3 ms·

Off topic from the post but something I find fascinating. I live in Maine and recently became aware of the Vail Site in northwest Maine, which purports to be ar

Off topic from the post but something I find fascinating. I live in Maine and recently became aware of the Vail Site in northwest Maine, which purports to be around 13000 years old [1]. The beringian migration predates that by a few thousand years I believe but the actual dispersal of Paleo-Indians to the broader Americas hinges on the melting of the ice sheets that covered North America up until only a thousand years or so prior to the Vail site proper. I know we are talking about a scale of thousands of years but it blows my mind that people (without work animals) found their way across the continent and set up shop here when there was probably little actual reason to come here at all since, presumably, game and fish were as robust in all the lands they traveled to arrive here and fellow human pressure was non-existent. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vail_Site https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vail_Site

briga 4y ago
>there was probably little actual reason to come here at all since, presumably, game and fish were as robust in all the lands they travelled to arrive here and fellow human pressure was non-existent. I don't think this is true, there were lots of good reasons to move into the Americas, notably the presence of many large species of game animals that evolved without natural defences against humans (which were all quickly hunted to extinction or out-competed). Maine would have been on the fringes of habitability at the time, but other areas like Mexico and Peru were ideal climates for humans to move to, much better than the Siberian wilderness their ancestors travelled through.
- krrrh 4y ago
  One thing that really blew my mind was learning that Beringian civilization lasted thousands years before the ice sheets receded enough for people to move into North America as Berginia was slowly swallowed by the sea. This is sometimes referred to as the "Beringian standstill population". By the time people made it down to Mexico they were likely another few distinct civilizations removed from Siberia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beringia#Human_habitation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beringia#Human_habitation
- prescriptivist 4y ago
  Sorry, to clarify I mean there was probably little actual reason to migrate to the east coast of North America at that time.
  - medstrom 4y ago
    Trajectory, maybe. If generations of moving east-ish (from Alaska) always got you to better lands, where do you suggest walking next? East!
ema 4y ago
I doubt that fellow human pressure was non-existent. A thousand years is plenty of time for even a small founding population to swell enough in size to fill every nook and cranny of a continent.
mushbino 4y ago
Human footprints were recently found in New Mexico that were definitively dated to 23,000 years ago so humans have probably been here for much longer than that.
- kibwen 4y ago
  FSVO "here"; 23,000 years ago, Maine would have been buried under an ice sheet 1.5 miles deep. :P
doodlebugging 4y ago
When I consider stuff like this I look back on my own experiences in life and it is easy enough to see that an ordinary person or group of people can cover a lot of ground in a short period of time on foot. From the west coast of Alaska to the east coast in Maine it is about 5500 miles. Moving 10 miles a day it only takes 18 months. Even if you only lived for 30 years back then there is plenty of opportunity for a single individual to have made the entire journey on foot allowing lots of opportunities for seasonal pauses or to delay progress because they liked the new digs better than the last place they stopped. A reasonably adventurous person could easily have seen most of the continental US in a lifetime especially when you consider that boats were part of their skill sets. Even moving as a group you could easily traverse the continent settling for short periods wherever things looked promising. I will have to look up the Vail site as I am not familiar with that one. I know there is the Buttermilk site in central Texas (Gault site) that has yielded dates in the 16000-21000 yr range as near as I remember.
- tremon 4y ago
  Even if you only lived for 30 years back then Note, this isn't generally true. The low average life expectancy in those ages is skewed down by infant mortality and conflict. In a way, human life span follows a bathtub curve so reducing infant mortality in our (modern) age has massively increased the average life expectancy, but it doesn't mean people in those days didn't live past 40. Or, exaggerating mildly: nobody lived for 30 years back then; half the population didn't make it past their first birthday, the other half lived for 60 years.
  - doodlebugging 4y ago
    Yes. I agree with the lifespan information you've laid out. There has been a misconception amongst laymen that our lifespans have become longer for a number of reasons because it is usually framed in a way that bolsters the notion that all those who came before had shorter lifespans than we are likely to enjoy. That isn't really the case because obviously if someone mentions an average lifespan or a median lifespan then that is the number that sticks in the memory and most people whiff on the fact that with any average or median, around 50% of the people lived longer and 50% of the people did not live as long. No upper bound is given and the lower bound is intuitively occupied by those who didn't survive infancy. In hindsight, I should've framed that differently. I was attempting to illustrate that it doesn't take much time at all to cover a lot of ground and if you are motivated by the need to feed yourself or your family or if you just feel the unshakable need to see what is over that distant hill then a short lifespan still offers plenty of opportunity to see the world and scratch those itches. I spent several months when I was younger living on the road and in the back-country. I knew every morning that my primary goal needed to be locating drinkable water for myself, my traveling partner, and our horses and my secondary goal was finding food. We carried our shelters and implements that we would need to keep all our gear in order but water and food were paramount concerns. We were young and totally not clued in to all the planning that would normally be involved in undertaking a multi-week, multi-state trip so inaccurate assumptions were made about accessibility, cost, and availability of necessities. We had fun, we survived our own incompetence and we moved on with new skill-sets and an enhanced appreciation for how the real world really works.

briga 4y ago

>there was probably little actual reason to come here at all since, presumably, game and fish were as robust in all the lands they travelled to arrive here and fellow human pressure was non-existent. I don't think this is true, there were lots of good reasons to move into the Americas, notably the presence of many large species of game animals that evolved without natural defences against humans (which were all quickly hunted to extinction or out-competed). Maine would have been on the fringes of habitability at the time, but other areas like Mexico and Peru were ideal climates for humans to move to, much better than the Siberian wilderness their ancestors travelled through.

krrrh 4y ago
One thing that really blew my mind was learning that Beringian civilization lasted thousands years before the ice sheets receded enough for people to move into North America as Berginia was slowly swallowed by the sea. This is sometimes referred to as the "Beringian standstill population". By the time people made it down to Mexico they were likely another few distinct civilizations removed from Siberia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beringia#Human_habitation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beringia#Human_habitation
prescriptivist 4y ago
Sorry, to clarify I mean there was probably little actual reason to migrate to the east coast of North America at that time.
- medstrom 4y ago
  Trajectory, maybe. If generations of moving east-ish (from Alaska) always got you to better lands, where do you suggest walking next? East!

ema 4y ago

I doubt that fellow human pressure was non-existent. A thousand years is plenty of time for even a small founding population to swell enough in size to fill every nook and cranny of a continent.

mushbino 4y ago

Human footprints were recently found in New Mexico that were definitively dated to 23,000 years ago so humans have probably been here for much longer than that.

kibwen 4y ago
FSVO "here"; 23,000 years ago, Maine would have been buried under an ice sheet 1.5 miles deep. :P

doodlebugging 4y ago

When I consider stuff like this I look back on my own experiences in life and it is easy enough to see that an ordinary person or group of people can cover a lot of ground in a short period of time on foot. From the west coast of Alaska to the east coast in Maine it is about 5500 miles. Moving 10 miles a day it only takes 18 months. Even if you only lived for 30 years back then there is plenty of opportunity for a single individual to have made the entire journey on foot allowing lots of opportunities for seasonal pauses or to delay progress because they liked the new digs better than the last place they stopped. A reasonably adventurous person could easily have seen most of the continental US in a lifetime especially when you consider that boats were part of their skill sets. Even moving as a group you could easily traverse the continent settling for short periods wherever things looked promising. I will have to look up the Vail site as I am not familiar with that one. I know there is the Buttermilk site in central Texas (Gault site) that has yielded dates in the 16000-21000 yr range as near as I remember.

tremon 4y ago
Even if you only lived for 30 years back then Note, this isn't generally true. The low average life expectancy in those ages is skewed down by infant mortality and conflict. In a way, human life span follows a bathtub curve so reducing infant mortality in our (modern) age has massively increased the average life expectancy, but it doesn't mean people in those days didn't live past 40. Or, exaggerating mildly: nobody lived for 30 years back then; half the population didn't make it past their first birthday, the other half lived for 60 years.
- doodlebugging 4y ago
  Yes. I agree with the lifespan information you've laid out. There has been a misconception amongst laymen that our lifespans have become longer for a number of reasons because it is usually framed in a way that bolsters the notion that all those who came before had shorter lifespans than we are likely to enjoy. That isn't really the case because obviously if someone mentions an average lifespan or a median lifespan then that is the number that sticks in the memory and most people whiff on the fact that with any average or median, around 50% of the people lived longer and 50% of the people did not live as long. No upper bound is given and the lower bound is intuitively occupied by those who didn't survive infancy. In hindsight, I should've framed that differently. I was attempting to illustrate that it doesn't take much time at all to cover a lot of ground and if you are motivated by the need to feed yourself or your family or if you just feel the unshakable need to see what is over that distant hill then a short lifespan still offers plenty of opportunity to see the world and scratch those itches. I spent several months when I was younger living on the road and in the back-country. I knew every morning that my primary goal needed to be locating drinkable water for myself, my traveling partner, and our horses and my secondary goal was finding food. We carried our shelters and implements that we would need to keep all our gear in order but water and food were paramount concerns. We were young and totally not clued in to all the planning that would normally be involved in undertaking a multi-week, multi-state trip so inaccurate assumptions were made about accessibility, cost, and availability of necessities. We had fun, we survived our own incompetence and we moved on with new skill-sets and an enhanced appreciation for how the real world really works.