Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nth American Indian origins

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nth American Indian origins

    Originally posted by tankie View Post
    Hmm , im misinformed by cowboy books again .
    Chuckle. Don't get me started. Amerind (pardon me all y'all native Americans out there; I'm a European intruder) culture, prehistory & especially linguistics are a sort of freak of mine.

    Did you know that the Cheyenne (within recorded european history) were settled Eastern Woodlands Algonquians with a log house/fortified village/corn-beans-squash agricultural society before moving to Minnesota for some unknown reason to do the same thing & only then becoming an iconic nomadic plains hunting culture?

    There's some really weird stuff about the Injuns that needs some serious research, & what's being done is butt up against a bunch of romantic political correctness.

    Prof

  • #2
    Originally posted by Prof View Post
    Chuckle. Don't get me started. Amerind (pardon me all y'all native Americans out there; I'm a European intruder) culture, prehistory & especially linguistics are a sort of freak of mine.

    Did you know that the Cheyenne (within recorded european history) were settled Eastern Woodlands Algonquians with a log house/fortified village/corn-beans-squash agricultural society before moving to Minnesota for some unknown reason to do the same thing & only then becoming an iconic nomadic plains hunting culture?

    There's some really weird stuff about the Injuns that needs some serious research, & what's being done is butt up against a bunch of romantic political correctness.

    Prof
    Prof,

    As a 10 year old I had the great good fortune to visit America. I think it was at the Museum of Natural History in Chicago where I saw a East Coat Indian lodge for the first time. We got to walk inside a full sized reconstruction of one. In an instant my entire understanding of American Indian culture was changed forever.

    The only time I have really seen this type of society depicted on film was in 'Black Robe', though there may be others.
    sigpic

    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Prof View Post
      Chuckle. Don't get me started. Amerind (pardon me all y'all native Americans out there; I'm a European intruder) culture, prehistory & especially linguistics are a sort of freak of mine.

      Did you know that the Cheyenne (within recorded european history) were settled Eastern Woodlands Algonquians with a log house/fortified village/corn-beans-squash agricultural society before moving to Minnesota for some unknown reason to do the same thing & only then becoming an iconic nomadic plains hunting culture?

      There's some really weird stuff about the Injuns that needs some serious research, & what's being done is butt up against a bunch of romantic political correctness.

      Prof
      Isn't there some big hoohah at the moment about genetic origins, with political factions preventing the DNA testing of bones from archaeological sites?
      In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

      Leibniz

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
        Isn't there some big hoohah at the moment about genetic origins, with political factions preventing the DNA testing of bones from archaeological sites?
        Yep. Major-league frustrating. Of course, it's exactly equivalent to some of the suggestions I've seen here in discussions about disposal & treatment of the unintentionally interred crew of recently sunken warships. As far as I'm concerned, when you're dead you're dead, & if you died in an interesting or controversial place, well, f*ckit. You oughta get dug up. Let the diggers leave a monument.

        One item, though, that really drives me up the wall, is modern "Native American" claims to jurisdiction over Paleolithic & early Neolithic remains. These skeletons are simply not "Indians." God knows what they are. Let's find out. Hell, God knows what the "Indians" are, for that matter. Or were. The unitary Mongolian origin business is, & has been since the first Daguerrotype photos depicting such a wide range of racial subtypes, is total bullshit, & papers linking current Amerind languages to ancient Western & Central Asian languages need further investigation. If the breakthrough at the end of the straights of the Bosphorus that produced the Black Sea in ~9K BCE also resulted in the similar flood myths in Europe, Asia & the Americas because of a major diaspora then we need to know it. Dammit. Urrrh.

        The Disgruntled Prof

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Prof View Post
          If the breakthrough at the end of the straights of the Bosphorus that produced the Black Sea in ~9K BCE also resulted in the similar flood myths in Europe, Asia & the Americas because of a major diaspora then we need to know it. Dammit. Urrrh.

          The Disgruntled Prof
          Prof,send me to some books about those Indian(can't force myself to say Native Americans-I must be raciss) myths.Wanna check myself(and show my PHD in history GF what a smart and well read chap I am)
          Those who know don't speak
          He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mihais View Post
            Prof,send me to some books about those Indian(can't force myself to say Native Americans-I must be raciss) myths.Wanna check myself(and show my PHD in history GF what a smart and well read chap I am)
            Mihais:

            The "fact" that the "Indians" here on the North/Central & South American continents (& I've really got to figure out some way to get rid of all these apostrophes) have a Mongolian ancestry is still prevalent. I don't know why. I sure as Hell haven't got anything against Mongolian peoples, but let's figure it all out.

            Early European New World paintings, which were usually Romantic but also expected to be successfully representational if the artists wanted their stuff to sell, depicted the folks Europeans ran into here. These were initially members of littoral or just inland cultures. As you would expect, their appearance matches well with photography done later, & those photographs also recorded nearly all indigenous American types, littoral or well inland.

            The Cheyenne (Só'taa'e + Tsé-tsêhéstâhese), the critters that started this little literary divergence, which incidentally is due entirely to Tankie so blame him, were a (probably)Cree (certainly)Algonquian people who were physically large (~70", about the size of Cro-Magnons!) & had distinctly European (specifically Central European) appearance. Elements of their language have similarities to Protoslovak. The pictures of the Eastern Woodland peoples also look European.

            On the other hand, the Apache, say, look Korean. Many relatively undisturbed central & South American communities could easily be Cambodian. & then, check out Mayan petroglyphs. Look Semitic to me, & good ole Thor Heyerdahl agrees. Or did until he croaked.

            I know that that the "Siberian" land bridge to Alaska was available for walking for thousands of years, & was available off & on, mostly on, during the crucial period between 13000-7000BCE, & further, I suspect that ancient open-ocean navigation wasn't as absent as the anthropological stick-in-the-mudders tend to insist. How did the "aborigines", say, get to OZ?

            As for papers, well, go get'em, tiger.

            Prof

            Comment


            • #7
              What a scumbag I'm sometimes,Prof.I re-read my post and saw that I forgot to say ''please''.I'm ashamed of my behaviour.Now,can you good sir suggest some titles,please?

              I have serious,and I mean serious,doubts about the whole Protoslovak stuff.More probable an Indo-European proto-language would fit better(even that sounds SF,but keep an open mind).Particularly in the context of a shared myth and presumed dissemination of that myth from the Black Sea area.Or,maybe the flood myth is even earlier,but remains to be found what other event could have been so catastrophic 15000-20000 years ago to be known worldwide.
              I remember hearing talks about this:Stanford-Bradley abstract
              Googling further I came to this:'06 Anthropology Lecture Photo Gallery

              Agreed about the navigation part.Those guys weren't dumb,and the good ole Thor Heyerdahl(only the mention of his name and I remember childhood readings) proved it.
              Those who know don't speak
              He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                What a scumbag I'm sometimes,Prof.I re-read my post and saw that I forgot to say ''please''.I'm ashamed of my behaviour.Now,can you good sir suggest some titles,please?

                I have serious,and I mean serious,doubts about the whole Protoslovak stuff.More probable an Indo-European proto-language would fit better(even that sounds SF,but keep an open mind).Particularly in the context of a shared myth and presumed dissemination of that myth from the Black Sea area.Or,maybe the flood myth is even earlier,but remains to be found what other event could have been so catastrophic 15000-20000 years ago to be known worldwide.
                I remember hearing talks about this:Stanford-Bradley abstract
                Googling further I came to this:'06 Anthropology Lecture Photo Gallery

                Agreed about the navigation part.Those guys weren't dumb,and the good ole Thor Heyerdahl(only the mention of his name and I remember childhood readings) proved it.
                Mihais:

                You don't need a world-wide-catastrophe model for the hypothesis (note that I do not say "theory") to work. Just a "local" disturbance, & not only that, at a later date than you suggest.

                If there were a fairly large human agricultural population within what is now the Black Sea basin (& there is now some - including underwater - archeological evidence to suggest that that there was), then the known rupture of the known barrier at the head of the Bosphorus, at the time it is now known to have happened, would have displaced the population in whatever direction that parts of the population decided to get displaced to, & would have done all that displacement at about the right time.

                The event, if there really were an organized bunch of people there to watch it, probably took some years to develop. Not exactly the TV dam-break scenario catastrophe you will probably see next year on the History Channel, but you can't really farm land under an inch of seawater either, can you?

                So you move. & as you move, you talk. & write. & leave stories, legends, myths. Whatever.

                So. If there were some unknown but recently suggested important, maybe seminal, setted Black Sea basin population & the dam @ the end of the Bosphorus broke, scattering those guys sort of grumpily but lazily in all directions carrying their stories with them along with their cattle & technology, & if the dam-break part of the business happened when it appears to have happened, & if one of their wandering highways, ultimately, led into Alaska, then the odd similarities between Middle Eastern & Amerind Flood myths would make sense.

                As for the linguistics part of it, oops. Embarrassingly, since that was my subfield, all the papers I had were not only old, old, old, but are also gone, gone, gone. There was an interesting lay review of the subject in Scientific American years ago, sometime between '76 & '80. I'm pretty sure of the dates; I know the article was there. Your librarian would be a nice resource, here. Sometimes the 'Net doesn't make the grade.

                I know that proto-indoeuropean would be a better fit as far as dates are concerned. After all, what the f*ck is this evolutionary subdivision doing 'way back then, anyway? But also remember, as I'm sure that you do, that linguistic archeology exceeds even regular archeology at inexactitude.

                What a place.

                Prof

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think it's quite certain(I won't say fully certain,'cause only idiots have certitudes) that the Black Sea area was some sort of craddle for migrations in all directions.That can be true for the 2000 BC(the aproximate start of Indo-European groups migrations)for 8000BC(our guys)and likely for 35-40000 BC(welcome to Europe,Homo Sapiens).A look at the map would prove the point.

                  My point is your point.I talked about dissemination,spreading of a good enough story,that people talk about for hundreds of generations.I say that if we don't find another event earlier,we can be reasonably sure there is a link between the various populations,at that particular time.
                  Would the melting of the ice during the last glacial period qualify as such a memorable event?Because we may witness a worldwide parallel creation process,regardless of what happened around Black Sea area.
                  No expert in prehistoric eras,just trying my best shoots in the dark
                  Those who know don't speak
                  He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Prof View Post
                    I know that that the "Siberian" land bridge to Alaska was available for walking for thousands of years, & was available off & on, mostly on, during the crucial period between 13000-7000BCE, & further, I suspect that ancient open-ocean navigation wasn't as absent as the anthropological stick-in-the-mudders tend to insist. How did the "aborigines", say, get to OZ?

                    As for papers, well, go get'em, tiger.

                    Prof
                    Prof,

                    Is there actual evidence of significant migration across something like the Pacific at that time? Pari can tell us when Maori & other Pacific Islanders did it. The Aboriginies in Oz came down from Sth/Sth East Asia overland (land bridges again) & via relatively short sea voyages. If you look at the distance between Australia & Timor even now, it isn't a huge voyage and you can pretty much see Papua New Guinea from the nth tip of Cape York Penninsular . It could be done in something designed for short coastal hops. I suspect that something similar was the case for the Americas. Hops from Nth Asia & Siberia along that coast would certainly have been possible.
                    sigpic

                    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                      The Aboriginies in Oz came down from Sth/Sth East Asia overland (land bridges again) & via relatively short sea voyages. If you look at the distance between Australia & Timor even now, it isn't a huge voyage and you can pretty much see Papua New Guinea from the nth tip of Cape York Penninsular.
                      Part of the leaking gun runner areas now are only 2 hrs from australian territory by small boat - and I means 25cc outboards, not larger passenger vessels.

                      considering that there are also parts now where on freakish tides, people can walk between some of the islands, then the odds are pretty good that 40.000 years ago the land bridges were far more pronounced and in use. some of the animal and bird species from PNG and Oz are biological cousins that would have had to habe been engaging in physical rumpy at some stage to get their DNA helix's "familiar" :)
                      Linkeden:
                      http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                      http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by gf0012-aust View Post
                        Part of the leaking gun runner areas now are only 2 hrs from australian territory by small boat - and I means 25cc outboards, not larger passenger vessels.

                        considering that there are also parts now where on freakish tides, people can walk between some of the islands, then the odds are pretty good that 40.000 years ago the land bridges were far more pronounced and in use. some of the animal and bird species from PNG and Oz are biological cousins that would have had to habe been engaging in physical rumpy at some stage to get their DNA helix's "familiar" :)
                        Mods:

                        The original topic of this thread was fun & useful but has admittedly (not my fault. It was Tankie. Tankie did it! Tankie!) zoomed 'way off- topic. On the other hand, the current subject is fascinating, at least to me, & an example of just what a limitless range this outfit has. Besides me just starting a new one, any way to break off the last few posts & use them to start over?

                        Prof
                        Last edited by Prof; 16 Jan 10,, 15:04. Reason: add word

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                          Prof,

                          Is there actual evidence of significant migration across something like the Pacific at that time? Pari can tell us when Maori & other Pacific Islanders did it. The Aboriginies in Oz came down from Sth/Sth East Asia overland (land bridges again) & via relatively short sea voyages. If you look at the distance between Australia & Timor even now, it isn't a huge voyage and you can pretty much see Papua New Guinea from the nth tip of Cape York Penninsular . It could be done in something designed for short coastal hops. I suspect that something similar was the case for the Americas. Hops from Nth Asia & Siberia along that coast would certainly have been possible.
                          Not for boat migration that far back. The only pertinent archeological finds that old (& then only possible finds, at that) are architectural. But those are in relatively shallow water off the Southern coast of the Black Sea west of the straits, & there is certainly evidence for open ocean navigation much later in pre-history using technology that wouldn't have been out of line for 12-14K ago. Domesticated yams in South America are identical to the "indiginous" yams found in Polynesia by early European arrivals, for example. Right now it only boils down to an Occam's Razor argument, but seems to me that that would be a fine reason all by itself to go to work. Standing in its way, though, is some very resilient prejudice. Early humans identical to ourselves simply couldn't have done certain things because they were around too early. As things stand now, the civilizational alarm clock was set for ~4000BCE, that's it, so shut up. Or something like that.

                          Prof
                          Last edited by Prof; 16 Jan 10,, 16:25.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Just poking around I ran into the notion that I should have remembered. This is the "Nostratic Hypothesis". "Nostratic" = parent language/group from 'way back that links many European, Asiatic & PaleoAfrican language groups with Amerind & Askimo groups. Big in the Soviet Union in the 60s, less so elsewhere, especially in America, where it was reviled. Linguistic Cold War politics. Now it's considered reasonable in most circles but not fully demonstrated, & a bunch of the PaleoAfrican stuff has been snipped off, even by some true believers.

                            Also, during my perambulations I ran across a bunch of predicted Indoeuropean migration maps, all of which start their timelines from ~6K to ~3K BCE & have their geographic origin on the North/NE shores of the Black Sea. You'd figure that the initial flight from that flood 12K ago would stop where the original lake stopped becoming the new sea, a logical point for population & language concentration & a reasonable geographical point from which later migrations might proceed.

                            Prof

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Prof View Post
                              Mods:

                              The original topic of this thread was fun & useful but has admittedly (not my fault. It was Tankie. Tankie did it! Tankie!) zoomed 'way off- topic. On the other hand, the current subject is fascinating, at least to me, & an example of just what a limitless range this outfit has. Besides me just starting a new one, any way to break off the last few posts & use them to start over?

                              Prof
                              I vote ''Aye''
                              Those who know don't speak
                              He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X