In 1542, Conquistador Francisco de Orellano emerged from the Amazon in 1542 and claimed to have seen large cities in the interior, some of which were populated by women warriors. From what I know, historians have debated Orellano's claims ever since with some arguing that he was lying or confused and others saying that he was telling the truth. Those who believe Orellano have gotten a boost in recent years with new discoveries that point to the Amazon having a large pre-contact population, but, obviously questions still remain.
I haven't heard anyone debate Captain Hernando de Ribera's account of his journey through the South American interior from 1543 to 1545. While reading Cabeza de Vaca's journal of his South American expeditions from 1540 to 1545 (they are almost as cool as his earlier and more famous North American journey), he mentioned receiving a report from Ribera where Ribera claimed that he also encountered female tribes, as well as "little people," "people with beards," "black people," and "people with white and yellow metal." Unfortunately I'm not very familiar with the geography of South America and the translator for the version of the text doesn't seem to know enough about South American history to offer much help, but I believe that Ribera traveled from what is today northern Argentina to northern Bolivia.
My gut instinct is that Ribera was lying, but if I'm correct about the location where he traveled, I know that archaeologists have made new discoveries that show the population of this area was much larger than previously thought. So is there any chance Ribera was telling the truth?
If so, how do we explain it? I can see the people with white and yellow being the Incas or another Andean civilization (he even mentions something that sounds like Lake Titicaca). The only explanation I can figure for the little people is that they could simply be a tribe that are genetically predisposed to being small and perhaps the black and bearded people are also genetic outliers for the region in that they have slightly darker skin and some facial hair. The Spanish had also been in Peru for 10 years, so maybe Ribera simply heard rumors of an escaped slave village and the bearded people were Spaniards? If not these explanations, is there any evidence of pre-Columbian African settlement of South America? I know we have the very questionable Olmec claim, but I haven't heard anything about South America. It would certainly seem to be a possibility.
Sorry for the long post. Looking forward to hearing answers.
Source: Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca's The South American Expeditions, 1540-1545 translated by Baker H. Morrow.
Accounts of Bearded Indians have nothing to do with Black, White or Asian, Melanesian or aboriginal people. Most Native Americans had a deep aversion to body and facial hair, but most Amazon tribes like the Acha people, Aztec, Paiute, Yuchi, Miwok, Pacific Northwest tribes, and the Chumash Indians especially the coastal tribes, the Island of Santa Cruz was called by the Spaniards “ Island of the Bearded Men. There were countless pictures of Ferndando Librado who was descended from parents solely of Chumash Santa Cruz Island ancestry. The North and South Americans Indians had Copper, gold, and silver and bronze metal works. With no reason for outside held of diffusion of metallurgy. Foreigners need to stop stealing Native accomplishments to attribute them to fake Indian foreigners.
Native American tribes had gold from trade, there were dark and light skinned natives, they also used paint to color their skin., native Americans were short and tall. Native Americans grew beards as full or as thin as anyone else.