but experts in archaeology did not find the evidence convincing. The dates from supposed pre-Clovis archaeological sites in North America, as presented by Stanford and Bradley, are much older than the time of the Solutrean culture in Europe, by about 5,000 to 10,000 years.
Genetic claims
Mitochondrial haplogroup X2a has been suggested as a possible sign of ancient movement of people across the Atlantic Ocean. However, a detailed review by Raff & Bolnick (2015) states that X2a has not been found in Eurasia. Studies of where this group is located do not support the idea that it originated in Europe rather than Siberia. Analysis of the full genome of Kennewick Man, who belongs to the earliest known version of X2a, shows no signs of recent European ancestry. This suggests the deepest branch of X2a may have originated on the West Coast of the Americas. Additionally, detailed studies of genetic data from Native American populations have not found evidence of European ancestry from the Pleistocene era or trans-Atlantic gene flow.
Carbon dating issues
The Solutrean hypothesis is questioned because of large time gaps between the Clovis and Solutrean periods, no clear evidence that Solutrean people could sail across the ocean, no specific Solutrean tools found in Clovis technology, the difficulty of the proposed travel route, and other issues.
In 1970, a stone tool called a biface hand axe was found by a fishing boat named Cinmar off the east coast of Virginia. This area was once dry land before sea levels rose during the Late Pleistocene. The tool was found in the same group of materials as the remains of a mastodon. Scientists later dated the mastodon’s tusks to be about 22,000 years old. Also, several archaeological sites on the Delmarva Peninsula were discovered by Darrin Lowery of the University of Delaware. These sites have dates between 16,000 and 18,000 years, but the evidence is not certain. These findings led Stanford and Bradley to support the idea in 2014 that people lived in North America before the Clovis culture and that these people might have connections to ancient Europeans.
Two main issues are debated about the Cinmar biface. First, it is unclear if the tool’s connection to the mastodon remains is important. Second, Stanford and Bradley claimed the biface is older than the Late Glacial Maximum (LGM) and not from a later time period. They said this because they studied many tools from the eastern seaboard and found no similar bifaces from after the LGM. However, a report in the January 2015 issue of American Antiquity reviewed the research and concluded that the claim that these tools are rare and not from after the LGM is not supported. The report also studied 13 artifacts said to be older than 22,000 years and found they looked the same as tools from the Holocene period (a time after the last ice age) along the eastern seaboard. The report concluded that these tools are common, are linked to known time periods and cultures, and are connected to activities like fishing in the ocean or deep sea. Because of this, the report said there is no reason to believe that tools found on the Delmarva Peninsula, New England, the continental shelf, or anywhere else in eastern North America are from the Solutrean culture or older than the Clovis culture, let alone part of a separate pre-Clovis culture.
Geographical separation
Arthur J. Jelinek, an anthropologist, noticed similarities between Solutrean and Clovis styles in a 1971 study. He pointed out that the two cultures were far apart in both place and time, making a direct connection unlikely. The dates of Solutrean sites in Europe and proposed transitional sites in the Americas only overlap at the very beginning and end of the Solutrean period. He also said that traveling across the Atlantic Ocean with the tools and ships available at that time would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible. Lawrence G. Straus agreed, writing that there is no evidence of boats or seafaring during the Solutrean period. Straus studied Solutrean artifacts in what is now Cantabria, Spain. During the Solutrean era, this area was inland, not near the coast. At the sites, he found seashells and fish from shallow water, but no signs that people used deep-sea resources. Some people argue that evidence of Solutrean seafaring might be lost because parts of the coastlines from western Europe and eastern North America during the Last Glacial Maximum are now underwater.
Another challenge to the idea that Solutrean people reached the Americas is the lack of non-technological evidence, such as cave paintings like those in Spain’s Cave of Altamira, which are not found in the Americas. Bradley and Stanford responded by saying that only a small group of Solutrean people may have adapted to a coastal lifestyle and crossed the Atlantic. This group might not have shown all the typical Solutrean cultural features. A carved bone piece showing a mammoth found near the Vero man site in Florida was dated to between 20,000 and 13,000 years ago. It is considered the oldest known artwork in the Americas. Art historian Barbara Olins compared the Vero carving to drawings of mammoths from the "Franco-Cantabrian" region in Europe. She noted that the San people of southern Africa also created realistic animal images in a style similar to "Franco-Cantabrian" art, suggesting that such styles might have developed independently in North America.
Political controversy
Similar to the controversy surrounding Kennewick Man, the Solutrean hypothesis became a topic of political debate during the 2010s. It gained attention from some white supremacist groups, who claimed that white Solutreans first settled the Americas (ignoring the fact that Solutreans were likely brown-skinned). These groups suggested that later, red-skinned Beringians arrived and that this led to the idea that American Indians do not have a rightful claim to the land.
A 2018 episode of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's documentary The Nature of Things was criticized by scientists and Native American communities. This was because the episode presented the Solutrean hypothesis without thoroughly examining the evidence.