Bison hair found in Greenland
Inger E
see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short Essay.
BISON OR BEAR HAIR
© Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
BACKGROUND
Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
Bay.
BISON
Bison belongs to the class Mammalia, order Artiodactyla, family Bocidae.
There are different undergroups under the subgroup with the same name as the
family name Bocidae.
The European Bison have or should we say had two lines, one is now gone:
* Bison bonasus caucasicus (now gone)
* Bison bonasus bonasus
The later weren't seen at all in today's Scandinavia and the Baltic's in the
Medieval Age.
The contacts between Scandinavia and Caucasus where Bison bonasus causasicus
lived where broken around 1050 AD when the Viking Age ended.
The contacts between Scandinavia and the Hungarian Pusta where the later
lived in small groups during Medieval time were broken from around 1100 AD
to the end of the 14th Century due to two main reasons:
I:
The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old contacts
between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
II:
The Osman Empire had around 1300 expanded and incooperated among other
Hungary in their desire to make the European people Muslims. The Osman
Empire existed into modern days.
The furtrade in the 12th-14th Century went from Greenland to Norway and the
Orkney Islands not in the opposite direction.(ref. Diplomas dealing with
cargo from Greenland).
All this leads up to the simple conclusion: It' s highly unlikely that Bison
hair found in Greenland could and would have been from any Bison living in
Caucasus or on the Hungarian Pusta provided that we are talking about rope
and hair dated between 1100 and 1500.
BEAR
The only alikeness between any bear and a bison is that they both belong to
the class Mammalia. The bear belongs to the order Carnivora, family Ursidae,
subfamily Ursinae and species Ursus arctos. In this group, the Ursus arctos
there are several different undergroups:
One is the Brown bear(German " Braunbär") living in Northern Europe. The
Brown bear weight up to 250-350 kilogram and can be up to 2 metres high.
One other is the Grizzly bear living in North America. The Grizzly bear can
up to 2 metres 80 centimetres high, the shoulders can be up to 1,5 metres(1
metre 50 centimetres), the weight for the Grizzly bear is normally up to 780
kilogram - the Yukon Grizzly bear weight less 140-150 kilogram in average.
There is no alikeness between a Brown bear hair and a bison hair, thus it's
almost impossible to take one for the other.
Further more: the Brown bear lives in Scandinavia and we never have seen any
indication that hairs from Brown bear was used to make ropes. Thus it's
highly unlikely that any ropes made of Brown bear hair from Scandinavia
would and could have been found in Greenland.
CONCLUSION
All bison hair found in rope and or free in Greenland must be belived to
have North American origin. There is only two ways it can have been
transported to Greenland:
* The Norse hunted for furs in North America and among the Mamals they
hunted we have reason to believe that bison was one.
* Merchandising or trade via several hands.
Inger E Johansson
© Gothenburg February 2002
Kel Rekuta
an interesting article, unfortunately without references.
Could you please add some?
>
> Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't
> see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short Essay.
This observation was based on a discussion elsewhere? I must
have missed it in SHM.
>
> BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> © Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> BACKGROUND
> Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
> the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
> Bay.
Would that have been Plains or Woodland Bison? The range of
such animals was quite different. I'm curious as to where
such information is published.
>
> BISON
> Bison belongs to the class Mammalia, order Artiodactyla, family Bocidae.
> There are different undergroups under the subgroup with the same name as the
> family name Bocidae.
> The European Bison have or should we say had two lines, one is now gone:
> * Bison bonasus caucasicus (now gone)
> * Bison bonasus bonasus
I understand they were extinct well before the Iron Age. Not
really my area of study though.
>
> The later weren't seen at all in today's Scandinavia and the Baltic's in the
> Medieval Age.
>
> The contacts between Scandinavia and Caucasus where Bison bonasus causasicus
> lived where broken around 1050 AD when the Viking Age ended.
Really? Didn't the Hansa have substantial trade of fur, et
cetera from central Asia throughout the Baltic region? The
Scandinavian peoples certainly continued to trade with the
Hansa until its economic decline in the 16th Century.
>
> The contacts between Scandinavia and the Hungarian Pusta where the later
> lived in small groups during Medieval time were broken from around 1100 AD
> to the end of the 14th Century due to two main reasons:
>
> I:
> The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old contacts
> between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
>
> II:
> The Osman Empire had around 1300 expanded and incooperated among other
> Hungary in their desire to make the European people Muslims. The Osman
> Empire existed into modern days.
>
> The furtrade in the 12th-14th Century went from Greenland to Norway and the
> Orkney Islands not in the opposite direction.(ref. Diplomas dealing with
> cargo from Greenland).
>
> All this leads up to the simple conclusion: It' s highly unlikely that Bison
> hair found in Greenland could and would have been from any Bison living in
> Caucasus or on the Hungarian Pusta provided that we are talking about rope
> and hair dated between 1100 and 1500.
>
A simple explanation would be to question the origin of the
rope.
Ships need a lot of rope. Rope can be fabricated from all
sorts of fibre. Whether the rope found in Greenland contains
some fibre from the Baltic or Caucasus is not as relevant as
the dating of the rope. Rope has a relatively short life
span, perhaps two generations. If the archaeological find
has been dated after trade with Iceland ceased in the 14thC
(?) shortly before the demise of the colony, then you can
safely assume the fibre didn't originate in the East.
However, there are references to Greenlanders trading ropes
and cables for Norwegian goods. (see references below)
> BEAR
> The only alikeness between any bear and a bison is that they both belong to
> the class Mammalia. The bear belongs to the order Carnivora, family Ursidae,
> subfamily Ursinae and species Ursus arctos. In this group, the Ursus arctos
> there are several different undergroups:
>
> One is the Brown bear(German " Braunbär") living in Northern Europe. The
> Brown bear weight up to 250-350 kilogram and can be up to 2 metres high.
Now this is what first caught my eye....
>
> One other is the Grizzly bear living in North America. The Grizzly bear can
> up to 2 metres 80 centimetres high, the shoulders can be up to 1,5 metres(1
> metre 50 centimetres), the weight for the Grizzly bear is normally up to 780
> kilogram - the Yukon Grizzly bear weight less 140-150 kilogram in average.
Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
St. Lawrence basin.
There are references to the trade of polar bear cubs and
adult pelts to Europe. (Gwyn Jones, A History of the
Vikings, p293. & Else Roesdahl, The Vikings, p272.)
>
> There is no alikeness between a Brown bear hair and a bison hair, thus it's
> almost impossible to take one for the other.
>
> Further more: the Brown bear lives in Scandinavia and we never have seen any
> indication that hairs from Brown bear was used to make ropes. Thus it's
> highly unlikely that any ropes made of Brown bear hair from Scandinavia
> would and could have been found in Greenland.
>
> CONCLUSION
> All bison hair found in rope and or free in Greenland must be belived to
> have North American origin. There is only two ways it can have been
> transported to Greenland:
>
> * The Norse hunted for furs in North America and among the Mamals they
> hunted we have reason to believe that bison was one.
>
> * Merchandising or trade via several hands.
>
> Inger E Johansson
> © Gothenburg February 2002
Both reasonable conclusions based on extensive written
evidence. But where has the confusion of bear and bison hair
been discussed?
Kel Rekuta
John G Harrison
"Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3C629AB0...@sympatico.ca...
> Inger E wrote:
>
> an interesting article, unfortunately without references.
> Could you please add some?
>
> >
> > Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who
can't
> > see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short
Essay.
>
> This observation was based on a discussion elsewhere? I must
> have missed it in SHM.
>
> >
> > BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> > © Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> > BACKGROUND
> > Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated
to
> > the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> > contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> > during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of
Hudson
> > Bay.
>
Regards
John
Eric Stevens
Not just "four hairs". Inger originally wrote:
"Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs,
dated to the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen
questions ... "
She doesn't actually say how much bison hair there was in the rope.
A Google search on 'bison hair rope greenland' produces a number of
hits including http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
which carries a brief discussion of the find. From the text, what was
found was a rope made of bison hair, not just a rope containing bison
hair.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Gilmore, Phyllis
Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Inger E wrote:
> > BEAR
> > The only alikeness between any bear and a bison is that they both belong to
> > the class Mammalia. The bear belongs to the order Carnivora, family Ursidae,
> > subfamily Ursinae and species Ursus arctos. In this group, the Ursus arctos
> > there are several different undergroups:
> >
> > One is the Brown bear(German " Braunbär") living in Northern Europe. The
> > Brown bear weight up to 250-350 kilogram and can be up to 2 metres high.
>
> Now this is what first caught my eye....
>
> >
> > One other is the Grizzly bear living in North America. The Grizzly bear can
> > up to 2 metres 80 centimetres high, the shoulders can be up to 1,5 metres(1
> > metre 50 centimetres), the weight for the Grizzly bear is normally up to 780
> > kilogram - the Yukon Grizzly bear weight less 140-150 kilogram in average.
>
> Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
> the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
> indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
> northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
> and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
> St. Lawrence basin.
Webster's Collegiate, 10th edition:
"brown bear: any of several bears predomininantly borwn in color that
are sometimes considered a single species (Usus arctos) including the
grizzly bear and that formerly inhabited Western North America from the
barrens of Alaska to northern Mexico and much of Europe and Asia but are
now much restricted in range."
"grizzly bear: a very large brown bear (Ursos arctos horribilis) of the
uplands of western No. America."
It's that "western" part i find interesting in both cases.
Phyllis
David Debono
(c) Monty Python
David D.
The Mediaeval Combat Society
The Historical Reenactment Web Site
http://www.montacute.net/histrenact/welcome.htm
Michael Zalar
> > © Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> > BACKGROUND
> > Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
> > the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> > contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> > during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
> > Bay.
>
> Would that have been Plains or Woodland Bison? The range of
> such animals was quite different. I'm curious as to where
> such information is published.
>
re: bison range.
The following websites give a fairly good idea of where the bison were
in North America
http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html
and
http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp
Inger E
it's 07.56 and I am on my way to work, thus I can't send you all information
directly. I am sorry.
If you go to http://www.google.com and write following words in the
searchline you will find more, but not all. The rest I will add in a mail to
the group later today. OK?
searchwords:
Norse yarn Canada Greenland artifact
_______
You don't need to write a "+" in between the words. AND: Don't write a "+"
in between if you aren't writing from a Scandinavian or an English computer,
there is a bug in some of the other languages transcription of a "+".
Inger E
Inger E
"John G Harrison" <jo...@abercromby14.freeserve.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:a3uah6$888$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
Inger E
may I call you that, first of all I would like to say I alway find your
lines interesting. Hope you don't mind.
You are correct or should I say your ref. is correct, but the problem is
that the hair from a Scandinavian bear doesn't actually look like the hair
from a grizzly even if they both today are talked about as Ursos arctos. The
problem here in this group and elsewhere have been that there still are
scientists, ok no zoologists or biologists, who actually believe that it's
impossible to see the difference between a brown bear hair and bison. There
even have been a mail from a person who's education I don't know anything
about suggesting that the brown bear and the bison belonged to the same
family subgroup etc......
Inger E
"Gilmore, Phyllis" <gil...@dcmail1.rand.org> skrev i meddelandet
news:gilmore-62E2D2...@lumberjack.rand.org...
Inger E
you may be found of Monty Python, who wouldn't be in a kindergarten? Never
the less if you haven't anything positive to add to the bison hair
discussion I suggest that you return to your play-toys. I know I am rude,
but you yourself are the same bringing Monty Python into this question.
Inger E
"David Debono" <david....@montacute.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:gnt56u8esnndek8gb...@4ax.com...
Mike Cleven
Yes, but if the theories about the Northwest Passage being open in those
times _were_ true then there _are_ grizzlies, a few at least, as far as
the northern end of the Mackenzie Range; probably pretty competitive for
turf with polar bears, but still a possibility......grizzlies range out
onto the Prairies near the headwaters of the Bow, Athapaska,
Saskatchewan etc. Rivers, which were trade routes, as well as navigable
for much of their distance (with portaging) for a very long ways from
Lake Winnipeg....
--
Mike Cleven
http://www.cayoosh.net (early BC history)
http://www.hiyu.net (Cayoosh Jargon phrasebook/history)
Mike Cleven
small correction: I'm not sure that's what the range I'm thinking of is
called; it's the boundary between the NWT and the Yukon Territory.
Mike Cleven
David Debono wrote:
You're no relation to Edward deBono, are you? The psychological
theorist?
Inger E. Johansson
news:3C62F2DC...@bigfoot.com...
>
>
> Mike Cleven wrote:
> >
> > "Gilmore, Phyllis" wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <3C629AB0...@sympatico.ca>,
> > > Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
<snip>
> > >
> > > It's that "western" part i find interesting in both cases.
> >
> > Yes, but if the theories about the Northwest Passage being open in those
> > times _were_ true then there _are_ grizzlies, a few at least, as far as
> > the northern end of the Mackenzie Range;
>
> small correction: I'm not sure that's what the range I'm thinking of is
> called; it's the boundary between the NWT and the Yukon Territory.
>
> probably pretty competitive for
> > turf with polar bears, but still a possibility......grizzlies range out
> > onto the Prairies near the headwaters of the Bow, Athapaska,
> > Saskatchewan etc. Rivers, which were trade routes, as well as navigable
> > for much of their distance (with portaging) for a very long ways from
> > Lake Winnipeg....
Mike,
would you actually say that it's possible to make a mistake between for
exampl a Yokon bear and a bison bear's hair?
That I very much doubt. bear hear and bison hair aren't alike at all if
you have access to a good microscope, that's what I have been told by a
friend of mine who use to look for different types of hairs on textiles
to identify criminals. That sounds ok to me because if it's possible,
which it is, to distinct between a white poodlehair and a white Bisson
fraiche's hair and distinct them both from a white husky than I would be
very much disappointed if a scholar of the fack wouldn't have knowledge
enough to see what can be seen in broad daylight when it comes to bear
hair and bison hair. Wouldn't you be?
One other thing,
in the western area you are discussing above films usually show other
interesting "things" in the terrain. Thus I would like to know if you by
any chance know how old the custom is to mark the border between two
group's land with stones. Is it known to have existed since "ancient"
age or is it a late custom?
Inger E
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
erilar
<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> A Google search on 'bison hair rope greenland' produces a number of
> hits including http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> which carries a brief discussion of the find. From the text, what was
> found was a rope made of bison hair, not just a rope containing bison
> hair.
Rope is portable...
--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka erilar)
What do you mean, too many books??
------------------------------------------------
Erilar's Cave Annex: http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
David Debono
wrote:
>
>
>David Debono wrote:
>
>You're no relation to Edward deBono, are you? The psychological
>theorist?
No we have the intellect to spell our surname correctly :-) :-)
(You may infur that I have been asked this once or twice before!)
Actually I have read a couple of his books so long ago that I can't
remember what they were about.
Take care
Inger E
"erilar" <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
news:erilarloFRY-DDB3...@news.airstreamcomm.net...
> In article <g7l56ukf0m5h359qs...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens
> <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > A Google search on 'bison hair rope greenland' produces a number of
> > hits including http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> > which carries a brief discussion of the find. From the text, what was
> > found was a rope made of bison hair, not just a rope containing bison
> > hair.
>
> Rope is portable...
Yes it is, that's no doubt about it. But, neither the Norse Vikings(695-1100
AD) nor the later Norse in Greenland(1100-1529 AD) had the habit to make
ropes of bison hair.....
on the other hand if we look at supposed traded gods such as a large iron
cooking-pot no one could make a Viking or a later Norse trade that
either......
if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have taken
at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more than
likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and Hudson
Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
Canada....
Btw - have you read my lines re. Canade/Canada written in 1360's document? I
guess there will be much more out in the open than anyone can, could and
would have expected...
Inger E
Hammerstad
(oldtiden) and medieval times common in the woods of Central Europe, ca. year
1000 it existed as far North as Østergøtland." As Inger will confirm,
Østergøtand is in Sweden and year 1000 is later than the Bronze Age. But I doubt
she'll provide a reference to contradict the dictionary.
Then again if Inger's reason for posting on the Greenland rope possibly
containing bison hair has the same source as the link Eric Stevens found, this
discussion is very premature. Why not just wait until the analysis of the rope
is completed, which should also show the geographic source of the hair.
Unless Inger can come up with a reference to the result of the analysis having
been done (its probably not according to Eric's link) why not let this matter
lie - just write it of as due to her usual compulsive posting.
Kel Rekuta
>
> "erilar" <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
> news:erilarloFRY-DDB3...@news.airstreamcomm.net...
> > In article <g7l56ukf0m5h359qs...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens
> > <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > A Google search on 'bison hair rope greenland' produces a number of
> > > hits including http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> > > which carries a brief discussion of the find. From the text, what was
> > > found was a rope made of bison hair, not just a rope containing bison
> > > hair.
> >
> > Rope is portable...
>
> Yes it is, that's no doubt about it. But, neither the Norse Vikings(695-1100
> AD) nor the later Norse in Greenland(1100-1529 AD) had the habit to make
> ropes of bison hair.....
As the supply of hemp might have been limited in such a
northern climate, what did they make rope out of? My limited
sources claim the Greenlanders exported rope as well as the
fur, ivory and timber we expect to see. Would they not have
used any available fibre to twist rope and line? Bison hair
is quite long (personal experience) and might make
reasonable rope. Same thing with musk ox hair. Perhaps the
Greenlanders traded with the Dorset Inuit for that as well
as fur and ivory?
>
> on the other hand if we look at supposed traded gods such as a large iron
> cooking-pot no one could make a Viking or a later Norse trade that
> either......
>
> if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
> from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have taken
> at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more than
> likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and Hudson
> Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
> Canada....
Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
Could it be that the Greenlanders, who were later accused of
having "gone native", were trading with the locals? As you
have noted, a lot of hunters were required to collect that
much ivory.
Alex
> I have an essay called An Elk by An Elk....etc etc etc
>
> (c) Monty Python
>
> On Thu, 07 Feb 2002 12:45:48 GMT, "Inger E"
> <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
>
> >Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't
> >see the difference between Bisons and Bears
The difference between Bulls (of any type) and Bears is quite obvious
for
anybody who from time to time pays attention to the financial markets.
>I have written this short Essay.
> >
> >BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> >© Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> >BACKGROUND
> >Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
> >the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> >contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> >during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
> >Bay.
> >
> >BISON
> >Bison belongs to the class Mammalia, order Artiodactyla, family Bocidae.
> >There are different undergroups under the subgroup with the same name as the
> >family name Bocidae.
> >The European Bison have or should we say had two lines, one is now gone:
> >* Bison bonasus caucasicus (now gone)
> >* Bison bonasus bonasus
This is probably what's called "zubr".
As for the 'caucasicus', was it 'tur'? (a big bull with the impressive
horns and not so impressive fur) it did not survive.
> >
> >The later weren't seen at all in today's Scandinavia and the Baltic's in the
> >Medieval Age.
If she is referencing zubr, this depends on a definition of
"Baltic's".
Today the main habitats are in the forests of Belorussia and Poland.
In the
middle ages habitat was considerably wider. Small wonder that they are
not
seen in today's Scandinavia: by the 1st quarter of XX they could be
found only
in the zoos (at lowest point they had been down to 48 species). By the
80's
this number increased to appr. 2,000 (up to 800 in SU). Poland being,
AFAIK,
a "Baltic State" was and still is one of the main habitats.
> >
> >The contacts between Scandinavia and Caucasus where Bison bonasus causasicus
> >lived where broken around 1050 AD when the Viking Age ended.
> >
> >The contacts between Scandinavia and the Hungarian Pusta where the later
> >lived in small groups during Medieval time were broken from around 1100 AD
> >to the end of the 14th Century due to two main reasons:
> >
> >I:
> >The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's
AFAIK, direction from Scandinavia to Hungary is rather "South" then
"West"
(Budapest being appr as much to the "West" as Stokholm and
considerably to
the South-East from Copehhagen).
> and after 1100 the old contacts
> >between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> >interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
Interesting. Their raids to the west ended in 1050's and at the same
time
their interest toward the East ceased to exists. Was a previous
statement
a typo?
> >
> >II:
> >The Osman Empire had around 1300
There was a small Ottoman state at this time but it was not an Empire.
They did not even cross Bosphorus at this time.
>expanded and incooperated among other
> >Hungary
A 1st noticeable encounter with Hungarians happened in 1363. Serb and
Hungarian
army moved on Adrianople and had been defeated by Ottomans on r.
Maritza.
Hungary was not "incooperated" (probably "conquered"?) until 1526
after the
battle at Mohacs.
I suspect that by this time the vikings had been safely extinct. Don't
know
what this have to do with the bisons.
>in their desire to make the European people Muslims.
... and to kill all the bisons. This actually was their main task
because
when Hungary was freed from the Ottomans there were still plenty of
Christians
around but (AFAIK) no bisons.
>The Osman
> >Empire existed into modern days.
Sure. There were no bisons to attack them from behind....
> >BEAR
> >The only alikeness between any bear and a bison is that they both belong to
> >the class Mammalia.
Nonsense. Both have four legs, one head, teeth, and fur. None of them
(AFAIK)
uses fork and knife.
> >
> >One is the Brown bear(German " Braunbär") living in Northern Europe. The
> >Brown bear weight up to 250-350 kilogram and can be up to 2 metres high.
> >
> >One other is the Grizzly bear living in North America. The Grizzly bear can
> >up to 2 metres 80 centimetres high, the shoulders can be up to 1,5 metres(1
> >metre 50 centimetres), the weight for the Grizzly bear is normally up to 780
> >kilogram - the Yukon Grizzly bear weight less 140-150 kilogram in average.
> >
From above one may conclude that there are only 2 types of the bears.
IIRC, there are 7 different types of them bears (one lives in the
Southern America), including a white bear who lives in Arctica. This
has nothing to
do with the bisons because all of them had been safely digested by the
Ottomans.
Inger E
"Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> skrev i meddelandet
news:3C648D74...@sympatico.ca...
I have been going thru documentation from harbors where the boats arrived, I
haven't seen any rope ref. Would you please send me a link or a ref to the
source(-s) you mention?
>
>
> >
> > on the other hand if we look at supposed traded gods such as a large
iron
> > cooking-pot no one could make a Viking or a later Norse trade that
> > either......
> >
> > if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
> > from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have
taken
> > at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more
than
> > likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and
Hudson
> > Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
> > Canada....
>
> Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
Well it is. The problem is not that there aren't a copy of an intersting
annal from one of the monestries. The problem is that when it was returned
from Greenland in 1472(!) the original's where abouts the last century
haven't been located. The annal had been written in an earlier minoritian
monestry which in the end had been a Birgittiner monestry. the Swedish
Nobleman who carried it with him to Munkeliv and than on to Vadstena.
> Could it be that the Greenlanders, who were later accused of
> having "gone native", were trading with the locals? As you
> have noted, a lot of hunters were required to collect that
> much ivory.
I don't think that thats the way the main ivory were "collected". I am
pretty sure that several Norse men married locals - Gisele told us in the
group last year that Norse mail DNA can be seen from about 1100 in the later
Dorset population.
Inger E
Post Scriptum.
Do you have access to Deslien's map with the Norse settlements marked? If
not send me a private line and I will send it to you.
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>> if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
>> from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have taken
>> at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more than
>> likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and Hudson
>> Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
>> Canada....
>
>Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
>Could it be that the Greenlanders, who were later accused of
>having "gone native", were trading with the locals? As you
>have noted, a lot of hunters were required to collect that
>much ivory.
I think there may be mention - at least Farley Mowat in the 'The
Farfarers' seemed to know quite a bit about it. I haven't tried to
follow up his sources.
As to why you think there is no mention in the surviving literature -
the sagas make up the bulk of the surviving literature, as opposed to
the surving written records. The sagas were generally written up to
several hundred years after the events described and were written by
Christians who had a vested interest in blowing their own trumpet.
There are all kinds of theories including some that the Greenlanders
who were later accused of having "gone native" were the natives with
whom everybody was trading. I have even seen it suggested that the
'skraelings' generally despised and hunted by the Greenland Norse were
Greenlanders who had "gone native".
I don't give much credence to that but it does suggest that last but
there is not necessarily a reliable correspondence between the events
of the time and the sagas, many of which were produced as belated PR
blurbs for the families concerned.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Svein Kjærevik
--
______________________________________
Svein Kjærevik
Kjærevik Båtservice
5636 Varaldsøy
Norway
E-Mail: kja...@online.no
______________________________________
"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
news:99298.24617$l93.4...@newsb.telia.net...
>
> >
> > Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
>
> Well it is. The problem is not that there aren't a copy of an intersting
> annal from one of the monestries. The problem is that when it was returned
> from Greenland in 1472(!) the original's where abouts the last century
> haven't been located. The annal had been written in an earlier minoritian
> monestry which in the end had been a Birgittiner monestry. the Swedish
> Nobleman who carried it with him to Munkeliv and than on to Vadstena.
This requires an explanation.
A Greenland annal?
A Swedish nobleman??
A Greenland voyage in 1472???
The last documented return sailing from Greenland happened in
1410 when Einride returned. Any contact beyond that must be new pieces of
history! Well, it happends from time to time.
Regards, Svein.
>
.
>
> Inger E
>
Svein Kjærevik
--
______________________________________
Svein Kjærevik
Kjærevik Båtservice
5636 Varaldsøy
Norway
E-Mail: kja...@online.no
______________________________________
"Hammerstad" <eg...@start.no> wrote in message
news:3C64629E...@start.no...
.
>
> Then again if Inger's reason for posting on the Greenland rope possibly
> containing bison hair has the same source as the link Eric Stevens found,
this
> discussion is very premature. Why not just wait until the analysis of the
rope
> is completed, which should also show the geographic source of the hair.
The rope of bisonhair discovered in Greenland is also
mentioned in Heyerdal/ Lilliestrøm 1999. I assume it refers to the same
finding.
>
> Unless Inger can come up with a reference to the result of the analysis
having
> been done (its probably not according to Eric's link) why not let this
matter
> lie - just write it of as due to her usual compulsive posting.
Are somebody working on the matter? It should definately be
possible to confirm if the hair really origin from the NA Bison.
Regards, Svein.
>
>
>
Svein Kjærevik
--
______________________________________
Svein Kjærevik
Kjærevik Båtservice
5636 Varaldsøy
Norway
E-Mail: kja...@online.no
______________________________________
"Michael Zalar" <m_z...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a458909b.02020...@posting.google.com...
>
> re: bison range.
> The following websites give a fairly good idea of where the bison were
> in North America
>
> http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html
> and
> http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp
One map borders the bison area to the shores of Lake Manitoba.
The other one seems to include the land between L.M. and L. Winnipeg.
Perhaps the bison did not accept strict borders. The question must then be
if the Greenlanders explored that far and returned to tell about the
magnificent land they had discovered?. If they did, it is understandable
that they finally left Greenland. The land has proven it's qualities - it
has been the new homeland for thousands of Icelanders for more than hundred
years.
Regards, Svein.
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
>news:99298.24617$l93.4...@newsb.telia.net...
>>
> > >
>> > Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
>>
>> Well it is. The problem is not that there aren't a copy of an intersting
>> annal from one of the monestries. The problem is that when it was returned
>> from Greenland in 1472(!) the original's where abouts the last century
>> haven't been located. The annal had been written in an earlier minoritian
>> monestry which in the end had been a Birgittiner monestry. the Swedish
>> Nobleman who carried it with him to Munkeliv and than on to Vadstena.
>
> This requires an explanation.
>A Greenland annal?
>A Swedish nobleman??
>A Greenland voyage in 1472???
> The last documented return sailing from Greenland happened in
>1410 when Einride returned. Any contact beyond that must be new pieces of
>history! Well, it happends from time to time.
>Regards, Svein.
>>
Not really a 'new piece of history'. Merely a little known piece of
history. I will see if I can dig out some references.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Søren Larsen
"Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> skrev i en meddelelse news:3C648D74...@sympatico.ca...
> As the supply of hemp might have been limited in such a
> northern climate, what did they make rope out of? My limited
> sources claim the Greenlanders exported rope as well as the
> fur, ivory and timber we expect to see. Would they not have
> used any available fibre to twist rope and line? Bison hair
> is quite long (personal experience) and might make
> reasonable rope. Same thing with musk ox hair. Perhaps the
> Greenlanders traded with the Dorset Inuit for that as well
> as fur and ivory?
>
Walrus hide was used to make ropes.
>
> >
> > on the other hand if we look at supposed traded gods such as a large iron
> > cooking-pot no one could make a Viking or a later Norse trade that
> > either......
> >
> > if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
> > from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have taken
> > at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more than
> > likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and Hudson
> > Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
> > Canada....
>
> Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
> Could it be that the Greenlanders, who were later accused of
> having "gone native", were trading with the locals? As you
> have noted, a lot of hunters were required to collect that
> much ivory.
The Walrus was hunted in Nordsetr in the breeding season
while the males are are gathered in colonies and are territorial.
You just pluck them like mushrooms-or maybe this is sinplification ;-)
Cheers
Soren Larsen
Søren Larsen
"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
>
> I:
> The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old contacts
> between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
Someone should have told Valdemar II. Then maybe he wouldn't have taken
Estonia in 1219 and his decendants might not have kept it for 150 y. before selling
it to the German order.
Cheers
Soren Larsen
Inger E
"Svein Kjærevik" <kja...@online.no> skrev i meddelandet
news:XS598.2914$HL2....@news2.ulv.nextra.no...
>
>
> --
> ______________________________________
> Svein Kjærevik
>
> Kjærevik Båtservice
> 5636 Varaldsøy
> Norway
>
> E-Mail: kja...@online.no
> ______________________________________
> "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
> news:99298.24617$l93.4...@newsb.telia.net...
> >
> > >
> > > Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
> >
> > Well it is. The problem is not that there aren't a copy of an intersting
> > annal from one of the monestries. The problem is that when it was
returned
> > from Greenland in 1472(!) the original's where abouts the last century
> > haven't been located. The annal had been written in an earlier
minoritian
> > monestry which in the end had been a Birgittiner monestry. the Swedish
> > Nobleman who carried it with him to Munkeliv and than on to Vadstena.
>
> This requires an explanation.
> A Greenland annal?
information and tried to follow it's way back to Euorpe) was in a book
written by a Danish Archaeolog in 1920's
> A Swedish nobleman??
Yes. I have his name - but I don't have sort out his profession - was he a
representative for the Birgittiner mother monestry in Vadstena or was he a
representative for the Danish King in 1470's that's what I am not sure of. I
know which ship he sailed with, and that he returned. I have the name of 5
persons on the ship but those five names I haven't been able to establish if
they all returned. I know that the annal were at Munkeliv and was supposed
to be given to Vadstena, but that's not confirmed that it was. If it is the
original annal - not the copied documents into a copybook - might still
exist, it might have been taken by Gustav Vasa when he took all valuable
things from our monestries and later disappeared when The Royal Castle Three
Crowns cut fire ..... I can't say for sure for the moment.
> A Greenland voyage in 1472???
One of three in the 1470's which I have had confirmed. There might have been
two more.
> The last documented return sailing from Greenland happened in
> 1410 when Einride returned. Any contact beyond that must be new pieces of
history!
Well if you read thru the bibliographies of King Hans- Kristian Tyrann you
will find ref. made by Scholars in the first 40 years of the 20's Century. I
found my "favorite" book at an Antiquavariate - a certain Prof Weibull had
written his name inside it in the 1920's.
Inger E
Inger E
"Søren Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> skrev i meddelandet
news:a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de...
Sören,
as you are aware of the Swedes and the Danes weren't exactly friends between
1112 - 1319..... Valdemar II had better contacts with Estonia, or should we
be fair to say part of Estonia than the Swedish Jarls.... but the Swedish
Jarls of the Folkunga Dynasty hadn't only to fight Russian folkgroups they
also had at least two fights with Valdemar's people and with the "German
Orden" back in those days. That's was one of the reasons that the Swedes and
the Norse turned westward..... not to mention the fact that from 1100 the
Swedish Church grow closer to the Papal Church than it had been in the
9th-10th Century....
Inger E
>
> Cheers
> Soren Larsen
>
>
>
>
>
>
Alex
Or to Alexander Nevsky who got his nickname for defeating Swedes on R. Neva
in 1240. :-)
IMHO, there are two major problems with I's "logic":
(1) The bison-like animals (zubres) had been widely available in the areas,
which were very close to the Baltic coast (Russia, Poland, Lithuania). No need
to look as far as Hungary.
(2) Regardless 'viking' (in a narrow meaning of this word) activities, there
always had been relations between the Scandinavian states and their neighbours
(Hanseatic cities, Poland, Novgorod, etc.). And if zubr's "byproducts" were
available to these neighbours (they were), they could easily find their way
to the Scandinavian countries.
Combination of these two factors makes all speculations about the travels
to America simply unnecessary (they may or may not exist but they did not
have to exist to get access to 'bizon' hair).
Eric Stevens
I haven't really started looking yet but I have found reference to the
Danish-Norwegian-Portuguese expedition of 1473 involving Joanno vas
Corte Real.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
I think it all hangs on whether or not it is possible to identify the
particular species of bison.
The URL I previously cited
http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
the idea of a European bison.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Hammerstad
>
> The URL I previously cited
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
> appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
> the idea of a European bison.
>
Why not ask her, she is a member of the staff of the institution which deals with archaeology in Greenland:
http://www.sila.dk/ Frankly I would believe that finding the source of the possible bison hair would not be on a
high priority list of things to do.
Otherwise the bison hair issue was flogged to death in the thread you had one reference to, see:
http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/ This is the archive of the Old Norse Net, and most (if not all) of the "Norse in
North America" issues that Inger and others bring up here have also had a flogging there previously.
Inger E
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:f8e58188.02020...@posting.google.com...
> "S?en Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> wrote in message
news:<a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de>...
> > "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
> > >
> > > I:
> > > The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old
contacts
> > > between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> > > interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
> >
> > Someone should have told Valdemar II. Then maybe he wouldn't have taken
> > Estonia in 1219 and his decendants might not have kept it for 150 y.
before selling
> > it to the German order.
>
> Or to Alexander Nevsky who got his nickname for defeating Swedes on R.
Neva
> in 1240. :-)
That Alexander Nevsky defeated Swedes or should I say a member of the old
Varjagan Dynasty the one we in Sweden calls the Folkunga Dynasty on River
Neva in 1240 is correct. The Bishop of Linköping had as you might know a
fortress there up to 1240. I am not talking about Sveaborg, btw. The Bishop
of Linköping was brother of the King and had a son Ulf who participated in
the battles. Ulf is remembered in Russian sources and in Swedish sources
among other thing for that battle - you see back than a jarl of Finland
owned the landarea you are discussing. It didn't belong to Russia, nor to
Estonia in those days AND there were no Bisons there. Of course not, in
Russian sources as well as in other the closest Bison at that time were in
Caucasus.
But then again I believe you haven't had time to read the Russian sources,
have you?
>
> IMHO, there are two major problems with I's "logic":
>
> (1) The bison-like animals (zubres) had been widely available in the
areas,
> which were very close to the Baltic coast (Russia, Poland, Lithuania).
Alex they weren't in the Baltics in 13th Century or for what that matter in
the 14th Century!!! Do your homework better.
<snip>
>
> (2) Regardless 'viking' (in a narrow meaning of this word) activities,
there
> always had been relations between the Scandinavian states and their
neighbours
> (Hanseatic cities, Poland, Novgorod, etc.). And if zubr's "byproducts"
were
> available to these neighbours (they were), they could easily find their
way
> to the Scandinavian countries.
Speculations about bisons living in the Baltic Sea area during the period we
call Medieval Age, from 1100 AD btw here in Sweden, is one of the worst
fanasty told and only show the person's lack of knowledge of the History in
this area.
> Combination of these two factors makes all speculations about the travels
> to America simply unnecessary (they may or may not exist but they did not
> have to exist to get access to 'bizon' hair).
Alex,
for your information the furtrade went from Greenland to Bergen, Orkney,
Tönsberg and than on to Hull, Lynn and London. Not the other way round. And
the boats that sailed weren't Swedish boats - they were Norse boats and
Orkney boats....
Good Night Alex,
sweet dreams but remember to take a better look in the books before you
relate the dreams to the group next time.
Inger E
Inger E
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:h86b6usjgi8q5ecff...@4ax.com...
> On 9 Feb 2002 09:30:19 -0800, am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
>
> >"S?en Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> wrote in message
news:<a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de>...
> >> "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
> >
> >(2) Regardless 'viking' (in a narrow meaning of this word) activities,
there
> >always had been relations between the Scandinavian states and their
neighbours
> >(Hanseatic cities, Poland, Novgorod, etc.). And if zubr's "byproducts"
were
> >available to these neighbours (they were), they could easily find their
way
> >to the Scandinavian countries.
> >
> >Combination of these two factors makes all speculations about the travels
> >to America simply unnecessary (they may or may not exist but they did not
> >have to exist to get access to 'bizon' hair).
>
> I think it all hangs on whether or not it is possible to identify the
> particular species of bison.
>
> The URL I previously cited
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
> appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
> the idea of a European bison.
Eric,
you wouldn't believe how fun people had at my table today when I told them
about Alex and other persons's fantasy production of a bison here in this
area - especially fun had a friend of mine who use to go to Latvia once or
twice a year and who have good knowledge of the rest of the Baltics..... we
decided that it must be the fact that people in other parts of the world now
realised that we don't have white Ice Bears walking on the streets that made
some fool invent Bisons in this area.....
Inger E
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric Stevens
Alex
> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:f8e58188.02020...@posting.google.com...
> > "S?en Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> wrote in message
> news:<a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de>...
> > > "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
> > > >
> > > > I:
> > > > The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old
> contacts
> > > > between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> > > > interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
> > >
> > > Someone should have told Valdemar II. Then maybe he wouldn't have taken
> > > Estonia in 1219 and his decendants might not have kept it for 150 y.
> before selling
> > > it to the German order.
> >
> > Or to Alexander Nevsky who got his nickname for defeating Swedes on R.
> Neva
> > in 1240. :-)
>
> That Alexander Nevsky defeated Swedes or should I say a member of the old
> Varjagan Dynasty the one we in Sweden calls the Folkunga Dynasty on River
> Neva in 1240 is correct.
I don't need your approval of this fact. It is too well-known.
>The Bishop of Linköping had as you might know a
> fortress there up to 1240. I am not talking about Sveaborg, btw. The Bishop
> of Linköping was brother of the King and had a son Ulf who participated in
> the battles. Ulf is remembered in Russian sources and in Swedish sources
> among other thing for that battle - you see back than a jarl of Finland
> owned the landarea you are discussing.
Alexander defeated Jarl Birger (sp) but this has very little to do with the
issue.
>It didn't belong to Russia, nor to
> Estonia in those days AND there were no Bisons there.
I never said that bisons were available in Estonia but their close analogy
was and still is available in Russia and Poland.
>Of course not, in
> Russian sources as well as in other the closest Bison at that time were in
> Caucasus.
It looks like you have serious reading problems. Equivalent of bison is
called 'zubr' and it inhabited in the areas very close to the Baltic coast.
It is widely mentioned in Russian sources (and perhaps in Polish) and there is
no need to make any uneducated guesses because these species are still alive
in Poland and Belorussia. Their herds went close to extinction only at the
beginning of XX, mostly due to a mass use of the modern hunting rifles.
Another, now extinct, species was "tur" (not to mix with a mountain ram,
which still lives on Caucass). In XI - XIII centuries both these animals lived
in a much wider area and you may find references to them in a testament of
Vladimir Monomach, a Great Prince of Kiev.
>
> But then again I believe you haven't had time to read the Russian sources,
> have you?
>
Unlike you, I did. And I must add that only an absolutely ignorant person
will deny existence of the zubrs in Russia.
> >
> > IMHO, there are two major problems with I's "logic":
> >
> > (1) The bison-like animals (zubres) had been widely available in the
> areas,
> > which were very close to the Baltic coast (Russia, Poland, Lithuania).
>
> Alex they weren't in the Baltics in 13th Century or for what that matter in
> the 14th Century!!! Do your homework better.
You are incompetent on this issue. They still live very close to Baltic coast.
They did not have to live _on_ the coast because the trade relationships
between the coastal and inland areas never were severed.
> <snip>
>
> >
> > (2) Regardless 'viking' (in a narrow meaning of this word) activities,
> there
> > always had been relations between the Scandinavian states and their
> neighbours
> > (Hanseatic cities, Poland, Novgorod, etc.). And if zubr's "byproducts"
> were
> > available to these neighbours (they were), they could easily find their
> way
> > to the Scandinavian countries.
>
> Speculations about bisons living in the Baltic Sea area during the period we
> call Medieval Age, from 1100 AD btw here in Sweden, is one of the worst
> fanasty told and only show the person's lack of knowledge of the History in
> this area.
>
(a) Person who never heard about zubr probably should shut up and get some
elementary eductaion.
(b) If you learn to read other people posts, you find out that I mentioned
areas "inland", which are pretty close to the coast.
>
> > Combination of these two factors makes all speculations about the travels
> > to America simply unnecessary (they may or may not exist but they did not
> > have to exist to get access to 'bizon' hair).
>
> Alex,
> for your information the furtrade went from Greenland to Bergen, Orkney,
> Tönsberg and than on to Hull, Lynn and London. Not the other way round. And
> the boats that sailed weren't Swedish boats - they were Norse boats and
> Orkney boats....
An idea that all goods had been transported _from_ Greenland and nothing
had been imported or brought by the coming ships is completely moronic.
Not that this is a big surprise considering that you are the author.
>
> Good Night Alex,
> sweet dreams but remember to take a better look in the books before you
> relate the dreams to the group next time.
I would not recommend this to you because you are obviously functionally
illiterate. But stop smoking whatever you are smoking and cut on your drinking.
Daryl Krupa
> an interesting article, unfortunately without references.
> Could you please add some?
Kel:
Inger doesn't do references.
She is our revered mentor, not our research assistant. <g>
> Inger E wrote:
> > Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't
> > see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short Essay.
>
> This observation was based on a discussion elsewhere?
> I must have missed it in SHM.
Inger's losing track of what was said where, and by whom.
This is presumably associated with her lack of references.
She also posted a screed on Late Medieval trading patterns
in Eastern Europe to sci.archaeology. This was in defense of
her bison distribution hypothesis, in answer to a challenge
of her ideas re: bear distribution, which challenge had only
appeared in SHM.
> Inger E wrote:
> > BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> > © Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> > BACKGROUND
> > Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
> > the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> > contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> > during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
> > Bay.
>
> Would that have been Plains or Woodland Bison? The range of
> such animals was quite different. I'm curious as to where
> such information is published.
Try these URLs, previously cited by Michael Zalar in re: to this topic.
http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp
http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html
<snip>
> Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
> the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
> indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
> northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
> and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
> St. Lawrence basin.
<snip>
And these, on bears.
http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/grizzly/grizzly.html
http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/blbear/blbear.html
Griz used to occupy the Great Plains before being extirpated
there by Europeans.
The barren ground grizzlies definitely occupy the northeastern
shores of Hudson Bay, and may have occupied Ungava in historical
times.
(Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)
The salient point here is that Inger has claimed that bear hair,
found on the shores of Baffin Bay and named as Grizzly bear hair,
cannot be hair from an European brown bear, because they are of
different sizes.
This claim ignores the fact that they are the same species,
_Ursos arctos_,
known all around the northern reaches of the hemisphere,
from Britain eastward to Hudson Bay, with a gap in the
North Atlantic and on the eastern coast of North America.
Of all the places Norsemen are known to have visited,
the North American end of their distribution is the only area
devoid of brown bears.
Any _Ursos arctos_ hair in a Norse rope near Baffin Bay is
much more likely to have been traded from Europe than
collected from a North American bear.
And now the proof that Inger is not knowledgeable on
this subject:
she did not bring up the fact that Grizzly bears are
named after the grizzled, or silver-haired, look of
mature adult "silverbacks".
Grizzly bear hair from the back and flanks of a mature adult
_looks_ different from European brown bair hair.
Surely that is more important than size differences.
Inger knows nothing of biogeography, not even that it exists
as a discipline. At one point she claimed that because caribou
pelts were different in different parts of Greenland, there
must have been extensive timber resources available to Medieval
Norse on Baffin Island, which thus must have been Markland,
which meant that Vinland had been somewhere beyond southwest
Hudson Bay. All in ignorance of the inconvenient fact that
Baffin Island has probably been treeless for millions of years,
and certainly for the last 100,000 years.
IMO, Kel, you have seen as much information on this subject
as you are going to. I predict that Inger will ignore the topic
from now on, as she has done when others of her
pronouncements-born-of-ignorance have been challenged.
Hoping that this helps,
Daryl Krupa
(who has petted bison and spun their wool, and
been much, much closer to a grizzly bear than
he ever wanted to be, and collected some of its hair,
and seen several others in the wild,
so that he is confident that he can tell the difference
between the two far better than some ditzy Bohuslander
kindergarten worker)
Eric Stevens
>It looks like you have serious reading problems. Equivalent of bison is
>called 'zubr' ...
But is its hair such as to be readily confused with the hair of a
North American bison?
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
But what about 600 years ago?
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Daryl Krupa
> I have an essay called An Elk by An Elk....etc etc etc
Ah-hem-hem-hem.
That's "Ann", not "Anne", Elk.
(Mrs.)
Daryl Krupa
<snip>
> The URL I previously cited
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison.
> She appears to either have not considered or, more likely,
> has rejected the idea of a European bison.
From the cited URL:
So what did they find.
Aside from sheep/goat, they are said to have fibers, fleeces, pelts
or artifacts made from the hair of cattle (Bos taurus),
Bison (Bison bison or Bison bonasus - American or European bison),
Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus), Musk ox (Ovibos moschatus),
Brown/black/grizzly bear (Ursus sp.), Polar bear (Thalarctos maritimus),
wolf (Canis sp.) and fox (probably arctic fox, Alopex lagopus).
As usual, Eric sees only what he wants to see.
More in sadness than in anger,
Daryl Krupa
Hammerstad
The conclusion of your link says: "the bison hair (if North American and if
bison)" - so why your question? Again, why not contact the relevant
examinators of the hair before speculating further?
Eric Stevens
wrote:
Try reading the article again. and you will find I was refering to the
**direct quote** from Jette Arneborg.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Eric Stevens
Its a strange world when an honest question is regarded as unwarranted
speculation.
If you don't know the answer, why don't you say so? Better still, why
bother answering at all?
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Hammerstad
Your so-called honest question is based upon wishful thinking, read the link
again (carefully this time). You have posted about half a dozen unnecessary
answers in this thread, your why's thus point back to you, sorry.
Mike Cleven
Ungava _is_ the northeastern shore of Hudson Bay, i.e. north of the tree
line and a bit below. I can see there having been browns/grizzes in the
James Bay-Grand River area, though (the southeastern shore); do you mean
the Manitoba coastline, somehow? In any case, competition for turf
between grizzes and polars would most likely have favoured the latter,
both for reasons of aggression/power and for the latter's greater
suitability to the arctic climate and the ice of the Bay.
> (Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)
NB which are the corporate survival of the Hudson's Bay Company, named
in the days when Hudson Bay _was_ known as Hudson's Bay....
>
> The salient point here is that Inger has claimed that bear hair,
> found on the shores of Baffin Bay and named as Grizzly bear hair,
> cannot be hair from an European brown bear, because they are of
> different sizes.
> This claim ignores the fact that they are the same species,
> _Ursos arctos_,
> known all around the northern reaches of the hemisphere,
> from Britain eastward to Hudson Bay, with a gap in the
> North Atlantic and on the eastern coast of North America.
I'm going to have to check on this with some fish & wildlife dept
acquaintances; in BC a distinction is made between grizzlies and browns,
I think, although maybe browns are really only immature grizzes; they're
known for being more aggressive than either grizzes or the various
subvarieties of blacks found here (cinnamons, kermodes/whites, etc.)
>
> Of all the places Norsemen are known to have visited,
> the North American end of their distribution is the only area
> devoid of brown bears.
> Any _Ursos arctos_ hair in a Norse rope near Baffin Bay is
> much more likely to have been traded from Europe than
> collected from a North American bear.
Agreed, but if there was penetration of the Manitoba Lakes and adjoining
river systems, it's possible they acquired bearskins/fur there.
>
> And now the proof that Inger is not knowledgeable on
> this subject:
> she did not bring up the fact that Grizzly bears are
> named after the grizzled, or silver-haired, look of
> mature adult "silverbacks".
> Grizzly bear hair from the back and flanks of a mature adult
> _looks_ different from European brown bair hair.
> Surely that is more important than size differences.
>
> Inger knows nothing of biogeography, not even that it exists
> as a discipline. At one point she claimed that because caribou
> pelts were different in different parts of Greenland, there
> must have been extensive timber resources available to Medieval
> Norse on Baffin Island, which thus must have been Markland,
> which meant that Vinland had been somewhere beyond southwest
> Hudson Bay. All in ignorance of the inconvenient fact that
> Baffin Island has probably been treeless for millions of years,
> and certainly for the last 100,000 years.
Markland is generally conceded to have been Labrador, with Helluland
("the place of stones") being Baffin. Still, I think there were trees
on Baffin more recently than your cite; there's a petrified/mummified
forest up that way somewhere, and I don't think it's _that_ old. I'm
bcc'ing this to someone who lives in Pangnirtung who's familiar with
this kind of detail, as well as wildlife issues in the region (Hi
Keith!)
> IMO, Kel, you have seen as much information on this subject
> as you are going to. I predict that Inger will ignore the topic
> from now on, as she has done when others of her
> pronouncements-born-of-ignorance have been challenged.
>
> Hoping that this helps,
> Daryl Krupa
> (who has petted bison and spun their wool, and
> been much, much closer to a grizzly bear than
> he ever wanted to be, and collected some of its hair,
> and seen several others in the wild,
I was hiking along an subalpine powerline in a remote valley in
southwest-central BC a few years ago in the company of a feisty and
rather tiny "red heeler" (similar to a blue heeler herding dog, only red
in colouring), who decided to take issue with a big brown down below the
access road I was walking on......geeez, I'm glad the bear was more
interested in the berries than in responding to the dog's aggression;
the dog backed off and followed along with me as I quietly trotted away
from the place as fast as I could get! There were more blacks than
people in the valley bottom, which was full of abandoned apple orchards
and attracted scores of them; down there I was usually in the company of
an aging Staffordshire which was a great security blanket, especially
because you'd run into three or four a day (not including the cubs
hanging with the sows).
> so that he is confident that he can tell the difference
> between the two far better than some ditzy Bohuslander
> kindergarten worker)
Bohuslanderinne.....(-er is a male ending, I think)
--
Mike Cleven
http://www.cayoosh.net (Bridge River Lillooet history)
http://www.hiyu.net (Chinook Jargon phrasebook/history)
Eric Stevens
For your irascible information I have established that it is not
difficult to distinguish the hair of the European species of bison
from either of the main American species.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Steve Marcus
Assuming that the rope is made of "American" bison hair, all you
would then have to do is to ask the rope if it got to Greenland
on a Norse vessel or in an Inuit vessel.
An "actual" Norse artifact found in North America known as the
"Norse Penny" is regarded as having clerly arrived in its final
resting place in Maine as a result of transportation through an
Inuit-Native American Indian trade network. Given the Inuit
presence on Greenland, and that there was Norse-Inuit trade, the
presence of a rope made of bison hair would not, per se,
establish a Norse presence in North America.
> Regards,
>
> Eric Stevens
Steve
--
The above posting is neither a legal opinion nor legal advice,
because we do not have an attorney-client relationship, and
should not be construed as either. This posting does not
represent the opinion of my employer, but is merely my personal
view.
Kel Rekuta
>
> Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<3C629AB0...@sympatico.ca>...
>
> > an interesting article, unfortunately without references.
> > Could you please add some?
I've read some of her pontificaton. I should have added a
smiley.
>
> Kel:
> Inger doesn't do references.
> She is our revered mentor, not our research assistant. <g>
>
> > Inger E wrote:
> > > Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't
> > > see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short Essay.
> >
> > This observation was based on a discussion elsewhere?
> > I must have missed it in SHM.
I don't read the archaeology site, or I'd have realized she
cross posts frequently.
And also neglects to read replies completely. She asked for
my sources, which were listed in the very post she replied
to.
> >
> > Would that have been Plains or Woodland Bison? The range of
> > such animals was quite different. I'm curious as to where
> > such information is published.
>
> Try these URLs, previously cited by Michael Zalar in re: to this topic.
> http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp
> http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html
Thanks. I was relying on memory. I spent a couple years in
Alberta, travelling to parks at every opportunity.
>
> <snip>
> > Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
> > the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
> > indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
> > northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
> > and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
> > St. Lawrence basin.
> <snip>
Even more useful. I hadn't realized the grizzly ranged that
far east in pre-Columbian times. Thanks!
>
> And these, on bears.
> http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/grizzly/grizzly.html
> http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/blbear/blbear.html
>
> Griz used to occupy the Great Plains before being extirpated
> there by Europeans.
> The barren ground grizzlies definitely occupy the northeastern
> shores of Hudson Bay, and may have occupied Ungava in historical
> times.
> (Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)
Wanna buy a blanket? ;-}
>
> Inger knows nothing of biogeography, not even that it exists
> as a discipline. At one point she claimed that because caribou
> pelts were different in different parts of Greenland, there
> must have been extensive timber resources available to Medieval
> Norse on Baffin Island, which thus must have been Markland,
> which meant that Vinland had been somewhere beyond southwest
> Hudson Bay. All in ignorance of the inconvenient fact that
> Baffin Island has probably been treeless for millions of years,
> and certainly for the last 100,000 years.
> IMO, Kel, you have seen as much information on this subject
> as you are going to. I predict that Inger will ignore the topic
> from now on, as she has done when others of her
> pronouncements-born-of-ignorance have been challenged.
>
> Hoping that this helps,
> Daryl Krupa
> (who has petted bison and spun their wool, and
> been much, much closer to a grizzly bear than
> he ever wanted to be, and collected some of its hair,
> and seen several others in the wild,
> so that he is confident that he can tell the difference
> between the two far better than some ditzy Bohuslander
> kindergarten worker)
ROTFL....
I saw one in Glacier National Park many years ago.
I wasn't looking at the grizzly's hair. Those claws are
longer than my fingers!
And the head on the critter. Wow. I was very happy to be
well above it on a tower.
I never would have thought bison hair would spin well. Isn't
it coarse? I've only touched the head and mane.
Thanks for the info.
Kel
Alex
No need to go 600 years back. A notriceable population of "zubr" (european
bison) still exists in Poland and Belorus. As for Ingred and her friends
having fun, well, what can I say about the bunch of ill-educated idiots who
obviously unable to make even a simple search on internet...
[Not to mention that I used to live in the country, which had the biggest herd
of the european bison.]
Alex
AFAIK, the main difference between zubr and american bison is that
zubr
has shorter hairs on the neck and slightly smaller than its american
relative.
You can see the picture, for example, on
http://hum.amu.edu.pl/~zbzw/ph/pnp/bial.htm (site of Bialowieski
National Park, Poland) or just make a search on "bison bonasus" and it
will produce a lot
of related links, some with the photos.
Eric Stevens
>> >you wouldn't believe how fun people had at my table today when I told them
>> >about Alex and other persons's fantasy production of a bison here in this
>> >area - especially fun had a friend of mine who use to go to Latvia once or
>> >twice a year and who have good knowledge of the rest of the Baltics..... we
>> >decided that it must be the fact that people in other parts of the world now
>> >realised that we don't have white Ice Bears walking on the streets that made
>> >some fool invent Bisons in this area.....
>> >
>>
>> But what about 600 years ago?
>
>No need to go 600 years back. A notriceable population of "zubr" (european
>bison) still exists in Poland and Belorus. As for Ingred and her friends
>having fun, well, what can I say about the bunch of ill-educated idiots who
>obviously unable to make even a simple search on internet...
>[Not to mention that I used to live in the country, which had the biggest herd
>of the european bison.]
Actually, a web search will show that it is not quite that simple and
that deliberate efforts to save them have been made over recent years.
However, I was referring to Ingers comment "about white Ice Bears"
walking on the streets. I was really asking the extent of the "white
Ice Bears" 600 years ago. Presumably they were more extensive then but
I suspect by not much.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
George Black
and we're back to Ingers pretend friends who never actually have names.
Just degrees and doctorates that somehow vary according to the subject
discussed
Todd A. Farmerie
>
> Daryl Krupa wrote:
> >
> > The salient point here is that Inger has claimed that bear hair,
> > found on the shores of Baffin Bay and named as Grizzly bear hair,
> > cannot be hair from an European brown bear, because they are of
> > different sizes.
> > This claim ignores the fact that they are the same species,
> > _Ursos arctos_,
> > known all around the northern reaches of the hemisphere,
> > from Britain eastward to Hudson Bay, with a gap in the
> > North Atlantic and on the eastern coast of North America.
>
> I'm going to have to check on this with some fish & wildlife dept
> acquaintances; in BC a distinction is made between grizzlies and browns,
> I think, although maybe browns are really only immature grizzes; they're
> known for being more aggressive than either grizzes or the various
> subvarieties of blacks found here (cinnamons, kermodes/whites, etc.)
In Alaska, they are discussed as subspecies, differing in
behavior and diet (browns are coastal and live primarily on fish,
griz are inland and have a broader diet including hikers, Kodiac
are on Kodiac Island).
taf
Inger E
I think it's you who better read the text and check the latin names you quot
once more. The bison you suppose to be European hasn't been anywhere near
the Baltic Sea region before 1750, or should I say before 1921 when that
bison type was introduced in a Zoo in order to bread a new stock from that +
Am.Bison + Caucasian Bison.....
Good Night Daryl,
You will once more make a new fantastic laughing story in Swedish circles.
Imagin there still is people out there who believes Scandinavia(today's and
yesterday's landarea included) had Bisons in the Medieval Age - that one is
even better than the Ice Bear story!
Inger E
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:tamd6ukcbto91hptg...@4ax.com...
Inger E
We didn't have it 600 years ago the only Bison found is from before 3200
BC!!!! and that's too ooo ooo long ago!
We haven't had anyone since before 1750 when one Bison was introduced, and
no stock before 1921 when Skansen Zoo in Stockholm together with Zoos in
Poland and the Baltic tried to help preserving the only 12 Bisons left in
all of Europe.
Inger E
Mike Cleven
A couple of years in Alberta? No wonder you were travelling to parks at
every opportunity. Where was your sentence? Boring-ness in Edmonton,
or cowboy-ness in Calgary?
>
> >
> > <snip>
> > > Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
> > > the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
> > > indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
> > > northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
> > > and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
> > > St. Lawrence basin.
> > <snip>
>
> Even more useful. I hadn't realized the grizzly ranged that
> far east in pre-Columbian times. Thanks!
IIRC they were present in the Black Hills at the time of the Sioux Wars.
>
> >
> > And these, on bears.
> > http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/grizzly/grizzly.html
> > http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/blbear/blbear.html
> >
> > Griz used to occupy the Great Plains before being extirpated
> > there by Europeans.
> > The barren ground grizzlies definitely occupy the northeastern
> > shores of Hudson Bay, and may have occupied Ungava in historical
> > times.
> > (Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)
>
> Wanna buy a blanket? ;-}
If you've got an original 19th Century one, or earlier, it's worth a LOT
of money. Try e-Bay.
Depends on which part of the fur; I think, as with the musk-ox, there's
an "under-fur" that's quite fine. But coarse hair, like jute, would
make for good rope anyway.
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
> Kel
--
Inger E
what's "wellknown" isn't always true - you lean on bad sources who either
lean on someone else or haven't done their homework ! Belarus(=White Russia)
aren't in the Baltic Sea Region and Never been!!!! And Belarus's southern
region hadn't contact with the Norse or Swedes after 1100 to King Karl XII:s
days(d. 1718). It's a long way from that area to the Baltic Sea region. You
are dreaming.
As for drinking - I guess your drinks might grow as old as mine - the
youngest bought buttle in my home haven't been emtied for two years and I
guess it will take the last liqued at least one year more before it's time
to buy a new one! I am not to keen on it, never have been because I can't
afford to pay the price the wines I am keen on and I rather drink Mineral
water than bad wine.
Inger E
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:f8e58188.02021...@posting.google.com...
Inger E
You can't use a stock in Belrus which was raced from Caucasian stock an 2
individuals talking about Scandinavian or Baltic Bison existens in the
Medieval Age!
You and Daryl haven't studied Biology, Zoology and Geology so stop
harressing me!
As for sending ref. I have done so, many times over the small amount of ref
you have sent to the group over the years.
Good Night Alex continue your sweet dreams!
Inger E
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:f8e58188.02021...@posting.google.com...
Inger E. Johansson
news:3C6747C5...@ihug.co.nz...
> Inger E wrote:
> >
> > "Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
> > news:h86b6usjgi8q5ecff...@4ax.com...
> > > On 9 Feb 2002 09:30:19 -0800, am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
> > >
> > > >"S?en Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> wrote in message
> > news:<a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de>...
> > > >> "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> > news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
> > <snip>
<snip>
> and we're back to Ingers pretend friends who never actually have names.
> Just degrees and doctorates that somehow vary according to the subject
> discussed
George,
this is only one of those I ref. to as a friend, or should I say friend
of my family since I was a child and my former boss1987-1988 when I
returned to Linköping.
I guess that archaeologist and former head of Östergötland's
Länsmuseum's works talk for itself:
http://www.libris.kb.se/netacgi/generateframe?url=/enkel.sokning.html
Inger E
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Inger E
"Todd A. Farmerie" <farm...@interfold.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:3C676108...@interfold.com...
> Mike Cleven wrote:
> >
> > Daryl Krupa wrote:
> > >
> > > The salient point here is that Inger has claimed that bear hair,
> > > found on the shores of Baffin Bay and named as Grizzly bear hair,
> > > cannot be hair from an European brown bear, because they are of
> > > different sizes.
Brown bear and Grizzly bear aren't alike at all. Please contact any Zoo if
you don't believe me.
Inger E
Michael Zalar
> Assuming that the rope is made of "American" bison hair, all you
> would then have to do is to ask the rope if it got to Greenland
> on a Norse vessel or in an Inuit vessel.
>
> An "actual" Norse artifact found in North America known as the
> "Norse Penny" is regarded as having clerly arrived in its final
> resting place in Maine as a result of transportation through an
> Inuit-Native American Indian trade network.
To clarify here, the presence of chert impliments from Ramah Bay in
northern Labrador at the same site the Norse penny was found seems to
indicate that the penny arrived through trade with that site (see
http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/2/16/h16-4223-e.html ). While highly suggestive
that the penny came via trade (I have heard that this was an
established trade route), it cannot be considered conclusive evidence
that the Norse did not visit the region.
Given the Inuit
> presence on Greenland, and that there was Norse-Inuit trade, the
> presence of a rope made of bison hair would not, per se,
> establish a Norse presence in North America.
The Inuit themselves would have had to have a source for the bison
hair, for, as far as I can tell, the Inuit areas did not overlap
(except possibly in Western Cananda, depending on which map you use).
If so they would have had to have traded with Amerinds to obtain
buffalo hair. But:
"The extent of pre-Columbian Aboriginal trade is impressive. For
example, the ancestors of today's Canadian Inuit traded amber from the
most northerly of the Arctic Islands, copper from deposits near the
southern edge of the Arctic Ocean and meteoric iron from northern
Greenland. That trade does not seem to have crossed the ethnic divide
between Inuit and Amerindian peoples, however."
http://www.businesshistory.com/balance.htm
Logically if
1) The Greenland Norse could have obtained the bison hair from the
Inuits, only if the Inuits first traded to get hair from Amerinds and,
2) There was no trade between the Inuit and Amerinds then,
3) The Greenland Norse obtained the bison hair from some other means.
Now obviously, points one and two cannot be expressed with absolute
certainty. Perhaps the Inuit did pentrate far enough inland to
capture bison, or maybe there was trade between Inuit and Amerinds
(has there been a determination of whether the Inuit are known to have
possessed things like buffalo pelts?). I admit I have only found the
one reference to the lack of trade between Inuit and Amerind, but then
again I have not found a referece showing that there was such trade.
Michael
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > Eric Stevens
>
> Steve
Michael Zalar
> Otherwise the bison hair issue was flogged to death in the thread you had one reference to, see:
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/ This is the archive of the Old Norse Net, and most (if not all) of the "Norse in
> North America" issues that Inger and others bring up here have also had a flogging there previously.
Uh-huh.
If by flogging you mean having discussion cut off in mid-debate. In
Nov of 1999, I posted an announcement that I was giving a talk on the
Kensington Runestone. This prompted a certain amount of debate, in
which I was rebutting a great many of the arguments (and
misconceptions) which were put forth against the stone.
I was even taking on the linguistic arguments being presented against
the runestone. It was a terribly exhaustive process, taking me
several hours a night just to cover a few points; not being a linguist
myself, I needed to sort through various arguments from various
sources to attempt to make a cohesive rebuttal. Curiously there were
no counter arguments to my rebuttal. In the middle of this process the
following was posted:
Subject: ADM: Kensington
Dear all,
It is time to start a new thread on ONN now, I would say. The
arguments on the
Kensington stone have been seen time and time again and we are all
getting a bit tired of them. Believers in the stone as a real runic
inscription will not change their minds no matter what arguments are
given and scholars working with runic inscriptions professionally can
not come to any other conclusion than declaring the stone a late 19th
century fake, it is to obvious. Thats where this discussion starts and
ends.
I therefore suggest that those who wish to continue this discussion do
so in
private communication
All the best
Karl G. Johansson
List Administrator
Now, it should be admitted that there were people who posted believing
that the debate should continue, pointing out that those who did not
wish to read about the topic could easily avoid it, but it was clear
that the 'powers above' really had no intrest in an open debate on the
topic. So I guess that is how it was 'flogged' to death.
A real dissapointment to me though.
Michael
Steve Marcus
>
> Steve Marcus <barbm...@erols.com> wrote in message
> >
> > Assuming that the rope is made of "American" bison hair, all you
> > would then have to do is to ask the rope if it got to Greenland
> > on a Norse vessel or in an Inuit vessel.
> >
> > An "actual" Norse artifact found in North America known as the
> > "Norse Penny" is regarded as having clerly arrived in its final
> > resting place in Maine as a result of transportation through an
> > Inuit-Native American Indian trade network.
>
> To clarify here, the presence of chert impliments from Ramah Bay in
> northern Labrador at the same site the Norse penny was found seems to
> indicate that the penny arrived through trade with that site (see
> http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/2/16/h16-4223-e.html ). While highly suggestive
> that the penny came via trade (I have heard that this was an
> established trade route), it cannot be considered conclusive evidence
> that the Norse did not visit the region.
I am unaware that I stated that the Norse penny was conclusive
evidence to prove the negative proposition that "the Norse did
not visit the region". I am unaware of anyone who has so
stated. I am unaware that it is even possible to prove the
negative proposition. So what?
>
> Given the Inuit
> > presence on Greenland, and that there was Norse-Inuit trade, the
> > presence of a rope made of bison hair would not, per se,
> > establish a Norse presence in North America.
>
> The Inuit themselves would have had to have a source for the bison
> hair, for, as far as I can tell, the Inuit areas did not overlap
> (except possibly in Western Cananda, depending on which map you use).
> If so they would have had to have traded with Amerinds to obtain
> buffalo hair. But:
> "The extent of pre-Columbian Aboriginal trade is impressive. For
> example, the ancestors of today's Canadian Inuit traded amber from the
> most northerly of the Arctic Islands, copper from deposits near the
> southern edge of the Arctic Ocean and meteoric iron from northern
> Greenland. That trade does not seem to have crossed the ethnic divide
> between Inuit and Amerindian peoples, however."
> http://www.businesshistory.com/balance.htm
The last sentence contradicts the evidence by which the Norse
penny is believed to have come to rest in Maine. The chert that
you refer to above is Ramah chert, believed to have come from a
quarry in Labrador which at the time was "Inuit territory", while
the Norse penny was discovered in an American Indian settlement
site, together with a couple of other Inuit artifacts. It
is believed that this is evidence of an "extensive trade route"
by which Inuit from a large geographic area exchange trade items
with each other, and by which the southernmost Inuit traded with
Native American Indians.
Of course it is possible that the Inuit-N.A.I contact was other
than friendly. The point is, or course, that an artifact (or two
or three) discovered out of context does not, per se, establish
the positive proposition, that "the Norsemen were here".
>
> Logically if
> 1) The Greenland Norse could have obtained the bison hair from the
> Inuits, only if the Inuits first traded to get hair from Amerinds and,
> 2) There was no trade between the Inuit and Amerinds then,
> 3) The Greenland Norse obtained the bison hair from some other means.
>
> Now obviously, points one and two cannot be expressed with absolute
> certainty. Perhaps the Inuit did pentrate far enough inland to
> capture bison, or maybe there was trade between Inuit and Amerinds
> (has there been a determination of whether the Inuit are known to have
> possessed things like buffalo pelts?). I admit I have only found the
> one reference to the lack of trade between Inuit and Amerind, but then
> again I have not found a referece showing that there was such trade.
>
See "Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga", Smithsonian Institution,
2000, at pages 206-207; article by Peter Schledermann, University
of Calgary, Alberta (referencing an article by Steven L. Cox
entitled Palaeo-Eskimo Occupations of the North Labrador Coast,
published in 1978 in Arctic Anthropology 15(2):96-118. It should
be noted that Cox takes care to state that the Norse "could have"
visited site where the Norse penny was found, but there is
absolutely no other Norse artifact that has been found at the
site to so indicate. There is another article in the Smithsonian
publication, at pages 240-241 discussing evidence of Inuit
(Dorset) contact with the Norse. That article is by Patricia
Sutherland, Canadian Museum of Civilization, Hull, Quebec.
> Michael
> >
> > Steve
natur...@webtv.net
Brown Bears have been divided by taxonomists into varying numbers of
species based on the characteristics of local populations. So it kind of
depends on which book you are getting your information from as to which
species you think you are talking about. For purposes of discussion in
this thread I'd suggest posters use a local common name as well as
naming the location of the bear population they are referring to.
It is possible to distinguish populations within a species using hair.
Human beings and dogs both have hair characteristics of that sort.
Even though it may be all one species, it is possible to look at a hair
and identify the population it came from, at least in some cases.
Nearly forgot: some "Brown Bears" can fairly be called black, but they
are, in fact a different genus and species from Black Bears (Euarctos),
which may also have a range of colors.
All the above means that there can be a black bear that is a Brown Bear
and a brown bear that is a Black Bear :-)
erilar
am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
> Eric Stevens <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:<g9hd6usn9ire6ht8r...@4ax.com>...
> >
> > But what about 600 years ago?
>
> No need to go 600 years back. A notriceable population of "zubr"
> (european
> bison) still exists in Poland and Belorus. As for Ingred and her friends
> having fun, well, what can I say about the bunch of ill-educated idiots
> who
> obviously unable to make even a simple search on internet...
> [Not to mention that I used to live in the country, which had the biggest
> herd
> of the european bison.]
But she might encounter factual data that didn't fit her theories!!!!
Horrors!!!
--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka erilar)
What do you mean, too many books??
------------------------------------------------
Erilar's Cave Annex: http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
erilar
Eric Stevens
>Eric Stevens wrote:
>
>>
>> The URL I previously cited
>> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
>> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
>> appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
>> the idea of a European bison.
>>
>
>Why not ask her, she is a member of the staff of the institution which deals with archaeology in Greenland:
>http://www.sila.dk/ Frankly I would believe that finding the source of the possible bison hair would not be on a
>high priority list of things to do.
>
>Otherwise the bison hair issue was flogged to death in the thread you had one reference to, see:
>http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/ This is the archive of the Old Norse Net, and most (if not all) of the "Norse in
>North America" issues that Inger and others bring up here have also had a flogging there previously.
>
>
You seem to have a penchant for not discussing these matters.
Elsewhere in a related thread you dumped on me for "unwarranted
speculation" on the grounds that I dared to ask if it is possible to
distinguish the hair of the Europen bison species from those of the
North America. (For your information, I have been told by a forensic
expert that it almost certainly is).
The fact that you had a discussion on the topic elsewhere at some time
in the past, and are now bored with it, is no grounds for terminating
the discussion of others. Nobody is making you participate.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Alex
> Alex,
> what's "wellknown" isn't always true - you lean on bad sources who either
> lean on someone else or haven't done their homework ! Belarus(=White Russia)
> aren't in the Baltic Sea Region and Never been!!!! And Belarus's southern
> region hadn't contact with the Norse or Swedes after 1100 to King Karl XII:s
> days(d. 1718). It's a long way from that area to the Baltic Sea region. You
> are dreaming.
I see that we already did a major trip from Caucass to Belaruss. This
is an
obvious progress. Now, let's look at your new arguments (the old
insistense
on Caucass being the closest habitat is not on the table anymore). The
are
flawed on many levels:
(1) Even now zubr's habitat is not limited to Belarus. A considerable
part
of the surviving herd is in Poland, which is usually defined as a
"Baltic state". During the Middle Ages this habitat was much wider and
included what's
now Lithuania, parts of Russia and a bigger territory in Poland. All
these
countries had extensive trade relations with the countries on a Baltic
coast
and the Hanseatic cities.
(2) When you are talking about Belarus' "contact" with the Norse, etc.
you are
missing a substantial point. From 13 till 16 century Belarus
(princedoms of
Polotsk, Pinsk-Turov, etc.) had been a part of the Great Princedom of
Lithuania
and from mid-16 century - a part of Kingdom of Poland. Even before
union
with Poland Lithuania had relations with the territories on Baltic
coast so
it does not make sense to say that some part of it did not have any
relations
with them. BTW, in case you missed it, Lithuania, is also defined as a
"Baltic
state".
(3) Zubr's wider areal means that it also lived in what now is Western
Russia.
Which means that its byproducts would be available over most of the
"Russian"
(in the terms of XIII - XIV century borders) territories and could
easily get
to the Baltic coast through the Novgorod and/or Pskov trade channels.
There was no need for zubr to go all the way to Tallinn (as one of
your
friends assumed) saying "Mooo, I'm zubr, kill me."
Hammerstad
> On Sat, 09 Feb 2002 23:52:24 GMT, Hammerstad <eg...@start.no> wrote:
>
> >Eric Stevens wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> The URL I previously cited
> >> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> >> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
> >> appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
> >> the idea of a European bison.
> >>
> >
> >Why not ask her, she is a member of the staff of the institution which deals with archaeology in Greenland:
> >http://www.sila.dk/ Frankly I would believe that finding the source of the possible bison hair would not be on a
> >high priority list of things to do.
> >
> >Otherwise the bison hair issue was flogged to death in the thread you had one reference to, see:
> >http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/ This is the archive of the Old Norse Net, and most (if not all) of the "Norse in
> >North America" issues that Inger and others bring up here have also had a flogging there previously.
> >
> >
> You seem to have a penchant for not discussing these matters.
> Elsewhere in a related thread you dumped on me for "unwarranted
> speculation" on the grounds that I dared to ask if it is possible to
> distinguish the hair of the Europen bison species from those of the
> North America.
Why the dishonest quotation? "Unwarranted speculation" are words I have not used in this discussion.
> (For your information, I have been told by a forensic
> expert that it almost certainly is).
>
The point is that those who have investigated the hair have not determined from which side of the Atlantic the source
of the hair belonged to. And it is stated in the link you quoted (but obviously still have not read carefully) that
further testing needs to be done implying that this would determine the source. But that makes your posts rather
superfluous doesn't it.
>
> The fact that you had a discussion on the topic elsewhere at some time
> in the past, and are now bored with it, is no grounds for terminating
> the discussion of others. Nobody is making you participate.
>
Again deliberately (allthough not directly) misquoting me. I have not participated in any discussion on ONN, nor can
I see that I have in any way implied that.
In a comment to your "honest question" elsewhere, I gave some thoughts to using stronger words. Seen in the context
of this post, I obviously should and would have been right to have done so.
Eric Stevens
>Eric Stevens wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 09 Feb 2002 23:52:24 GMT, Hammerstad <eg...@start.no> wrote:
>>
>> >Eric Stevens wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> The URL I previously cited
>> >> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
>> >> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
>> >> appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
>> >> the idea of a European bison.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Why not ask her, she is a member of the staff of the institution which deals with archaeology in Greenland:
>> >http://www.sila.dk/ Frankly I would believe that finding the source of the possible bison hair would not be on a
>> >high priority list of things to do.
>> >
>> >Otherwise the bison hair issue was flogged to death in the thread you had one reference to, see:
>> >http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/ This is the archive of the Old Norse Net, and most (if not all) of the "Norse in
>> >North America" issues that Inger and others bring up here have also had a flogging there previously.
>> >
>> >
>> You seem to have a penchant for not discussing these matters.
>> Elsewhere in a related thread you dumped on me for "unwarranted
>> speculation" on the grounds that I dared to ask if it is possible to
>> distinguish the hair of the Europen bison species from those of the
>> North America.
>
>Why the dishonest quotation? "Unwarranted speculation" are words I have not used in this discussion.
I was merely reinforcing Michael Zalar's point that you seem to wish
to terminate these discussions. If you want to cite your actual
accustaoin of speculation rather than my paraphrase, you are welcome
to go back and look for it.
>
>> (For your information, I have been told by a forensic
>> expert that it almost certainly is).
>>
>
>The point is that those who have investigated the hair have not determined from which side of the Atlantic the source
>of the hair belonged to. And it is stated in the link you quoted (but obviously still have not read carefully) that
>further testing needs to be done implying that this would determine the source. But that makes your posts rather
>superfluous doesn't it.
As I have already told you, I was quoting and discussing the
significance of the actual quoted words of the person responsible.
What others may have said was outside the scope of my remarks. And no,
I'm not going to get bogged down in a hair splitting argument with you
over this.
>
>>
>> The fact that you had a discussion on the topic elsewhere at some time
>> in the past, and are now bored with it, is no grounds for terminating
>> the discussion of others. Nobody is making you participate.
>>
>
>Again deliberately (allthough not directly) misquoting me. I have not participated in any discussion on ONN, nor can
>I see that I have in any way implied that.
>
>In a comment to your "honest question" elsewhere, I gave some thoughts to using stronger words. Seen in the context
>of this post, I obviously should and would have been right to have done so.
>
It would have been better if you had ignored me rather than complain
about the unnecessary number of ensuing articles to which you have
been the major contributor.
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Emir
<gbl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> > Eric,
> > you wouldn't believe how fun people had at my table today...
> and we're back to Ingers pretend friends who never actually have names.
> Just degrees and doctorates that somehow vary according to the subject
> discussed
Oh, we're well beyond that. Now she's talking to buildings:
In article <FrM98.17675$n4.30...@newsc.telia.net>, "Inger E"
<inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
> btw. I was talking to the Museum of Natur History here in Gothenburg - they
> told be that it wasn't 3200 BC but 8000 BP when we in Scandinavia last had
> Bisons walking around. I guess they know it better than Daryl and Alex,
> don't you?
Emir
Inger E
2 flies don't make a summer and 8-12 bisons spread over an area in the
mountains in southern Belarus don't make a stock.
Don't try to fool anyone, you are fool enough not to be able to read the
map.
Good Night Alex,
return when you have something essential to discuss re. the American Bison
hair in the rope found in Garden under sandet or elsewhere in Greenland. If
you haven't anything to discuss re. that - than you better keep your lines
to yourself, you can read the subject line can't you?
Inger E
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:f8e58188.02021...@posting.google.com...
George Black
>
> "George Black" <gbl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:3C6747C5...@ihug.co.nz...
> > and we're back to Ingers pretend friends who never actually have names.
> > Just degrees and doctorates that somehow vary according to the subject
> > discussed
>
> George,
> this is only one of those I ref. to as a friend, or should I say friend
> of my family since I was a child and my former boss1987-1988 when I
> returned to Linköping.
>
> I guess that archaeologist and former head of Östergötland's
> Länsmuseum's works talk for itself:
> http://www.libris.kb.se/netacgi/generateframe?url=/enkel.sokning.html
Yup. Speaks for itself and its such a well run site that it doesn't have
an English translation.
Now, do you want to refute this European Bison ??
George Black
>
> Alex,
> 2 flies don't make a summer and 8-12 bisons spread over an area in the
> mountains in southern Belarus don't make a stock.
> Don't try to fool anyone, you are fool enough not to be able to read the
> map.
So, if there are more than 8 or 12 Bison in that particular herd I look
forward to you apologising.
Michael Zalar
> Michael Zalar wrote:
> > To clarify here, the presence of chert impliments from Ramah Bay in
> > northern Labrador at the same site the Norse penny was found seems to
> > indicate that the penny arrived through trade with that site (see
> > http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/2/16/h16-4223-e.html ). While highly suggestive
> > that the penny came via trade (I have heard that this was an
> > established trade route), it cannot be considered conclusive evidence
> > that the Norse did not visit the region.
>
> I am unaware that I stated that the Norse penny was conclusive
> evidence to prove the negative proposition that "the Norse did
> not visit the region". I am unaware of anyone who has so
> stated. I am unaware that it is even possible to prove the
> negative proposition. So what?
I did not accuse you of saying so, however some might infer from your
statement that there was decisive evidence that the Norse did not
visit the region. I was merely attempting to clarify this point by
adding additional information, much of which supports the idea that
the penny came to the area by means of trade.
A distinction must be made here between the Dorset (or Tunit) culture
which existed in the Arctic regions from about 3000 - 1000 years ago
and the later Thule Inuit culture which essentially replaced them
(see: http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/archeo/oracles/eskimos/12.htm ).
In brief, the Thule culture invaded the Dorset regions from Alaska
circa 1000 AD, and would have been dominant in the Arctic in the time
period of the bison hairs. The Labrador area would have been one of
the last Dorset areas to be overcome.
According to one site
(http://www.arctictravel.com/chapters/archeolpage.html) "Despite the
lack of dogs and little evidence they used large boats, the Dorset
people travelled and traded materials over long distances." While I
dont have sufficient evidence to claim this outright, it may well be
that it was the Dorset peoples who conducted the trade that (may have)
brought the Norse penny to Maine (that being mid 11th century as I
recall).
Unfortunately I have not come across whether the chert was traded from
a Dorset, Thule, or perhaps even Native American culture on Ramah Bay.
However because of this lack of evidence, it also cannot be said with
assurance that the Thule Inuit were trading along the coast, or
trading with Amerind culture at all.
> Of course it is possible that the Inuit-N.A.I contact was other
> than friendly. The point is, or course, that an artifact (or two
> or three) discovered out of context does not, per se, establish
> the positive proposition, that "the Norsemen were here".
>
Of course not, never said that it did.
> >
> > Logically if
> > 1) The Greenland Norse could have obtained the bison hair from the
> > Inuits, only if the Inuits first traded to get hair from Amerinds and,
> > 2) There was no trade between the Inuit and Amerinds then,
> > 3) The Greenland Norse obtained the bison hair from some other means.
> >
> > Now obviously, points one and two cannot be expressed with absolute
> > certainty. Perhaps the Inuit did pentrate far enough inland to
> > capture bison, or maybe there was trade between Inuit and Amerinds
> > (has there been a determination of whether the Inuit are known to have
> > possessed things like buffalo pelts?). I admit I have only found the
> > one reference to the lack of trade between Inuit and Amerind, but then
> > again I have not found a referece showing that there was such trade.
> >
>
> See "Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga", Smithsonian Institution,
> 2000, at pages 206-207; article by Peter Schledermann, University
> of Calgary, Alberta (referencing an article by Steven L. Cox
> entitled Palaeo-Eskimo Occupations of the North Labrador Coast,
> published in 1978 in Arctic Anthropology 15(2):96-118. It should
> be noted that Cox takes care to state that the Norse "could have"
> visited site where the Norse penny was found, but there is
> absolutely no other Norse artifact that has been found at the
> site to so indicate. There is another article in the Smithsonian
> publication, at pages 240-241 discussing evidence of Inuit
> (Dorset) contact with the Norse. That article is by Patricia
> Sutherland, Canadian Museum of Civilization, Hull, Quebec.
>
>
> Steve
There is certainly evidence of both Dorset and Thule cultures trading
with the Norse. The question is did the Thule trade with Amerinds, in
particular, was there a way for bison hairs to reach Greenland via
established trade routes. From that one can undertake the process
(admittidly subjective) of trying to determine the various means by
which the bison hairs could have arrived in Greenland.
Michael
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>Inger E wrote:
>>
>> Alex,
>> 2 flies don't make a summer and 8-12 bisons spread over an area in the
>> mountains in southern Belarus don't make a stock.
>> Don't try to fool anyone, you are fool enough not to be able to read the
>> map.
>
>
>So, if there are more than 8 or 12 Bison in that particular herd I look
>forward to you apologising.
At one stage they were down to 13 animal and 12 genomes. See
http://www.cbsg.org/bison.htm
Regards,
Eric Stevens
Floyd Davidson
I find the whole speculation that either Dorset Eskimo or Thule
Eskimo people were not trading with American Indian cultures to
be someone whimsical. Unfortunately I'm not familiar with
specifics in the areas of eastern Canada and Greenland, but I
see no reason to believe they would be any different than
the same Dorset and Thule cultures in Alaska. And of course
here there is no doubt at all that they were trading with
Indians, and with various Siberians too.
Wendel Oswalt spent years looking for various different kinds of
evidence of cultural cross-pollination between pre-historic
Yupik Eskimo people on the lower parts of the Kuskokwim River
and the Ingalik Indian people on the upper parts of the river.
I don't think he ever questioned that there was trade, as his
research was intended to prove that it had *significant*
influence on the two cultures involved.
Even more general have been indications going all the way back
to Paleo-Indian cultures indicating trade between Alaska and
Siberia. There are very few artifacts in Alaska that are of
Siberian design, or visa versa... but there are enough to support
the idea that _trade_ was occurring as opposed to mass migrations
at that late date.
Of course when Europeans did come to Alaska they found an entire
network of commercial trading that was very well defined. As
late as almost 1900 many of the trading routes were still being
used in the same way they had prior to Russian and then American
occupation. Indeed, the end of these trading networks only came
with the goldrush to Alaska in the 1890's, and the classic
example is a well known name with a usually unheard of story
behind it. The famous Chilkoot Trail from Skagway into Canada
was a well established trade route owned by the Chilkoot clan of
the Tlingit people. *Nobody* was allowed to carry anything of
value for trade over that trail without dealing with the
Chilkoot people. Of course the goldrush lead to disputes, and
the US Army and Navy were called in to force a settlement. At
one point 20 some Tlingits from Sitka were hired and taken to
Skagway to work as freight haulers. But they were *all*
executed immediately by locals protecting their property. At
another point a new, much reduced price, was agreed on and the
Chilkoot porters hauled a load up the trail, only to stop near
the top and demand to re-negotiate the agreement! That all came
to a screeching halt when a US Navy gun boat hove to offshore
from the village and the Chilkoot were informed 1) what the new
price was and 2) that the village would be blown to bits with
cannon if there was any further difficulty. The US Navy had
previously bombarded the village of Hoonah for far less, so
they were not about to fight over it.
Whatever, Alaska was laced with well worn trails between
different groups of people. I don't believe that archaeologists
would find it that difficult to locate evidence for such trading
networks all across the Arctic, and it seems exceedingly naive
to suggest that there would not be.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) fl...@barrow.com
Steve Marcus
>
> Steve Marcus <barbm...@erols.com> wrote in message news:<3C67CF9B...@erols.com>...
> > Michael Zalar wrote:
>
> > > To clarify here, the presence of chert impliments from Ramah Bay in
> > > northern Labrador at the same site the Norse penny was found seems to
> > > indicate that the penny arrived through trade with that site (see
> > > http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/2/16/h16-4223-e.html ). While highly suggestive
> > > that the penny came via trade (I have heard that this was an
> > > established trade route), it cannot be considered conclusive evidence
> > > that the Norse did not visit the region.
> >
> > I am unaware that I stated that the Norse penny was conclusive
> > evidence to prove the negative proposition that "the Norse did
> > not visit the region". I am unaware of anyone who has so
> > stated. I am unaware that it is even possible to prove the
> > negative proposition. So what?
>
> I did not accuse you of saying so, however some might infer from your
> statement that there was decisive evidence that the Norse did not
> visit the region. I was merely attempting to clarify this point by
> adding additional information, much of which supports the idea that
> the penny came to the area by means of trade.
I understand that you are trying to clarify matters. I can only
think of two posters on this newsgroup, one of whom does not have
English as that poster's native tongue, the other of whom does
have English as that poster's native tongue, who could possibly
infer that I said that there was "decisive evidence" that the
Norse hadn't visited the site in Maine where the Norse penny was
found.
Again, for their benefit, it is impossible to prove conclusively
that the Norse weren't there, or for that matter anywhere else.
This is different than, and not inconsistent with, the statement
that given the presence of "Inuit only" material in the context
in which the Norse penny was discovered, coupled with the absence
of any Norse context on the site where the Norse penny was found,
the Norse penny does not establish a Norse presence in Maine.
Michael, another frequent poster who did not wish to participate
in this thread because of the presence in the thread of one of
the above referenced posters, sent this to me with instructions
that I may use it as I see fit. While the frequent poster's
correspondence to me doesn't address the Thule versus Dorset
issue directly, perhaps the references furnished do:
============================================================================================================
"Ramah chert, for example, available only in Northern Labrador,
is found in abundance at Recent Indian sites throughout Labrador
(Fitzhugh 1978: 147; Loring 1988, 1992), and in lesser but still
meaningful quantities at Recent Indian sites in Newfoundland
(Hull 1999; Pastore 1989: 70; Reader 1998: 58; Schwarz 1993).
Ramah chert even appears periodically throughout the Canadian
Maritimes and New England (Loring 1992). In addition
to Ramah chert, a plethora of other raw material moved throughout
the far northeast and eastern Subarctic (Bourque 1994; Denton
1998; Loring in press; McCaffrey 1983, 1989; Wright 1994). Some
of this raw material appears to have originated in Newfoundland
(Pintal 1989: 35; Renouf 1999: 414)."
Excerpt from:
An Ahistory of Hunter-Gatherers: The Beothuk Indians of
Newfoundland and the Anthropological Imagination, Donald H. Holly
Jr. Paper presented at the 98th Annual Meeting of the American
Anthropological Association,
November 17-21, 1999, Chicago
Works cited above:
Bourque, Bruce J.
1994 Evidence for Prehistoric Exchange on the Maritime
Peninsula. In Exchange Systems in North America. Timothy G. Baugh
and Jonathan E. Ericson, eds. Pp. 23-46. New York: Plenum Press.
Denton, David
1998 From the Source, to the Margins and Back: Notes on
Mistassini Quartzite and Archaeology in the area of the Colline
Blanche. In L'eveilleur et l'ambassadeur: Essais archaeologiques
et ethnohistoriques en hommage a Charles A. Martijn. Roland
Tremblay, ed. Pp. 17-32. Paleo-Quebec 27. Montreal: Recherches
Amerindiennes au Quebec.
Hull, Stephen H.
1999 The Recent Indians at North Cove: the 1998 Field
Season. Unpublished ms. on file, office of Historic Resources,
Dept of Tourism and Culture, Government of Newfoundland and
Labrador, St. John's.
Fitzhugh, William W.
1978 Winter Cove 4 and the Point Revenge Occupation of
the Central Labrador Coast. Arctic Anthropology 15(2):146-174.
Loring, Stephen
1988 Keeping Things Whole: Nearly Two Thousand Years of
Indian (Innu) Occupation in Northern Labrador. In Boreal Forest
and Sub-Arctic Archaeology. "Paddy" C.S. Reid, ed. Pp 157-182.
Occasional Publications of the London Chapter, Ontario
Archaeological Society #6. London, Ontario: Ontario
Archaeological Society.
1992 Princes and Princesses of Ragged Fame: Innu
Archaeology and Ethnohistory in Labrador. Ph.D. dissertation,
Anthropology Department, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
in press "And They Took Away the Stones from Ramah":
Lithic raw material sourcing and Eastern Arctic Archaeology. In
Proceedings of the Elders Conference in Eastern Arctic
Archaeology. William Fitzhugh and
Stephen Loring, eds. Burlington: University Press of New England.
McCaffrey, Moira T.
1983 Lithic Analysis and the Interpretation of Two
Prehistoric Sites from the Caniapiscau Region of Nouveau Quebec.
M.A. thesis, Anthropology Department, McGill University.
1989 L'acquisition et l'echange de matieres lithiques
durant la Prehistoire recente: Un regard vers la fosse du
Labrador. Recherches Amerindiennes au Quebec 19(2-3):95-107.
Pastore, Ralph
1989 The Collapse of the Beothuk World. Acadiensis
19(1):52-71.
Pintal, Jean-Yves
1989 Contributions a la prehistorie recente de
Blanc-Sablon. Recherches amerindiennes au Quebec 19(2-3):33-44.
Reader, David
1998 Early Recent Indian Interior Occupation at Deer
Lake Beach: Implications for Theories of Recent Indian and
Beothuk Resource Use, Settlement, and Social Organization in
Newfoundland. Northeast Anthropology 55(Spring):47-70.
Renouf, M.A.P.
1999 Prehistory of Newfoundland hunter-gatherers:
extinctions or adaptations? World Archaeology 30(3):403-420.
Schwarz, Frederick A.
1993 Archaeological Investigations at the Bank Site,
Terra Nova National Park, Bonavista Bay, Newfoundland.
Unpublished ms. on file, office of Historic Resources, Dept of
Tourism and Culture, Government of
Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John's.
Wright, James V.
1994 The Prehistoric Transportation of Goods in the St.
Lawrence River Basin. In Prehistoric Exchange Systems in North
America. Timothy G. Baugh and Jonathan E. Ericson, eds. Pp.
47-71. New York:
Plenum Press.
I imagine that the above materials might help you to decide for
yourself if it is possible to establish trade between the Innuit
and Amerinds. Certainly the sources that I originally quoted
seem quite certain of contact between Innuit people and Amerinds
that resulted in transmittal of "things" (either through trade or
otherwise) from one to the other.
>
> Michael
Inger E
since one of the persons you refer to below is myself and I in the book
which I am working on also present a ref. to an English document written
before Columbus had set sail proving not only that the Norse but also the
English or should I say Scots not only visited the area in question but also
had a small settlement there close to the Indians in the Pre-Columbian days,
I suggest that you at least try to be open for new information( or should I
say information known by the Historians as late as in the days between the
two World Wars but later forgotten).
Can we agree that you at least hold your breath and wait until you see not
only information presented by me but the more important information
presented in form of artifacts from an undergoing excavation in a small part
of the area in question? OK?
Inger E
"Steve Marcus" <barbm...@erols.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:3C6922A6...@erols.com...
ed...@gyldendal.dk
wrote:
>"Inger E. Johansson" wrote:
It is a searchpage for a library database. It is one Inger's usual
tricks to give a searchpage as reference - without any keywords.
Cheers
Soren Larsen
Alex
> Inger E wrote:
> >
> > Alex,
> > 2 flies don't make a summer and 8-12 bisons spread over an area in the
> > mountains in southern Belarus don't make a stock.
> > Don't try to fool anyone, you are fool enough not to be able to read the
> > map.
>
>
> So, if there are more than 8 or 12 Bison in that particular herd I look
> forward to you apologising.
She will not. Each time she is caught on lying or a simple stupidity, she
pretends that nothing happens and becomes extremely aggressive. So nothing
new there.
This particular herd (in late 80's of XX ) in Belorussia and Poland ammounted
to appr. 2000 heads. As you understand, it was much bigger before the era
of hunting rifles and increased population.
BTW, their current habitat is not in the "mountains" as Imbecile wrote. It in
the forest (Bialowez).
Alex
Only after an extensive hunting with the modern rifles (beginning of XX
century). Hardly relevant to the Middle Ages. As you understand, if there
were only "8-12 bisons" available in XIV century, by now they'd be extinct.
Alex
> In article <3C6747C5...@ihug.co.nz>, George Black
> <gbl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
> > > Eric,
> > > you wouldn't believe how fun people had at my table today...
>
>
> > and we're back to Ingers pretend friends who never actually have names.
> > Just degrees and doctorates that somehow vary according to the subject
> > discussed
>
>
> Oh, we're well beyond that.
Yes, this is rather old news. She is even past the stage of reading
the
non-existing historians.
>Now she's talking to buildings:
>
>
> In article <FrM98.17675$n4.30...@newsc.telia.net>, "Inger E"
> <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
>
> > btw. I was talking to the Museum of Natur History here in Gothenburg - they
> > told be that it wasn't 3200 BC but 8000 BP when we in Scandinavia last had
> > Bisons walking around. I guess they know it better than Daryl and Alex,
> > don't you?
>
Not simply talks but gets a response.... "And The Building said in a
voice of
thunder: You will not see the bisons in Scandinavia. Only the pink
elephants!"
She rejected my assumption that her behavior can be partially excused
by an excessive intake of an alcohol. With this excuse gone, I'm
forced to assume
that this is a natural behavior.
As far as bisons in Scandinavia are involved, I never said that they
lived
in _Scandinavia_. Just pointed out that they lived and still live in
Poland
and Belorussia. It probably does not make sense to comment on The
Imbecile's
well-known inability to read.
Alex
> In article <f8e58188.02021...@posting.google.com>,
> am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
>
> > Eric Stevens <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message
> > news:<g9hd6usn9ire6ht8r...@4ax.com>...
>
> > >
> > > But what about 600 years ago?
> >
> > No need to go 600 years back. A notriceable population of "zubr"
> > (european
> > bison) still exists in Poland and Belorus. As for Ingred and her friends
> > having fun, well, what can I say about the bunch of ill-educated idiots
> > who
> > obviously unable to make even a simple search on internet...
> > [Not to mention that I used to live in the country, which had the biggest
> > herd
> > of the european bison.]
>
> But she might encounter factual data that didn't fit her theories!!!!
> Horrors!!!
She had been forced to acknowledge that bisons could be found closer to
Scandinavia than Caucass (which was an unexpected concession).
Now she is in a new stage: ignores their habitat in Poland and talks about
Belorusia (by some unknown reason, "mountains" instead of "forest", but
never mind) as not having any connection to Baltics. This about the place
that was under Lithuanian and than Polish rule since XIII century.
So don't worry, facts don't disturb her natural (she rejected excuse of
being drunk) oblivion.
Just curious, do they show her for money in Sweden? It can be a nice source
of income.
Kel Rekuta
>
> Steve,
> since one of the persons you refer to below is myself and I in the book
> which I am working on also present a ref. to an English document written
> before Columbus had set sail proving not only that the Norse but also the
> English or should I say Scots not only visited the area in question but also
> had a small settlement there close to the Indians in the Pre-Columbian days,
> I suggest that you at least try to be open for new information( or should I
> say information known by the Historians as late as in the days between the
> two World Wars but later forgotten).
>
I'm open minded and willing to read (or at least look for)
any actual references you'd deign to provide. Cryptic
references to resources you have access to "proving" a Scots
settlement in North America are not sufficient, or in fact,
productive.
> Can we agree that you at least hold your breath and wait until you see not
> only information presented by me but the more important information
> presented in form of artifacts from an undergoing excavation in a small part
> of the area in question? OK?
>
> Inger E
Why wait? You could provide a real reference and win our
undying admiration. ;-}
Since it is already in English, many of us could improve our
clearly meagre knowledge of Scottish history without unduly
taxing our abilities.
Breathlessly awaiting your reply.
Kel
George Black
Inger E
"Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> skrev i meddelandet
news:3C69E09C...@sympatico.ca...
Kel,
unfortunatly not half of it is written in English, and than I am not talking
about Medieval English + English either. Many documentations, or should I
say up to 30 % is written in Medieval Latin which I suppose that most can
read but a large number of the documents are written in either Medieval
Norse, Medieval Swedish, Medieval German(only a few in "German") than some
is written in a funny mix of a Scandinavian language and "Latin"/ or any of
the rest.
I am not presenting my material to this group, that's final. What I can do
and have done to a smaller number of people is providing them with a smaller
amount of information such as up to 200 quoted diplomas and alike
documentation + up to 350 ref. I always start by sending around 50 diplomas.
If the person agree to keep the information to himself than I can and have
priovided them with information of their special interest. There is only one
person Prof. Dick Harrisson who have had it all. Or should I say all I had
up to the day I sent him the material, which have been three times with full
material up to early Winter(Oct)2001.
Inger E
Michael Zalar
> Michael, another frequent poster who did not wish to participate
> in this thread because of the presence in the thread of one of
> the above referenced posters, sent this to me with instructions
> that I may use it as I see fit. While the frequent poster's
> correspondence to me doesn't address the Thule versus Dorset
> issue directly, perhaps the references furnished do:
>
> ============================================================================================================
> "Ramah chert, for example, available only in Northern Labrador,
> is found in abundance at Recent Indian sites throughout Labrador
> (Fitzhugh 1978: 147; Loring 1988, 1992), and in lesser but still
> meaningful quantities at Recent Indian sites in Newfoundland
> (Hull 1999; Pastore 1989: 70; Reader 1998: 58; Schwarz 1993).
> Ramah chert even appears periodically throughout the Canadian
> Maritimes and New England (Loring 1992). In addition
> to Ramah chert, a plethora of other raw material moved throughout
> the far northeast and eastern Subarctic (Bourque 1994; Denton
> 1998; Loring in press; McCaffrey 1983, 1989; Wright 1994). Some
> of this raw material appears to have originated in Newfoundland
> (Pintal 1989: 35; Renouf 1999: 414)."
>
<bibliography clipped.>
Thank you for the citations - should I ever come to investigate the
matter fully, this will be quite helpful.
It should be pointed out that the distribution of the Ramah chert
cannot even be directly tied to the Dorset culture - as noted at
http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/archeo/cvh/neuf/eneuf7.htm
"The Point Revenge people occupied small coastal campsites not unlike
those of their Intermediate Indian predecessors. At these sites are
found distinctive notched projectile points, chipped stone knives, and
small "thumbnail" scrapers (figure). Strangely, almost all of these
tools and weapons are made of Ramah chert from northern Labrador, even
though most Recent Indian sites in Labrador are well south of the
Ramah chert quarries. Whether this material was obtained through trade
with Dorset Eskimos or by occasional visits to the quarries themselves
remains unknown."
The chert had been excavated from the quarries at Ramah previous to
the coming of the Dorset peoples by a group known as the Maritime
Archaic people, so the site was known and in use up to 5000 years ago.
(see: http://www.heritage.nf.ca/aboriginal/maritime.html ) In lack of
dating regrding the finds from the above quote, the dispersal to some
of these places may have even occured prior to the Dorset era. Indeed
another site notes "Ramah Chert is found only at Ramah Bay in northern
Labrador. Maritime Archaic artifacts made from this unique stone have
been found as far south as Maine"
(http://collections.ic.gc.ca/ancient/page/craft.html .
And again: "The Maritime Archaic Indian culture inhabited the coast of
Labrador in the northeastern Canadian subarctic between 7000-1800 BC.
They are well known for their use of marine resources, mortuary
ceremonialism (red ocher graves in cemeteries or under rock mounds),
and long distance exchange systems (Ramah chert and other materials)."
http://www.sv.uit.no/seksjon/ark/ansatte/hood/bhhjem.html
On the other hand, I also find the following from the Old Norse Net
archives (http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00336.html)
"Late Dorset material culture, ca. 1300 AD, extends in
Labrador south to Okak and Nain, with only scattered objects found
farther
south. Use of Ramah chert by Point Revenge groups and its exchange
farther south clearly implies that there was trade and interaction
between
these groups, if all visually-identified "Ramah chert" is really from
the
Ramah Bay quarries in N. Labrador. It should be noted that there is a
nearly identical quartzite/chert called Mistassini Quartzite found in
the
Boreal Forest interior SE of Hudson's Bay and that the intervening
areas
are poorly known from the archaeologists' limited perspective of
wanting
to know where Native Americans got their stone for making tools.
Assuming
that most "Ramah chert" really is from Ramah Bay, there is clear
evidence
of interaction between areas dominated by Late Dorset material culture
(multiple sites) and Point Revenge material culture (multiple sites).
Whether this interaction was intermarriage, aggression, trade,
alliance,
actual travel from one area to another, cooperation, etc. is hard to
say
with available data. "
At any rate, the farthest reach south that I have seen for Ramah
chert, be it traded by Archaic Maritime, Dorset, or Indian cultures is
Maine, and that still lies quite beyond the range of the Bison as
given by the maps previously referenced.
Michael
Emir
> emi...@yahoo.com (Emir) wrote in message
news:<emir_ak-1102...@dialup-65.58.42.39.dial1.chicago1.level3.net>...
> > In article <3C6747C5...@ihug.co.nz>, George Black
> > <gbl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > Eric,
> > > > you wouldn't believe how fun people had at my table today...
> >
> >
> > > and we're back to Ingers pretend friends who never actually have names.
> > > Just degrees and doctorates that somehow vary according to the subject
> > > discussed
> >
> >
> > Oh, we're well beyond that.
>
> Yes, this is rather old news. She is even past the stage of reading
> the non-existing historians.
Alex, what's the matter, were you asleep in drama class again? If
so you would have known that in the Diplomica Satyricon Petronius
clearly indicates that the grotto scene contains no bisons!!!!!!!
Goodnight Alex, someday you will be a Scholar, for now you will
have to suffice being the topic of conversation between Inger's
pepper and salt shakers.
> >Now she's talking to buildings:
> >
> >
> > In article <FrM98.17675$n4.30...@newsc.telia.net>, "Inger E"
> > <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
> >
> > > btw. I was talking to the Museum of Natur History here in Gothenburg
- they
> > > told be that it wasn't 3200 BC but 8000 BP when we in Scandinavia last had
> > > Bisons walking around. I guess they know it better than Daryl and Alex,
> > > don't you?
> >
>
> Not simply talks but gets a response.... "And The Building said in a
> voice of thunder: You will not see the bisons in Scandinavia. Only the pink
> elephants!"
Behold, O Great Thor! Smite the fun-seekers with your Hammer
of the Scholars!
> She rejected my assumption that her behavior can be partially excused
> by an excessive intake of an alcohol. With this excuse gone, I'm
> forced to assume that this is a natural behavior.
There's a certain hand gesture I could make which would explain
what her problem is, but I guess that doesn't carry over well to
usenet (or to polite company for that matter).
> As far as bisons in Scandinavia are involved, I never said that they
> lived in _Scandinavia_. Just pointed out that they lived and still live in
> Poland and Belorussia. It probably does not make sense to comment on The
> Imbecile's well-known inability to read.
What's hilarious is that this thread has been going, with different
titles, for as long as I've been reading usenet.
Inger sez: "In six months, I will make cold fusion in my Viking
bathtub!"
Various archeology folks say: "Where are the sources?"
Eric Stevens sez: "I'm not saying she *can* make cold fusion, but
I refuse to believe that she *can't* make cold fusion."
Emir sez: "Inger, you're a dummyhead."
Eventually a few knowledgable people are so annoyed that they're
forced to dissect her ramblings point by point. At which time,
Inger says she wasn't talking about COLD fusion at all, and only
an UnScholarly Lout with no knowledge of the Widely Spoke Language
of Swedish (for fun, why don't we direct her to some search engines
in the .ru, .hr and .yu domains?) would say such a thing, and give
a list of "searchmotor" sites where someone can find out about the
grazing habits of middle eastern yam-yaks instead.
In the meantime, she offers to mail documents to people... and
then, as happened with that recent bloke, insults him when he
tells her it has absolutely nothing to do with what they're talking
about.
One day she'll be gone, and we'll realize what we've got going.
Emir
Kel Rekuta
Well, at least this reply was less cryptic than the last
one. Clearly Scandinavian languages are beyond my
experience. I can probably access anything you mention at
the University of Toronto. If not the Celtic Studies at
University of Guelph has an excellent library.
Please forward whatever you may in Middle English or Scots,
Medieval German and Latin.
I would be grateful for any references provided.
Regards,
Kel
Alex
> In article <f8e58188.02021...@posting.google.com>,
> am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
>
> > emi...@yahoo.com (Emir) wrote in message
> news:<emir_ak-1102...@dialup-65.58.42.39.dial1.chicago1.level3.net>...
> > > In article <3C6747C5...@ihug.co.nz>, George Black
> > > <gbl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Eric,
> > > > > you wouldn't believe how fun people had at my table today...
> > >
> > >
> > > > and we're back to Ingers pretend friends who never actually have names.
> > > > Just degrees and doctorates that somehow vary according to the subject
> > > > discussed
> > >
> > >
> > > Oh, we're well beyond that.
> >
> > Yes, this is rather old news. She is even past the stage of reading
> > the non-existing historians.
>
>
>
> Alex, what's the matter, were you asleep in drama class again? If
> so you would have known that in the Diplomica Satyricon Petronius
> clearly indicates that the grotto scene contains no bisons!!!!!!!
<Immediately waking up>
... And a great Russian historian A.K.Tolstoy did not mention a single
bison in his "History of the Russian State from Gostromisel to
Timashev"...
[Couple years before you appearence on shm, after getting a usual
recommendation to read some unidentified Swedish sources on Russian
history,
I returned a favor by recommending to read the work mentioned above.
Of
course, I got a response that she knows it but unfortunately this
source is
outdated. Just in case you don't know, it's a famous satiric poem,
which
even The Imbecile would not be able to mistook for a history book. The
funniest
thing is that soon after this fiasco she had a nerve to deny the whole
event
(with a dozen or so "witnesses" being present).]
>
> Goodnight Alex, someday you will be a Scholar, for now you will
> have to suffice being the topic of conversation between Inger's
> pepper and salt shakers.
... and her friends who travel <in all necessary places> and know for
sure
that the pink elephants do not walk unrestricted on the streets of
Stokholm (to think about it, maybe we are talking about the same
"people")...
>
>
> > >Now she's talking to buildings:
> > >
> > >
> > > In article <FrM98.17675$n4.30...@newsc.telia.net>, "Inger E"
> > > <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > btw. I was talking to the Museum of Natur History here in Gothenburg
> - they
> > > > told be that it wasn't 3200 BC but 8000 BP when we in Scandinavia last had
> > > > Bisons walking around. I guess they know it better than Daryl and Alex,
> > > > don't you?
> > >
> >
> > Not simply talks but gets a response.... "And The Building said in a
> > voice of thunder: You will not see the bisons in Scandinavia. Only the pink
> > elephants!"
>
>
> Behold, O Great Thor! Smite the fun-seekers with your Hammer
> of the Scholars!
No, no, no. Her "friends" (let's call them "SS" and "PS") are having
the
righteous fun. The Great Thor will smite the bison-believers.
>
>
> > She rejected my assumption that her behavior can be partially excused
> > by an excessive intake of an alcohol. With this excuse gone, I'm
> > forced to assume that this is a natural behavior.
>
>
> There's a certain hand gesture I could make which would explain
> what her problem is, but I guess that doesn't carry over well to
> usenet (or to polite company for that matter).
>
To think about it, she denied drinking the wine and did not say
anything
about the more potent substancies. So the big quantities of a low
quality
spirit are not out of question (and more likely to do the necessary
brain'damage than a wine).
>
> > As far as bisons in Scandinavia are involved, I never said that they
> > lived in _Scandinavia_. Just pointed out that they lived and still live in
> > Poland and Belorussia. It probably does not make sense to comment on The
> > Imbecile's well-known inability to read.
>
>
> What's hilarious is that this thread has been going, with different
> titles, for as long as I've been reading usenet.
>
> Inger sez: "In six months, I will make cold fusion in my Viking
> bathtub!"
>
> Various archeology folks say: "Where are the sources?"
>
> Eric Stevens sez: "I'm not saying she *can* make cold fusion, but
> I refuse to believe that she *can't* make cold fusion."
>
> Emir sez: "Inger, you're a dummyhead."
>
> Eventually a few knowledgable people are so annoyed that they're
> forced to dissect her ramblings point by point. At which time,
> Inger says she wasn't talking about COLD fusion at all, and only
> an UnScholarly Lout with no knowledge of the Widely Spoke Language
> of Swedish (for fun, why don't we direct her to some search engines
> in the .ru, .hr and .yu domains?) would say such a thing, and give
> a list of "searchmotor" sites where someone can find out about the
> grazing habits of middle eastern yam-yaks instead.
Very good summary. :-)
>
> In the meantime, she offers to mail documents to people... and
> then, as happened with that recent bloke, insults him when he
> tells her it has absolutely nothing to do with what they're talking
> about.
>
> One day she'll be gone, and we'll realize what we've got going.
and what we are missing....
Alex
> "Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> skrev i meddelandet
> news:3C69E09C...@sympatico.ca...
> > Inger E wrote:
Ingred wrote:
> > > Steve,
> > > since one of the persons you refer to below is myself and I in the book
> > > which I am working on also present a ref. to an English document written
> > > before Columbus had set sail proving not only that the Norse but also
> the
> > > English or should I say Scots not only visited the area in question but
> also
> > > had a small settlement there close to the Indians in the Pre-Columbian
> days,
Then on Kel's rather naive request to present a reference to this particular
document:
> Kel,
> unfortunatly not half of it is written in English,
>and than I am not talking
> about Medieval English + English either.
Half of the English document written not in English... well, perhaps Latin?
> Many documentations,
Looks like a single document started self-multiplication at some point
between her two posts... Hopefully, it still restrained itself to one or
two languages....
>or should I
> say up to 30 % is written in Medieval Latin
Aha, so we have 50% on <whatever> English and 30% on <whatever> Latin...
> which I suppose that most can
> read but a large number of the documents are written in either Medieval
> Norse, Medieval Swedish, Medieval German(only a few in "German") than some
> is written in a funny mix of a Scandinavian language and "Latin"/ or any of
> the rest.
... and 20% of it in German, Swedish, etc. ....
Picture looks like following. An initial English document started self-copying
(probably as a result of being subjected to Ingred's theories). Initially,
it could restrain itself to the various modifications of English, then
mutation started. Initially, it was more or less limited to a Medieval Latin
but eventually, as a result of inbreeding and a further subjection to the
above-mentioned theories, mutation completely went out of control and the
remaining 20% of a by-product ended up being on various unrelated languages
including Contemporary Gibberish (referenced as "a funny mix").
>
> I am not presenting my material to this group, that's final.
For information, which we are NOT going to receive, we are trully grateful! :-)
Keep good work, Ingred: life would be boring without people like you.
Daryl Krupa
> On 10 Feb 2002 10:09:17 -0800, am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
>
> >It looks like you have serious reading problems. Equivalent of bison is
> >called 'zubr' ...
>
> But is its hair such as to be readily confused with the hair of a
> North American bison?
They are both Genus _Bison_.
This is because the North American bison was named after
the European bison.
They are very closely allied, and interbreed successfully.
So, yes.
Daryl Krupa
Daryl Krupa
> On 10 Feb 2002 12:12:51 -0800, icyc...@yahoo.com (Daryl Krupa)
> wrote:
>
> >Eric Stevens <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message news:<h86b6usjgi8q5ecff...@4ax.com>...
> ><snip>
> >> The URL I previously cited
> >> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> >> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison.
> >> She appears to either have not considered or, more likely,
> >> has rejected the idea of a European bison.
> >
> >
> >So what did they find.
> >Aside from sheep/goat, they are said to have fibers, fleeces, pelts
> >or artifacts made from the hair of cattle (Bos taurus),
> >Bison (Bison bison or Bison bonasus - American or European bison),
> >Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus), Musk ox (Ovibos moschatus),
> >Brown/black/grizzly bear (Ursus sp.), Polar bear (Thalarctos maritimus),
> >wolf (Canis sp.) and fox (probably arctic fox, Alopex lagopus).
> >
> > As usual, Eric sees only what he wants to see.
> >
> Try reading the article again. and you will find I was refering to the
> **direct quote** from Jette Arneborg.
I did.
From the direct quote:
"... the most likely place for the bison fibres seems to be
the North American mainland."
This means that she has considered a less likely place than
"the North American mainland." I.e., Europe.
The accusation of selective viewing still stands.
Daryl Krupa
Inger E
had you been a gentleman you would have had the knowledge you request long
ago. Since you aren't a gentleman I think it's fair to say good night. Kel
have had an answer of his own and he speaks for himself.
Inger E
"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:f8e58188.02021...@posting.google.com...
Daryl Krupa
<snip>
> > The barren ground grizzlies definitely occupy
> > the northeastern shores of Hudson Bay,
> > and may have occupied Ungava in historical times.
>
Mike Cleven <iro...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:<3C664E3D...@bigfoot.com>...
> Ungava _is_ the northeastern shore of Hudson Bay, i.e. north of the tree
> line and a bit below. I can see there having been browns/grizzes in the
> James Bay-Grand River area, though (the southeastern shore); do you mean
> the Manitoba coastline, somehow?
Damn. I meant "northwestern shores of Hudson Bay", i.e. Keewatin.
<snip>
> > (Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)
>
> NB which are the corporate survival of the Hudson's Bay Company, named
> in the days when Hudson Bay _was_ known as Hudson's Bay....
Exactly. _Now_ known as Hudson Bay.
(Stop agreeing with me; it's confusing.)
> > The salient point here is that Inger has claimed that bear hair,
> > found on the shores of Baffin Bay and named as Grizzly bear hair,
> > cannot be hair from an European brown bear, because they are of
> > different sizes.
> > This claim ignores the fact that they are the same species,
> > _Ursos arctos_,
> > known all around the northern reaches of the hemisphere,
> > from Britain eastward to Hudson Bay, with a gap in the
> > North Atlantic and on the eastern coast of North America.
>
> I'm going to have to check on this with some fish & wildlife dept
> acquaintances; in BC a distinction is made between grizzlies and browns,
> I think, although maybe browns are really only immature grizzes; they're
> known for being more aggressive than either grizzes or the various
> subvarieties of blacks found here (cinnamons, kermodes/whites, etc.)
But this discussion has nothing to do with local idiomatic usage in B.C..
I referred to "the European brown bear", not a British Columbian brown bear.
<snip>
> > And now the proof that Inger is not knowledgeable on
> > this subject:
> > she did not bring up the fact that Grizzly bears are
> > named after the grizzled, or silver-haired, look of
> > mature adult "silverbacks".
> > Grizzly bear hair from the back and flanks of a mature adult
> > _looks_ different from European brown bair hair.
> > Surely that is more important than size differences.
> >
> > Inger knows nothing of biogeography, not even that it exists
> > as a discipline. At one point she claimed that because caribou
> > pelts were different in different parts of Greenland, there
> > must have been extensive timber resources available to Medieval
> > Norse on Baffin Island, which thus must have been Markland,
> > which meant that Vinland had been somewhere beyond southwest
> > Hudson Bay. All in ignorance of the inconvenient fact that
> > Baffin Island has probably been treeless for millions of years,
> > and certainly for the last 100,000 years.
>
> Markland is generally conceded to have been Labrador, with Helluland
> ("the place of stones") being Baffin. Still, I think there were trees
> on Baffin more recently than your cite; there's a petrified/mummified
> forest up that way somewhere, and I don't think it's _that_ old.
It's from the Tertiary, well before the "Ice Ages", from a time
when conditions were warm eonough to allow trees to grow throughout
the Canadian Arctic, up Axel Heiberg Island (next to Ellesmere Island).
It's millions of years old.
Mostly stumps in sand.
Completely useless for timber.
Check your sources.
> I'm bcc'ing this to someone who lives in Pangnirtung who's familiar
> with this kind of detail, as well as wildlife issues in the region
> (Hi Keith!)
Do tell what he replies on these matters.
By the way, what are his qualifications?
<snip>
> > so that he is confident that he can tell the difference
> > between the two far better than some ditzy Bohuslander
> > kindergarten worker)
>
> Bohuslanderinne.....(-er is a male ending, I think)
Thank you for the correction, I shall check on that.
Daryl Krupa
Daryl Krupa
> For your irascible information I have established that it is not
> difficult to distinguish the hair of the European species of bison
> from either of the main American species.
There is only one species of bison in North America.
There are two remaining sub-species.
You are not a reliable source.
Daryl Krupa
Daryl Krupa
> I've read some of her pontificaton. I should have added a
> smiley.
Understood; I just exploited the oppurtunity for an archeological dig
<smiley smiley smiley>
> I don't read the archaeology site, or I'd have realized she
> cross posts frequently.
> And also neglects to read replies completely. She asked for
> my sources, which were listed in the very post she replied
> to.
We are almost, but not quite, beneath her notice.
> Daryl Krupa wrote:
> > Try these URLs, previously cited by Michael Zalar in re: to this topic.
> > http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp
> > http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html
>
> Thanks. I was relying on memory. I spent a couple years in
> Alberta, travelling to parks at every opportunity.
Ever get up to Wood Buffalo National Park, or Elk Island?
Beaucoup de bison in each, and there are numerous Plains bison
ranches/farms hereabouts now (a friend raises them).
> Even more useful. I hadn't realized the grizzly ranged that
> far east in pre-Columbian times. Thanks!
>> Daryl Krupa wrote:
> > And these, on bears.
> > http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/grizzly/grizzly.html
> > http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/blbear/blbear.html
> > Griz used to occupy the Great Plains before being extirpated
> > there by Europeans.
> > The barren ground grizzlies definitely occupy the
> > northeastern shores of Hudson Bay,
> > and may have occupied Ungava in historical times.
Sorry, that should have been "northwestern shores of Hudson Bay".
Griz seem to have occurred wherever there was open land with
large herds of ungulates (e.g. bison, caribou) to supply carrion.
> > (Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)
>
> Wanna buy a blanket? ;-}
"We already got one!"
- a previously undiscovered French Ki-nig-it in Arthurian Britain
<snip>
> > Hoping that this helps,
> > Daryl Krupa
> > (who has petted bison and spun their wool, and
> > been much, much closer to a grizzly bear than
> > he ever wanted to be, and collected some of its hair,
> > and seen several others in the wild,
> > so that he is confident that he can tell the difference
> > between the two far better than some ditzy Bohuslander
> > kindergarten worker)
>
> ROTFL....
>
> I saw one in Glacier National Park many years ago.
> I wasn't looking at the grizzly's hair. Those claws are
> longer than my fingers!
> And the head on the critter. Wow. I was very happy to be
> well above it on a tower.
Wow. I was glad that mine turned and skedaddled back into the
dense bush (BIG POINTY TEETH!)
and that the truck was only a minute's run away from our rendezvous.
> I never would have thought bison hair would spin well. Isn't
> it coarse? I've only touched the head and mane.
The hair, no. The wool, yes (can be collected from wallows,
fences, and trees where they have been rubbing off their
winter undercoat).
> Thanks for the info.
Nye problemia, kazhe
Daryl Krupa