 is a bit out of scope, but I think at the end you will see we have some issues in common. How indigenous people arrive on the Canary Islands and how they survive isolated for such a long time are still unresolved questions. The available evidence supports that people from North Africa colonize the Canary Islands and they successfully survive in different island ecologies with low densities of edible resources and lacking outside support. This represents that was the most limited of the Eurasian colonization in antiquity. When I say Eurasian colonization, I mean the people who arrived to the Canary Islands, they brought the Neolithic farming package. We haven't found any evidence of Sub-Saharan African colonization in the Canary Islands, so we can see here the same farming package that we can found in North Africa. And these people remained isolated until the middle 80s when the Canaries arrived and finally conquered the islands. However, today the chronology of the colonization is still unresolved and we don't know for example how people aspire to the islands and this is important because according to the timing of the colonization we can consider why these people arrived to the islands and who and also how they arrived to the islands. The Canaries were presenting islands with a unique natural diversity and had different environments, different between the different and the islands. Also the islands didn't have any metal ores and were forced to adapt the technological skills to make tools using the available volcanic rocks. We don't have any flint, we don't have metals and also after the first colonization process we don't find any metals in the islands because we don't have any evidence of contact with the continent after the first colonization process. The early colonies translocated the domestic plants and animals and introduced by the city species with them. Thanks to a very good preservation of the Canary remains we have found desiccated cereals, desiccated insects related to the to the stored grains and also we have mummies and different kinds of organic remains. We know these people transport the island environments to make them more habitable for farming populations. We have different kinds of evidence and we can see how people transport these islands into more habitable landscapes but these practices became differentiated in islands with different environments. So we can say that at some point the environment constrained the development of these societies but also we can see that we have islands with similar environments and they became differentiated so only the environment doesn't explain the differences that Europeans found when they arrived. The archaeological evidence also demonstrates that Canarian inhabitants share similar or identical technological and cultural backgrounds when they arrived but these cultures became differentiated through time. When Europeans arrived in the Middle Ages they indicated that Canarian inhabitants spoke different dialects and didn't have the same fairness skills needed to navigate between islands. These texts combined with archaeological evidence also demonstrate a significant diversity between islands in terms of social complexity, material culture and demographic development. There are currently three main hypotheses explaining the colonization of the Canary Islands. The first belief definition of unique groups from cartridge found archipelago in the exploratory journeys they will have settled in the eastern islands and in northern to explore more of these such as murex. These arguments are mainly based on some radiocarbon dates of non-identified charcoal on ancient settlements and a few comparisons of material culture from Lanzarote that show affinities with unique typologies according to those defending these hypotheses. So here we can see we have evidence of accumulation before the outset of the common area especially in Tenerife but also in La Palma and in Lanzarote. These are one of the archaeological evidence and the author defend this hypothesis proposed as elements of unique influence. The point here is for example in this case it looks like a tourist can be but it's dated in a archaeological liar from the 6th century AD. In this case we have a tannit but it is it has been found in a well dated in the Middle Ages. The point is many some of the hypotheses came from the from the 80s where the radiocarbon dates were not applied in all their archaeological sites. However today there are some authors that are defending these hypotheses. A second hypothesis proposed that Romans from North Africa arrived to the Canary Islands around the 1st century BC bringing them non-suffering verbiage populations to exploit the islands coastal resources such as Moorish. In support of these hypotheses we have evidence of Roman presence in part of Amphora near the coastline of Lanzarote and Forteventura the eastern islands and also we have a short-term settlement with Roman material with Roman evidence in Lobos Islet which is between Lanzarote and Forteventura. Also we have some ceramic findings in in the heartlands of Lanzarote and Pliny the Elder mentioned the well the discovery of the Canary Islands in the 1st century BC by fishing men from North Africa. Also Pliny the Elder mentioned that who was the second the king of Mauritania a light of Rome sponsored an exploration of the Canary Islands around the 1st century BC. According to these hypotheses the collapse of the Roman empire caused the abandonment of the verbiage population who remained isolated under the arrival of the European people. So these verbiage people are the indigenous people we know today as Wanges or Canarians ancient Canarians. The third hypothesis hypothesis sorry is based on on the M&A's radiocarbon days and you can see here everything changed according to the the first hypothesis. If we consider all only the the hygienic radiocarbon days the colonization of the Canary Islands was around the 1st millennium AD. Also according to these hypotheses the scholars say that the verbiage population arrived by themselves maybe escaping from the Roman expansion of in the North Africa or because of the war between different verbiage groups. The point is we don't have any evidence of Roman culture features in the Roman and in the Aboriginal cultures. So the lack of archaeological research and systematic radiocarbon days from some islands especially the smaller islands hinders the development of an accurate view of the the chronology and dynamics of the colonization because it's not so it's not important only to understand when the Canaries were first colonized but also how humans spread through the islands. If we go to the mitochondrial DNA evidence on humans we can see different diversities between islands suggesting an heterogeneous process of colonization or different evolutionary histories. In this case in El Hierro Island which is the the smallest island in the Canaries we can see a very low mitochondrial diversity. It can be resolved of a bottleneck effect during the colonization, during the spread of humans but also it can be resolved of crises during the population of this island. So at the end we only have samples from the people who remained after a crisis so we don't know exactly what happened to have this kind of evidence. Also we have some Apollo groups which are only observed in the Canary Islands. According to the coalescent ages of these Apollo groups they are dated in the first millennium AD but we have a problem with that because we know that because these samples the individual sample have this radiocarmic days because we don't have dates from previous periods. And also which is interesting in the eastern islands we have found older Apollo groups that we haven't found in the other islands. Also we have dated these individuals and all of them are dated after the 11th century AD. It means that maybe these individuals came from a second migration wave after the 10th century AD at least. This is interesting because we can see differences between the archaeology of the eastern islands and the western islands especially in Gran Canaria. So we don't know if the difference in the archaeological record depends on the new migration or depends on indigenous process because it's true at the same time these differences are very slight and not very important differences just in the occupational pattern in the structure they use. If we consider Gran Canaria as a model because is where we have available more radiocarbon dates we can establish a proposal of a sequence for for the occupation of the Canary Islands. According to the the MES radiocarbon dates we are able to consider at least three main chronological periods. The first colonization process until the 6th century AD when all the Canary Islands were populated and the consolidation of the settlement and the demographic expansion until the 14th century AD we can see an increase in the number of new carbon dates and the last period of the European contact and contacts between this date to 1496 when all the Canary Islands were conquered. Here maybe in this increase is working the second migration way but according to the ancient DNA results this migration way was not an important output of population so we can see also an economic development thanks to to a better adaptation or just because they populated all the islands and also if we consider the changes in vegetation according to different pollen records we can see it since 2300 BP there is there was an important change in the vegetation involving the clearance of bootlands as indicated by the mark in the decline of pounds and the spread of grasses on the pollen records. This result could be indicating that the Canary was populated earlier than the MES radiocarbon dates indicate later later once the forest has been cleared in the area and the culture was luckily established as a justified increase of cereals after 1800 years BP. These changes coincide with the increase in fire frequency and some of them with clear archaeological evidence of occupation. The point here we need a highest resolution of pollen records because these results come from natural basins so we don't understand very well this specific period when the first colonists arrived to the islands. So we can say that Roman people discovering the islands on later and later their population arrived by themselves or maybe Roman people or Romanized people assisted them to travel to the islands. However why did Romans occupy Lobos Island where they didn't have any water resources? Why didn't they occupy Fuerteventura and Sarotec? Here for example there are some wells that European people explode when they arrive. So that doesn't mean that these islands were populated when Roman arrived and they decided to stay in Lobos just because to be safer so we don't know exactly. So this week I received a confirmation by starting grant so I got the project to get to explore how people from North Africa colonize the Canary Islands and how they successfully survived in different island ecologies so hopefully we will have more evidence in in five years time. Thank you very much for...