Norse; Finns and Swedes in Pre-Columbian NA
Inger E
quotation:
Wide and far they fared
Needing sustenance
Over ice and wastelands
To Vinland they came
Wealth weighs little
For those who die early
Rune stone from Hønen, Norway.
Translation by Suzanne Carlson
source: http://www.neara.org/CARLSON/atlantic.html
and then you better prepare yourself with the knowledge that King Magnus
Eriksson(King of Sweden from 1319 to 1360's) was a king of one of the larger
Empire that ever existed on this Earth by remembering that King Magnus's
Empire northwestern border was Disco Bay in Greenland and the easternborder
was where Sveaborg on the border between Finland and Russia. Included in his
Empire was Vinland, the Orkney Island, Skane(from mid1340's), Shetland
Islands and some more distant places. After preparing yourself with that
knowledge you might find the following quoation re. DNA-results from the
1300's in NA a bit more understandable:
"The lineage 2 sequence was identical to one found in two Finnish
individuals "
source:
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v62n5/970850/970850.htm
l
More to follow this time next year.
Inger E
Richard Flavin
>From: "Inger E" inger_e....@telia.com
>Date: 11/16/2002 3:37 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <N%xB9.4957$1r1.1...@newsc.telia.net>
And perhaps by this time next year we'll know more about the Eriksson (sp?)
family that owned the land in the 1860s which became (in)famous as Ohman's farm
in 1898 after the alleged discovery of the KRS. Or maybe sooner.
RDF
--
Flavin's Corner:
http://www.flavinscorner.com
Steve Marcus
I hope that more than I know that the quotation from the Honen
Stone is believed to be a corrupted translation, is only partial,
and that the Honen Stone no longer exists.
I also hope that more than I know that the Inuit people had an
extensive trading network, and may well have "exchanged genes"
with the Finns and perhaps with both the Greenland Norse and the
North American non-Inuit Native population.
>
> Inger E
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.
Steve Marcus
1860, dontcha' know? :)
--
> Flavin's Corner:
> http://www.flavinscorner.com
Steve
Eric Stevens
The URL unwrapped is
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v62n5/970850/970850.html
Eric Stevens
Richard Flavin
>From: Steve Marcus barbm...@erols.com
>Date: 11/16/2002 8:57 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <3DD6F77E...@erols.com>
Steve,
I was tempted to reply in Inger-ish (If you were less of a scholar..., only
those who have spoken directly to..., when the next blue moon is high in the
sky, then your tears of shame will boil away on your red and embarrassed
cheeks, etc.), but I resist and remain just Rick. Nielson told me so a couple
of weeks ago. 'Tis a pity local researchers haven't done the basic work. 'Tis
an ongoing joke that some foreign researchers believe basic work isn't
necessary. But, this is UseNet.
Regards,
Rick
Horace LaBadie
<inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
SNIP
>and then you better prepare yourself with the knowledge that King Magnus
>Eriksson(King of Sweden from 1319 to 1360's) was a king of one of the larger
>Empire that ever existed on this Earth by remembering that King Magnus's
>Empire northwestern border was Disco Bay in Greenland and the easternborder
>was where Sveaborg on the border between Finland and Russia. Included in his
>Empire was Vinland, the Orkney Island, Skane(from mid1340's), Shetland
>Islands and some more distant places. After preparing yourself with that
>knowledge you might find the following quoation re. DNA-results from the
>1300's in NA a bit more understandable:
>"The lineage 2 sequence was identical to one found in two Finnish
>individuals "
>source:
>http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v62n5/970850/970850.htm
>l
You conveniently omitted to mention that every reference to that
particular lineage in the above paper is qualified by the word
"contamination" or "contaminated." The lineage is a product of the
laboratory procedure. Or are you claiming to be more competent judge of
the testing than the authors of the study?
>
>More to follow this time next year.
>
>Inger E
Unless it's the laboratory source of the contamination, no there isn't.
HWL
Eric Stevens
On the other hand, you conveniently failed to not the number of
references to 'contaminate' or 'contamination'' which refer to the
steps they took to avoid contamination of the samples. In the case of
this particular reference, that they were contaminated was not
entirely clear cut:
"Two of these lineages (2 and 25) were excluded from
further analyses, as likely cases of contamination (despite
multiple independent extractions of these samples). The
sequence of lineage 25 (from burial 200) matched the sequence
of the primary author (A.S.). The lineage 2 sequence was
identical to one found in two Finnish individuals (Lahermo et
al. 1996) and segregates with the reference sequence in
phylogenetic analyses (data not shown). Although this
sequence does not match the author's sequence or that
of the primary osteologist involved with the sample, this
lineage may be the result of contamination from an unknown
source. Additional investigation of the mtDNA sequences
of individuals involved with the skeletal collection may reveal
the possible source for this sequence. Lineage 25 was from
the "other" group (as is the primary author), whereas extracts
from the individual with lineage 2 did have the gain of the
HaeIII site that characterizes haplogroup A in Native Americans;
however, this mutation has also been found in two Caucasians
(Cann et al. 1987)".
The situation is not the the lineages have been shown to be
contaminated. It is that contamination remains a possibility and that
"Additional investigation of the mtDNA sequences of individuals
involved with the skeletal collection ... ". I would not read too much
into this either way at the moment. However, that the the mtDNA has
not been contaminated cannot yet be ruled out.
Eric Stevens
Inger E
you better start reading the article once again - and you better try to
compare with the mix there was at the time in question in northern
Bohuslän - Ranriki, not the mix there were at the time in question in NA.
Inger E
"Horace LaBadie" <hwlab...@nospam.highstream.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:hwlabadiejr-17...@1cust94.tnt4.tpa2.da.uu.net...
Gisele Horvat
<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
[...]
>The situation is not the the lineages have been shown to be
>contaminated. It is that contamination remains a possibility and that
>"Additional investigation of the mtDNA sequences of individuals
>involved with the skeletal collection ... ". I would not read too much
>into this either way at the moment. However, that the the mtDNA has
>not been contaminated cannot yet be ruled out.
I agree with your assessment, Eric, but for interest's sake, I'd like
to point out something that I did not know when I first read this
article some time ago. While sequence #2 was identical to a few
European haplogroup V sequences in the first hypervariable region, it
also had the mutation characteristic of Native American haplogroup A
(663G) in the slower-evolving part of the sequence:
"...extracts from the individual with lineage 2 did have the gain of
the HaeIII site that characterizes haplogroup A in Native Americans;
however, this mutation has also been found in two Caucasians (Cann et
al. 1987)". (Stone & Stoneking, 1998)
It's a composite. I've seen many similar instances which I assume
are legit or are not due to contamination. I think they're due to
some type of recombination.
Gisele
Inger E
"Gisele Horvat" <g-ho...@shaw.ca> skrev i meddelandet
news:3dd733d8.55705583@shawnews...
Gisele,
thanks for your quick answer.
Of course it would have been strange if there hadn't been any "transaction"
from NA native to Scandinavian/Caucasian etc. According to stories there
were at least two who after arriving in the Old World settled with
Europeans.
Anyhow Gisele, a year or two ago you helped my friend Tomas W to information
re. the European Pre-columbian impact in the DNA-reports for the period(if I
remember it correctly) 1100-1400. I haven't seen the same urls discussed
here in the group, do you happen to have it at hand?
Inger E
Gisele Horvat
<inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
>Gisele,
>thanks for your quick answer.
>Of course it would have been strange if there hadn't been any "transaction"
>from NA native to Scandinavian/Caucasian etc. According to stories there
>were at least two who after arriving in the Old World settled with
>Europeans.
>
>Anyhow Gisele, a year or two ago you helped my friend Tomas W to information
>re. the European Pre-columbian impact in the DNA-reports for the period(if I
>remember it correctly) 1100-1400. I haven't seen the same urls discussed
>here in the group, do you happen to have it at hand?
Hi Inger,
Unfortunately, I'll need more than that to juggle my memory.
Gisele
Inger E
Gisele,
short after you and I had discussed a possible/plausible Italian and
Scandinavian Pre-Columbian impact/intermarriages(?) in some of the Indian
groups in eastern US, my friend Tomas asked a question re. what the male DNA
suggested for possibilities. Have to ask Tomas if he still have the answer
in his computer or if he have it on paper.
Inger E
Horace LaBadie
<inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
>Horace,
>you better start reading the article once again - and you better try to
>compare with the mix there was at the time in question in northern
>Bohuslän - Ranriki, not the mix there were at the time in question in NA.
>
>Inger E
SNIP
So, you are claiming a better knowledge of the testing circumstances than
the authors.
HWL
David Johnson
news:hwlabadiejr-17...@1cust42.tnt4.tpa2.da.uu.net:
Of course she does! Inger knows all, sees all, tells all...six months from
now.
David
Seppo Renfors
You had better take that up with the historians of Kensington, who say
the first setter arrived in the 1870'ies, and settled where the
present water tower is.
--
SIR -Philosopher Unauthorised
------------------------------------------------------------------
" Don't resent getting old. A great many are denied that privilege "
---------------------------------------------------------------
Seppo Renfors
If it is a recombination, wouldn't this then carry through to
subsequent generations, and be found even now - well, unless that
maternal line ceased to exist in the meantime somehow?
Richard Flavin
>Date: 11/18/2002 5:57 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <3DD8C786...@not.ollis.com.au>
--snip--
>Nielson told me so a
>couple
>> of weeks ago. 'Tis a pity local researchers haven't done the basic work.
>'Tis
>> an ongoing joke that some foreign researchers believe basic work isn't
>> necessary. But, this is UseNet.
>> Regards,
>> Rick
>
>You had better take that up with the historians of Kensington, who say
>the first setter arrived in the 1870'ies, and settled where the
>present water tower is.
I had better, huh? Ah, there's nothing like troll droppings on a Monday
morning to get the week started properly. Hey, Seppo, I told you before I
don't care to exchange posts with you. You're an idiot with a keyboard and you
bore me. Sure, you could have asked if I heard Nielsen correctly or if Nielsen
is to be trusted with information about an Eriksson (sp.?) family in the 1860s
on the land that became the Ohman farm, but that would have been too close to
reasonable discussion for a troll like you. Back under your bridge!
RDF
Inger E
"Seppo Renfors" <Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> skrev i meddelandet
news:3DD8C786...@not.ollis.com.au...
Or better still they can take a look at the map over Kensington from 1895.
Can't find the url for the moment I had it written down somewhere but it
seems that the map entry page I used is down for the moment.
Inger E
Gisele Horvat
In a data base, consisting of thousands of sequences obtained from
locations all over the world, Stone and Stoneking only found 2
hypervariable region I sequences which matched Oneota #2 and both of
these were in Finland. I can easily pick out these two as well.
They were F14 & F148 of Sajantila et al. GenomeRes 5:42-52, 1995.
My point - sampling is not sufficiently sensitive to trace every type
sequence and I don't think it ever was intended to be. If Oneota #2 is
alive and flourishing in the Americas, no one would know because no
one is really looking for it. (Believe it or not, there is not a
great deal of interest in the hypervariable sequences of Americans
with European ancestry!) :-)
>well, unless that
>maternal line ceased to exist in the meantime somehow?
It's hard to say. I am aware of one American sequence which is
similar but not idencal.
Gisele
Tomi
first settlers was called Finn ... something. So there is nothing peculiar
here;-)
--
Tomi
Inger E
don't get so high - actually in the party that set of together with Knutson
there were one person who had a Finnish parent.
Inger E
"Tomi" <to...@invalid.inet.fi> skrev i meddelandet
news:Xns92CAD4E...@192.89.123.233...
Peter Ashby
g-ho...@shaw.ca (Gisele Horvat) wrote:
> "...extracts from the individual with lineage 2 did have the gain of
> the HaeIII site that characterizes haplogroup A in Native Americans;
> however, this mutation has also been found in two Caucasians (Cann et
> al. 1987)". (Stone & Stoneking, 1998)
>
> It's a composite. I've seen many similar instances which I assume
> are legit or are not due to contamination. I think they're due to
> some type of recombination.
Recombination in mtDNA? Care to expand on that hypothesis Giselle? I
read the pcr methods and note that they often needed to reamplify the
samples with nested primers. One amplification is risk enough with pcr,
with 2 your risk is amplified by an unknown amount, which can be very
large. I think that without other evidence to positively rule out
contamination the default hypothesis should be that they are. They state
that the pcrs were carried out in a separate room and that the operator
wore protection. Was the room positive in air pressure wrt to
surrounding rooms? for eg. Pcr is so powerful you have to be very
careful with contamination. See the steps taken with the Neanderthal
sequence for the extreme.
Peter
--
Peter Ashby
Wellcome Trust Biocentre
University of Dundee, Scotland
Reverse the Spam and remove to email me.
Seppo Renfors
I have come across references to the Sajantila study before. It was in
relation to the Saami people, whom I had been attempting to track back
to a "homeland". The Saami, as near as I can tell, originated from
around the head waters of the Irtysh to the Yenisey river on the
steppes north of the Altai mountains.
The Mongol people, tracing them via their legends on creation, is
thought to have originated from West of Lake Baikal. A nearby region
to the Saami people. So if the Finnish people were Saami, then it may
well bring it back to a similar source as the Mongol connection - and
not "European" at all.
> My point - sampling is not sufficiently sensitive to trace every type
> sequence and I don't think it ever was intended to be. If Oneota #2 is
> alive and flourishing in the Americas, no one would know because no
> one is really looking for it. (Believe it or not, there is not a
> great deal of interest in the hypervariable sequences of Americans
> with European ancestry!) :-)
Oh, I believe it, I believe it :-)
> >well, unless that
> >maternal line ceased to exist in the meantime somehow?
>
> It's hard to say. I am aware of one American sequence which is
> similar but not idencal.
If the tribe ceased to exist, it is possible the line was lost too.
Seppo Renfors
Richard Flavin wrote:
>
> >Subject: Re: Norse; Finns and Swedes in Pre-Columbian NA
> >From: Seppo Renfors Sen...@not.ollis.com.au
> >Date: 11/18/2002 5:57 AM Eastern Standard Time
> >Message-id: <3DD8C786...@not.ollis.com.au>
> --snip--
>
> >Nielson told me so a
> >couple
> >> of weeks ago. 'Tis a pity local researchers haven't done the basic work.
> >'Tis
> >> an ongoing joke that some foreign researchers believe basic work isn't
> >> necessary. But, this is UseNet.
> >> Regards,
> >> Rick
> >
> >You had better take that up with the historians of Kensington, who say
> >the first setter arrived in the 1870'ies, and settled where the
> >present water tower is.
>
> I had better, huh? Ah, there's nothing like troll droppings on a Monday
> morning to get the week started properly. Hey, Seppo, I told you before I
> don't care to exchange posts with you. You're an idiot with a keyboard and you
> bore me.
Watch out or you'll get nose bleed, bloody pompous jackass!!
I posted that initial data for 1870's, you go shooting your mouth off
about the dates, I just suggested you had better take that argument up
with the source of my information - the historians of Kensington
instead of gushing your sneering lizard breath at others. You've got a
bloody big mouth, but pretty piss poor with anything else. Try and
keep a civil tongue in your face for once.
[..]
Gisele Horvat
<Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote:
>I have come across references to the Sajantila study before. It was in
>relation to the Saami people, whom I had been attempting to track back
>to a "homeland". The Saami, as near as I can tell, originated from
>around the head waters of the Irtysh to the Yenisey river on the
>steppes north of the Altai mountains.
What do you base this upon?
>The Mongol people, tracing them via their legends on creation, is
>thought to have originated from West of Lake Baikal. A nearby region
>to the Saami people. So if the Finnish people were Saami, then it may
>well bring it back to a similar source as the Mongol connection - and
>not "European" at all.
For about as long as I can remember, I've been bugged by the fact that
the mtDNA marker which many of the Saami have in common with many
Mongolians must be interpreted as a parallel mutation (when a strictly
maternal mode of inheritance is assumed).
Gisele
Seppo Renfors
Gisele Horvat wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 22:55:16 +1030, Seppo Renfors
> <Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote:
>
> >I have come across references to the Sajantila study before. It was in
> >relation to the Saami people, whom I had been attempting to track back
> >to a "homeland". The Saami, as near as I can tell, originated from
> >around the head waters of the Irtysh to the Yenisey river on the
> >steppes north of the Altai mountains.
>
> What do you base this upon?
On a number of things. A little from mtDNA studies, lot from
linguistics, some archaeology and some independent thinking. You can
have the paper I wrote up about it if you want, it is mainly for my
own interest I wrote it, but you are welcome to it if you wish. Let me
know here if you want it.
> >The Mongol people, tracing them via their legends on creation, is
> >thought to have originated from West of Lake Baikal. A nearby region
> >to the Saami people. So if the Finnish people were Saami, then it may
> >well bring it back to a similar source as the Mongol connection - and
> >not "European" at all.
>
> For about as long as I can remember, I've been bugged by the fact that
> the mtDNA marker which many of the Saami have in common with many
> Mongolians must be interpreted as a parallel mutation (when a strictly
> maternal mode of inheritance is assumed).
There is a distinct possibility of there being an early mixing of the
people. It is not possible to be precise about a thing like an ancient
homeland.
Gisele Horvat
<Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote:
>Gisele Horvat wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 22:55:16 +1030, Seppo Renfors
>> <Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> >I have come across references to the Sajantila study before. It was in
>> >relation to the Saami people, whom I had been attempting to track back
>> >to a "homeland". The Saami, as near as I can tell, originated from
>> >around the head waters of the Irtysh to the Yenisey river on the
>> >steppes north of the Altai mountains.
>>
>> What do you base this upon?
>
>On a number of things. A little from mtDNA studies, lot from
>linguistics, some archaeology and some independent thinking. You can
>have the paper I wrote up about it if you want, it is mainly for my
>own interest I wrote it, but you are welcome to it if you wish. Let me
>know here if you want it.
Sure, if it's convenient.
>> >The Mongol people, tracing them via their legends on creation, is
>> >thought to have originated from West of Lake Baikal. A nearby region
>> >to the Saami people. So if the Finnish people were Saami, then it may
>> >well bring it back to a similar source as the Mongol connection - and
>> >not "European" at all.
>>
>> For about as long as I can remember, I've been bugged by the fact that
>> the mtDNA marker which many of the Saami have in common with many
>> Mongolians must be interpreted as a parallel mutation (when a strictly
>> maternal mode of inheritance is assumed).
>
>There is a distinct possibility of there being an early mixing of the
>people. It is not possible to be precise about a thing like an ancient
>homeland.
Gisele
qvyht fi
"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
news:N%xB9.4957$1r1.1...@newsc.telia.net...
> I hope that more than I have seen and read the following sites:
>
> quotation:
> Wide and far they fared
> Needing sustenance
> Over ice and wastelands
> To Vinland they came
> Wealth weighs little
> For those who die early
> Rune stone from Hønen, Norway.
> Translation by Suzanne Carlson
>
> source: http://www.neara.org/CARLSON/atlantic.html
>
> and then you better prepare yourself with the knowledge that King Magnus
> Eriksson(King of Sweden from 1319 to 1360's) was a king of one of the
larger
> Empire that ever existed on this Earth by remembering that King Magnus's
> Empire northwestern border was Disco Bay in Greenland and the
easternborder
> was where Sveaborg on the border between Finland and Russia. Included in
his
Sveaborg was build at late 1700's.
Inger E
"qvyht fi" <qv...@thisisnotpartofaddress-yahoo.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:vemD9.20658$ZE1.4...@news1.nokia.com...
>
> "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
> news:N%xB9.4957$1r1.1...@newsc.telia.net...
> > I hope that more than I have seen and read the following sites:
> >
> > quotation:
> > Wide and far they fared
> > Needing sustenance
> > Over ice and wastelands
> > To Vinland they came
> > Wealth weighs little
> > For those who die early
> > Rune stone from Hønen, Norway.
> > Translation by Suzanne Carlson
> >
> > source: http://www.neara.org/CARLSON/atlantic.html
> >
> > and then you better prepare yourself with the knowledge that King Magnus
> > Eriksson(King of Sweden from 1319 to 1360's) was a king of one of the
> larger
> > Empire that ever existed on this Earth by remembering that King Magnus's
> > Empire northwestern border was Disco Bay in Greenland and the
> easternborder
> > was where Sveaborg on the border between Finland and Russia. Included in
> his
>
> Sveaborg was build at late 1700's.
That I know but did you know that on the other side of the river there were
a castle from 1250? I usually refer to Sveaborg due to the fact that I can't
pronounce today's names in the area and the ones that were in 1350-1370 are
hard to find on historical maps for people outside Europe. That I have
learnt over the years.
>
> > Empire was Vinland, the Orkney Island, Skane(from mid1340's), Shetland
> > Islands and some more distant places. After preparing yourself with that
> > knowledge you might find the following quoation re. DNA-results from the
> > 1300's in NA a bit more understandable:
> > "The lineage 2 sequence was identical to one found in two Finnish
> > individuals "
> > source:
> >
>
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v62n5/970850/970850.htm
> > l
> >
> >
> > More to follow this time next year.
> >
> > Inger E
> >
> >
Inger E
Tomi
Viipuri, on the other hand was at the border between Russia (or Novgorod)
and Sweden in Karelia. It was built in the late 13th century.
--
T: Tomi
Inger E
> Sveaborg is on an island outside Helsinki. Vyborg, or the castle of
> Viipuri, on the other hand was at the border between Russia (or Novgorod)
> and Sweden in Karelia. It was built in the late 13th century.
>
Tomi,
what's the name of the fortress that was during the 18th century on the
non-Karelian side. In the book we had when I read History that one was
called Sveaborg as well.... I understand that that isn't correct but still
it would be nice to know the real name. The one in Karelia you are talking
about was planned for in 1350's I never seen an actual year for the "first
stone". Have you?
Inger E
Peter Ashby
Tomi <to...@invalid.inet.fi> wrote:
Sveaborg is also a lovely place to spend a late summer's day with your
family.
Seppo Renfors
While the Mongols attacked Russia in the East, the Swedish "Prince"
and his troops (including bishops, Finns and Tavastians) pushed their
way as far as River Neva. It was there in 1240 they were defeated by
Alexander Nevski, the Prince of Novgorod. In the 1300's a loose border
dividing Swedish and Novgorod interest came to be. It extended from
River Kymi, through Eastern Tavastia to a point on the Gulf of Bothnia
(Gulf of Finland). In 1293 the Swedish embarked on their 3rd Crusade
and founded Wiborg (Viipuri) fortress. In the 1300's they founded the
Landskrona fortress on the River Neva (I have no exact date for this
one).
The Neva runs through St Petersburg, south of the 1323 border (it
ended at about modern day Repino), so it must have been before then,
in the early 1300's.
The war came to an and finally in 1323 with the treaty of Pähkinäsaari
(Schlüssenburg, or now Petrokrepost) - though the English translation
of "Pähkinäsaari" = "Nut Island" :-)
According to a map I have from 1323, the fortresses, castles around at
that time show;
Wiborg - 1293,
Olavinlinna (Nyslott) 1475,
Landskrona fortress (early 1300 - not shown on map as it was destroyed
by Novgorod)
these are the most likely ones you seek.
Inger E
thanks. Tack så mycket.
btw. did you have time to read the first file I sent you? I have been
waiting to send more when ever it's suitable.
Inger E
"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.ollis.com.au> skrev i meddelandet
news:3DDF8882...@not.ollis.com.au...
Tomi
news:3DDF8882...@not.ollis.com.au:
>
>
> Inger E wrote:
>>
>> "Tomi" <to...@invalid.inet.fi> skrev i meddelandet
>> news:Xns92CE9B2...@192.89.123.233...
>> > Sveaborg is on an island outside Helsinki. Vyborg, or the castle of
>> > Viipuri, on the other hand was at the border between Russia (or
>> > Novgorod) and Sweden in Karelia. It was built in the late 13th
>> > century.
>> >
>>
>> Tomi,
>> what's the name of the fortress that was during the 18th century on
>> the non-Karelian side. In the book we had when I read History that one
>> was called Sveaborg as well.... I understand that that isn't correct
>> but still it would be nice to know the real name. The one in Karelia
>> you are talking about was planned for in 1350's I never seen an actual
>> year for the "first stone". Have you?
>
>
> According to a map I have from 1323, the fortresses, castles around at
> that time show;
> Wiborg - 1293,
> Olavinlinna (Nyslott) 1475,
> Landskrona fortress (early 1300 - not shown on map as it was destroyed
> by Novgorod)
> these are the most likely ones you seek.
>
I'd suggest the castle of Bårgå. It's probably from the 13th century. But I
don't know if it has ever had a name other than "Borg" (castle).
--
T: Tomi
Wade Wofford
> I hope that more than I have seen and read the following sites:
>
> quotation:
> Wide and far they fared
> Needing sustenance
> Over ice and wastelands
> To Vinland they came
> Wealth weighs little
> For those who die early
> Rune stone from Hønen, Norway.
> Translation by Suzanne Carlson
Dear Inger,
OUCH! Sounds like they were acknowledging that they were warning
people away from Vinland & admitting that ventures there were NOT
likely to go well.
> source: http://www.neara.org/CARLSON/atlantic.html
>
> and then you better prepare yourself with the knowledge that King Magnus
> Eriksson(King of Sweden from 1319 to 1360's) was a king of one of the larger
> Empire that ever existed on this Earth by remembering that King Magnus's
> Empire northwestern border was Disco Bay in Greenland and the easternborder
> was where Sveaborg on the border between Finland and Russia. Included in his
> Empire was Vinland,
No. The ONLY documented Norse settlement in the Americas PREDATED his
reign by something like THREE centuries. MANY GENERATIONS BEFORE
Magnus Eriksson was even born, Norse contact had been reduced to
occasional forays in search of such things as lumber.
He had absolutely NO control over "Vinland", and as such it was NOT
part of any "Empire" of his.
> the Orkney Island, Skane(from mid1340's), Shetland
> Islands and some more distant places.
Still doesn't sound all that big. The Mongols ruled a far larger
empire, as did the Inca, the Romans, Alexander the Great, the
Persians, and a goodly number of other ancient peoples. (Or not so
ancient, note the Ottoman Turks! Heck, half a dozen modern countries
are bigger!)
> After preparing yourself with that
> knowledge you might find the following quoation re. DNA-results from the
> 1300's in NA a bit more understandable:
> "The lineage 2 sequence was identical to one found in two Finnish
> individuals "
> source:
> http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v62n5/970850/970850.htm
> l
So, which of the three possible explanations are you arguing for?
1) Sample contamination?
2) A Finnish woman "went Native" (voluntarily OR involuntarily) and
contributed her rare Finnish lineage to a tribal population ancestral
to the modern Sioux Indians (as the Oneota are thought to be)?
3) Some early Norse explorer brought back a foreign bride?
> More to follow this time next year.
>
> Inger E
Why so late? The article you linked to was written in 1997 & published
in 1998! I've been tracking it, and there has been no indication of
"followup" research on those samples.
Face it, a four year old article is hardly cause for saying "More to
follow this time next year" (or the year after that, or after that, or
so on and so on ad nauseum?). If you have specifics, post them. But
it's NOT valid to post old news and pretend to insider knowledge....
of a field you've no direct connection to.
Sincerely,
Wade Wofford.
Inger E
"Wade Wofford" <kenuch...@yahoo.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:63d94394.0211...@posting.google.com...
> "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
news:<N%xB9.4957$1r1.1...@newsc.telia.net>...
> > I hope that more than I have seen and read the following sites:
> >
> > quotation:
> > Wide and far they fared
> > Needing sustenance
> > Over ice and wastelands
> > To Vinland they came
> > Wealth weighs little
> > For those who die early
> > Rune stone from Hønen, Norway.
> > Translation by Suzanne Carlson
>
> Dear Inger,
>
> OUCH! Sounds like they were acknowledging that they were warning
> people away from Vinland & admitting that ventures there were NOT
> likely to go well.
Have your read Adam of Bremen's book from 1050's to 1070's? It's in it as
well.
>
> > source: http://www.neara.org/CARLSON/atlantic.html
> >
> > and then you better prepare yourself with the knowledge that King Magnus
> > Eriksson(King of Sweden from 1319 to 1360's) was a king of one of the
larger
> > Empire that ever existed on this Earth by remembering that King Magnus's
> > Empire northwestern border was Disco Bay in Greenland and the
easternborder
> > was where Sveaborg on the border between Finland and Russia. Included in
his
> > Empire was Vinland,
>
> No. The ONLY documented Norse settlement in the Americas PREDATED his
> reign by something like THREE centuries. MANY GENERATIONS BEFORE
> Magnus Eriksson was even born, Norse contact had been reduced to
> occasional forays in search of such things as lumber.
On the contrary. The Catholic church collected Peter's coin from 23
settlements as late as in 1340's. That was one of the main problem that made
the so called search-patrol actually a optake-voyage=a voyage to convert the
lost souls back to the right Christian views.
>
> He had absolutely NO control over "Vinland", and as such it was NOT
> part of any "Empire" of his.
Have you read anything at all about the content in the boats from Greenland?
Guess you hadn't. Thus you know nothing at all about the crazy view taken by
you and many other during the years regarding king Magnus Erikson's days.
Most of the items wasn't possible to find in Greenland or Iceland for that
matter. Some were only possible to have been had with real good relations
deep in Hudson Bay as well as Quebec area.
>
> > the Orkney Island, Skane(from mid1340's), Shetland
> > Islands and some more distant places.
>
> Still doesn't sound all that big. The Mongols ruled a far larger
> empire, as did the Inca, the Romans, Alexander the Great, the
> Persians, and a goodly number of other ancient peoples. (Or not so
> ancient, note the Ottoman Turks! Heck, half a dozen modern countries
> are bigger!)
When did you ever look carefully on a map? Not this year anyhow.
>
> > After preparing yourself with that
> > knowledge you might find the following quoation re. DNA-results from the
> > 1300's in NA a bit more understandable:
> > "The lineage 2 sequence was identical to one found in two Finnish
> > individuals "
> > source:
> >
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v62n5/970850/970850.htm
> > l
>
> So, which of the three possible explanations are you arguing for?
>
> 1) Sample contamination?
>
> 2) A Finnish woman "went Native" (voluntarily OR involuntarily) and
> contributed her rare Finnish lineage to a tribal population ancestral
> to the modern Sioux Indians (as the Oneota are thought to be)?
Might have been one of the two persons aboard the Knutson expedition with
Finnish roots if no other voyage will be suggested. Personally I think there
were lots of voyages into this area.
>
> 3) Some early Norse explorer brought back a foreign bride?
That have been spoken of in the early 20th century. I never found any hard
proof for it but it's said there was an Indian female and her brother
brought over in King Svein Estridson's days.
>
> > More to follow this time next year.
> >
> > Inger E
>
> Why so late? The article you linked to was written in 1997 & published
> in 1998! I've been tracking it, and there has been no indication of
> "followup" research on those samples.
Because an interesting study and work done by American Scholars is underway
and will be launched in due time. You don't believe anything but American
Scholars do you? Thus why shall I send you the information they have had and
followed up?
Inger E
Erik A. Mattila
> Because an interesting study and work done by American Scholars is underway
> and will be launched in due time. You don't believe anything but American
> Scholars do you? Thus why shall I send you the information they have had and
> followed up?
>
> Inger E
Hi Inger - I just wanted your opinion on this:
I saw a television program some years back - "The Red Paint People" I
think it was called. The claim was made that these people crossed the
north Atlantic regularly to Scandanavia, and also cited evidence of
technology transfer - apparently teaching Norwegians how to make typical
Cape Dorset fish-hooks. The crossing wasn't much of a problem, since
the canoes just followed the migrating Great Auks.
Do you know what the science is behind this (if any)? Let's see, I
think this was dated about 7kya.
Regards, Erik
Inger E
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:3DE1556B...@oco.net...
> Inger E wrote:
>
> > Because an interesting study and work done by American Scholars is
underway
> > and will be launched in due time. You don't believe anything but
American
> > Scholars do you? Thus why shall I send you the information they have had
and
> > followed up?
> >
> > Inger E
>
> Hi Inger - I just wanted your opinion on this:
>
> I saw a television program some years back - "The Red Paint People" I
> think it was called. The claim was made that these people crossed the
> north Atlantic regularly to Scandanavia, and also cited evidence of
> technology transfer - apparently teaching Norwegians how to make typical
> Cape Dorset fish-hooks. The crossing wasn't much of a problem, since
> the canoes just followed the migrating Great Auks.
Let me put it this way. I do know that there exist factors which speak for
that opinion. The hooks are identical or almost the same, so are arrows of
flint, scrapers(hudskrapor) and some other items(artifacts). I haven't seen
or heard any proof for that.
On the other hand I have heard one of the best archaeologists specialist in
that period to give definitiv confirmation that there were a regulary
merchandise contact between Tanum's parish(belonging to Norway before 17th
century AD) and northern Scotland incl. the Atlantic islands north of
Scotland from early Bronze Age. Who knows if the contacts by same type of
boat(that was confirmed) managed to go all way to America. Open sea and open
sea distanse is the only difference....
>
> Do you know what the science is behind this (if any)? Let's see, I
> think this was dated about 7kya.
see above.
>
> Regards, Erik
>
Inger E
David Johnson
news:3DE1556B...@oco.net:
Science behind it? Boy, have _you_ asked the wrong person!
David
George Black
"David Johnson" <troll...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Xns92D0B2E83A959tr...@207.217.77.23...
--
_________________________________________
George Black
ICQ#: 6963409
More ways to contact me: http://wwp.icq.com/6963409
_________________________________________
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~gblack/index.htm
Erik A. Mattila
> "David Johnson" <troll...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns92D0B2E83A959tr...@207.217.77.23...
>
>>"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in
>>news:3DE1556B...@oco.net:
>>
>>
>>>Inger E wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Because an interesting study and work done by American Scholars is
>>>>underway and will be launched in due time. You don't believe anything
>>>>but American Scholars do you? Thus why shall I send you the
>>>>information they have had and followed up?
>>>>
>>>>Inger E
>>>
>>>Hi Inger - I just wanted your opinion on this:
>>>
>>>I saw a television program some years back - "The Red Paint People" I
>>>think it was called. The claim was made that these people crossed the
>>>north Atlantic regularly to Scandanavia, and also cited evidence of
>>>technology transfer - apparently teaching Norwegians how to make
>>>typical Cape Dorset fish-hooks. The crossing wasn't much of a
>>>problem, since the canoes just followed the migrating Great Auks.
>>>
>>>Do you know what the science is behind this (if any)? Let's see, I
>>>think this was dated about 7kya.
>>
>>Science behind it? Boy, have _you_ asked the wrong person!
>
> I think that the tongue was firmly planted :-))
Oh, heck no, George, I wasn't intending any sarcasm. In fact, I've
enjoyed a polite relationship with Inger on various newsgroups for about
5 years now, on and off, and it is something that I enjoy very much.
I've never felt compelled to insult her, and her ideas are valuable to
me. And I don't want to be inpolite to you or David either, but if you
compare Inger's response to my question to both yours and David's, it
looks like I asked the right person.
Erik
Seppo Renfors
Inger E wrote:
>
> Seppo,
> thanks. Tack så mycket.
> btw. did you have time to read the first file I sent you? I have been
> waiting to send more when ever it's suitable.
I haven't finished reading it yet, but almost, my reading speed isn't
the best for Swedish, but I manage. But send more any time it is
convenient for you, I still have plenty of free space on my computer.
I'll get around to reading it all eventually. It's very interesting.
Actually your finding of the rising ground is relevant to the early
travel even in the area of Hudson Bay -> Minnesota. Similar would have
occurred in NA as well. It too had a very heavy coating of ice once,
so it is reasonable to expect the ground to have continued slowly
rising between the 14th c to current. Couple this with the warmer
climatic conditions at the time, it does suggest easier navigability
of rivers and lakes then than today.
These conditions have been overlooked in the discussion - mainly by
those who suggest "impossible" etc.
Seppo Renfors
Borgå or Porvoo, no I don't have any information on that either. It
isn't on the map for 1323. Hämeenlinna (1240) is, but it is not in the
area indicated by Inger.
George Black
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message
news:3DE1C082...@oco.net...
Let's see now. The 'Red Paint People' were in the North American continent
with all the art and language that is part of those people local to that
area..
I would expect more than similar looking fish hooks...
And I accept you don't like my answers ... they are based upon learning and
reference to publications... and not upon unnamed authority
Tomi
> Borgå or Porvoo, no I don't have any information on that either. It
> isn't on the map for 1323. Hämeenlinna (1240) is, but it is not in the
> area indicated by Inger.
Well, it should be there, and it's in the area Inger was talking about
("the area that was during the 18th century on the non-Karelian side",
although I'm not quite sure what this means).
--
T: Tomi
Tomi
>> I saw a television program some years back - "The Red Paint People" I
>> think it was called. The claim was made that these people crossed the
>> north Atlantic regularly to Scandanavia, and also cited evidence of
>> technology transfer - apparently teaching Norwegians how to make
>> typical Cape Dorset fish-hooks. The crossing wasn't much of a
>> problem, since the canoes just followed the migrating Great Auks.
>
> Let me put it this way. I do know that there exist factors which speak
> for that opinion. The hooks are identical or almost the same, so are
> arrows of flint, scrapers(hudskrapor) and some other items(artifacts).
> I haven't seen or heard any proof for that.
>
> On the other hand I have heard one of the best archaeologists
> specialist in that period to give definitiv confirmation that there
> were a regulary merchandise contact between Tanum's parish(belonging to
> Norway before 17th century AD) and northern Scotland incl. the Atlantic
> islands north of Scotland from early Bronze Age. Who knows if the
> contacts by same type of boat(that was confirmed) managed to go all way
> to America. Open sea and open sea distanse is the only difference....
BTW does anybody know where is the closest place to Europe where kayaks
have been in use. It seems that people with kayaks have been visiting
Orkneys from time immemorial, well according to the native tales at least.
They have even found a kayak or two on their shores. I don't suppose they
could have come from Siberia. Perhaps Greenland is a better alternative? Or
perhaps kayaks were used in Norway some time in history as well.
Is it likely that "Eskimos" moved southwards during the cold phase which
evidently killed the European population in Greenland? If so there could be
some traces of this migration in Ireland and Scotland, perhaps elsewhere,
too.
--
T: Tomi
Horace LaBadie
>Inger E wrote:
>
>> Because an interesting study and work done by American Scholars is underway
>> and will be launched in due time. You don't believe anything but American
>> Scholars do you? Thus why shall I send you the information they have had and
>> followed up?
>>
>> Inger E
>
>Hi Inger - I just wanted your opinion on this:
>
>I saw a television program some years back - "The Red Paint People" I
>think it was called. The claim was made that these people crossed the
>north Atlantic regularly to Scandanavia, and also cited evidence of
>technology transfer - apparently teaching Norwegians how to make typical
>Cape Dorset fish-hooks. The crossing wasn't much of a problem, since
>the canoes just followed the migrating Great Auks.
The Maritime Archaic Indians is the currently preferred term. They were
highly adept at exploiting the coastal marine resources, as well as the
land resources such as caribou. What possible advantage would there be for
them to follow Great Auks across an ocean to Scandinavia? They had
everything they needed where they were. The paleoeskimos semed to have
crowded them to the South eventually.
>Do you know what the science is behind this (if any)? Let's see, I
>think this was dated about 7kya.
>
>Regards, Erik
HWL
Erik A. Mattila
>>Oh, heck no, George, I wasn't intending any sarcasm. In fact, I've
>>enjoyed a polite relationship with Inger on various newsgroups for about
>>5 years now, on and off, and it is something that I enjoy very much.
>>I've never felt compelled to insult her, and her ideas are valuable to
>>me. And I don't want to be inpolite to you or David either, but if you
>>compare Inger's response to my question to both yours and David's, it
>>looks like I asked the right person.
>
> Let's see now. The 'Red Paint People' were in the North American continent
> with all the art and language that is part of those people local to that
> area..
> I would expect more than similar looking fish hooks...
> And I accept you don't like my answers ... they are based upon learning and
> reference to publications... and not upon unnamed authority
I don't know why you would think that (that I wouldn't like your
answers). I'm just fishing around here (get it?). I thought Inger
could be helpful because she is familiar with Scandinavian languages and
archaeology.
I've come across a reference to Gutorm Gjessing, for example. Most of
his work is published in Norwegian, so I don't have access to it. But
he apparently did advance a thesis concerning "identical" cultures
coexisting in the Northamerican northeast and Norway 7kya, falling under
the rubric "Red Paint People." Gjessing also appears to be an advocate
of the "Circumpolar Culture" concept.
Since this thread has focused on gene exchanges and gene evidence of
contact, I would think that this thesis is worthy of consideration
insofar as it posits a scenario that would accomodate gene swapping.
But I'm just a tourist in these matters - Scandinavian archaeology and
the gene sciences.
And I know next to nothing about Gjessing's work, his reputation or his
biography. I do know that he has 37 publications listed on the UC
Melvyl database, which is pretty stout. My sense is that he is (was) a
reputable scholar who wouldn't theorize a "identical culture" based on
similar fishhooks.
Anyway, I would like to know more about this, just to satisfy my
curiosity. If it adds something meaningful to this discussion, so much
the better.
Regards, Erik
Doug Weller
wrote:
[SNIP]
>
>I've come across a reference to Gutorm Gjessing, for example. Most of
>his work is published in Norwegian, so I don't have access to it. But
>he apparently did advance a thesis concerning "identical" cultures
>coexisting in the Northamerican northeast and Norway 7kya, falling under
>the rubric "Red Paint People." Gjessing also appears to be an advocate
>of the "Circumpolar Culture" concept.
131-136. Despite the obvious role of Bering Strait, it is strange that
"nowhere on the globe are there to be found prehistoric remains so
closely related morphologically as those of North Norway . . . and those
of the east coast of North America." Only a specialist in petrology can
distinguish Red Paint (Maine) crescent-shaped knives (strongly
reminiscent of Eskimo ulus), from the very similar so- called
boot-shaped knives of North Norway. One also finds in North Norway
check-stamped ware of exactly the same type as from the Eastern
Woodlands. Other similarities are noted, notably quadrupeds drawn with a
line running from the mouth through the neck terminating in a circular
figure where the heart is supposed to be (occurs over vast areas of
North America and among the Zu—i, but not the Eskimo, so supposedly the
motif reached America before the latter settled around the Bering
Strait).
Gjessing was an ardent diffusionist, working at a time when it was more
acceptable (I would say that we've done a lot more work since then).
Just found this:
http://www.yukoncollege.yk.ca/~agraham/nost202/10kbc_5001bc.pdf
Eric can probably tell you more about current proponents of a
circumpolar culture. Makes me wonder what Stanford thinks of it.
Doug
--
Doug Weller member of moderation panel sci.archaeology.moderated
Submissions to: sci-archaeol...@medieval.org
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk
George Black
> George Black wrote:
>
> >>Oh, heck no, George, I wasn't intending any sarcasm. In fact, I've
> >>enjoyed a polite relationship with Inger on various newsgroups for about
> >>5 years now, on and off, and it is something that I enjoy very much.
> >>I've never felt compelled to insult her, and her ideas are valuable to
> >>me. And I don't want to be inpolite to you or David either, but if you
> >>compare Inger's response to my question to both yours and David's, it
> >>looks like I asked the right person.
> >
> > Let's see now. The 'Red Paint People' were in the North American
continent
> > with all the art and language that is part of those people local to that
> > area..
> > I would expect more than similar looking fish hooks...
> > And I accept you don't like my answers ... they are based upon learning
and
> > reference to publications... and not upon unnamed authority
>
> I don't know why you would think that (that I wouldn't like your
> answers). I'm just fishing around here (get it?). I thought Inger
> could be helpful because she is familiar with Scandinavian languages and
> archaeology.
Sorry. :-)))
> I've come across a reference to Gutorm Gjessing, for example. Most of
> his work is published in Norwegian, so I don't have access to it. But
> he apparently did advance a thesis concerning "identical" cultures
> coexisting in the Northamerican northeast and Norway 7kya, falling under
> the rubric "Red Paint People." Gjessing also appears to be an advocate
> of the "Circumpolar Culture" concept.
The immediate problem that I have with the theory is
a) the distances
2) the ability of these peoples to find food sufficient along this 'route'
3) The lack of archaeological evidence
4) and the fact that the Red Paint People were not in the high artic
>
> Since this thread has focused on gene exchanges and gene evidence of
> contact, I would think that this thesis is worthy of consideration
> insofar as it posits a scenario that would accomodate gene swapping.
> But I'm just a tourist in these matters - Scandinavian archaeology and
> the gene sciences.
>
> And I know next to nothing about Gjessing's work, his reputation or his
> biography. I do know that he has 37 publications listed on the UC
> Melvyl database, which is pretty stout. My sense is that he is (was) a
> reputable scholar who wouldn't theorize a "identical culture" based on
> similar fishhooks.
>
> Anyway, I would like to know more about this, just to satisfy my
> curiosity. If it adds something meaningful to this discussion, so much
> the better.
I wish you luck
Erik A. Mattila
Thanks, Doug. One thought that came to me was that all theories
concerning the populating of the Western Hemisphere are "diffusionist
theories" whether it passed through Beringia, Easter Island, of flying
saucers. That is, with the exception of the original bolt of lightening
starting life on earth and human evolution in paleohollywood.
But seriously, the circumpolar concept does not necessarily beg the
question of populating the Americas, as any cultural contacts in
antiquity could have been restricted to the circumpolar space. I don't
know about Stanford (you are referring to Dennis Stanford?). At
http://www.neara.org/gillmore.htm he's quoted as saying, in reference to
crossing the North Atlantic ""Humans are humans and these are modern
humans like you and me, with well-developed brains that can reason and
figure out. Ocean-going travel isn't that much, and they could do it."
Erik
Erik A. Mattila
>>I saw a television program some years back - "The Red Paint People" I
>>think it was called. The claim was made that these people crossed the
>>north Atlantic regularly to Scandanavia, and also cited evidence of
>>technology transfer - apparently teaching Norwegians how to make typical
>>Cape Dorset fish-hooks. The crossing wasn't much of a problem, since
>>the canoes just followed the migrating Great Auks.
>
>
>
> The Maritime Archaic Indians is the currently preferred term. They were
> highly adept at exploiting the coastal marine resources, as well as the
> land resources such as caribou. What possible advantage would there be for
> them to follow Great Auks across an ocean to Scandinavia? They had
> everything they needed where they were. The paleoeskimos semed to have
> crowded them to the South eventually.
Obviously you have a strong point there, Horace. At best I, or anyone
else for that matter, could only speculate as to motive, and some
speculatons would seem more credible than others. But I understand the
Auks were so tasty that modern sailors ate them all up, so the Maritime
Archaics might have simply followed their favorite dish over (I joke, in
case there's any misunderstanding).
But at this point I'm just interested is discovering what evidence
exists, especially to see if the gene picture we have today supports or
trashes the idea.
Erik
Erik A. Mattila
> The immediate problem that I have with the theory is
> a) the distances
Yes, the distances are formidable, especially in a large canoe.
> 2) the ability of these peoples to find food sufficient along this 'route'
Well, this is where the Great Auks come in. As I understand it, these
flightless birds migrated across the North Atlantic in a yearly pattern,
and they were easy pickings.
> 3) The lack of archaeological evidence
This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and it
was more than just the fishhooks. See Doug Weller's post on this
thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
> 4) and the fact that the Red Paint People were not in the high artic
But they were in northern Labrador and possibly Baffin Island, a good
jumping off point. Also, the Great Auk migration was likely along the
east coast at least to Maine.
Erik
Eric Stevens
All I have ever been able to make out is the lacey outline of a ghost.
I think there may have been something but I have no real idea of what.
>Makes me wonder what Stanford thinks of it.
>
>Doug
> --
>
> Doug Weller member of moderation panel sci.archaeology.moderated
> Submissions to: sci-archaeol...@medieval.org
> Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk
>
Eric Stevens
Gisele Horvat
<emat...@oco.net> wrote:
>George Black wrote:
>
>> The immediate problem that I have with the theory is
>> a) the distances
>
>Yes, the distances are formidable, especially in a large canoe.
>
>> 2) the ability of these peoples to find food sufficient along this 'route'
>
>Well, this is where the Great Auks come in. As I understand it, these
>flightless birds migrated across the North Atlantic in a yearly pattern,
>and they were easy pickings.
>
>> 3) The lack of archaeological evidence
>
>This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and it
>was more than just the fishhooks. See Doug Weller's post on this
>thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
>that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
>evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
Quite often, genetic findings can be interpreted as having travelled
in either direction. For this reason, a reader should always be
looking for the specific findings indicative of direction.
I'd like to describe, here, a anomaly that I recently came across. A
German and an Austrian each had a rare feature, in their mtDNA
sequences, which is only found in Central America and has been called
"the Central American deletion". One of those sequences was
classified as belonging to the predominant European haplogroup and the
other as "D?" and it resembles the Inuit "D" lineages. In Central
America, it is the 'A' lineages which have the Central American
deletion (rather than D) but Inuit have lineages belonging to both
haplogroups. Also, one of two Hispanics which had African American
lineages also had this Central American deletion in their, otherwise,
African sequences. I believe all of these incidences to be related
but this must be due to some form of transferance other than
inheritance from the mother.
In Germany and area, I've also previously noticed what could be called
Inuit/Native American mtDNA variants in European mtDNA lineages. No
one but me pays any attention to them.
Also, Erik, did you see the information I posted some time ago about
the Tyrolean Iceman having an HLA haplotype which is predominantly
found the New World?
It is also my belief that the few German (and Tuscan) haplogroup X
lineages are phylogenetically closer to the North American ones than
any other Old World ones but I remain completely undecided about
nearly everything else pertaining to this haplogroup... Not enough
information has been obtained or released yet.
3/6 Micmacs had haplogroup X lineages. That's 50%.... but what kind
of sample size is six?
In this newsgroup, someone once showed me how the European canoes of
one area closely resembled eastern Native American canoes but I must
have paid little attention because I can't even remember the details.
Gisele
George Black
> George Black wrote:
>
> > The immediate problem that I have with the theory is
> > a) the distances
>
> Yes, the distances are formidable, especially in a large canoe.
> > 2) the ability of these peoples to find food sufficient along this
'route'
>
> Well, this is where the Great Auks come in. As I understand it, these
> flightless birds migrated across the North Atlantic in a yearly pattern,
> and they were easy pickings.
Salmon are easy pickings but no-one ever 'followed' the migrations as they
had to prepare all those fish to last them through the winter and store
them. This involves a base and storage areas..
And also for the Great Auk.. a food supply that needed catching and storing
to feed the tribe through the winter
> > 3) The lack of archaeological evidence
>
> This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and it
> was more than just the fishhooks. See Doug Weller's post on this
> thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
> that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
> evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
The Red Paint People buried their dead among ochre, not always red as the
name implies..
were the Red Paint people popping off to Scandinavia for a couple of weeks
fishhook making workshops you might expect that any dead would be buried as
per custom...
> > 4) and the fact that the Red Paint People were not in the high artic
>
> But they were in northern Labrador and possibly Baffin Island, a good
> jumping off point. Also, the Great Auk migration was likely along the
> east coast at least to Maine.
They were based in Maine... And it's an awful long way from Maine to the
high Artic and one hell of a long way to Scandinavia from there
Inger E
> Horace LaBadie wrote:
>
> >>I saw a television program some years back - "The Red Paint People" I
> >>think it was called. The claim was made that these people crossed the
> >>north Atlantic regularly to Scandanavia, and also cited evidence of
> >>technology transfer - apparently teaching Norwegians how to make typical
> >>Cape Dorset fish-hooks. The crossing wasn't much of a problem, since
> >>the canoes just followed the migrating Great Auks.
> >
> >
> >
> > The Maritime Archaic Indians is the currently preferred term. They were
> > highly adept at exploiting the coastal marine resources, as well as the
> > land resources such as caribou. What possible advantage would there be
for
> > them to follow Great Auks across an ocean to Scandinavia? They had
> > everything they needed where they were. The paleoeskimos semed to have
> > crowded them to the South eventually.
>
> Obviously you have a strong point there, Horace. At best I, or anyone
> else for that matter, could only speculate as to motive, and some
> speculatons would seem more credible than others.
Eric and Horace,
obviously Horace haven't checked and read who they made the red-paint
carefully. There are details there that together suggest that a deeper
comparing study of tools, which btw are very much alike those found in the
so called Prästesäm site Tanum and over to Hamburgsund in south up to the
north part of the Sannäsfjord, all places in Tanum's parish. If Horace check
he will find that the iron used in eastern NA in many cases have traces of a
non-local existing third and forth component in the color. Same goes for the
Rock Carvings in Tanum.
Inger E
Inger E
> George Black wrote:
>
> > The immediate problem that I have with the theory is
> > a) the distances
>
> Yes, the distances are formidable, especially in a large canoe.
The distance is no problem as you all will see and hear next year. Anyhow
open Sea= Ocean travelling have now been proven to have existed at least
from 2000 BC(4000 BP). Eric if you look at page 14 in the Swedish text I
sent you and in the conclusions you will see that I had it in my thesis
myself but a major work in this has been done by one of the archaeologists
who have specialist in the period discussed.
>
> > 2) the ability of these peoples to find food sufficient along this
'route'
>
> Well, this is where the Great Auks come in. As I understand it, these
> flightless birds migrated across the North Atlantic in a yearly pattern,
> and they were easy pickings.
Erik and George,
the food was in those days dried meat and nuts. That's no big problem not at
all. The only problem they had was fresh water.
>
> > 3) The lack of archaeological evidence
>
> This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and it
> was more than just the fishhooks.
I second Erik in this respect. Not all have been published for George to be
able to read.
See Doug Weller's post on this
> thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
> that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
> evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
Such study is on-the-way.
>
> > 4) and the fact that the Red Paint People were not in the high artic
>
> But they were in northern Labrador and possibly Baffin Island, a good
> jumping off point. Also, the Great Auk migration was likely along the
> east coast at least to Maine.
>
> Erik
Inger E
Inger E
"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:vci5uucqi3vije4ps...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 22:56:32 +0000, Doug Weller
> <dwe...@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 14:21:05 -0800, in sci.archaeology, Erik A. Mattila
> >wrote:
> >[SNIP]
> >>
> >>I've come across a reference to Gutorm Gjessing, for example. Most of
> >>his work is published in Norwegian, so I don't have access to it. But
> >>he apparently did advance a thesis concerning "identical" cultures
> >>coexisting in the Northamerican northeast and Norway 7kya, falling under
> >>the rubric "Red Paint People." Gjessing also appears to be an advocate
> >>of the "Circumpolar Culture" concept.
> >Gjessing, Gutorm. The Circumpolar Stone Age. Antiquity 27 (1953):
> >131-136. Despite the obvious role of Bering Strait, it is strange that
> >"nowhere on the globe are there to be found prehistoric remains so
> >closely related morphologically as those of North Norway . . . and those
> >of the east coast of North America." Only a specialist in petrology can
> >distinguish Red Paint (Maine) crescent-shaped knives (strongly
> >reminiscent of Eskimo ulus), from the very similar so- called
> >boot-shaped knives of North Norway. One also finds in North Norway
> >check-stamped ware of exactly the same type as from the Eastern
> >Woodlands. Other similarities are noted, notably quadrupeds drawn with a
> >line running from the mouth through the neck terminating in a circular
> >figure where the heart is supposed to be (occurs over vast areas of
> >motif reached America before the latter settled around the Bering
> >Strait).
> >
> >Gjessing was an ardent diffusionist, working at a time when it was more
> >acceptable (I would say that we've done a lot more work since then).
> >
> >Just found this:
> >http://www.yukoncollege.yk.ca/~agraham/nost202/10kbc_5001bc.pdf
> >
> >Eric can probably tell you more about current proponents of a
> >circumpolar culture.
>
> All I have ever been able to make out is the lacey outline of a ghost.
> I think there may have been something but I have no real idea of what.
>
> >Makes me wonder what Stanford thinks of it.
> >
> >Doug
> > --
The part from Troms in Norway to eastern Siberia the Berings have been known
for the last 100 years. I thought you knew that.
Inger E
Inger E
"Gisele Horvat" <g-ho...@shaw.ca> skrev i meddelandet
news:3de2d909.37011222@shawnews...
Gisele,
I don't have the photos in my computer anymore if it was one from a book and
the other from the one found in Dammen Sannäs. I know I sent those photos to
someone, might have been you if it was 5-6 years ago.
Inger E
Erik A. Mattila
> "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message
> news:3DE2CC88...@oco.net...
>
>>George Black wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The immediate problem that I have with the theory is
>>>a) the distances
>>
>>Yes, the distances are formidable, especially in a large canoe.
>
>
>
>>>2) the ability of these peoples to find food sufficient along this
>>
> 'route'
>
>>Well, this is where the Great Auks come in. As I understand it, these
>>flightless birds migrated across the North Atlantic in a yearly pattern,
>>and they were easy pickings.
>
>
> Salmon are easy pickings but no-one ever 'followed' the migrations as they
> had to prepare all those fish to last them through the winter and store
> them. This involves a base and storage areas..
> And also for the Great Auk.. a food supply that needed catching and storing
> to feed the tribe through the winter
Salmon are not easy pickings at sea.
>
>
>>>3) The lack of archaeological evidence
>>
>>This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and it
>>was more than just the fishhooks. See Doug Weller's post on this
>>thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
>>that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
>>evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
>
>
> The Red Paint People buried their dead among ochre, not always red as the
> name implies..
> were the Red Paint people popping off to Scandinavia for a couple of weeks
> fishhook making workshops you might expect that any dead would be buried as
> per custom...
Yes, that's what got Gjessings interested...the paleonorwegian red paint
burials.
>>>4) and the fact that the Red Paint People were not in the high artic
>>
>>But they were in northern Labrador and possibly Baffin Island, a good
>>jumping off point. Also, the Great Auk migration was likely along the
>>east coast at least to Maine.
>
> They were based in Maine... And it's an awful long way from Maine to the
> high Artic and one hell of a long way to Scandinavia from there
You mean something like "Headquarters: Maritime Archaic Indians." I
don't think it was quite like that. But seriously, I don't know why you
keep bringing-up this "High Arctic" business. Look at a map, you can
see the obvious route from the Maritime Provinces to Southern Greenland
to Iceland etc. It would not even cross the Arctic Circle. This is
also the supposed route of the Auk migrations. See:
http://www.rom.on.ca/biodiversity/auk/aukmig2.html
Erik
George Black
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message
news:3DE31B0C...@oco.net...
> George Black wrote:
> > "Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> wrote in message
> > news:3DE2CC88...@oco.net...
> >
> >>George Black wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>The immediate problem that I have with the theory is
> >>>a) the distances
> >>
> >>Yes, the distances are formidable, especially in a large canoe.
> >
> >
> >
> >>>2) the ability of these peoples to find food sufficient along this
> >>
> > 'route'
> >
> >>Well, this is where the Great Auks come in. As I understand it, these
> >>flightless birds migrated across the North Atlantic in a yearly pattern,
> >>and they were easy pickings.
> >
> >
> > Salmon are easy pickings but no-one ever 'followed' the migrations as
they
> > had to prepare all those fish to last them through the winter and store
> > them. This involves a base and storage areas..
> > And also for the Great Auk.. a food supply that needed catching and
storing
> > to feed the tribe through the winter
>
> Salmon are not easy pickings at sea.
No but they're pretty available in river mouths and estuaries waiting to go
upstream.....
and the food has to be caught and stored for the oncoming winter... or is it
your belief that the entire population went along on the Auk migration??
> >
> >
> >>>3) The lack of archaeological evidence
> >>
> >>This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and it
> >>was more than just the fishhooks. See Doug Weller's post on this
> >>thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
> >>that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
> >>evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
> >
> >
> > The Red Paint People buried their dead among ochre, not always red as
the
> > name implies..
> > were the Red Paint people popping off to Scandinavia for a couple of
weeks
> > fishhook making workshops you might expect that any dead would be buried
as
> > per custom...
>
> Yes, that's what got Gjessings interested...the paleonorwegian red paint
> burials.
I have references to Neanderthol painting their dead with red ochre. And
Chinese burials involving ochre
> >>>4) and the fact that the Red Paint People were not in the high artic
> >>
> >>But they were in northern Labrador and possibly Baffin Island, a good
> >>jumping off point. Also, the Great Auk migration was likely along the
> >>east coast at least to Maine.
> >
> > They were based in Maine... And it's an awful long way from Maine to the
> > high Artic and one hell of a long way to Scandinavia from there
>
> You mean something like "Headquarters: Maritime Archaic Indians." I
> don't think it was quite like that. But seriously, I don't know why you
> keep bringing-up this "High Arctic" business. Look at a map, you can
> see the obvious route from the Maritime Provinces to Southern Greenland
> to Iceland etc. It would not even cross the Arctic Circle. This is
> also the supposed route of the Auk migrations. See:
> http://www.rom.on.ca/biodiversity/auk/aukmig2.html
Why I refer to the high Artic is (if there was such a trading/migratory
route) because they would have moved through the Artic area.
I've looked at the map.
Is it the premise that the migrating auks were accompanied by canoes of Red
Paint People through that particular area of the North Atlantic??
I'll emphasis the terms North Atlantic and canoe.. The only safe place to
have a canoe in the North Atlantic would be near the ice...
Erik A. Mattila
I don't actually have a belief about this, George. I'm not convinced
such trips ever occured, but I'm also not convinced they didn't. I'm
just saying this so you won't brand me a nut case...I'm just playing
along out of interest in the topic.
So I would say the entire population didn't go along for the ride. For
several reasons, one being that a splinter group was driven away,
another that young men were looking for wives that they weren't related
to. Fishhook salesmen is also an intriguing thesis. Also, I notice
that the Auk nesting grounds on the map are much larger near Europe, so
egg gathering comes to mind.
>>>>>3) The lack of archaeological evidence
>>>>
>>>>This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and it
>>>>was more than just the fishhooks. See Doug Weller's post on this
>>>>thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
>>>>that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
>>>>evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
>>>
>>>
>>>The Red Paint People buried their dead among ochre, not always red as
>>
> the
>
>>>name implies..
>>>were the Red Paint people popping off to Scandinavia for a couple of
>>
> weeks
>
>>>fishhook making workshops you might expect that any dead would be buried
>>
> as
>
>>>per custom...
>>
>>Yes, that's what got Gjessings interested...the paleonorwegian red paint
>>burials.
>
> I have references to Neanderthol painting their dead with red ochre. And
> Chinese burials involving ochre
Yes, I'm aware of this.
>>>>>4) and the fact that the Red Paint People were not in the high artic
>>>>
>>>>But they were in northern Labrador and possibly Baffin Island, a good
>>>>jumping off point. Also, the Great Auk migration was likely along the
>>>>east coast at least to Maine.
>>>
>>>They were based in Maine... And it's an awful long way from Maine to the
>>>high Artic and one hell of a long way to Scandinavia from there
>>
>>You mean something like "Headquarters: Maritime Archaic Indians." I
>>don't think it was quite like that. But seriously, I don't know why you
>>keep bringing-up this "High Arctic" business. Look at a map, you can
>>see the obvious route from the Maritime Provinces to Southern Greenland
>>to Iceland etc. It would not even cross the Arctic Circle. This is
>>also the supposed route of the Auk migrations. See:
>>http://www.rom.on.ca/biodiversity/auk/aukmig2.html
>
>
> Why I refer to the high Artic is (if there was such a trading/migratory
> route) because they would have moved through the Artic area.
> I've looked at the map.
> Is it the premise that the migrating auks were accompanied by canoes of Red
> Paint People through that particular area of the North Atlantic??
> I'll emphasis the terms North Atlantic and canoe.. The only safe place to
> have a canoe in the North Atlantic would be near the ice...
Indeed. But how do you define canoe? Some are very large (we're
probably talking about hide coverd boats). 7kya the ice may well have
been further south, and the North Atlantic weather different than in the
historical period.
Kevin Smith reports finding a microblade in 1996 in Iceland, which he
describes: "The microblade core is referable to North American arctic
forms and does not fit well with Scandinavian Mesolithic or later types.
Its context is in a disturbed layer, without other material of
comparable age or type - although our geochemical analyses indicate that
the stone from which it was made is most likely Icelandic jasper."
http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/III/msg00614.html
This is a scientific frontier, though. Even the concept of Maritime
Archaic Indians is very new. Evidence is scarce, but it will surely
accumulate in the near future.
Erik
Horace LaBadie
SNIP
>Indeed. But how do you define canoe? Some are very large (we're
>probably talking about hide coverd boats). 7kya the ice may well have
>been further south, and the North Atlantic weather different than in the
>historical period.
The most obvious objection is the date, 7kya. The MAI didn't reach
Newfoundland Island until about 5kya. How and why would they bypass such
an attractive area to go wandering across the Atlantic Ocean? They were a
very settled people, taking several thousand years to fill Labrador and
Newfoundland. Skipping off regularly to Europe for an Auk lunch doesn't
sound very likely.
SNIP
>
>Erik
HWL
Doug Weller
wrote:
[SNIP]
>
>The most obvious objection is the date, 7kya. The MAI didn't reach
>Newfoundland Island until about 5kya. How and why would they bypass such
>an attractive area to go wandering across the Atlantic Ocean? They were a
>very settled people, taking several thousand years to fill Labrador and
>Newfoundland. Skipping off regularly to Europe for an Auk lunch doesn't
>sound very likely.
We had some discussions about this in 1995. This might help, might no.
*From: mbwi...@ix.netcom.com (Mary Beth Williams)
*Subject: Re: Red Paint
*Date: 1995/07/04
*Message-ID: <3tc02i$c...@ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>#1/1
*distribution: world
*references: <3taoud$4...@spot.YKnet.yk.ca>
*organization: Netcom
*newsgroups: sci.archaeology
*In <3taoud$4...@spot.YKnet.yk.ca> Doug Rutherford <ycru...@yknet.yk.ca>
*writes:
*This thread appears to need a wee bit of definition. It started out
*discussing the "Red Paint" burial complex from Maine and the Atantic
*Provinces. Since this was a portion of my Master's thesis, and
*viewing the way the thread seems to have ballooned off topic, I think I
*should throw in a wee bit of definition.
*The "Red Paint" burial complex was defined by Warren K. Moorehead in
*1925(The Archaeology of Maine) to describe a burial complex observed
*which was characterized by the following components:
*- red ocre (either powdered hematite or cuprite sprinkled over the
*grave area
*- a variety of grave goods, including large ground stone wood working
*tools such as gouges and adzes
*Radiocarbon dating of organics at sites excavated later establish this
*mortuary ceremonialism dating between c. 5,000 B.P. and c. 3,700 B.P.
*In sites where there was very good organic preservation (see Ancient
*People of Port aux Choix, ISER Press, St. John's, NF, 1976 by J.A.
*Tuck), it is evident that the grave goods cover a much broader range of
*the material culture than the lithic ones observed by Moorehead.
*The Nova program, The Red Paint People, dealt strictly with this
*mortuary complex dating between 5,000-3,700 B.P. This particular
*period is referred to as either being related to the Laurentian Archaic
*Tradition (David Sanger, University of Maine at Orano), the Maritime
*Archaic Tradition (James Tuck, Memorial University of Newfoundland) or
*as the Moorehead Phase of the Maritime Archaic Tradition (Bruce
Bourque,
*Maine State Museum).
*The only person in the program who tried to expand this range was
*Graeme Clarke, who simply expanded the range and unrelated cultural
*complexes as evidence for his "pan-arctic" culture. Cultural
continuity
*(and the evidence in Maine and the Maritimes suggests that there is
_not_,
*does not come into play. The Red Paint mortuary complex was a 1,300
C-14
*year cultural trait, not a culture... Using it as more than anything
*else than a temporal marker for this time is probably not a good idea.
*I hope this helps lay things out a little better....
*Many and deepfelt thanks, Doug... I think you much more eloquently
*articulated the point I was trying to make, that is, as the MA is
*strictly defined temporally, you cannot drag it back into the
*PaleoIndian, and forward into the Woodland Period on a whim...
*Furthermore, Clarke's pet theory of pan-Artic cultural continuity does
*not take into account that the traits he uses for definition, e.g., red
*ochre and heavy adzes and gouges, can also be found in southern New
*England as well, during the Late Archaic, as well as into the
*Woodland... However, I don't think anyone is prepared to argue that the
*Red Paint tradition (if it ever actually existed) stretched as far
*south as the Middle Atlantic.. Well, then again, maybe that's exactly
*what Whittet is arguing with his Pennsylvania citations <g>...
*MB Williams
Wesleyan
George Black
As you say it is a subject that aroused my interest also. So much in fact I
spent all yesterday looking for ochre burial customs in Europe
> So I would say the entire population didn't go along for the ride. For
> several reasons, one being that a splinter group was driven away,
> another that young men were looking for wives that they weren't related
> to. Fishhook salesmen is also an intriguing thesis. Also, I notice
> that the Auk nesting grounds on the map are much larger near Europe, so
> egg gathering comes to mind.
Yup. Rather than try to keep up with a mob of aquatic birds swimming 24/7
while paddling canoes packed with Great Auk carcasses it'd be much simpler
to head 'em off at the pass where you'd have room to preserve them
> >>>>>3) The lack of archaeological evidence
> >>>>
> >>>>This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and
it
> >>>>was more than just the fishhooks. See Doug Weller's post on this
> >>>>thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
> >>>>that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
> >>>>evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>The Red Paint People buried their dead among ochre, not always red as
> >>
> > the
> >
> >>>name implies..
> >>>were the Red Paint people popping off to Scandinavia for a couple of
> >>
> > weeks
> >
> >>>fishhook making workshops you might expect that any dead would be
buried
> >>
> > as
> >
> >>>per custom...
> >>
> >>Yes, that's what got Gjessings interested...the paleonorwegian red paint
> >>burials.
> >
> > I have references to Neanderthol painting their dead with red ochre. And
> > Chinese burials involving ochre
>
> Yes, I'm aware of this.
Hey I looked for the paleonorwegian red paint burials. Nothing atr all in
English. Not even from some sites that would be REALLY interested
We do not know a lot about the red paint people mainly because most of their
sites were on shorelines that are now underwater...
however they were a maritime people...
Canoes? On the North Atlantic? Catching Great Auks for processing ashore? In
an open boat?
Now it's true I've never sailed in the North Atlantic but that is one
serious bit of ocean
> Kevin Smith reports finding a microblade in 1996 in Iceland, which he
> describes: "The microblade core is referable to North American arctic
> forms and does not fit well with Scandinavian Mesolithic or later types.
> Its context is in a disturbed layer, without other material of
> comparable age or type - although our geochemical analyses indicate that
> the stone from which it was made is most likely Icelandic jasper."
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/III/msg00614.html
>
> This is a scientific frontier, though. Even the concept of Maritime
> Archaic Indians is very new. Evidence is scarce, but it will surely
> accumulate in the near future.
Quote from your posted URL
There have also been attempts to link the "Red Paint People" (Maritime
Archaic/Late Archaic) of the Canadian Maritime provinces and Maine with
the Late Mesolithic cultures of Denmark and western France. Again, there
is a chronological problem with 1,500-3,000 years separating the
apparently 'similar' cultures on the two sides of the Atlantic, (LM
cultures in question, ca. 9,500-8,000 BP and Red Paint People/Maritime
Archaic ca, 7,000-5,000 B.P.).
-----------------------------------------------
This is quite an interesting subject. Shall we do a cut of stuff gone over
?
George Black
"Doug Weller" <dwe...@ramtops.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jJWdnRpxs_q...@News.GigaNews.Com...
Thanks for that Doug.
The Paint people was one of the subjects here when I first arrived :-))
and the name of one contributor didn't escape me
Eric Stevens
wrote:
George, It wasn't yesterday. It was today. The reason you think it was
yesterday is that your computer calandar is a day ahead of itself
:-)
Eric Stevens
Erik A. Mattila
Yep, the date is problematical. However, if you enter sea level change
into the equation, it is even more problematical. In the links below on
Port au Choix, for example, the "B" model has the sea level dipping
below its present level in 8000-7000 BP and rising back gradually. The
idea here of course is that older occupation sites would be submerged.
Sea Level change: Port au Choix http://www.delweb.com/nfmuseum/9620Re.htm
http://www.delweb.com/nfmuseum/9717Re.htm
Also, because we're talking about relative sea level, there are local
variations. The northern Labrador penninsula has actually risen since
9000BP, so the likely coastal archaeological sites would be further
inland. This area has not been surveyed systematically.
http://cgrg.geog.uvic.ca/abstracts/BellAddressingOne.html
Additionally, your dates may be incorrect (correct insofar as
Newfoundland is concerned, given the possiblity of older sites that have
submerged. The L'Anse-Amour [southern Labrador] burial is dated 7500BP,
and lauded as the oldest burial mound in the Americas. The descrepencies
between Newfoundland dates and Labrador dates is will cited in the
literature I've looked at. I can't think of any reason why an earlier
occupation of Newfoundland was nixed by favoring Labrador, other than
the evidence is yet to be discovered.
L'Anse-Amour
http://www.delweb.com/nfmuseum/notes12.htm
This one has a very kewl QTVR of the burial mound
http://www.intoarch.com/Articles/article/7/1/
But you still have me stumped as to motive for an Atlantic Crossing.
Speculating such a thing is fun, but pretty wild and wooly, I think.
Erik
Inger E
Have you looked at published information from underwater-archaeologic
excavation sites east of NA and west of Europe from the period before the
sealevel started rising. The exact year for that was 7901 BC btw.
Inger E
>
>
Doug Weller
[SNIP]
>
>Have you looked at published information from underwater-archaeologic
>excavation sites east of NA and west of Europe from the period before the
>sealevel started rising. The exact year for that was 7901 BC btw.
How is that figure obtained?
Doug
zolota
"George Black" <gbl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:as0i2m$aq8$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
SNIP
> Yup. Rather than try to keep up with a mob of aquatic birds swimming 24/7
> while paddling canoes packed with Great Auk carcasses it'd be much simpler
> to head 'em off at the pass where you'd have room to preserve them
>
There was a thriving industry processing the Auk on the islands off
Newfoundland. Because they were nesting the birds did not flee and were just
picked up or clubbed. In that industry the birds were burned to boil water
to release the feathers, presumably the indians would have burned some to
render the oil of others and/or dry meat. (Used the oil to cook meat?) With
such easy pickings, why would anyone risk their life to reach identical
islands across the Atlantic. Another note, the Auk was the most aquatic bird
in the Northern Hemisphere, like a penguin. How could someone catch them
from a boat with low effort?
Z
Inger E
"Doug Weller" <dwe...@ramtops.demon.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:4NidnVkcbLO...@News.GigaNews.Com...
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 21:08:49 GMT, in sci.archaeology, Inger E wrote:
> [SNIP]
> >
> >Have you looked at published information from underwater-archaeologic
> >excavation sites east of NA and west of Europe from the period before the
> >sealevel started rising. The exact year for that was 7901 BC btw.
>
> How is that figure obtained?
>
> Doug
First of all you have to realise that it was a special event which cased the
sealevel to rise. Secondly due to the fact that the process can and have
been studied in sediment where the tip-of point was - Svea Fall in the
middle of Sweden it's been studied for many years. At a point during this
process Lake Vaettern was seperated from the Sea etc etc. Anyhow I haven't
seen any reports in English, not even a summery. For those who can read
Swedish I recommend:
Håkansson Lars, Ahl Thorsten; Vätterns-recenta sediment och sedimentkemi;SNV
PM740 NLU Rapport 88
Uppsala 1976
and other works from Statens Naturvårdsverk up to 1990. I know it's a lot of
reading, I read them all myself before I wrote my C-thesis where I analysed
the waterlevels from the Stone Age up to 1000 AD from the area we today call
the Baltic Sea(once the Yoldia Sea) as a starter to my analyse of waterways
towards Lake Roxen. If someone takes on reading all sediment reports edited
you will have a good view of what caused the Oceans to rise 120 metres in
the first place and then up to 156 metres higher than it was during the
period from the last Ice Age's peak up to 10000 BC.
Inger E
Erik A. Mattila
> Have you looked at published information from underwater-archaeologic
> excavation sites east of NA and west of Europe from the period before the
> sealevel started rising. The exact year for that was 7901 BC btw.
>
> Inger E
I wish I could at this point in my curiosity, Inger. I live in the
desert in Southern California, a few miles south of the Salton Sea. The
nearest decent library is in San Diego, a hundred twenty miles away. So
I'm pretty much restricted to culling the Internet, which you can
imagine I'm thankful for.
But I did see a couple of mentions of proposed underwater work. But
diving in those waters is formidible, I think. I recall reading about
proposed core drilling, which seems pretty destructive to me.
But you might want to review the two sea level urls I posted. I've been
interested in this every since you wrote about it a couple of years ago.
It looks to me like it is a very complex process, not just a linear
rise from your date (above) to the present, due to elasticity of the
mantel and the rebound phenomena.
http://www.delweb.com/nfmuseum/9620Re.htm
http://www.delweb.com/nfmuseum/9717Re.htm
Erik
Inger E
if it's ok I will try to send you some links, have sent one more to follow.
Inger E
btw. the links are all in Swedish
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@oco.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:3DE3F3FE...@oco.net...
George Black
"zolota" <zol...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:K%RE9.56549$ea.10...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
Yup. The Maori method of preserving mutton birds is to encase them in their
own fat...
--
Erik A. Mattila
> As you say it is a subject that aroused my interest also. So much in fact I
> spent all yesterday looking for ochre burial customs in Europe
Did you find this Kurgan site?
http://www.iras.ucalgary.ca/~volk/sylvia/Kurgans.htm
Much too modern for our discussion, but nevertheless interesting. The
author claims red ochre burial is a proto-indo-european and
indo-european trait.
>>So I would say the entire population didn't go along for the ride. For
>>several reasons, one being that a splinter group was driven away,
>>another that young men were looking for wives that they weren't related
>>to. Fishhook salesmen is also an intriguing thesis. Also, I notice
>>that the Auk nesting grounds on the map are much larger near Europe, so
>>egg gathering comes to mind.
>
>
> Yup. Rather than try to keep up with a mob of aquatic birds swimming 24/7
> while paddling canoes packed with Great Auk carcasses it'd be much simpler
> to head 'em off at the pass where you'd have room to preserve them
> Hey I looked for the paleonorwegian red paint burials. Nothing atr all in
> English. Not even from some sites that would be REALLY interested
The only one I know of is Gjessing, and come to think of it, I may be
just gjessing myself. I think in the few brief quotes I've read of his
he cites red paint burials in Norway.
>>Indeed. But how do you define canoe? Some are very large (we're
>>probably talking about hide coverd boats). 7kya the ice may well have
>>been further south, and the North Atlantic weather different than in the
>>historical period.
>
>
> We do not know a lot about the red paint people mainly because most of their
> sites were on shorelines that are now underwater...
> however they were a maritime people...
> Canoes? On the North Atlantic? Catching Great Auks for processing ashore? In
> an open boat?
> Now it's true I've never sailed in the North Atlantic but that is one
> serious bit of ocean
It's pretty easy for me to forget about the fury of north atlantic
setting here in the desert near the bottom of the Salton trough, 179'
feet below sea level. But I ran across this interesting web site about
kayak saftey, canone sponsons, and their antecedents in Northwestern
watercraft (Umiaks, kayaks etc.). You might to take a look:
http://www.sponsonguy.com/safetyschool.html
But speaking of sea level rise, there's only a 40' high pile of Colorado
River silt between me and the Gulf of California.
> Quote from your posted URL
> There have also been attempts to link the "Red Paint People" (Maritime
> Archaic/Late Archaic) of the Canadian Maritime provinces and Maine with
> the Late Mesolithic cultures of Denmark and western France. Again, there
> is a chronological problem with 1,500-3,000 years separating the
> apparently 'similar' cultures on the two sides of the Atlantic, (LM
> cultures in question, ca. 9,500-8,000 BP and Red Paint People/Maritime
> Archaic ca, 7,000-5,000 B.P.).
> -----------------------------------------------
Yeah, I read that. But the sea level issue would also be pertinent
mesolithic Scandinavia - the older sites being submerged (if they exist
at all.) I think the consensus among archaeologists is growing that
marine archaeology is going to remap the whole discourse. That's pretty
exciting to me. I'm all ears.
> This is quite an interesting subject. Shall we do a cut of stuff gone over
Sounds good to me. I'll start now. If you find anything on red paint
burials in Norway, please post. At the other end of this discussion is
the other enigma - how were the paleoeskimos able to push out the MAI
[apparently] so easily. I mean, what advantage did they have? Walrus
hyde armour? Clovis points? Could it have been a virus or plague?
Erik
Erik A. Mattila
> "zolota" <zol...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>>There was a thriving industry processing the Auk on the islands off
>>Newfoundland. Because they were nesting the birds did not flee and were
>
> just
>
>>picked up or clubbed. In that industry the birds were burned to boil water
>>to release the feathers, presumably the indians would have burned some to
>>render the oil of others and/or dry meat. (Used the oil to cook meat?)
>
> With
>
>>such easy pickings, why would anyone risk their life to reach identical
>>islands across the Atlantic. Another note, the Auk was the most aquatic
>
> bird
>
>>in the Northern Hemisphere, like a penguin. How could someone catch them
>>from a boat with low effort?
>
>
> Yup. The Maori method of preserving mutton birds is to encase them in their
> own fat...
I'd like to add that I hooked a Brown Pelican once while trolling for
Sierra Mackeral off Puerto Peñasco, Sonora (the bird actually dove down
on my lure, which was nothing more than a piece of nylon chord unraveled
and tied onto a hook). It was quite an experience, like fishing in 3D.
And quite a fight, too. When we got the bird up to the Panga we were
in, I saw how large it was, and it looked pretty dangerous also. A
twenty-five foot hyde boat with six oars can click along at a adaquate
trolling speed. Which brings us back to those damm shell fishhooks.
Erik
George Black
> George Black wrote:
>
> > As you say it is a subject that aroused my interest also. So much in
fact I
> > spent all yesterday looking for ochre burial customs in Europe
>
> Did you find this Kurgan site?
> http://www.iras.ucalgary.ca/~volk/sylvia/Kurgans.htm
> Much too modern for our discussion, but nevertheless interesting. The
> author claims red ochre burial is a proto-indo-european and
> indo-european trait.
>
particular time over an extended area such as Indo European would suggest
In New Zealand we are surrounded by some of the roughest waters in the
world.. but it all looks so benign on a good day that people are lulled into
a false sense of security....
I was in the Navy, been a fisherman and have done some sailing so I'm
pretty used to what the sea can throw up...
> But speaking of sea level rise, there's only a 40' high pile of Colorado
> River silt between me and the Gulf of California.
>
> > Quote from your posted URL
> > There have also been attempts to link the "Red Paint People" (Maritime
> > Archaic/Late Archaic) of the Canadian Maritime provinces and Maine with
> > the Late Mesolithic cultures of Denmark and western France. Again,
there
> > is a chronological problem with 1,500-3,000 years separating the
> > apparently 'similar' cultures on the two sides of the Atlantic, (LM
> > cultures in question, ca. 9,500-8,000 BP and Red Paint People/Maritime
> > Archaic ca, 7,000-5,000 B.P.).
> > -----------------------------------------------
>
> Yeah, I read that. But the sea level issue would also be pertinent
> mesolithic Scandinavia - the older sites being submerged (if they exist
> at all.) I think the consensus among archaeologists is growing that
> marine archaeology is going to remap the whole discourse. That's pretty
> exciting to me. I'm all ears.
If you've looked at my web site you'll know that I have some interest in
things maritime especially some of the local history.
You not only have sea level rises but also wave action to destroy sites and
material...
> > This is quite an interesting subject. Shall we do a cut of stuff gone
over
>
> Sounds good to me. I'll start now. If you find anything on red paint
> burials in Norway, please post. At the other end of this discussion is
> the other enigma - how were the paleoeskimos able to push out the MAI
> [apparently] so easily. I mean, what advantage did they have? Walrus
> hyde armour? Clovis points? Could it have been a virus or plague?
>
Force of numbers always works for me.
--
Seppo Renfors
Tomi wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote in
> news:3DE17C65...@not.ollis.com.au:
>
> > Borgå or Porvoo, no I don't have any information on that either. It
> > isn't on the map for 1323. Hämeenlinna (1240) is, but it is not in the
> > area indicated by Inger.
>
> Well, it should be there, and it's in the area Inger was talking about
> ("the area that was during the 18th century on the non-Karelian side",
> although I'm not quite sure what this means).
For whatever reason, it isn't there and it isn't referred to in the
related text either. I understand Inger referred to about current
border (or a tad west), as the Russians pinched Kareli from Finland
and it is on their side now.
--
SIR -Philosopher Unauthorised
------------------------------------------------------------------
" Don't resent getting old. A great many are denied that privilege "
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tomi
news:3DE4BA6B...@not.ollis.com.au:
> For whatever reason, it isn't there and it isn't referred to in the
> related text either.
Porvoo (Borgå, Castle river) was one of the six medieval cities in Finland
and the only one on the unprotected shore of the Baltic Sea (in Nyland,
Uusimaa, New Land) and as such needed a castle for protection. The reason
the text you are referring to doesn't mention it is, I believe, because it
didn't have much national importance, and so it never got particularly big
either. It was more like a fortress than an actual castle, actually
"linnas" and "borgs" could mean just hills with forificationsa. In the late
14th century the "governor" of Nyland built his manor there but already by
15th century the manor and the castle were apparently abandoned. This is
the only castle I know of in the area just west of Karelia.
Just didn't want to let ramain in your confused state regarding this
important issue;-)
--
T: Tomi
Seppo Renfors
Gisele Horvat wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:21:12 -0800, "Erik A. Mattila"
> <emat...@oco.net> wrote:
>
> >George Black wrote:
> >
> >> The immediate problem that I have with the theory is
> >> a) the distances
> >
> >Yes, the distances are formidable, especially in a large canoe.
> >
> >> 2) the ability of these peoples to find food sufficient along this 'route'
> >
> >Well, this is where the Great Auks come in. As I understand it, these
> >flightless birds migrated across the North Atlantic in a yearly pattern,
> >and they were easy pickings.
> >
> >> 3) The lack of archaeological evidence
> >
> >This is what I'm not sure about. At least Gjessings offers some, and it
> >was more than just the fishhooks. See Doug Weller's post on this
> >thread, but I expect there is more than is mentioned in the abstract
> >that Doug quoted. The question in my mind right now is if genetic
> >evidence could be interpreted to support this theory.
>
> Quite often, genetic findings can be interpreted as having travelled
> in either direction. For this reason, a reader should always be
> looking for the specific findings indicative of direction.
>
> I'd like to describe, here, a anomaly that I recently came across. A
> German and an Austrian each had a rare feature, in their mtDNA
> sequences, which is only found in Central America and has been called
> "the Central American deletion". One of those sequences was
> classified as belonging to the predominant European haplogroup and the
> other as "D?" and it resembles the Inuit "D" lineages. In Central
> America, it is the 'A' lineages which have the Central American
> deletion (rather than D) but Inuit have lineages belonging to both
> haplogroups. Also, one of two Hispanics which had African American
> lineages also had this Central American deletion in their, otherwise,
> African sequences. I believe all of these incidences to be related
> but this must be due to some form of transferance other than
> inheritance from the mother.
There are rare occurrences were the mtDNA is inherited from the
father. I read a case recently about a person who has both mtDNA's -
the maternal and the paternal in different parts of the body. Most
unusual I thought.
But if a chance occurrence of the father contributing to the mtDNA
took place, could this perpetuate and be the cause?
> In Germany and area, I've also previously noticed what could be called
> Inuit/Native American mtDNA variants in European mtDNA lineages. No
> one but me pays any attention to them.
Do you know how far back in time these go?
>
> Also, Erik, did you see the information I posted some time ago about
> the Tyrolean Iceman having an HLA haplotype which is predominantly
> found the New World?
>
> It is also my belief that the few German (and Tuscan) haplogroup X
> lineages are phylogenetically closer to the North American ones than
> any other Old World ones but I remain completely undecided about
> nearly everything else pertaining to this haplogroup... Not enough
> information has been obtained or released yet.
>
> 3/6 Micmacs had haplogroup X lineages. That's 50%.... but what kind
> of sample size is six?
Isn't this the X that goes back to Asia - the Altai mountain regions -
to the Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan border region? Then again
isn't there some stories (myths?) about the Micmacs being blonde and
blue eyed?
But then again I found this:
http://www.go.ednet.ns.ca/lawrencetown/history/settlers.htm
"A Mic Mac family by the name of Jeremy once lived on the bank of the
Annapolis River behind Mrs. Velma Banks' house on the property
formerly owned by Mr. Jack Whitman's father. The family consisted of
Mr. Abe Jeremy, an Indian, his white wife, two daughters and a son
named Charlie. They lived in a small tarpaper house with a trail
leading from it to Middleton."
The date is most likely around 1822 or sometime later.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9479/kreole.html#3
"Besides this Basqu-Icelandic pidgin there are documented traces of
basque-algonquinian language contact in the 16th and 17th centuries.
In the book mentioned earlier, there is an article about canadian
pidgins is by Peter Bakker."
Theoretically a single female can leave a mtDNA footprint on a whole
population. But what is theoretical is often not so in practise. I
have wondered how large a group would it take to leave a significant
(something that isn't viewed as an oddity or aberration) mtDNA foot
print in a population?
> In this newsgroup, someone once showed me how the European canoes of
> one area closely resembled eastern Native American canoes but I must
> have paid little attention because I can't even remember the details.
>
> Gisele
--
Andrew Wells
<snips>> BTW does anybody know where is the closest place to Europe
where kayaks
> have been in use. It seems that people with kayaks have been visiting
> Orkneys from time immemorial, well according to the native tales at least.
> They have even found a kayak or two on their shores. I don't suppose they
> could have come from Siberia. Perhaps Greenland is a better alternative? Or
> perhaps kayaks were used in Norway some time in history as well.
>
> Is it likely that "Eskimos" moved southwards during the cold phase which
> evidently killed the European population in Greenland? If so there could be
> some traces of this migration in Ireland and Scotland, perhaps elsewhere,
> too.
An inuit (and I'm using the term loosely here) in a kayak visited
Aberdeen during the little ice age, IIRC.
Andrew
Gisele Horvat
<Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote:
>There are rare occurrences where the mtDNA is inherited from the
>father. I read a case recently about a person who has both mtDNA's -
>the maternal and the paternal in different parts of the body. Most
>unusual I thought.
>
>But if a chance occurrence of the father contributing to the mtDNA
>took place, could this perpetuate and be the cause?
This is what I think is the cause but, if it is, then the phenomenon
might not be so rare.
After posting, I realized that I forgot to mention one additional
important fact. The German sequence also had a rarish variant (97A)
in close vicinity to the 6 bp deletion (106 - 111 del) in common with
some of the previously mentioned Central American sequences. If you
or Peter, who has expressed an interest in my "hypothesis", or anyone
is interesting in seeing this information, I have it all referenced
and summarized. This is only one example of many and they must be
regarded as anomalies rather than evidence of this or that because I
don't have the fathers' sequences.
>> In Germany and area, I've also previously noticed what could be called
>> Inuit/Native American mtDNA variants in European mtDNA lineages. No
>> one but me pays any attention to them.
>
>Do you know how far back in time these go?
No, no idea.
>> Also, Erik, did you see the information I posted some time ago about
>> the Tyrolean Iceman having an HLA haplotype which is predominantly
>> found the New World?
>>
>> It is also my belief that the few German (and Tuscan) haplogroup X
>> lineages are phylogenetically closer to the North American ones than
>> any other Old World ones but I remain completely undecided about
>> nearly everything else pertaining to this haplogroup... Not enough
>> information has been obtained or released yet.
>>
>> 3/6 Micmacs had haplogroup X lineages. That's 50%.... but what kind
>> of sample size is six?
>
>Isn't this the X that goes back to Asia - the Altai mountain regions -
>to the Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan border region?
This is the X that has been *found* in the Altai. I have not yet
seen a comprehensive Altai sample, but all of the populations to the
west of the Altai mountains, have relatively high frequencies of
lineages belonging to European haplogroups and, although Derenko et
al. did not think so, Altai haplogroup X could be due to admixture
from Europe or the Middle East.
>Then again
>isn't there some stories (myths?) about the Micmacs being blonde and
>blue eyed?
>But then again I found this:
>
>http://www.go.ednet.ns.ca/lawrencetown/history/settlers.htm
>"A Mic Mac family by the name of Jeremy once lived on the bank of the
>Annapolis River behind Mrs. Velma Banks' house on the property
>formerly owned by Mr. Jack Whitman's father. The family consisted of
>Mr. Abe Jeremy, an Indian, his white wife, two daughters and a son
>named Charlie. They lived in a small tarpaper house with a trail
>leading from it to Middleton."
>
>The date is most likely around 1822 or sometime later.
Haplogroup X in America was originally thought to be due to
post-Columbian European admixture but, later, that idea was dismissed.
>http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9479/kreole.html#3
>"Besides this Basqu-Icelandic pidgin there are documented traces of
>basque-algonquinian language contact in the 16th and 17th centuries.
>In the book mentioned earlier, there is an article about canadian
>pidgins is by Peter Bakker."
>
>
>Theoretically a single female can leave a mtDNA footprint on a whole
>population. But what is theoretical is often not so in practise. I
>have wondered how large a group would it take to leave a significant
>(something that isn't viewed as an oddity or aberration) mtDNA foot
>print in a population?
It might depend largely upon the number of daughters that initial
female had.
Gisele
Gisele Horvat
<Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote:
[...]
>Isn't this the X that goes back to Asia - the Altai mountain regions -
>to the Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan border region? Then again
>isn't there some stories (myths?) about the Micmacs being blonde and
>blue eyed?
I would like to make one more point about the above. I am unaware of
any reason to associate blonde hair and blue eyes with haplogroup X.
The predominant Native American haplogroup, A, belongs to the same
haplogroup cluster. This cluster falls, phylogenetically, between
African haplogroups and European and also between African haplogroups
and some found in southern Asia and Oceania.
Gisele
Inger E
"Andrew Wells" <and...@wellinghall.force9.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:2f9adb4c.02112...@posting.google.com...
> Tomi <to...@invalid.inet.fi> wrote in message
news:<Xns92EF896...@192.89.123.233>...
> <snips>> BTW does anybody know where is the closest place to Europe
> where kayaks
> > have been in use. It seems that people with kayaks have been visiting
> > Orkneys from time immemorial, well according to the native tales at
least.
> > They have even found a kayak or two on their shores. I don't suppose
they
> > could have come from Siberia. Perhaps Greenland is a better alternative?
Or
> > perhaps kayaks were used in Norway some time in history as well.
The first canot/kayak - described to be something in between actually - in
Norway is mentioned in 12th century in a chapel of what was to be the
Nidaros Dome. It's a specific story about it which I will tell you all in
May next year, not before. Due to special circumstances I have let three
persons have the full details. Can't explain more for the moment about that
canot/kayak.
The next is that such a vessel is described to have been brought by King
Hakon, son of Magnus Eriksson back to Norway before 1368. The one who tells
the story in 1505 was a Bishop confirming in a letter that he himself had
seen the vessel in Nidaros.
Inger E
Inger E
"Gisele Horvat" <g-ho...@shaw.ca> skrev i meddelandet
news:3de4e484.772383@shawnews...
The European link might have been from the contact with the real
Wends(observe no Finns) in the Troms area.
Inger E
Seppo Renfors
Very interesting indeed. Here is a bit of addition to this story:
http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~ae050/beothuk.html
"As such, it can reasonably be said that the Beothuk were of Algonkian
origin (as were the Micmac, Montagnais and Naskaupi Indians). They
were also somewhat taller and their complexions lighter than other
North American Indians. Their habit of using red ochre to paint their
bodies traditionally has been the reason Europeans called them Red
Indians."
Wade Wofford
<snip>>
> to the Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan border region? Then again
> isn't there some stories (myths?) about the Micmacs being blonde and
> blue eyed?
> But then again I found this:
Dear Seppo Renfors,
I ran detailed searches on these "stories" a year or two ago, & the
few accounts of "Caucasian" type coloration among the Micmac ALL dated
to long after (1-2 centuries) the start of miscegenation between the
Micmac and European settlers/sailors. The earliest accounts describe
their coloration as being "like that of Gypsies"...
This is the haplogroup X that IN THE OLD WORLD is most common in the
Near East (among groups such as the Druze, who are likely
predominantly of Phoenician descent), that is found in Europe at a
LOWER FREQUENCY than it is in the Near East (The NE also has a greater
diversity of lineages within the haplogroup), and that was recently
found in Northern & Southern Altaians. The researchers who reported
it among the Altai stated that the Altai X lineages were ancestral to
(or at least closer to the "root" than) both the European and the
Native American X lineages (hence that while European X lineages
couldn't have been the source of either the Altaian or NA X lineages,
the Altaian X lineages COULD have migrated from the Altai into Europe,
and SEPERATELY from the Altai to the Americas).
They found it among the Altai by specifically checking "other" mtDNA
lineages from previous studies (samples that in previous studies
hadn't turned out to belong to any of the common Asian haplogroups
that those studies HAD tested for), & implied that it might well turn
out to exist among other Asian populations as well.... since many such
studies reveal unidentified lineages.
> http://www.go.ednet.ns.ca/lawrencetown/history/settlers.htm
> "A Mic Mac family by the name of Jeremy once lived on the bank of the
> Annapolis River behind Mrs. Velma Banks' house on the property
> formerly owned by Mr. Jack Whitman's father. The family consisted of
> Mr. Abe Jeremy, an Indian, his white wife, two daughters and a son
> named Charlie. They lived in a small tarpaper house with a trail
> leading from it to Middleton."
>
> The date is most likely around 1822 or sometime later.
There is a considerable amount of documented miscegenation (especially
along the Newfoundland coastal regions) between Micmac and early White
settlers (& sailors who jumped ship, etc), seemingly starting as early
as the late 16th century. Such mixed bloods are FAR more resistant to
introduced diseases (smallpox, etc) than were fullblood Indians, so
it's not surprising that mixed ancestry ("features", whether
associated with family traditions of admixture or not) is quite common
among many surviving tribes today.
Sincerely,
Wade Wofford.
Inger E
"Wade Wofford" <kenuch...@yahoo.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:63d94394.02112...@posting.google.com...
Question: Is there by any chance as far as "today's knowledge" is at hand
any specific places where it's a higher frequency? If so is it close to
waterways or the Sea?
Inger E
Gisele Horvat
wrote:
>Seppo Renfors <Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote in message news:<3DE4D412...@not.ollis.com.au>...
><snip>>
>> Isn't this the X that goes back to Asia - the Altai mountain regions -
>> to the Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan border region? Then again
>> isn't there some stories (myths?) about the Micmacs being blonde and
>> blue eyed?
>> But then again I found this:
>
>Dear Seppo Renfors,
>
>I ran detailed searches on these "stories" a year or two ago, & the
>few accounts of "Caucasian" type coloration among the Micmac ALL dated
>to long after (1-2 centuries) the start of miscegenation between the
>Micmac and European settlers/sailors. The earliest accounts describe
>their coloration as being "like that of Gypsies"...
Speaking of gypsies, I recently read that the Roma frequency of
haplogroup X was 7.6% (which was higher than I expected). This was
a fairly large sample (275) unlike the Druze (45).
Gisele
Wade Wofford
> > "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
> news:<N%xB9.4957$1r1.1...@newsc.telia.net>...
> > > I hope that more than I have seen and read the following sites:
> > >
> > > quotation:
> > > Wide and far they fared
> > > Needing sustenance
> > > Over ice and wastelands
> > > To Vinland they came
> > > Wealth weighs little
> > > For those who die early
> > > Rune stone from Hønen, Norway.
> > > Translation by Suzanne Carlson
> >
> > Dear Inger,
> >
> > OUCH! Sounds like they were acknowledging that they were warning
> > people away from Vinland & admitting that ventures there were NOT
> > likely to go well.
>
> Have your read Adam of Bremen's book from 1050's to 1070's? It's in it as
> well.
Dear Inger,
I hope you don't feel that I was doubting the accuracy of the
translation, or the existance of the runestone itself! I was merely
pointing out that it's message is NOT indicative of Norse possession
of Vinland, and in fact implies that it's writer felt that going there
was likely to result in an early grave....
As for Adam of Bremen, firstly, he CANNOT be taken as gospel. Not
only does he claim that the Greenland Norse were greenish in color,
but he was informed (by the same authority who told him of Vinland &
Greenland) that parts of Sweden were inhabited by Cyclops & cannibals!
Secondly, he mentions NO Norse colonies in Vinland, rather, he simply
mentions it's existance (calling it an island) & gives a BRIEF
description.
He is proof only of Norse knowledge of "Vinland's" existance (in
independant confirmation of several Icelandic sagas), but nothing
more.
> > > source: http://www.neara.org/CARLSON/atlantic.html
> > >
> > > and then you better prepare yourself with the knowledge that King Magnus
> > > Eriksson(King of Sweden from 1319 to 1360's) was a king of one of the
> larger
> > > Empire that ever existed on this Earth by remembering that King Magnus's
> > > Empire northwestern border was Disco Bay in Greenland and the
> easternborder
> > > was where Sveaborg on the border between Finland and Russia. Included in
> his
> > > Empire was Vinland,
> >
> > No. The ONLY documented Norse settlement in the Americas PREDATED his
> > reign by something like THREE centuries. MANY GENERATIONS BEFORE
> > Magnus Eriksson was even born, Norse contact had been reduced to
> > occasional forays in search of such things as lumber.
>
> On the contrary. The Catholic church collected Peter's coin from 23
> settlements as late as in 1340's. That was one of the main problem that made
> the so called search-patrol actually a optake-voyage=a voyage to convert the
> lost souls back to the right Christian views.
Details, please.
The Catholic Encyclopedia indicates that NO tithes were collected from
"Vinland", and that NO Church documentation exists of a Catholic
presence in Vinland (although a bishop is reported to have set out in
search of it in 1121, there is no followup mention of his efforts).
Amusingly, it DOES mention the truth behind a number of false stories
(the "cup of Vinland masur wood", the Vinland martyrdom of Bishop John
of Ireland) that had been the subject of various claims.
> > He had absolutely NO control over "Vinland", and as such it was NOT
> > part of any "Empire" of his.
>
> Have you read anything at all about the content in the boats from Greenland?
> Guess you hadn't. Thus you know nothing at all about the crazy view taken by
> you and many other during the years regarding king Magnus Erikson's days.
> Most of the items wasn't possible to find in Greenland or Iceland for that
> matter. Some were only possible to have been had with real good relations
> deep in Hudson Bay as well as Quebec area.
Details, please. What I have heard indicates that there was nothing
that couldn't be obtained either directly by the Greenland Norse
themselves, by them via trade with Greenland Inuit, or by occasional
rare forays after such things as timber. I've heard of NOTHING that
would have necessitated an actual settlement (let alone one additional
to L'Anse Aux Meadows).
> > > the Orkney Island, Skane(from mid1340's), Shetland
> > > Islands and some more distant places.
> >
> > Still doesn't sound all that big. The Mongols ruled a far larger
> > empire, as did the Inca, the Romans, Alexander the Great, the
> > Persians, and a goodly number of other ancient peoples. (Or not so
> > ancient, note the Ottoman Turks! Heck, half a dozen modern countries
> > are bigger!)
>
> When did you ever look carefully on a map? Not this year anyhow.
Looking at a map, & consulting an almanac, it looks like his "empire"
consisted of something like roughly 1.5 million square miles of land
surface (but of which a bit more than half was "useless" Greenland
glacier).
This is rather small potatoes. The U.S. is more than twice that size
(virtually all habitable, too!). So is Canada, China, Russia (FOUR
times larger, without even counting the old U.S.S.R.), Brazil, and
Australia. Hell, before part of it was partitioned into Pakistan,
INDIA was bigger.
Looking back, you've got the Roman Empire, the Mongols, that of
Alexander the Great, plus Persia AND Parthia. Or more recently, there
were the empires possessed by the British, French, Spanish (hell, the
MEXICAN part of the Spanish Empire used to be bigger all by itself,
before the U.S. obtained a goodly chunk of it), Germans, Portuguese, &
Ottomans.
So right off the top of my head, I came up with 18 "empires"
significantly larger than Magnus Eriksson's. I think it likely that a
professional historian (or geographer) would know of quite a few
others.
(Many of these STILL rank as larger even if you try inflating the size
by counting empty ocean between scattered possessions..... since logic
dictates that you'd have to do likewise with them as well, in such an
event).
> > > After preparing yourself with that
> > > knowledge you might find the following quoation re. DNA-results from the
> > > 1300's in NA a bit more understandable:
> > > "The lineage 2 sequence was identical to one found in two Finnish
> > > individuals "
> > > source:
> > >
> http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJHG/journal/issues/v62n5/970850/970850.htm
> > > l
> >
> > So, which of the three possible explanations are you arguing for?
> >
> > 1) Sample contamination?
> >
> > 2) A Finnish woman "went Native" (voluntarily OR involuntarily) and
> > contributed her rare Finnish lineage to a tribal population ancestral
> > to the modern Sioux Indians (as the Oneota are thought to be)?
>
> Might have been one of the two persons aboard the Knutson expedition with
> Finnish roots if no other voyage will be suggested. Personally I think there
> were lots of voyages into this area.
Unless one of these two persons were female, they could NOT have
passed on their mtDNA lineage.
"Lots of voyages" are NOT supported by either the archaeological,
documentary, nor genetic data. And even assuming their existance, how
many would have carried (& lost to the Natives) Finnish WOMEN?
> > 3) Some early Norse explorer brought back a foreign bride?
>
> That have been spoken of in the early 20th century. I never found any hard
> proof for it but it's said there was an Indian female and her brother
> brought over in King Svein Estridson's days.
Eh, would this have been the two children kidnapped by Thorfinn
Karlsefni?
> > > More to follow this time next year.
> > >
> > > Inger E
> >
> > Why so late? The article you linked to was written in 1997 & published
> > in 1998! I've been tracking it, and there has been no indication of
> > "followup" research on those samples.
>
> Because an interesting study and work done by American Scholars is underway
> and will be launched in due time. You don't believe anything but American
> Scholars do you? Thus why shall I send you the information they have had and
> followed up?
>
> Inger E
Inger, I've no particular bias either for OR against "American
scholars". If you know of others, cite them & I'll try to access (&
computer translate) what I can.
As for these "American Scholars", why not give me what details you
have now? I'd be more than glad to check them out (home court
advantage, and all that), and to keep an eye out for future data.
Simply saying "scholars whom you won't identify" will publish
"something" "in the unspecified future" convinces nobody, and makes
your case look less believeable than it might actually deserve. I've
no axe to grind on this issue (I'm simply being properly conservative
with respect to requiring solid data before accepting a new historical
claim), so why not go ahead and give me what you have so far? I'll
give it an honest appraisal.
Hmm, are you by any chance thinking of the research.... and upcoming
book on the Vinland Map by historian Kirsten Seaver?
(She's the Norwegian born & raised but
currently-residing-in-California author of a prior book on Greenland &
the Norse exploration in North America, which I HAVEN'T yet read,
titled "The Frozen Echo: Greenland and the Exploration of North
America, Ca. A.D. 1000-1500").
Sincerely,
Wade Wofford.
Inger E
I see that you have read some of the earlier translations and not the latest
ones of Adam's. Actually Adam's writing can be taken real seriously. Not
only did he give good information re. Vinland, Markland and the other NA
areas but we do know where he got the information from and when. I am sure
it's never been in English editions of Adam's writing which in many cases
have missed Scolies translations as well, but the fact is that we do know
that Svein Estridson, Jarl Ulf's and Estrid's son with legal claim for the
Danish and the Norwegian crown visited Vineland, but not any proof for him
to have visit Greenland.
As for Adam of Bremen's stories of the Cyclopes:
a) we do know that he have got them from ancient writers as well as from one
of the Irish tales which was copied from an older handwritten document
50-100 years before Adam's days.
b) He wasn't speaking of Scandinavia not if you read his text. The Thule
refered was Iceland and the Cyclopes was one of the mamals which actually
looks to be Cyclopes on 19th century photos taken from distance as well.
>
> Secondly, he mentions NO Norse colonies in Vinland, rather, he simply
> mentions it's existance (calling it an island) & gives a BRIEF
> description.
Not completely true. He refer to the islands in the book but in the writings
from the Seed where he worked after the Viking Attack on Hamburg to the Pope
and the correspondence re. priests who was sent via Greenland to the outher
islands you can't miss what's it all about.
>
> He is proof only of Norse knowledge of "Vinland's" existance (in
> independant confirmation of several Icelandic sagas), but nothing
> more.
No Icelandic Saga was written at the time. Actually the so called Icelandic
Sagas were written long after all events and on top of that they aren't
trustworthy either than in small parts. They have stolen lots of material to
the Sagas from Norwegian material up to 1200. Observe that the first
document where Vinland is mentioned derive from Norse not from Icelandic.
The Icelanders didn't even manage to get their own history right - the areas
where their sagatellers said the first settlers settled have in some cases
been proven not to have any early settlements at all while other places have
been proven to have housings older than the Landnamsaga's earliest refered
settlement!
If you can read Swedish you may have my thesis. It was up in 1995 and I
managed to prove the lack of credibility in the Sagas as well as that they
neither were as early as been said.
Can you or can't you read Old-Swedish and Old-Norwegian?
>
> The Catholic Encyclopedia indicates that NO tithes were collected from
> "Vinland", and that NO Church documentation exists of a Catholic
> presence in Vinland (although a bishop is reported to have set out in
> search of it in 1121, there is no followup mention of his efforts).
We know know where Bishop Erik went and who he met with before he and all
his men(and a few women) settled down. I am sorry but you will have to wait
10-12 month for this part to be published, I am not the one to publish it.
>
> Amusingly, it DOES mention the truth behind a number of false stories
> (the "cup of Vinland masur wood", the Vinland martyrdom of Bishop John
> of Ireland) that had been the subject of various claims.
Your belief will be changed. That's not a prediction but a fact to be due to
the circumstanses with context and content involved that will prove things
you never could imagin in your dreams.
>
> > > He had absolutely NO control over "Vinland", and as such it was NOT
> > > part of any "Empire" of his.
> >
> > Have you read anything at all about the content in the boats from
Greenland?
> > Guess you hadn't. Thus you know nothing at all about the crazy view
taken by
> > you and many other during the years regarding king Magnus Erikson's
days.
> > Most of the items wasn't possible to find in Greenland or Iceland for
that
> > matter. Some were only possible to have been had with real good
relations
> > deep in Hudson Bay as well as Quebec area.
>
> Details, please. What I have heard indicates that there was nothing
> that couldn't be obtained either directly by the Greenland Norse
> themselves.
The Norse built many of the Longhouses. You will have more information about
this the next two years.
> by them via trade with Greenland Inuit, or by occasional
> rare forays after such things as timber. I've heard of NOTHING that
> would have necessitated an actual settlement (let alone one additional
> to L'Anse Aux Meadows).
For the moment two have been mentioned in minor but essential publications
and four are under excavations. Artifacts found up to now show the need of
changing the last part of the old Paradigm.
Appart from that there are written originals still existing.
>
> > > > the Orkney Island, Skane(from mid1340's), Shetland
> > > > Islands and some more distant places.
> > >
> > > Still doesn't sound all that big. The Mongols ruled a far larger
> > > empire, as did the Inca, the Romans, Alexander the Great, the
> > > Persians, and a goodly number of other ancient peoples. (Or not so
> > > ancient, note the Ottoman Turks! Heck, half a dozen modern countries
> > > are bigger!)
> >
> > When did you ever look carefully on a map? Not this year anyhow.
>
> Looking at a map, & consulting an almanac, it looks like his "empire"
> consisted of something like roughly 1.5 million square miles of land
> surface (but of which a bit more than half was "useless" Greenland
> glacier).
Your assumption. Compare it with the money the English had to pay to the
King Eric of Sweden, Norway and Denmark around 1440.
>
> This is rather small potatoes. The U.S. is more than twice that size
> (virtually all habitable, too!). So is Canada, China, Russia (FOUR
> times larger, without even counting the old U.S.S.R.), Brazil, and
> Australia. Hell, before part of it was partitioned into Pakistan,
> INDIA was bigger.
Neither of that includes the water all between. Actually your figure for
land is too little. Vinland on maps(not the so called Vineland map but maps
from 12th-15th century) included all land from Hudson Bay down to
Mississippi and all way westward. You will know more about this a year from
now.
>
> Looking back, you've got the Roman Empire, the Mongols, that of
> Alexander the Great, plus Persia AND Parthia. Or more recently, there
> were the empires possessed by the British, French, Spanish (hell, the
> MEXICAN part of the Spanish Empire used to be bigger all by itself,
> before the U.S. obtained a goodly chunk of it), Germans, Portuguese, &
> Ottomans.
>
> So right off the top of my head, I came up with 18 "empires"
> significantly larger than Magnus Eriksson's.
No your figures aren't correct. That's your problem.
Still do you mind if we take this debate after New Years Eve.
Inger E
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message news:<tM%D9.6290$1r1.2...@newsc.telia.net>...
>mentions it's existance (calling it an island) ...
I think you will find that he used 'island' in the sense of an
isolated territory and not necessarily a body of land surrounded by
water. This was a common manner of using the term in ancient times.
> ... & gives a BRIEF
>description.
---- snip ---
Eric Stevens
Seppo Renfors
Tomi wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors <Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote in
> news:3DE4BA6B...@not.ollis.com.au:
>
> > For whatever reason, it isn't there and it isn't referred to in the
> > related text either.
>
> Porvoo (Borgå, Castle river) was one of the six medieval cities in Finland
> and the only one on the unprotected shore of the Baltic Sea (in Nyland,
> Uusimaa, New Land) and as such needed a castle for protection. The reason
> the text you are referring to doesn't mention it is, I believe, because it
> didn't have much national importance, and so it never got particularly big
> either. It was more like a fortress than an actual castle, actually
> "linnas" and "borgs" could mean just hills with forificationsa. In the late
> 14th century the "governor" of Nyland built his manor there but already by
> 15th century the manor and the castle were apparently abandoned. This is
> the only castle I know of in the area just west of Karelia.
But you mentioned Viborg (Viipuri) earlier IIRC. That is right on the
south western corner of Kareli as I know it. As I understand it from
my parents is that Kareli was to the East of Imatra (6km from the
current Russian border) and therefor in Russia now. But I really have
no accurate description of the area, particularly to the West.
> Just didn't want to let ramain in your confused state regarding this
> important issue;-)
I know of the city, but had no recollection of the castle - nor
information on it. You are probably right with your reasoning.
Seppo Renfors
Gisele Horvat wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 00:47:54 +1030, Seppo Renfors
> <Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote:
>
> [...]
> >Isn't this the X that goes back to Asia - the Altai mountain regions -
> >to the Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan border region? Then again
> >isn't there some stories (myths?) about the Micmacs being blonde and
> >blue eyed?
>
> I would like to make one more point about the above. I am unaware of
> any reason to associate blonde hair and blue eyes with haplogroup X.
Oh, that comment wasn't meant to indicate haplogroup X has anything to
do with "blonde hair and blue eyes" specifically, but a story (most
likely myth) implying that it was from the Norse (ie European) contact
- said to be blonde and blue eyed (which isn't always true anyway).
> The predominant Native American haplogroup, A, belongs to the same
> haplogroup cluster. This cluster falls, phylogenetically, between
> African haplogroups and European and also between African haplogroups
> and some found in southern Asia and Oceania.
--
Seppo Renfors
Gisele Horvat wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 00:47:54 +1030, Seppo Renfors
> <Sen...@not.ollis.com.au> wrote:
>
> >There are rare occurrences where the mtDNA is inherited from the
> >father. I read a case recently about a person who has both mtDNA's -
> >the maternal and the paternal in different parts of the body. Most
> >unusual I thought.
> >
> >But if a chance occurrence of the father contributing to the mtDNA
> >took place, could this perpetuate and be the cause?
>
> This is what I think is the cause but, if it is, then the phenomenon
> might not be so rare.
I think you are right. Logically, all else being equal, it should be a
new mutation and propagate from then on. This subject is a bit like
computers, by the time I have read something and managed to grasp it,
it is out of date. But never mind, I'll propose this anyway. As the
combination of parental and maternal mtDNA isn't supposed to happen,
is it then not also possible that the propagation of this form of
mutation will not occur, or very rarely occur.
That in the "repair kit" of the mtDNA, there is a "switch" to
reactivate the original mtDNA to exclude the existing paternal portion
at conception in an offspring?
The case of the dual mtDNA made me think of it. That case involved an
adult IIRC who was ill and nobody could fathom why. Would it be
possible as a result of such a "repair" sequence being set off at some
stage in the person's later life that doesn't normally happen?
Otherwise if it caused the illness, wouldn't the person have been sick
from the very beginning of life? I wish I had kept the article.
> After posting, I realized that I forgot to mention one additional
> important fact. The German sequence also had a rarish variant (97A)
> in close vicinity to the 6 bp deletion (106 - 111 del) in common with
> some of the previously mentioned Central American sequences. If you
> or Peter, who has expressed an interest in my "hypothesis", or anyone
> is interesting in seeing this information, I have it all referenced
> and summarized. This is only one example of many and they must be
> regarded as anomalies rather than evidence of this or that because I
> don't have the fathers' sequences.
It would be interesting, for sure.
>
> >> In Germany and area, I've also previously noticed what could be called
> >> Inuit/Native American mtDNA variants in European mtDNA lineages. No
> >> one but me pays any attention to them.
> >
> >Do you know how far back in time these go?
>
> No, no idea.
>
> >> Also, Erik, did you see the information I posted some time ago about
> >> the Tyrolean Iceman having an HLA haplotype which is predominantly
> >> found the New World?
> >>
> >> It is also my belief that the few German (and Tuscan) haplogroup X
> >> lineages are phylogenetically closer to the North American ones than
> >> any other Old World ones but I remain completely undecided about
> >> nearly everything else pertaining to this haplogroup... Not enough
> >> information has been obtained or released yet.
> >>
> >> 3/6 Micmacs had haplogroup X lineages. That's 50%.... but what kind
> >> of sample size is six?
> >
> >Isn't this the X that goes back to Asia - the Altai mountain regions -
> >to the Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan border region?
>
> This is the X that has been *found* in the Altai.
Ouch, the slap on the wrist hurt :-)
> I have not yet
> seen a comprehensive Altai sample, but all of the populations to the
> west of the Altai mountains, have relatively high frequencies of
> lineages belonging to European haplogroups and, although Derenko et
> al. did not think so, Altai haplogroup X could be due to admixture
> from Europe or the Middle East.
I would suspect this is highly likely considering the traffic to and
fro in that steppe area over the millennia.
>
> >Then again
> >isn't there some stories (myths?) about the Micmacs being blonde and
> >blue eyed?
> >But then again I found this:
> >
> >http://www.go.ednet.ns.ca/lawrencetown/history/settlers.htm
> >"A Mic Mac family by the name of Jeremy once lived on the bank of the
> >Annapolis River behind Mrs. Velma Banks' house on the property
> >formerly owned by Mr. Jack Whitman's father. The family consisted of
> >Mr. Abe Jeremy, an Indian, his white wife, two daughters and a son
> >named Charlie. They lived in a small tarpaper house with a trail
> >leading from it to Middleton."
> >
> >The date is most likely around 1822 or sometime later.
>
> Haplogroup X in America was originally thought to be due to
> post-Columbian European admixture but, later, that idea was dismissed.
And that is why a source has been sough for this - I read an article
claiming it to be from the Altai region hence the earlier comment.
> >http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9479/kreole.html#3
> >"Besides this Basqu-Icelandic pidgin there are documented traces of
> >basque-algonquinian language contact in the 16th and 17th centuries.
> >In the book mentioned earlier, there is an article about canadian
> >pidgins is by Peter Bakker."
> >
> >
> >Theoretically a single female can leave a mtDNA footprint on a whole
> >population. But what is theoretical is often not so in practise. I
> >have wondered how large a group would it take to leave a significant
> >(something that isn't viewed as an oddity or aberration) mtDNA foot
> >print in a population?
>
> It might depend largely upon the number of daughters that initial
> female had.
Yeah... I thought that might well be the answer. Only it doesn't sit
all that comfortably with me.
A female, unless unwillingly at a new place, would tend to indicate
males as well from the same place/tribe. Common language and culture
would suggest it to be more likely they they stuck together for a time
at least (a couple of generations, perhaps longer) before any general
spread would take place. This suggest a greater number of people.
Later day studies have shown that the more affluent the society the
more female children are born (or so it is claimed at least). The
converse applies to non affluent societies. Since the patriarchal
religions have taken over at least, male children were thought as more
important than female children until fairly recently. Therefor boy
children were fed in priority to the girls in times of food shortages
with the related consequences. Some infanticide did occur among some
people at least. The first born had to be a boy - else lights out for
the poor kid. So a single female and her line in relation to mtDNA
would be in a fairly high risk situation of dying out.
This is partly why I think there really needs to be more than one in
practise for that footprint to take hold in a population. Though
theoretically it is entirely feasible for a single female to leave
that foot print - and more than likely have done in the past as well.
Though I see it unlikely to apply to more than few cases, I suspect
many more lines would die out never to be seen again.
Erik A. Mattila
> I think you will find that he used 'island' in the sense of an
> isolated territory and not necessarily a body of land surrounded by
> water. This was a common manner of using the term in ancient times.
Just for a side-dish of trivia, Eric - in 1970 during the Indian
occupation of Alcratraz Island, Peter BlueCloud (a Mohawk) published an
essay "Alcatraz is not an Island." Shortly after, Darryl Babe Wilson, a
Pit River (AKA Achomawi, NE California) wrote an essay "Pit River +IS+
an Island."
Erik