Bison hair found in Greenland

8 views
Skip to first unread message

Inger E

unread,
Feb 7, 2002, 7:45:48 AM2/7/02
to
Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't
see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short Essay.

BISON OR BEAR HAIR
© Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
BACKGROUND
Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
Bay.

BISON
Bison belongs to the class Mammalia, order Artiodactyla, family Bocidae.
There are different undergroups under the subgroup with the same name as the
family name Bocidae.
The European Bison have or should we say had two lines, one is now gone:
* Bison bonasus caucasicus (now gone)
* Bison bonasus bonasus

The later weren't seen at all in today's Scandinavia and the Baltic's in the
Medieval Age.

The contacts between Scandinavia and Caucasus where Bison bonasus causasicus
lived where broken around 1050 AD when the Viking Age ended.

The contacts between Scandinavia and the Hungarian Pusta where the later
lived in small groups during Medieval time were broken from around 1100 AD
to the end of the 14th Century due to two main reasons:

I:
The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old contacts
between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.

II:
The Osman Empire had around 1300 expanded and incooperated among other
Hungary in their desire to make the European people Muslims. The Osman
Empire existed into modern days.

The furtrade in the 12th-14th Century went from Greenland to Norway and the
Orkney Islands not in the opposite direction.(ref. Diplomas dealing with
cargo from Greenland).

All this leads up to the simple conclusion: It' s highly unlikely that Bison
hair found in Greenland could and would have been from any Bison living in
Caucasus or on the Hungarian Pusta provided that we are talking about rope
and hair dated between 1100 and 1500.

BEAR
The only alikeness between any bear and a bison is that they both belong to
the class Mammalia. The bear belongs to the order Carnivora, family Ursidae,
subfamily Ursinae and species Ursus arctos. In this group, the Ursus arctos
there are several different undergroups:

One is the Brown bear(German " Braunbär") living in Northern Europe. The
Brown bear weight up to 250-350 kilogram and can be up to 2 metres high.

One other is the Grizzly bear living in North America. The Grizzly bear can
up to 2 metres 80 centimetres high, the shoulders can be up to 1,5 metres(1
metre 50 centimetres), the weight for the Grizzly bear is normally up to 780
kilogram - the Yukon Grizzly bear weight less 140-150 kilogram in average.

There is no alikeness between a Brown bear hair and a bison hair, thus it's
almost impossible to take one for the other.

Further more: the Brown bear lives in Scandinavia and we never have seen any
indication that hairs from Brown bear was used to make ropes. Thus it's
highly unlikely that any ropes made of Brown bear hair from Scandinavia
would and could have been found in Greenland.

CONCLUSION
All bison hair found in rope and or free in Greenland must be belived to
have North American origin. There is only two ways it can have been
transported to Greenland:

* The Norse hunted for furs in North America and among the Mamals they
hunted we have reason to believe that bison was one.

* Merchandising or trade via several hands.

Inger E Johansson
© Gothenburg February 2002


Kel Rekuta

unread,
Feb 7, 2002, 10:18:08 AM2/7/02
to
Inger E wrote:

an interesting article, unfortunately without references.
Could you please add some?

>
> Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't
> see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short Essay.

This observation was based on a discussion elsewhere? I must
have missed it in SHM.

>
> BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> © Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> BACKGROUND
> Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
> the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
> Bay.

Would that have been Plains or Woodland Bison? The range of
such animals was quite different. I'm curious as to where
such information is published.

>
> BISON
> Bison belongs to the class Mammalia, order Artiodactyla, family Bocidae.
> There are different undergroups under the subgroup with the same name as the
> family name Bocidae.
> The European Bison have or should we say had two lines, one is now gone:
> * Bison bonasus caucasicus (now gone)
> * Bison bonasus bonasus

I understand they were extinct well before the Iron Age. Not
really my area of study though.

>
> The later weren't seen at all in today's Scandinavia and the Baltic's in the
> Medieval Age.
>
> The contacts between Scandinavia and Caucasus where Bison bonasus causasicus
> lived where broken around 1050 AD when the Viking Age ended.

Really? Didn't the Hansa have substantial trade of fur, et
cetera from central Asia throughout the Baltic region? The
Scandinavian peoples certainly continued to trade with the
Hansa until its economic decline in the 16th Century.

>
> The contacts between Scandinavia and the Hungarian Pusta where the later
> lived in small groups during Medieval time were broken from around 1100 AD
> to the end of the 14th Century due to two main reasons:
>
> I:
> The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old contacts
> between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
>
> II:
> The Osman Empire had around 1300 expanded and incooperated among other
> Hungary in their desire to make the European people Muslims. The Osman
> Empire existed into modern days.
>
> The furtrade in the 12th-14th Century went from Greenland to Norway and the
> Orkney Islands not in the opposite direction.(ref. Diplomas dealing with
> cargo from Greenland).
>
> All this leads up to the simple conclusion: It' s highly unlikely that Bison
> hair found in Greenland could and would have been from any Bison living in
> Caucasus or on the Hungarian Pusta provided that we are talking about rope
> and hair dated between 1100 and 1500.
>

A simple explanation would be to question the origin of the
rope.

Ships need a lot of rope. Rope can be fabricated from all
sorts of fibre. Whether the rope found in Greenland contains
some fibre from the Baltic or Caucasus is not as relevant as
the dating of the rope. Rope has a relatively short life
span, perhaps two generations. If the archaeological find
has been dated after trade with Iceland ceased in the 14thC
(?) shortly before the demise of the colony, then you can
safely assume the fibre didn't originate in the East.

However, there are references to Greenlanders trading ropes
and cables for Norwegian goods. (see references below)

> BEAR
> The only alikeness between any bear and a bison is that they both belong to
> the class Mammalia. The bear belongs to the order Carnivora, family Ursidae,
> subfamily Ursinae and species Ursus arctos. In this group, the Ursus arctos
> there are several different undergroups:
>
> One is the Brown bear(German " Braunbär") living in Northern Europe. The
> Brown bear weight up to 250-350 kilogram and can be up to 2 metres high.

Now this is what first caught my eye....

>
> One other is the Grizzly bear living in North America. The Grizzly bear can
> up to 2 metres 80 centimetres high, the shoulders can be up to 1,5 metres(1
> metre 50 centimetres), the weight for the Grizzly bear is normally up to 780
> kilogram - the Yukon Grizzly bear weight less 140-150 kilogram in average.

Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
St. Lawrence basin.

There are references to the trade of polar bear cubs and
adult pelts to Europe. (Gwyn Jones, A History of the
Vikings, p293. & Else Roesdahl, The Vikings, p272.)

>
> There is no alikeness between a Brown bear hair and a bison hair, thus it's
> almost impossible to take one for the other.
>
> Further more: the Brown bear lives in Scandinavia and we never have seen any
> indication that hairs from Brown bear was used to make ropes. Thus it's
> highly unlikely that any ropes made of Brown bear hair from Scandinavia
> would and could have been found in Greenland.
>
> CONCLUSION
> All bison hair found in rope and or free in Greenland must be belived to
> have North American origin. There is only two ways it can have been
> transported to Greenland:
>
> * The Norse hunted for furs in North America and among the Mamals they
> hunted we have reason to believe that bison was one.
>
> * Merchandising or trade via several hands.
>
> Inger E Johansson
> © Gothenburg February 2002

Both reasonable conclusions based on extensive written
evidence. But where has the confusion of bear and bison hair
been discussed?

Kel Rekuta

John G Harrison

unread,
Feb 7, 2002, 11:37:32 AM2/7/02
to

"Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3C629AB0...@sympatico.ca...

> Inger E wrote:
>
> an interesting article, unfortunately without references.
> Could you please add some?
>
> >
> > Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who
can't
> > see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short
Essay.
>
> This observation was based on a discussion elsewhere? I must
> have missed it in SHM.
>
> >
> > BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> > © Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> > BACKGROUND
> > Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated
to
> > the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> > contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> > during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of
Hudson
> > Bay.
>
Four hairs do not make a rope. Contamination etc. What are the sources?
Regards
John


Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 7, 2002, 2:35:32 PM2/7/02
to

Not just "four hairs". Inger originally wrote:

"Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs,
dated to the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen

questions ... "

She doesn't actually say how much bison hair there was in the rope.

A Google search on 'bison hair rope greenland' produces a number of
hits including http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
which carries a brief discussion of the find. From the text, what was
found was a rope made of bison hair, not just a rope containing bison
hair.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Gilmore, Phyllis

unread,
Feb 7, 2002, 4:00:14 PM2/7/02
to
In article <3C629AB0...@sympatico.ca>,
Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> Inger E wrote:

> > BEAR
> > The only alikeness between any bear and a bison is that they both belong to
> > the class Mammalia. The bear belongs to the order Carnivora, family Ursidae,
> > subfamily Ursinae and species Ursus arctos. In this group, the Ursus arctos
> > there are several different undergroups:
> >
> > One is the Brown bear(German " Braunbär") living in Northern Europe. The
> > Brown bear weight up to 250-350 kilogram and can be up to 2 metres high.
>
> Now this is what first caught my eye....
>
> >
> > One other is the Grizzly bear living in North America. The Grizzly bear can
> > up to 2 metres 80 centimetres high, the shoulders can be up to 1,5 metres(1
> > metre 50 centimetres), the weight for the Grizzly bear is normally up to 780
> > kilogram - the Yukon Grizzly bear weight less 140-150 kilogram in average.
>
> Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
> the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
> indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
> northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
> and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
> St. Lawrence basin.

Webster's Collegiate, 10th edition:

"brown bear: any of several bears predomininantly borwn in color that
are sometimes considered a single species (Usus arctos) including the
grizzly bear and that formerly inhabited Western North America from the
barrens of Alaska to northern Mexico and much of Europe and Asia but are
now much restricted in range."

"grizzly bear: a very large brown bear (Ursos arctos horribilis) of the
uplands of western No. America."

It's that "western" part i find interesting in both cases.

Phyllis

David Debono

unread,
Feb 7, 2002, 4:52:32 PM2/7/02
to
I have an essay called An Elk by An Elk....etc etc etc

(c) Monty Python

David D.
The Mediaeval Combat Society
The Historical Reenactment Web Site
http://www.montacute.net/histrenact/welcome.htm

Michael Zalar

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 1:08:36 AM2/8/02
to
Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> > © Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> > BACKGROUND
> > Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
> > the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> > contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> > during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
> > Bay.
>
> Would that have been Plains or Woodland Bison? The range of
> such animals was quite different. I'm curious as to where
> such information is published.
>

re: bison range.
The following websites give a fairly good idea of where the bison were
in North America

http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html
and
http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp

Inger E

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 1:59:20 AM2/8/02
to
John and Kel,
it's 07.56 and I am on my way to work, thus I can't send you all information
directly. I am sorry.

If you go to http://www.google.com and write following words in the
searchline you will find more, but not all. The rest I will add in a mail to
the group later today. OK?

searchwords:

Norse yarn Canada Greenland artifact

_______
You don't need to write a "+" in between the words. AND: Don't write a "+"
in between if you aren't writing from a Scandinavian or an English computer,
there is a bug in some of the other languages transcription of a "+".

Inger E

Inger E


"John G Harrison" <jo...@abercromby14.freeserve.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:a3uah6$888$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...

Inger E

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 2:05:01 AM2/8/02
to
Phillis,
may I call you that, first of all I would like to say I alway find your
lines interesting. Hope you don't mind.

You are correct or should I say your ref. is correct, but the problem is
that the hair from a Scandinavian bear doesn't actually look like the hair
from a grizzly even if they both today are talked about as Ursos arctos. The
problem here in this group and elsewhere have been that there still are
scientists, ok no zoologists or biologists, who actually believe that it's
impossible to see the difference between a brown bear hair and bison. There
even have been a mail from a person who's education I don't know anything
about suggesting that the brown bear and the bison belonged to the same
family subgroup etc......

Inger E


"Gilmore, Phyllis" <gil...@dcmail1.rand.org> skrev i meddelandet
news:gilmore-62E2D2...@lumberjack.rand.org...

Inger E

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 2:07:05 AM2/8/02
to
David,
you may be found of Monty Python, who wouldn't be in a kindergarten? Never
the less if you haven't anything positive to add to the bison hair
discussion I suggest that you return to your play-toys. I know I am rude,
but you yourself are the same bringing Monty Python into this question.

Inger E
"David Debono" <david....@montacute.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:gnt56u8esnndek8gb...@4ax.com...

Mike Cleven

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 4:33:23 AM2/8/02
to

Yes, but if the theories about the Northwest Passage being open in those
times _were_ true then there _are_ grizzlies, a few at least, as far as
the northern end of the Mackenzie Range; probably pretty competitive for
turf with polar bears, but still a possibility......grizzlies range out
onto the Prairies near the headwaters of the Bow, Athapaska,
Saskatchewan etc. Rivers, which were trade routes, as well as navigable
for much of their distance (with portaging) for a very long ways from
Lake Winnipeg....

--
Mike Cleven
http://www.cayoosh.net (early BC history)
http://www.hiyu.net (Cayoosh Jargon phrasebook/history)

Mike Cleven

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 4:33:55 AM2/8/02
to

small correction: I'm not sure that's what the range I'm thinking of is
called; it's the boundary between the NWT and the Yukon Territory.

Mike Cleven

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 4:34:55 AM2/8/02
to

David Debono wrote:

You're no relation to Edward deBono, are you? The psychological
theorist?

Inger E. Johansson

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 4:53:56 AM2/8/02
to
"Mike Cleven" <iro...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:3C62F2DC...@bigfoot.com...

>
>
> Mike Cleven wrote:
> >
> > "Gilmore, Phyllis" wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <3C629AB0...@sympatico.ca>,
> > > Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote:

<snip>


> > >
> > > It's that "western" part i find interesting in both cases.
> >
> > Yes, but if the theories about the Northwest Passage being open in those
> > times _were_ true then there _are_ grizzlies, a few at least, as far as
> > the northern end of the Mackenzie Range;
>
> small correction: I'm not sure that's what the range I'm thinking of is
> called; it's the boundary between the NWT and the Yukon Territory.
>
> probably pretty competitive for
> > turf with polar bears, but still a possibility......grizzlies range out
> > onto the Prairies near the headwaters of the Bow, Athapaska,
> > Saskatchewan etc. Rivers, which were trade routes, as well as navigable
> > for much of their distance (with portaging) for a very long ways from
> > Lake Winnipeg....


Mike,
would you actually say that it's possible to make a mistake between for
exampl a Yokon bear and a bison bear's hair?

That I very much doubt. bear hear and bison hair aren't alike at all if
you have access to a good microscope, that's what I have been told by a
friend of mine who use to look for different types of hairs on textiles
to identify criminals. That sounds ok to me because if it's possible,
which it is, to distinct between a white poodlehair and a white Bisson
fraiche's hair and distinct them both from a white husky than I would be
very much disappointed if a scholar of the fack wouldn't have knowledge
enough to see what can be seen in broad daylight when it comes to bear
hair and bison hair. Wouldn't you be?

One other thing,
in the western area you are discussing above films usually show other
interesting "things" in the terrain. Thus I would like to know if you by
any chance know how old the custom is to mark the border between two
group's land with stones. Is it known to have existed since "ancient"
age or is it a late custom?

Inger E

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

erilar

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 12:01:43 PM2/8/02
to
In article <g7l56ukf0m5h359qs...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens
<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:

> A Google search on 'bison hair rope greenland' produces a number of
> hits including http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> which carries a brief discussion of the find. From the text, what was
> found was a rope made of bison hair, not just a rope containing bison
> hair.

Rope is portable...

--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka erilar)

What do you mean, too many books??
------------------------------------------------
Erilar's Cave Annex: http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo

David Debono

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 12:54:40 PM2/8/02
to
On Fri, 08 Feb 2002 09:34:55 GMT, Mike Cleven <iro...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

>
>
>David Debono wrote:
>
>You're no relation to Edward deBono, are you? The psychological
>theorist?

No we have the intellect to spell our surname correctly :-) :-)
(You may infur that I have been asked this once or twice before!)

Actually I have read a couple of his books so long ago that I can't
remember what they were about.

Take care

Inger E

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 2:55:33 PM2/8/02
to

"erilar" <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
news:erilarloFRY-DDB3...@news.airstreamcomm.net...

> In article <g7l56ukf0m5h359qs...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens
> <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > A Google search on 'bison hair rope greenland' produces a number of
> > hits including http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> > which carries a brief discussion of the find. From the text, what was
> > found was a rope made of bison hair, not just a rope containing bison
> > hair.
>
> Rope is portable...

Yes it is, that's no doubt about it. But, neither the Norse Vikings(695-1100
AD) nor the later Norse in Greenland(1100-1529 AD) had the habit to make
ropes of bison hair.....

on the other hand if we look at supposed traded gods such as a large iron
cooking-pot no one could make a Viking or a later Norse trade that
either......

if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have taken
at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more than
likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and Hudson
Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
Canada....

Btw - have you read my lines re. Canade/Canada written in 1360's document? I
guess there will be much more out in the open than anyone can, could and
would have expected...

Inger E

Hammerstad

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 6:40:59 PM2/8/02
to
From my Norwegian dictionary (big!) on the European bison: "In pre-medieval
(oldtiden) and medieval times common in the woods of Central Europe, ca. year
1000 it existed as far North as Østergøtland." As Inger will confirm,
Østergøtand is in Sweden and year 1000 is later than the Bronze Age. But I doubt
she'll provide a reference to contradict the dictionary.

Then again if Inger's reason for posting on the Greenland rope possibly
containing bison hair has the same source as the link Eric Stevens found, this
discussion is very premature. Why not just wait until the analysis of the rope
is completed, which should also show the geographic source of the hair.

Unless Inger can come up with a reference to the result of the analysis having
been done (its probably not according to Eric's link) why not let this matter
lie - just write it of as due to her usual compulsive posting.

Kel Rekuta

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 9:46:12 PM2/8/02
to
Inger E wrote:
>
> "erilar" <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
> news:erilarloFRY-DDB3...@news.airstreamcomm.net...
> > In article <g7l56ukf0m5h359qs...@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens
> > <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > A Google search on 'bison hair rope greenland' produces a number of
> > > hits including http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> > > which carries a brief discussion of the find. From the text, what was
> > > found was a rope made of bison hair, not just a rope containing bison
> > > hair.
> >
> > Rope is portable...
>
> Yes it is, that's no doubt about it. But, neither the Norse Vikings(695-1100
> AD) nor the later Norse in Greenland(1100-1529 AD) had the habit to make
> ropes of bison hair.....


As the supply of hemp might have been limited in such a
northern climate, what did they make rope out of? My limited
sources claim the Greenlanders exported rope as well as the
fur, ivory and timber we expect to see. Would they not have
used any available fibre to twist rope and line? Bison hair
is quite long (personal experience) and might make
reasonable rope. Same thing with musk ox hair. Perhaps the
Greenlanders traded with the Dorset Inuit for that as well
as fur and ivory?


>
> on the other hand if we look at supposed traded gods such as a large iron
> cooking-pot no one could make a Viking or a later Norse trade that
> either......
>
> if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
> from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have taken
> at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more than
> likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and Hudson
> Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
> Canada....

Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
Could it be that the Greenlanders, who were later accused of
having "gone native", were trading with the locals? As you
have noted, a lot of hunters were required to collect that
much ivory.

Alex

unread,
Feb 8, 2002, 11:45:00 PM2/8/02
to
David Debono <david....@montacute.net> wrote in message news:<gnt56u8esnndek8gb...@4ax.com>...

> I have an essay called An Elk by An Elk....etc etc etc
>
> (c) Monty Python
>
> On Thu, 07 Feb 2002 12:45:48 GMT, "Inger E"
> <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote:
>
> >Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't
> >see the difference between Bisons and Bears

The difference between Bulls (of any type) and Bears is quite obvious
for
anybody who from time to time pays attention to the financial markets.

>I have written this short Essay.
> >
> >BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> >© Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> >BACKGROUND
> >Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
> >the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> >contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> >during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
> >Bay.
> >
> >BISON
> >Bison belongs to the class Mammalia, order Artiodactyla, family Bocidae.
> >There are different undergroups under the subgroup with the same name as the
> >family name Bocidae.
> >The European Bison have or should we say had two lines, one is now gone:
> >* Bison bonasus caucasicus (now gone)
> >* Bison bonasus bonasus

This is probably what's called "zubr".

As for the 'caucasicus', was it 'tur'? (a big bull with the impressive
horns and not so impressive fur) it did not survive.

> >
> >The later weren't seen at all in today's Scandinavia and the Baltic's in the
> >Medieval Age.

If she is referencing zubr, this depends on a definition of
"Baltic's".
Today the main habitats are in the forests of Belorussia and Poland.
In the
middle ages habitat was considerably wider. Small wonder that they are
not
seen in today's Scandinavia: by the 1st quarter of XX they could be
found only
in the zoos (at lowest point they had been down to 48 species). By the
80's
this number increased to appr. 2,000 (up to 800 in SU). Poland being,
AFAIK,
a "Baltic State" was and still is one of the main habitats.


> >
> >The contacts between Scandinavia and Caucasus where Bison bonasus causasicus
> >lived where broken around 1050 AD when the Viking Age ended.
> >
> >The contacts between Scandinavia and the Hungarian Pusta where the later
> >lived in small groups during Medieval time were broken from around 1100 AD
> >to the end of the 14th Century due to two main reasons:
> >
> >I:
> >The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's

AFAIK, direction from Scandinavia to Hungary is rather "South" then
"West"
(Budapest being appr as much to the "West" as Stokholm and
considerably to
the South-East from Copehhagen).

> and after 1100 the old contacts
> >between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> >interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.

Interesting. Their raids to the west ended in 1050's and at the same
time
their interest toward the East ceased to exists. Was a previous
statement
a typo?

> >
> >II:
> >The Osman Empire had around 1300

There was a small Ottoman state at this time but it was not an Empire.
They did not even cross Bosphorus at this time.

>expanded and incooperated among other
> >Hungary

A 1st noticeable encounter with Hungarians happened in 1363. Serb and
Hungarian
army moved on Adrianople and had been defeated by Ottomans on r.
Maritza.
Hungary was not "incooperated" (probably "conquered"?) until 1526
after the
battle at Mohacs.
I suspect that by this time the vikings had been safely extinct. Don't
know
what this have to do with the bisons.


>in their desire to make the European people Muslims.

... and to kill all the bisons. This actually was their main task
because
when Hungary was freed from the Ottomans there were still plenty of
Christians
around but (AFAIK) no bisons.

>The Osman
> >Empire existed into modern days.

Sure. There were no bisons to attack them from behind....


> >BEAR
> >The only alikeness between any bear and a bison is that they both belong to
> >the class Mammalia.

Nonsense. Both have four legs, one head, teeth, and fur. None of them
(AFAIK)
uses fork and knife.


> >
> >One is the Brown bear(German " Braunbär") living in Northern Europe. The
> >Brown bear weight up to 250-350 kilogram and can be up to 2 metres high.
> >
> >One other is the Grizzly bear living in North America. The Grizzly bear can
> >up to 2 metres 80 centimetres high, the shoulders can be up to 1,5 metres(1
> >metre 50 centimetres), the weight for the Grizzly bear is normally up to 780
> >kilogram - the Yukon Grizzly bear weight less 140-150 kilogram in average.
> >

From above one may conclude that there are only 2 types of the bears.
IIRC, there are 7 different types of them bears (one lives in the
Southern America), including a white bear who lives in Arctica. This
has nothing to
do with the bisons because all of them had been safely digested by the
Ottomans.

Inger E

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 12:08:21 AM2/9/02
to

"Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> skrev i meddelandet
news:3C648D74...@sympatico.ca...

I have been going thru documentation from harbors where the boats arrived, I
haven't seen any rope ref. Would you please send me a link or a ref to the
source(-s) you mention?

>
>
> >
> > on the other hand if we look at supposed traded gods such as a large
iron
> > cooking-pot no one could make a Viking or a later Norse trade that
> > either......
> >
> > if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
> > from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have
taken
> > at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more
than
> > likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and
Hudson
> > Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
> > Canada....
>
> Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?

Well it is. The problem is not that there aren't a copy of an intersting
annal from one of the monestries. The problem is that when it was returned
from Greenland in 1472(!) the original's where abouts the last century
haven't been located. The annal had been written in an earlier minoritian
monestry which in the end had been a Birgittiner monestry. the Swedish
Nobleman who carried it with him to Munkeliv and than on to Vadstena.


> Could it be that the Greenlanders, who were later accused of
> having "gone native", were trading with the locals? As you
> have noted, a lot of hunters were required to collect that
> much ivory.

I don't think that thats the way the main ivory were "collected". I am
pretty sure that several Norse men married locals - Gisele told us in the
group last year that Norse mail DNA can be seen from about 1100 in the later
Dorset population.

Inger E

Post Scriptum.
Do you have access to Deslien's map with the Norse settlements marked? If
not send me a private line and I will send it to you.


Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 3:25:03 AM2/9/02
to
On Fri, 08 Feb 2002 21:46:12 -0500, Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

>> if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
>> from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have taken
>> at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more than
>> likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and Hudson
>> Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
>> Canada....
>
>Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
>Could it be that the Greenlanders, who were later accused of
>having "gone native", were trading with the locals? As you
>have noted, a lot of hunters were required to collect that
>much ivory.

I think there may be mention - at least Farley Mowat in the 'The
Farfarers' seemed to know quite a bit about it. I haven't tried to
follow up his sources.

As to why you think there is no mention in the surviving literature -
the sagas make up the bulk of the surviving literature, as opposed to
the surving written records. The sagas were generally written up to
several hundred years after the events described and were written by
Christians who had a vested interest in blowing their own trumpet.

There are all kinds of theories including some that the Greenlanders
who were later accused of having "gone native" were the natives with
whom everybody was trading. I have even seen it suggested that the
'skraelings' generally despised and hunted by the Greenland Norse were
Greenlanders who had "gone native".

I don't give much credence to that but it does suggest that last but
there is not necessarily a reliable correspondence between the events
of the time and the sagas, many of which were produced as belated PR
blurbs for the families concerned.


Regards,

Eric Stevens

Svein Kjærevik

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 4:21:59 AM2/9/02
to

--
______________________________________
Svein Kjærevik

Kjærevik Båtservice
5636 Varaldsøy
Norway

E-Mail: kja...@online.no
______________________________________
"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
news:99298.24617$l93.4...@newsb.telia.net...


>
> >
> > Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
>
> Well it is. The problem is not that there aren't a copy of an intersting
> annal from one of the monestries. The problem is that when it was returned
> from Greenland in 1472(!) the original's where abouts the last century
> haven't been located. The annal had been written in an earlier minoritian
> monestry which in the end had been a Birgittiner monestry. the Swedish
> Nobleman who carried it with him to Munkeliv and than on to Vadstena.

This requires an explanation.
A Greenland annal?
A Swedish nobleman??
A Greenland voyage in 1472???
The last documented return sailing from Greenland happened in
1410 when Einride returned. Any contact beyond that must be new pieces of
history! Well, it happends from time to time.
Regards, Svein.
>
.
>
> Inger E
>

Svein Kjærevik

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 4:22:00 AM2/9/02
to

--
______________________________________
Svein Kjærevik

Kjærevik Båtservice
5636 Varaldsøy
Norway

E-Mail: kja...@online.no
______________________________________
"Hammerstad" <eg...@start.no> wrote in message
news:3C64629E...@start.no...


.
>
> Then again if Inger's reason for posting on the Greenland rope possibly
> containing bison hair has the same source as the link Eric Stevens found,
this
> discussion is very premature. Why not just wait until the analysis of the
rope
> is completed, which should also show the geographic source of the hair.

The rope of bisonhair discovered in Greenland is also
mentioned in Heyerdal/ Lilliestrøm 1999. I assume it refers to the same
finding.


>
> Unless Inger can come up with a reference to the result of the analysis
having
> been done (its probably not according to Eric's link) why not let this
matter
> lie - just write it of as due to her usual compulsive posting.

Are somebody working on the matter? It should definately be
possible to confirm if the hair really origin from the NA Bison.
Regards, Svein.
>
>
>


Svein Kjærevik

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 4:22:00 AM2/9/02
to

--
______________________________________
Svein Kjærevik

Kjærevik Båtservice
5636 Varaldsøy
Norway

E-Mail: kja...@online.no
______________________________________
"Michael Zalar" <m_z...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a458909b.02020...@posting.google.com...


>
> re: bison range.
> The following websites give a fairly good idea of where the bison were
> in North America
>
> http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html
> and
> http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp

One map borders the bison area to the shores of Lake Manitoba.
The other one seems to include the land between L.M. and L. Winnipeg.
Perhaps the bison did not accept strict borders. The question must then be
if the Greenlanders explored that far and returned to tell about the
magnificent land they had discovered?. If they did, it is understandable
that they finally left Greenland. The land has proven it's qualities - it
has been the new homeland for thousands of Icelanders for more than hundred
years.
Regards, Svein.


Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 4:32:12 AM2/9/02
to
On Sat, 09 Feb 2002 09:21:59 GMT, "Svein Kjærevik" <kja...@online.no>
wrote:

>"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
>news:99298.24617$l93.4...@newsb.telia.net...
>>
> > >
>> > Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
>>
>> Well it is. The problem is not that there aren't a copy of an intersting
>> annal from one of the monestries. The problem is that when it was returned
>> from Greenland in 1472(!) the original's where abouts the last century
>> haven't been located. The annal had been written in an earlier minoritian
>> monestry which in the end had been a Birgittiner monestry. the Swedish
>> Nobleman who carried it with him to Munkeliv and than on to Vadstena.
>
> This requires an explanation.
>A Greenland annal?
>A Swedish nobleman??
>A Greenland voyage in 1472???
> The last documented return sailing from Greenland happened in
>1410 when Einride returned. Any contact beyond that must be new pieces of
>history! Well, it happends from time to time.
>Regards, Svein.
>>

Not really a 'new piece of history'. Merely a little known piece of
history. I will see if I can dig out some references.


Regards,

Eric Stevens

Søren Larsen

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 4:26:20 AM2/9/02
to

"Kel Rekuta" <kre...@sympatico.ca> skrev i en meddelelse news:3C648D74...@sympatico.ca...


> As the supply of hemp might have been limited in such a
> northern climate, what did they make rope out of? My limited
> sources claim the Greenlanders exported rope as well as the
> fur, ivory and timber we expect to see. Would they not have
> used any available fibre to twist rope and line? Bison hair
> is quite long (personal experience) and might make
> reasonable rope. Same thing with musk ox hair. Perhaps the
> Greenlanders traded with the Dorset Inuit for that as well
> as fur and ivory?
>

Walrus hide was used to make ropes.


>
> >
> > on the other hand if we look at supposed traded gods such as a large iron
> > cooking-pot no one could make a Viking or a later Norse trade that
> > either......
> >
> > if we add to that the the amount of walruse-horns landed only in England
> > from Norse ports and Orkney were so high some years that it would have taken
> > at least 150 men to hunt the walruse delivered for export, it's more than
> > likely that the Norse not only had settlements between Labrador and Hudson
> > Bay but that they had hunting stations in several islands in the Arctic
> > Canada....
>
> Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
> Could it be that the Greenlanders, who were later accused of
> having "gone native", were trading with the locals? As you
> have noted, a lot of hunters were required to collect that
> much ivory.

The Walrus was hunted in Nordsetr in the breeding season
while the males are are gathered in colonies and are territorial.
You just pluck them like mushrooms-or maybe this is sinplification ;-)

Cheers
Soren Larsen

Søren Larsen

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 5:03:42 AM2/9/02
to

"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
>
> I:
> The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old contacts

> between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.

Someone should have told Valdemar II. Then maybe he wouldn't have taken
Estonia in 1219 and his decendants might not have kept it for 150 y. before selling
it to the German order.

Cheers
Soren Larsen


Inger E

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 11:08:07 AM2/9/02
to

"Svein Kjærevik" <kja...@online.no> skrev i meddelandet
news:XS598.2914$HL2....@news2.ulv.nextra.no...

>
>
> --
> ______________________________________
> Svein Kjærevik
>
> Kjærevik Båtservice
> 5636 Varaldsøy
> Norway
>
> E-Mail: kja...@online.no
> ______________________________________
> "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message
> news:99298.24617$l93.4...@newsb.telia.net...
> >
> > >
> > > Why is there no mention of them in the surviving literature?
> >
> > Well it is. The problem is not that there aren't a copy of an intersting
> > annal from one of the monestries. The problem is that when it was
returned
> > from Greenland in 1472(!) the original's where abouts the last century
> > haven't been located. The annal had been written in an earlier
minoritian
> > monestry which in the end had been a Birgittiner monestry. the Swedish
> > Nobleman who carried it with him to Munkeliv and than on to Vadstena.
>
> This requires an explanation.
> A Greenland annal?
Yes, the first time I saw it mentioned(before I started to look for copied
information and tried to follow it's way back to Euorpe) was in a book
written by a Danish Archaeolog in 1920's

> A Swedish nobleman??

Yes. I have his name - but I don't have sort out his profession - was he a
representative for the Birgittiner mother monestry in Vadstena or was he a
representative for the Danish King in 1470's that's what I am not sure of. I
know which ship he sailed with, and that he returned. I have the name of 5
persons on the ship but those five names I haven't been able to establish if
they all returned. I know that the annal were at Munkeliv and was supposed
to be given to Vadstena, but that's not confirmed that it was. If it is the
original annal - not the copied documents into a copybook - might still
exist, it might have been taken by Gustav Vasa when he took all valuable
things from our monestries and later disappeared when The Royal Castle Three
Crowns cut fire ..... I can't say for sure for the moment.


> A Greenland voyage in 1472???

One of three in the 1470's which I have had confirmed. There might have been
two more.

> The last documented return sailing from Greenland happened in
> 1410 when Einride returned. Any contact beyond that must be new pieces of
history!

Well if you read thru the bibliographies of King Hans- Kristian Tyrann you
will find ref. made by Scholars in the first 40 years of the 20's Century. I
found my "favorite" book at an Antiquavariate - a certain Prof Weibull had
written his name inside it in the 1920's.

Inger E

Inger E

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 11:13:30 AM2/9/02
to

"Søren Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> skrev i meddelandet
news:a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de...

Sören,
as you are aware of the Swedes and the Danes weren't exactly friends between
1112 - 1319..... Valdemar II had better contacts with Estonia, or should we
be fair to say part of Estonia than the Swedish Jarls.... but the Swedish
Jarls of the Folkunga Dynasty hadn't only to fight Russian folkgroups they
also had at least two fights with Valdemar's people and with the "German
Orden" back in those days. That's was one of the reasons that the Swedes and
the Norse turned westward..... not to mention the fact that from 1100 the
Swedish Church grow closer to the Papal Church than it had been in the
9th-10th Century....

Inger E

>
> Cheers
> Soren Larsen
>
>
>
>
>
>


Alex

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 12:30:19 PM2/9/02
to
"S?en Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> wrote in message news:<a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de>...

Or to Alexander Nevsky who got his nickname for defeating Swedes on R. Neva
in 1240. :-)

IMHO, there are two major problems with I's "logic":

(1) The bison-like animals (zubres) had been widely available in the areas,
which were very close to the Baltic coast (Russia, Poland, Lithuania). No need
to look as far as Hungary.

(2) Regardless 'viking' (in a narrow meaning of this word) activities, there
always had been relations between the Scandinavian states and their neighbours
(Hanseatic cities, Poland, Novgorod, etc.). And if zubr's "byproducts" were
available to these neighbours (they were), they could easily find their way
to the Scandinavian countries.

Combination of these two factors makes all speculations about the travels
to America simply unnecessary (they may or may not exist but they did not
have to exist to get access to 'bizon' hair).

Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 5:43:37 PM2/9/02
to

I haven't really started looking yet but I have found reference to the
Danish-Norwegian-Portuguese expedition of 1473 involving Joanno vas
Corte Real.


Regards,

Eric Stevens

Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 5:43:38 PM2/9/02
to

I think it all hangs on whether or not it is possible to identify the
particular species of bison.

The URL I previously cited
http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
the idea of a European bison.


Regards,

Eric Stevens

Hammerstad

unread,
Feb 9, 2002, 6:52:24 PM2/9/02
to
Eric Stevens wrote:

>
> The URL I previously cited
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
> appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
> the idea of a European bison.
>

Why not ask her, she is a member of the staff of the institution which deals with archaeology in Greenland:
http://www.sila.dk/ Frankly I would believe that finding the source of the possible bison hair would not be on a
high priority list of things to do.

Otherwise the bison hair issue was flogged to death in the thread you had one reference to, see:
http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/ This is the archive of the Old Norse Net, and most (if not all) of the "Norse in
North America" issues that Inger and others bring up here have also had a flogging there previously.


Inger E

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 12:23:52 AM2/10/02
to

"Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:f8e58188.02020...@posting.google.com...

> "S?en Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> wrote in message
news:<a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de>...
> > "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
> > >
> > > I:
> > > The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old
contacts
> > > between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> > > interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
> >
> > Someone should have told Valdemar II. Then maybe he wouldn't have taken
> > Estonia in 1219 and his decendants might not have kept it for 150 y.
before selling
> > it to the German order.
>
> Or to Alexander Nevsky who got his nickname for defeating Swedes on R.
Neva
> in 1240. :-)

That Alexander Nevsky defeated Swedes or should I say a member of the old
Varjagan Dynasty the one we in Sweden calls the Folkunga Dynasty on River
Neva in 1240 is correct. The Bishop of Linköping had as you might know a
fortress there up to 1240. I am not talking about Sveaborg, btw. The Bishop
of Linköping was brother of the King and had a son Ulf who participated in
the battles. Ulf is remembered in Russian sources and in Swedish sources
among other thing for that battle - you see back than a jarl of Finland
owned the landarea you are discussing. It didn't belong to Russia, nor to
Estonia in those days AND there were no Bisons there. Of course not, in
Russian sources as well as in other the closest Bison at that time were in
Caucasus.

But then again I believe you haven't had time to read the Russian sources,
have you?

>
> IMHO, there are two major problems with I's "logic":
>
> (1) The bison-like animals (zubres) had been widely available in the
areas,
> which were very close to the Baltic coast (Russia, Poland, Lithuania).

Alex they weren't in the Baltics in 13th Century or for what that matter in
the 14th Century!!! Do your homework better.
<snip>

>
> (2) Regardless 'viking' (in a narrow meaning of this word) activities,
there
> always had been relations between the Scandinavian states and their
neighbours
> (Hanseatic cities, Poland, Novgorod, etc.). And if zubr's "byproducts"
were
> available to these neighbours (they were), they could easily find their
way
> to the Scandinavian countries.

Speculations about bisons living in the Baltic Sea area during the period we
call Medieval Age, from 1100 AD btw here in Sweden, is one of the worst
fanasty told and only show the person's lack of knowledge of the History in
this area.


> Combination of these two factors makes all speculations about the travels
> to America simply unnecessary (they may or may not exist but they did not
> have to exist to get access to 'bizon' hair).

Alex,
for your information the furtrade went from Greenland to Bergen, Orkney,
Tönsberg and than on to Hull, Lynn and London. Not the other way round. And
the boats that sailed weren't Swedish boats - they were Norse boats and
Orkney boats....

Good Night Alex,
sweet dreams but remember to take a better look in the books before you
relate the dreams to the group next time.

Inger E

Inger E

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 10:47:15 AM2/10/02
to

"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:h86b6usjgi8q5ecff...@4ax.com...

> On 9 Feb 2002 09:30:19 -0800, am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:
>
> >"S?en Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> wrote in message
news:<a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de>...
> >> "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
<snip>

> >
> >(2) Regardless 'viking' (in a narrow meaning of this word) activities,
there
> >always had been relations between the Scandinavian states and their
neighbours
> >(Hanseatic cities, Poland, Novgorod, etc.). And if zubr's "byproducts"
were
> >available to these neighbours (they were), they could easily find their
way
> >to the Scandinavian countries.
> >
> >Combination of these two factors makes all speculations about the travels
> >to America simply unnecessary (they may or may not exist but they did not
> >have to exist to get access to 'bizon' hair).
>
> I think it all hangs on whether or not it is possible to identify the
> particular species of bison.
>
> The URL I previously cited
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison. She
> appears to either have not considered or, more likely, has rejected
> the idea of a European bison.

Eric,
you wouldn't believe how fun people had at my table today when I told them
about Alex and other persons's fantasy production of a bison here in this
area - especially fun had a friend of mine who use to go to Latvia once or
twice a year and who have good knowledge of the rest of the Baltics..... we
decided that it must be the fact that people in other parts of the world now
realised that we don't have white Ice Bears walking on the streets that made
some fool invent Bisons in this area.....

Inger E


>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric Stevens


Alex

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 1:09:17 PM2/10/02
to
"Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> wrote in message news:<Itn98.24861$l93.4...@newsb.telia.net>...

> "Alex" <am...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:f8e58188.02020...@posting.google.com...
> > "S?en Larsen" <soh...@wanadoo.dk> wrote in message
> news:<a42s90$1bqhb2$1...@ID-35736.news.dfncis.de>...
> > > "Inger E" <inger_e....@telia.com> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:0Gu88.16805$n4.27...@newsc.telia.net...
> > > >
> > > > I:
> > > > The Viking's raids westward ended in 1050's and after 1100 the old
> contacts
> > > > between the Byzantic Empire and Scandinavia were broken. The Northmens
> > > > interest from 1050 were westward not eastward.
> > >
> > > Someone should have told Valdemar II. Then maybe he wouldn't have taken
> > > Estonia in 1219 and his decendants might not have kept it for 150 y.
> before selling
> > > it to the German order.
> >
> > Or to Alexander Nevsky who got his nickname for defeating Swedes on R.
> Neva
> > in 1240. :-)
>
> That Alexander Nevsky defeated Swedes or should I say a member of the old
> Varjagan Dynasty the one we in Sweden calls the Folkunga Dynasty on River
> Neva in 1240 is correct.

I don't need your approval of this fact. It is too well-known.


>The Bishop of Linköping had as you might know a
> fortress there up to 1240. I am not talking about Sveaborg, btw. The Bishop
> of Linköping was brother of the King and had a son Ulf who participated in
> the battles. Ulf is remembered in Russian sources and in Swedish sources
> among other thing for that battle - you see back than a jarl of Finland
> owned the landarea you are discussing.

Alexander defeated Jarl Birger (sp) but this has very little to do with the
issue.

>It didn't belong to Russia, nor to
> Estonia in those days AND there were no Bisons there.

I never said that bisons were available in Estonia but their close analogy
was and still is available in Russia and Poland.

>Of course not, in
> Russian sources as well as in other the closest Bison at that time were in
> Caucasus.

It looks like you have serious reading problems. Equivalent of bison is
called 'zubr' and it inhabited in the areas very close to the Baltic coast.
It is widely mentioned in Russian sources (and perhaps in Polish) and there is
no need to make any uneducated guesses because these species are still alive
in Poland and Belorussia. Their herds went close to extinction only at the
beginning of XX, mostly due to a mass use of the modern hunting rifles.
Another, now extinct, species was "tur" (not to mix with a mountain ram,
which still lives on Caucass). In XI - XIII centuries both these animals lived
in a much wider area and you may find references to them in a testament of
Vladimir Monomach, a Great Prince of Kiev.


>
> But then again I believe you haven't had time to read the Russian sources,
> have you?
>

Unlike you, I did. And I must add that only an absolutely ignorant person
will deny existence of the zubrs in Russia.


> >
> > IMHO, there are two major problems with I's "logic":
> >
> > (1) The bison-like animals (zubres) had been widely available in the
> areas,
> > which were very close to the Baltic coast (Russia, Poland, Lithuania).
>
> Alex they weren't in the Baltics in 13th Century or for what that matter in
> the 14th Century!!! Do your homework better.

You are incompetent on this issue. They still live very close to Baltic coast.
They did not have to live _on_ the coast because the trade relationships
between the coastal and inland areas never were severed.

> <snip>
>
> >
> > (2) Regardless 'viking' (in a narrow meaning of this word) activities,
> there
> > always had been relations between the Scandinavian states and their
> neighbours
> > (Hanseatic cities, Poland, Novgorod, etc.). And if zubr's "byproducts"
> were
> > available to these neighbours (they were), they could easily find their
> way
> > to the Scandinavian countries.
>
> Speculations about bisons living in the Baltic Sea area during the period we
> call Medieval Age, from 1100 AD btw here in Sweden, is one of the worst
> fanasty told and only show the person's lack of knowledge of the History in
> this area.
>

(a) Person who never heard about zubr probably should shut up and get some
elementary eductaion.
(b) If you learn to read other people posts, you find out that I mentioned
areas "inland", which are pretty close to the coast.

>
> > Combination of these two factors makes all speculations about the travels
> > to America simply unnecessary (they may or may not exist but they did not
> > have to exist to get access to 'bizon' hair).
>
> Alex,
> for your information the furtrade went from Greenland to Bergen, Orkney,
> Tönsberg and than on to Hull, Lynn and London. Not the other way round. And
> the boats that sailed weren't Swedish boats - they were Norse boats and
> Orkney boats....

An idea that all goods had been transported _from_ Greenland and nothing
had been imported or brought by the coming ships is completely moronic.
Not that this is a big surprise considering that you are the author.


>
> Good Night Alex,
> sweet dreams but remember to take a better look in the books before you
> relate the dreams to the group next time.


I would not recommend this to you because you are obviously functionally
illiterate. But stop smoking whatever you are smoking and cut on your drinking.

Daryl Krupa

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 2:50:59 PM2/10/02
to
Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<3C629AB0...@sympatico.ca>...

> an interesting article, unfortunately without references.
> Could you please add some?

Kel:
Inger doesn't do references.
She is our revered mentor, not our research assistant. <g>

> Inger E wrote:
> > Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't

> > see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short Essay.
>
> This observation was based on a discussion elsewhere?
> I must have missed it in SHM.

Inger's losing track of what was said where, and by whom.
This is presumably associated with her lack of references.
She also posted a screed on Late Medieval trading patterns
in Eastern Europe to sci.archaeology. This was in defense of
her bison distribution hypothesis, in answer to a challenge
of her ideas re: bear distribution, which challenge had only
appeared in SHM.

> Inger E wrote:
> > BISON OR BEAR HAIR
> > © Johansson Inger E, Gothenburg February 2002
> > BACKGROUND
> > Bison hair found in a rope as well as four seperate bison hairs, dated to
> > the 13-14th Century, found in Greenland have risen questions re. Norse
> > contacts with the closest areas where Bison stock lived in North America
> > during the same period. We are talking about the southwestern part of Hudson
> > Bay.
>

> Would that have been Plains or Woodland Bison? The range of
> such animals was quite different. I'm curious as to where
> such information is published.

Try these URLs, previously cited by Michael Zalar in re: to this topic.
http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp
http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html

<snip>
> Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
> the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
> indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
> northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
> and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
> St. Lawrence basin.
<snip>

And these, on bears.
http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/grizzly/grizzly.html
http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/blbear/blbear.html

Griz used to occupy the Great Plains before being extirpated
there by Europeans.
The barren ground grizzlies definitely occupy the northeastern
shores of Hudson Bay, and may have occupied Ungava in historical
times.
(Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)

The salient point here is that Inger has claimed that bear hair,
found on the shores of Baffin Bay and named as Grizzly bear hair,
cannot be hair from an European brown bear, because they are of
different sizes.
This claim ignores the fact that they are the same species,
_Ursos arctos_,
known all around the northern reaches of the hemisphere,
from Britain eastward to Hudson Bay, with a gap in the
North Atlantic and on the eastern coast of North America.

Of all the places Norsemen are known to have visited,
the North American end of their distribution is the only area
devoid of brown bears.
Any _Ursos arctos_ hair in a Norse rope near Baffin Bay is
much more likely to have been traded from Europe than
collected from a North American bear.

And now the proof that Inger is not knowledgeable on
this subject:
she did not bring up the fact that Grizzly bears are
named after the grizzled, or silver-haired, look of
mature adult "silverbacks".
Grizzly bear hair from the back and flanks of a mature adult
_looks_ different from European brown bair hair.
Surely that is more important than size differences.

Inger knows nothing of biogeography, not even that it exists
as a discipline. At one point she claimed that because caribou
pelts were different in different parts of Greenland, there
must have been extensive timber resources available to Medieval
Norse on Baffin Island, which thus must have been Markland,
which meant that Vinland had been somewhere beyond southwest
Hudson Bay. All in ignorance of the inconvenient fact that
Baffin Island has probably been treeless for millions of years,
and certainly for the last 100,000 years.
IMO, Kel, you have seen as much information on this subject
as you are going to. I predict that Inger will ignore the topic
from now on, as she has done when others of her
pronouncements-born-of-ignorance have been challenged.

Hoping that this helps,
Daryl Krupa
(who has petted bison and spun their wool, and
been much, much closer to a grizzly bear than
he ever wanted to be, and collected some of its hair,
and seen several others in the wild,
so that he is confident that he can tell the difference
between the two far better than some ditzy Bohuslander
kindergarten worker)

Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 3:01:09 PM2/10/02
to
On 10 Feb 2002 10:09:17 -0800, am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:

>It looks like you have serious reading problems. Equivalent of bison is

>called 'zubr' ...

But is its hair such as to be readily confused with the hair of a
North American bison?

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 3:01:08 PM2/10/02
to

But what about 600 years ago?


Regards,

Eric Stevens

Daryl Krupa

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 3:03:45 PM2/10/02
to
David Debono <david....@montacute.net> wrote in message news:<gnt56u8esnndek8gb...@4ax.com>...
> I have an essay called An Elk by An Elk....etc etc etc

Ah-hem-hem-hem.
That's "Ann", not "Anne", Elk.
(Mrs.)

Daryl Krupa

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 3:12:51 PM2/10/02
to
Eric Stevens <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message news:<h86b6usjgi8q5ecff...@4ax.com>...
<snip>

> The URL I previously cited
> http://www.hum.gu.se/arkiv/ONN/1998onn/II/msg00645.html
> quotes Jette Arneborg as discussing the North American bison.
> She appears to either have not considered or, more likely,
> has rejected the idea of a European bison.

From the cited URL:

So what did they find.
Aside from sheep/goat, they are said to have fibers, fleeces, pelts
or artifacts made from the hair of cattle (Bos taurus),
Bison (Bison bison or Bison bonasus - American or European bison),
Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus), Musk ox (Ovibos moschatus),
Brown/black/grizzly bear (Ursus sp.), Polar bear (Thalarctos maritimus),
wolf (Canis sp.) and fox (probably arctic fox, Alopex lagopus).

As usual, Eric sees only what he wants to see.

More in sadness than in anger,
Daryl Krupa

Hammerstad

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 3:25:32 PM2/10/02
to
Eric Stevens wrote:

The conclusion of your link says: "the bison hair (if North American and if
bison)" - so why your question? Again, why not contact the relevant
examinators of the hair before speculating further?


Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 3:38:11 PM2/10/02
to
On 10 Feb 2002 12:12:51 -0800, icyc...@yahoo.com (Daryl Krupa)
wrote:


Try reading the article again. and you will find I was refering to the
**direct quote** from Jette Arneborg.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 3:38:11 PM2/10/02
to

Its a strange world when an honest question is regarded as unwarranted
speculation.

If you don't know the answer, why don't you say so? Better still, why
bother answering at all?


Regards,

Eric Stevens

Hammerstad

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 5:14:27 PM2/10/02
to
Eric Stevens wrote:

Your so-called honest question is based upon wishful thinking, read the link
again (carefully this time). You have posted about half a dozen unnecessary
answers in this thread, your why's thus point back to you, sorry.

Mike Cleven

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 5:40:34 PM2/10/02
to

Ungava _is_ the northeastern shore of Hudson Bay, i.e. north of the tree
line and a bit below. I can see there having been browns/grizzes in the
James Bay-Grand River area, though (the southeastern shore); do you mean
the Manitoba coastline, somehow? In any case, competition for turf
between grizzes and polars would most likely have favoured the latter,
both for reasons of aggression/power and for the latter's greater
suitability to the arctic climate and the ice of the Bay.

> (Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)

NB which are the corporate survival of the Hudson's Bay Company, named
in the days when Hudson Bay _was_ known as Hudson's Bay....

>
> The salient point here is that Inger has claimed that bear hair,
> found on the shores of Baffin Bay and named as Grizzly bear hair,
> cannot be hair from an European brown bear, because they are of
> different sizes.
> This claim ignores the fact that they are the same species,
> _Ursos arctos_,
> known all around the northern reaches of the hemisphere,
> from Britain eastward to Hudson Bay, with a gap in the
> North Atlantic and on the eastern coast of North America.

I'm going to have to check on this with some fish & wildlife dept
acquaintances; in BC a distinction is made between grizzlies and browns,
I think, although maybe browns are really only immature grizzes; they're
known for being more aggressive than either grizzes or the various
subvarieties of blacks found here (cinnamons, kermodes/whites, etc.)


>
> Of all the places Norsemen are known to have visited,
> the North American end of their distribution is the only area
> devoid of brown bears.
> Any _Ursos arctos_ hair in a Norse rope near Baffin Bay is
> much more likely to have been traded from Europe than
> collected from a North American bear.

Agreed, but if there was penetration of the Manitoba Lakes and adjoining
river systems, it's possible they acquired bearskins/fur there.


>
> And now the proof that Inger is not knowledgeable on
> this subject:
> she did not bring up the fact that Grizzly bears are
> named after the grizzled, or silver-haired, look of
> mature adult "silverbacks".
> Grizzly bear hair from the back and flanks of a mature adult
> _looks_ different from European brown bair hair.
> Surely that is more important than size differences.
>
> Inger knows nothing of biogeography, not even that it exists
> as a discipline. At one point she claimed that because caribou
> pelts were different in different parts of Greenland, there
> must have been extensive timber resources available to Medieval
> Norse on Baffin Island, which thus must have been Markland,
> which meant that Vinland had been somewhere beyond southwest
> Hudson Bay. All in ignorance of the inconvenient fact that
> Baffin Island has probably been treeless for millions of years,
> and certainly for the last 100,000 years.

Markland is generally conceded to have been Labrador, with Helluland
("the place of stones") being Baffin. Still, I think there were trees
on Baffin more recently than your cite; there's a petrified/mummified
forest up that way somewhere, and I don't think it's _that_ old. I'm
bcc'ing this to someone who lives in Pangnirtung who's familiar with
this kind of detail, as well as wildlife issues in the region (Hi
Keith!)


> IMO, Kel, you have seen as much information on this subject
> as you are going to. I predict that Inger will ignore the topic
> from now on, as she has done when others of her
> pronouncements-born-of-ignorance have been challenged.
>
> Hoping that this helps,
> Daryl Krupa
> (who has petted bison and spun their wool, and
> been much, much closer to a grizzly bear than
> he ever wanted to be, and collected some of its hair,
> and seen several others in the wild,

I was hiking along an subalpine powerline in a remote valley in
southwest-central BC a few years ago in the company of a feisty and
rather tiny "red heeler" (similar to a blue heeler herding dog, only red
in colouring), who decided to take issue with a big brown down below the
access road I was walking on......geeez, I'm glad the bear was more
interested in the berries than in responding to the dog's aggression;
the dog backed off and followed along with me as I quietly trotted away
from the place as fast as I could get! There were more blacks than
people in the valley bottom, which was full of abandoned apple orchards
and attracted scores of them; down there I was usually in the company of
an aging Staffordshire which was a great security blanket, especially
because you'd run into three or four a day (not including the cubs
hanging with the sows).

> so that he is confident that he can tell the difference
> between the two far better than some ditzy Bohuslander
> kindergarten worker)

Bohuslanderinne.....(-er is a male ending, I think)

--
Mike Cleven
http://www.cayoosh.net (Bridge River Lillooet history)
http://www.hiyu.net (Chinook Jargon phrasebook/history)

Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 6:17:35 PM2/10/02
to

For your irascible information I have established that it is not
difficult to distinguish the hair of the European species of bison
from either of the main American species.


Regards,

Eric Stevens

Steve Marcus

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 10:01:01 PM2/10/02
to

Assuming that the rope is made of "American" bison hair, all you
would then have to do is to ask the rope if it got to Greenland
on a Norse vessel or in an Inuit vessel.

An "actual" Norse artifact found in North America known as the
"Norse Penny" is regarded as having clerly arrived in its final
resting place in Maine as a result of transportation through an
Inuit-Native American Indian trade network. Given the Inuit
presence on Greenland, and that there was Norse-Inuit trade, the
presence of a rope made of bison hair would not, per se,
establish a Norse presence in North America.

> Regards,
>
> Eric Stevens

Steve
--
The above posting is neither a legal opinion nor legal advice,
because we do not have an attorney-client relationship, and
should not be construed as either. This posting does not
represent the opinion of my employer, but is merely my personal
view.

Kel Rekuta

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 8:29:00 PM2/10/02
to
Daryl Krupa wrote:
>
> Kel Rekuta <kre...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<3C629AB0...@sympatico.ca>...
>
> > an interesting article, unfortunately without references.
> > Could you please add some?

I've read some of her pontificaton. I should have added a
smiley.

>
> Kel:
> Inger doesn't do references.
> She is our revered mentor, not our research assistant. <g>
>
> > Inger E wrote:
> > > Due to the fact that there still are persons with high education who can't
> > > see the difference between Bisons and Bears I have written this short Essay.
> >
> > This observation was based on a discussion elsewhere?
> > I must have missed it in SHM.

I don't read the archaeology site, or I'd have realized she
cross posts frequently.
And also neglects to read replies completely. She asked for
my sources, which were listed in the very post she replied
to.

> >
> > Would that have been Plains or Woodland Bison? The range of
> > such animals was quite different. I'm curious as to where
> > such information is published.
>
> Try these URLs, previously cited by Michael Zalar in re: to this topic.
> http://www.bisoncentral.com/history/map.asp
> http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/bison/bison.html

Thanks. I was relying on memory. I spent a couple years in
Alberta, travelling to parks at every opportunity.

>
> <snip>
> > Grizzly bears do not appear to have ranged very far east of
> > the Rockies, certainly not as far as Hudson's Bay. The
> > indigenous ursine species vary from the polar bear in
> > northern and Central regions of the Hudson basin to black
> > and brown bears in the northern and eastern woodlands of the
> > St. Lawrence basin.
> <snip>

Even more useful. I hadn't realized the grizzly ranged that
far east in pre-Columbian times. Thanks!

>
> And these, on bears.
> http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/grizzly/grizzly.html
> http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/blbear/blbear.html
>
> Griz used to occupy the Great Plains before being extirpated
> there by Europeans.
> The barren ground grizzlies definitely occupy the northeastern
> shores of Hudson Bay, and may have occupied Ungava in historical
> times.
> (Note: "Hudson's Bay" is a chain of department stores.)

Wanna buy a blanket? ;-}

>
> Inger knows nothing of biogeography, not even that it exists
> as a discipline. At one point she claimed that because caribou
> pelts were different in different parts of Greenland, there
> must have been extensive timber resources available to Medieval
> Norse on Baffin Island, which thus must have been Markland,
> which meant that Vinland had been somewhere beyond southwest
> Hudson Bay. All in ignorance of the inconvenient fact that
> Baffin Island has probably been treeless for millions of years,
> and certainly for the last 100,000 years.

> IMO, Kel, you have seen as much information on this subject
> as you are going to. I predict that Inger will ignore the topic
> from now on, as she has done when others of her
> pronouncements-born-of-ignorance have been challenged.
>
> Hoping that this helps,
> Daryl Krupa
> (who has petted bison and spun their wool, and
> been much, much closer to a grizzly bear than
> he ever wanted to be, and collected some of its hair,
> and seen several others in the wild,
> so that he is confident that he can tell the difference
> between the two far better than some ditzy Bohuslander
> kindergarten worker)

ROTFL....

I saw one in Glacier National Park many years ago.
I wasn't looking at the grizzly's hair. Those claws are
longer than my fingers!
And the head on the critter. Wow. I was very happy to be
well above it on a tower.

I never would have thought bison hair would spin well. Isn't
it coarse? I've only touched the head and mane.

Thanks for the info.

Kel

Alex

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 9:28:34 PM2/10/02
to
Eric Stevens <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message news:<g9hd6usn9ire6ht8r...@4ax.com>...

No need to go 600 years back. A notriceable population of "zubr" (european
bison) still exists in Poland and Belorus. As for Ingred and her friends
having fun, well, what can I say about the bunch of ill-educated idiots who
obviously unable to make even a simple search on internet...
[Not to mention that I used to live in the country, which had the biggest herd
of the european bison.]

Alex

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 9:42:49 PM2/10/02
to
Eric Stevens <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message news:<gbhd6ugnl8s6rmv1a...@4ax.com>...

AFAIK, the main difference between zubr and american bison is that
zubr
has shorter hairs on the neck and slightly smaller than its american
relative.
You can see the picture, for example, on
http://hum.amu.edu.pl/~zbzw/ph/pnp/bial.htm (site of Bialowieski
National Park, Poland) or just make a search on "bison bonasus" and it
will produce a lot
of related links, some with the photos.

Eric Stevens

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 11:22:05 PM2/10/02
to
On 10 Feb 2002 18:28:34 -0800, am...@hotmail.com (Alex) wrote:

>> >you wouldn't believe how fun people had at my table today when I told them
>> >about Alex and other persons's fantasy production of a bison here in this
>> >area - especially fun had a friend of mine who use to go to Latvia once or
>> >twice a year and who have good knowledge of the rest of the Baltics..... we
>> >decided that it must be the fact that people in other parts of the world now
>> >realised that we don't have white Ice Bears walking on the streets that made
>> >some fool invent Bisons in this area.....
>> >
>>
>> But what about 600 years ago?
>
>No need to go 600 years back. A notriceable population of "zubr" (european
>bison) still exists in Poland and Belorus. As for Ingred and her friends
>having fun, well, what can I say about the bunch of ill-educated idiots who
>obviously unable to make even a simple search on internet...
>[Not to mention that I used to live in the country, which had the biggest herd
>of the european bison.]

Actually, a web search will show that it is not quite that simple and
that deliberate efforts to save them have been made over recent years.
However, I was referring to Ingers comment "about white Ice Bears"
walking on the streets. I was really asking the extent of the "white
Ice Bears" 600 years ago. Presumably they were more extensive then but
I suspect by not much.


Regards,

Eric Stevens

George Black

unread,
Feb 10, 2002, 11:25:41 PM2/10/02
to Inger E

and we're back to Ingers pretend friends who never actually have names.
Just degrees and doctorates that somehow vary according to the subject
discussed

Todd A. Farmerie

unread,
Feb 11, 2002, 1:13:28 AM2/11/02
to
Mike Cleven wrote:

>
> Daryl Krupa wrote:
> >
> > The salient point here is that Inger has claimed that bear hair,
> > found on the shores of Baffin Bay and named as Grizzly bear hair,
> > cannot be hair from an European brown bear, because they are of
> > different sizes.
> > This claim ignores the fact that they are the same species,
> > _Ursos arctos_,
> > known all around the northern reaches of the hemisphere,
> > from Britain eastward to Hudson Bay, with a gap in the
> > North Atlantic and on the eastern coast of North America.
>
> I'm going to have to check on this with some fish & wildlife dept
> acquaintances; in BC a distinction is made between grizzlies and browns,
> I think, although maybe browns are really only immature grizzes; they're
> known for being more aggressive than either grizzes or the various
> subvarieties of blacks found here (cinnamons, kermodes/whites, etc.)

In Alaska, they are discussed as subspecies, differing in
behavior and diet (browns are coastal and live primarily on fish,
griz are inland and have a broader diet including hikers, Kodiac
are on Kodiac Island).

taf

Inger E

unread,
Feb 11, 2002, 1:26:28 AM2/11/02
to
Daryl,
I think it's you who better read the text and check the latin names you quot
once more. The bison you suppose to be European hasn't been anywhere near
the Baltic Sea region before 1750, or should I say before 1921 when that
bison type was introduced in a Zoo in order to bread a new stock from that +
Am.Bison + Caucasian Bison.....

Good Night Daryl,
You will once more make a new fantastic laughing story in Swedish circles.
Imagin there still is people out there who believes Scandinavia(today's and
yesterday's landarea included) had Bisons in the Medieval Age - that one is
even better than the Ice Bear story!

Inger E


"Eric Stevens" <eric.s...@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet

news:tamd6ukcbto91hptg...@4ax.com...

Inger E

unread,
Feb 11, 2002, 1:30:24 AM2/11/02