00:00.00
archpodnet
Hello and welcome back to the pseudo archeology podcast episode 112 I am your host Dr Andrew Kingcullo and when we last left me I was in a deep pit of despair now as a very poor idea to help me out in my deep pit of despair. I thought I would talk about the Salutrrian hypothesis and again on the show tonight we're talking about the 2 hypothesis I of the salutrrian hypothesis and the salurrian hypothesis. We just went over the salurian. Let's check out the salutrion. So what is the Salutrrian hypothesis. Basically it's the idea that while we think of peopleling the new world as having come over the bearing land bridge right? and we've talked about this in in past episodes. You know how did the first people get here the dates for the earliest people into the new world. Good solid dates look like it's around. Oh we could say seventeen thousand years ago or something like that you know somewhere in that vicinity. Of people coming across the bering land bridge. You know again, it was the ice age. So the um it was a land bridge across from the far Easternmost Asia into Alaska right? and we have a ton of evidence genetic evidence and so on that the first peoples came.

01:32.14
archpodnet
That way now. The salutrian hypothesis doesn't disagree with that. It adds a little it says you know what while that was happening. There might have been a small group of people or a moderate group of people that came to the new world. From europe and the idea is that they followed the pack ice from across from the continent of Europe you know from like France going up up to the north across the pack ice and then ultimately down into the new world coming to the East Coast right now that idea came about it. It began in the 1970 s the most famous archeologist who kind of um was the ringleader of this idea is a guy named Dennis Stanford I just saw that Dennis Stanford most recently died and that's a that's a sad thing. It was nice to have you around Dennis. Um, and this idea I think the term controversial fits this idea perfectly and we don't have any direct evidence of this at all. But so why? why and bring it up in the first place. Why did people like Dennis Stanford talk about the saluter in hypothesis here's why it has to do with Clovis now we know that Clovis points are those large flat um, nicely made spear points that they date to right around thirteen thousand years ago ah people who've

03:09.29
archpodnet
Push the salutering hypothesis say look we don't really see the antecedents of that the the earlier forms of that in Northern Asia you know you you don't really see them there but we do see some spear points that look a lot like clovis. In the salutre region of France so that's where they gets the name salutrian right from the so the salutre region of France and when you look at the the ah spear points they do look similar. You got to give them that the salutre points look. Look decently similar to clovis fair ball this the saluttra points date to around twenty one thousand years ago so quite a bit earlier than Clovis we got remember Clovis is 13 right? So this is a decent was at 8000 years older or something like that. Kind of old. It's kind of not too precise and that's where stuff starts to fall down a little bit as we look look further. Um it starts to not not feel so good again. Is there any evidence that the salutrrian peoples sailed or had watercraft stuff. There's just like no evidence of that it would have to be that this technology um diffused out.

04:42.42
archpodnet
To other cultures further north and then across the Atlantic That's that's really hard to deal with right and we just yeah, just don't see the evidence for it. My friends. There's just not much there besides going hey look these 2 points. Look pretty similar um and in in terms of ah hey if european people were here during that time wouldn't we see maybe some Dna markers. Of them. The the idea being that they would have had like inner bread with native peoples and and so modern. Native american groups would be mostly of of asian descent. But you'd have a little sprinkling of the european stuff and you just don't. See it now I will say with the Dna stuff sometimes you do see a sliver of oh like like european bits and bobs in native culture. But why it's not from the atlantic side. It's because. Beringia the area of the being land bridge is like a funnel and it's sucking in people not just from Southern Asia but from Northern Asia and across as well. So you you have to look at Bryngia again as as sucking in peoples from across Asia Not just from below

06:17.13
archpodnet
It's funny I think we think of it as more southern asian groups kind of going up and over because we look at maps that are drawn with north up. You know if you look a map on the wall. It just seems like people would like walk up and over because of the way you are looking at an image of the earth. But if you're actually on the ground. It's more like a funnel right? or if you look at a globe from that angle. You'll see that sort of all of Asia kind of can funnel down into that point that would be the bearing land bridge. So my point being you can get genetic markers from that. Europe just about by way of the baing land bridge if you get what I mean right? you're you're you're sucking different peoples all the way across and then down so it's going to come from that side. It's not coming across the atlantic e. as much as I want to believe this I do have to be honest with you that when I first heard the salutrian hypothesis I thought that it had like a 2% chance of being true. You know and I first heard a long time ago like twenty years ago or something and I was like oh. Could be like the the idea that just a sprinkling of people maybe came across I thought that the clovis thing as being related to to salutrian points pretty far fetched and I will say that as time has gone on.

07:51.60
archpodnet
That 2% has faded into 0.002 right meaning the more I hear the more I look at it the more it just doesn't seem to work and you know what I don't want to throw Dennis Stanford under the bus totally though see that he was he was trying a serious thing. But he was trying it with very very little evidence. It was simply just a comparison of 2 artifact types and I think one of the big problems is he was doing the same thing that pseudo archeologists do when they compare pyramids. If you look at a maya pyramid and an egyptian pyramid you go hey look those pyramids are the same They must be related. But then when you look closer. They're really not the same at all and they're from 2 completely different time periods clovis and salutrian points. Yeah at at a glance you go? Oh they look pretty similar. But then as you look closer, you're like oh these points are kind of different clovis has a fluted base and which is one of its main characteristics and saluting points don't and they're like 8000 years different in time. Ah you see what I mean. It really starts to fall apart. But I do think it's a time when science is doing what science is supposed to do. There's a hypothesis that comes up the salutrian hypothesis right? and through testing and as more data comes along. We kind of go.

09:23.26
archpodnet
Yeah, it doesn't really work at all. We're leto so that that's kind of where I would put the salutine hypothesis at this point on top of everything else thinking about people in kayaks crossing the pack ice. You guys realize that's for the Titanic bought it. You know what? I'm saying. That's that's not a place for a kayak to go cruising I don't want to take my kayak lessons in the North Atlantic I know you can call me a was but. It just you see how this just fades as you look closer. You know it's like oh good try. But that's a miss that is a total swing with a miss. So with that. You know I think we can just sort of. Remember the good old days when we talked about the salutrrian and then we can just let it fade into its good night when we come back my closing thoughts on the salurian verses. The salutrion.