History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedNorses: Were the Skraelings Amerindians?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Apr-2007 at 22:36
Quote, Tommy:

Quote Well, according to the record of the Portuguese, they stated that the King of Norway had a mysterious land at the west, his ship would go there, and brought back animal skin,the ship spent one year to go there and returned,but the King kept the existence of the land as a secret.


That was new to me. Do you have any reference on that?
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Apr-2007 at 23:04
Good point!
In any case, even the son of Columbus, Fernando, mentioned a possible knowledge his father found in his trips to Northern Europe. Nothing new. It is very likely the news about new lands to the west filtered from Norse sources.
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2007 at 01:50
The key book to this subct-matter is "Westwards before Colombus" by Kare Prytz. According to Prytz Colombus returned from Labrador to Iceland, with the merchant Jon Jay in 1477.

That trip is mentioned by Fernando Colon, as the key to his fathers correct accounting of the width between Europe and Terra del Norumbega and - further south - Terra del Indianas.

The Norse settlements along Norumbega strected as far as Cheasapeak Bay, at least. Probably down to the Mexican Gulf, since the Northmen also are repported to have rowed along the Missisippi.

Prytz even found out that the old Norse settlements - along the east-coast - was using the name "Vinland" and "Vinland Goda", as well as "Landit Goda" - as they moved south. Vinland later became english, and named "Virginnia", while "Landit Goda" became portuguese and called "Terra Cova". Later the Spaniards took it over and the name became "Terra Coba" - before the English finally took it over and made it Carolina. From that point on the Terra Coba became the name for the (Spanish) island today called "Cuba"...!

But - that was all happening after 1370 - when the vital blows were made on the Norse strongholds of Greenland - that governed the "western isles" on behalf of the Norwegian king. In 1362-1364 a certain frenchman called Metzier visited Scandinavia where he wrote a book about the Norwegian Sea-King and his settlements "out in the ocean". According to Metzier it would take the Norwegian Chancellor three years to complete a sailing around this "enormous area", in order to collect the taxes and look after the trade of the Norwegian crown...


Edited by Boreasi - 05-Apr-2007 at 01:56
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
Jams View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jams Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2007 at 05:41
Boreasi, I'm not sure about what you were trying to say with those pictures?
 
True, some of the Sámi maybe short, but there's nothing in common between them and the actual Mongolians you posted? And Mongolians aren't short! And they sure aren't Inuit!!!!!
 
The only comparison that have been made have been with the Nenets, and they're not related at all, as have been found out. However, some studies seem to suggest they have something in common with Berbers, although that may be far back. All in all, they're just a specialized type of Europeans.
Infonor homepage: http://infonor.dk/ RAIPON homepage: http://www.raipon.org/
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2007 at 11:13
Sure?!

I think we should look for the logic of history when we deal with these questions. At least we should refrain from using pics of henna-bleached sami women to prove genetic points...

Traditional ethnology used to point to the mere fact that there were several tribes that have spread out around the circum-polar area of the arctic world - well after ice-time.

The first trace of these peoples - that also makes sense -  is a migration from the Himalayan area and northwards along the Ural mountain-range, where there was an ice-free corridor already 40.000 years ago.

Much later there have been a spread from the northern mounths of the arctic, Russian rivers towards both east and west. The Inuits and the Eskimos were held as the end of the eastern branch, while the Norwegian Sami were held as a logical end of western branch.

The similarities between these tribes were both physical as well as cultural. Looking into their traditional ways of life we can still see the paralells in life-style, housing, clothing and social organisation.

Obviously they have developed differences as well, but they are still not  disqualifieng the simlarities.  Recent mixes and traces of genetic markers common to their respective hemispheres can't be taken as a proof of anything but signs of integration.

Recent analyzis from Sweden have already shown that the DNA-markers of the Sami arrived to Scandinavia from the Ural-area - about 4.500 - 5.500 years ago.  Simultaniously we just heared that the Aleut and the Inuit reached Alaska some 2.500 years ago. From Kamchatcka, of course.

30 years back the antropologists talked about the 12 mongolian tribes that circumferenced the arctic nort. I haven't seen anything lately that really contradicts that.

---

Btw.: Could you name the different etnicities reflected in the pictures collected on the previous page?!


Edited by Boreasi - 05-Apr-2007 at 11:19
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
Jams View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jams Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2007 at 13:30
Hey Boreasi, I'm not too sure of any of this, to be honest. Let's not get too off topic, though.
 
(I guess you posted some people from Tibet, including the Dalai Lama and a miss contestant, an Inuit (in full garb) some dark haired Sámi (not all Sámi are dark haired!!!!) including a Sámi woman from a movie, and the sámi president, both previous and present)
Edit: Forgot the Mongolian, if that's what he is, the one with the bow!!


Edited by Jams - 06-Apr-2007 at 09:00
Infonor homepage: http://infonor.dk/ RAIPON homepage: http://www.raipon.org/
Back to Top
tommy View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 13-Sep-2005
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Points: 433
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tommy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2007 at 07:49
From a book,  the discovery of the Portuguese, it had such statement, i tell you more when i go back to university to find the book,and then i reply you.
leung
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 02:00
The first four pics are all northern Samis - who still have the strongest  same-charactheristics left. Though - we can see how some of them bear traces of partly Norwegian or Swede mix. The general pattern is quite clear, the further south and the younger they get - the higher influx we see from mixed marriages with Scandinavians. Thus the blonds are far more frequent among the southern Samis.

The Eskimo and Inuits actually have far less blondism - and still they show the same variation of physiognomy - as can be seen by the two Inuit women. The third American example was "Miss Arctic Circle" from Canada, 2005. She clearly has some Caucasian influx - too, although her pigmentation have remained Inuit or Aleut.

Then we have miss Tibet, miss Mongolia, Miss China and Miss Kazakstan - along with an actress in a Russian film. With what kind of certainty would you place the rigth country to the rigth miss? And what would be the plausible etnicity of the film-actress?

The answer to that would actually reflect directly back to the main issue of this thread.












Edited by Boreasi - 07-Apr-2007 at 02:10
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
tommy View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 13-Sep-2005
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Points: 433
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tommy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 02:45
But some samis clearly had Asian, or Mongolian -charactheristics , they had ethnical connection with people of Siberia or east asia
leung
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 03:15
The Samis had an eastern origin, simply. The same ones as the Inuit - just an "opposite" branch - from the same Uralic origin.

http://www.indians.org/Resource/FedTribes99/fedtribes99.html

http://www.usm.maine.edu/gany/webaa/disapear.htm

http://boxer.senate.gov/services/CAlinks/indians/tribalgroups.cfm

The sound of a Skrael;
http://www.folkways.si.edu/search/AlbumDetails.aspx?ID=414#
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
tommy View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 13-Sep-2005
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Points: 433
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tommy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 03:51
But Finns also from Uralic region, but I do not think they have Asian root?
leung
Back to Top
Jams View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jams Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 11:53
I actually posted the miss Tibet 2004 on a Mongolian forum, and the Mongolians there agreed that she would not look too alien there. She could pass for Mongolian.
 
Never the less, Eastern Sámi are often blond, the Finnish ones.
Technically, the Sámi have short faces, while northern Mongoloids have long (and wide-flat) faces, so there's a big morphological difference.
Also, Sámi aren't sinodont at all, and they have in fact small teeth as a characteristica - while northern Mongoloids have very large teeth. Furthermore, DNA test show they're their own, and mostly unrelated to those northern Mongoloids, but very related to Europeans, because they are Europeans.
 
However, just to be a little bit on topic:
Sámi artist Åsa Simma with her Native American husband Ouch
 
Ps. Eskimos have NO blondism, at least not the Kalaallit/Greenlandic Inuit ones, unless they're mixed or sick.
 
Pps. The Russian film you're talking about - the woman is Sámi, I already mentioned that!! Inari-Sami, I think, at least she's from Finland.
There's nothing remotely un-european about her:


Edited by Jams - 07-Apr-2007 at 15:17
Infonor homepage: http://infonor.dk/ RAIPON homepage: http://www.raipon.org/
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 22:29
Tommy,

The Finns are NOT from an Uralian root - but are the original population of the eastern part of Fenno-Skandia, while the  Swedes, Danes and Norse are their western counterparts.

That's been the case since mesolothic time. They both spread from the Baltic, after ice-time - born out of the same original "proto-caucasians" that had survived in a "biotic refugia" - up north, during the end of ice-time, according to the more recent sources.

The Finns spread east-wards over a vast area - from Transylvania to Tocharia. We see those traces already during the various stages of stone-age.

In western Europe these eastern Finns were originally called "Vaner" or "Vends" ("Vene", "Wende" "Wendi") - carrying amber from the Baltic to the Black Sea - and onwards. Thus we find "Schytian" mummies in their easternmost off-springs - the Tarim-bassin, in present China. The Chinese wall pretty much explains their eastern border.

Simultaniously another branch of people came out of the Himalayan mountains - that later made it along the northern coast of Russia to Scandinavia. Thus we have Samojeds and Sami.  The Himalayan population had kept the contact with their southern brothers much longer though, since they did not live isolated from their tropical origin during ice-time, but rather as the northenmost branch of the asian peoples. Thus we see their pigmentation to be far more intact - compared to the "refugians" that became the caucasian origin.

Jams,
The present population of Samis are definitly "European", in any juridical term, whatsoever. But their etnic and cultural characteristics originates from an altaic descent - not much doubt about that. Most of the northern samis still carry their pigment very clearly, as do the eskimos and the aleut-inuits.

Thus you were absolutely correct about Anna Kriistina Juuso. I just wonder if she could pass in a mongolian or tibetan beuty-contest?!

These mongolian branches have traditionally lived by a nomadic life-style and used the "Yur-ta-principle" when building their homes. Thus  have the circular cone-building as "lavvus" and "tipis" on each side of the north Atlantic, paralell to the squares and angles of the eurasian settlers.

As they have settled inbetween Scandinavians, Finns and American Indians they have adapted different morphologic traits that separate them genetically - today. But they still all share a common origin - as can be seen also in their respective traditions of architecture, life-style, clothing and cultural expressions. Their long, due and close relationship with the Finnish tribes of eastern Russia have made  very special impact on the western branch of the Himalayan descendants, as they have adapted to the Finno-Ugrian language.

Thus they were able to live successfully and prosperously side by side - for millenias - without ever getting into serious conflicts. Because they had a very clear division of culture - the Samojoeds and Samis were high-landers that lived "with a ligth bag" - with seasonal migrations to get to the scarcer sources of nature. Meanwhile the Finns would stick to their forests, rivers and lowlands - for the traditional fishery, log-production, lowland agriculture, boat-building and river-trade - connected to their Scandinavian neighbours that developed coastal setlements, ships and ocean-sailings.

When these "goths" reached America they populated the empty land of the east-coast and its islands. The Norse buildings and tools from the Orkneys are very similar to the Mound-builders of the US.

Thus the Norse kept their connections across the Atlantic already during neolithic time.  As the Inuits arrived they became a normal part of the scarce northmen that inhabitated the rural, arctic part of north America - too.

Thus we may see that there are two differnt styles of life-style and architecture among the North American Indians - too. The ones that were singing - like you can hear the Norwegian joiker - you may understand what the later Norsemen called them "hollers" - which in Norwegian can  still be written "skraelings"...



Edited by Boreasi - 07-Apr-2007 at 23:28
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2007 at 23:35

Genetic trails:

The genetic origin of the Sami is enigmatic and contributions from Continental Europe, Eastern Europe and Asia have been proposed. To address the evolutionary history of northern and southern Swedish Sami, we have studied their mtDNA haplogroup frequencies and complete mtDNA genome sequences. While the majority of mtDNA diversity in the northern Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish Sami is accounted for by haplogroups V and U5b1b1, the southern Swedish Sami have other haplogroups and a frequency distribution similar to that of the Continental European population. Stratification of the southern Sami on the basis of occupation indicates that this is the result of recent admixture with the Swedish population. The divergence time for the Sami haplogroup V sequences is 7600 YBP (years before present), and for U5b1b1, 5500 YBP amongst Sami and 6600 YBP amongst Sami and Finns. This suggests an arrival in the region soon after the retreat of the glacial ice, either by way of Continental Europe and/or the Volga-Ural region. Haplogroup Z is found at low frequency in the Sami and Northern Asian populations but is virtually absent in Europe. Several conserved substitutions group the Sami Z lineages strongly with those from Finland and the Volga-Ural region of Russia, but distinguish them from Northeast Asian representatives. This suggests that some Sami lineages shared a common ancestor with lineages from the Volga-Ural region as recently as 2700 years ago, indicative of a more recent contribution of people from the Volga-Ural region to the Sami population.

(Gyllensten et al, University of Upsala, 2006)

http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14470&PN=3



Edited by Boreasi - 07-Apr-2007 at 23:37
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
tommy View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 13-Sep-2005
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Points: 433
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tommy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2007 at 04:34
But some people say that there is no ethnical connection between Finns and Vikings, but they are both white people, One of my teachers stated that she had a Finns friend, and the friend stated that they were the offspring of the Huns, then this is not correct?
leung
Back to Top
Jams View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jams Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2007 at 05:55
Actually, the Nordic countries were NOT invaded by the Huns, or anyone else, from outside of Europe. If anything, other than the western countries like Britain and Spain etc., the Nordic countries incl. Finland are the ones that had the LEAST "Hun" influence.
 
If you ever came to Finland, you'll have admit they look just like any Scandinavian in general. Sure, there's the odd exotic looking person, but they're in the Scandinavian countries too, even where I live in Denmark, and we have had absolutely no Hun (or Sámi) influence here.
(Alhough personally I'm part Finnish, but that's recent)
The "exoticness" frequency may be slightly higher in Finland, but it's not something conected with the Huns. Rather, if anything, it may be an "Uralic" thing, whatever that is.
 
That Finnish friend must have been joking!
 
Boreasi, we may not actually disagree as much as I thought.
The way I see it, the Uralic branch (maybe a misnomer, but the term has sorta stuck) "branched off" from the other Europids at an early stage, perhaps as far back as the branch of of the ones who became (Northern)Mongoloids, or perhaps a bit later, and this branch moved about and spread until it reconected in the west with other Europids, while in the east they reconected with the Mongoloid branch - thus becoming Nenets. A few stayed relatively outside of influence (Mansi/Khanty) but were later a bit influenced by both Nenets and Finnic peoples (Komi I think] While the western part may have been the Sámi, who in turn were quite isolated, but also had some late influence from Finns -( I'm not absolutely convinced Sámi are Uralic, though, they're somewhat Unique)
This may have happened multiple times, complicating the matter further.
 
We're talking a timeframe of 10000+ years here, of course!
 


Edited by Jams - 08-Apr-2007 at 06:15
Infonor homepage: http://infonor.dk/ RAIPON homepage: http://www.raipon.org/
Back to Top
Hope View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 04-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 184
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hope Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2007 at 06:37
Just a note to the Finnish-Hunnic thing:
 
Finnish belongs to the same linguistic group as the Samis, the Estonians and the Hungarians.
Back to Top
Jams View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jams Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2007 at 17:07
Yes, the languages are related, especially Finnish & Estonian, less so the Sámi languages.
However, the Hungarian language seem to be much more distantly related.
Or so they say, I don't speak any of those languages!
Infonor homepage: http://infonor.dk/ RAIPON homepage: http://www.raipon.org/
Back to Top
Joinville View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 353
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joinville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Apr-2007 at 20:09
Originally posted by Boreasi Boreasi wrote:


<h3 minmax_bound="true">Genetic trails:</h3>

<p minmax_bound="true">This suggests an arrival in the region soon
after the retreat of the glacial ice, either by way of Continental
Europe and/or the Volga-Ural region.

So it's either or both, but nothing is really settled for now it seems.

The ancestors of the Sami walked in as soon as the ice retreated enough, something like 15.000 years ago.

Likely one contribution came from the south, others from the Urals in the east.

Any link with other arctic peoples to the east is quite weak, and probably non-existant with the Inuits.

And you still can't pick out the 15.000 Sami living in Stockholm in a crowd.
One must not insult the future.
Back to Top
Jams View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jams Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Apr-2007 at 05:50
The oldest Sámi remains I've heard about are 5600 years old, or something like that, with some evidence of 8000 years old settlement. Those might not really have been Sámi as we know them today, but the area was populated.
 
Another thing, the Sámi cannot have been the Skraelings, because the Norse, especially those from Norway, and they were the ones going to Greenland and America,  knew very well the Sámi, so they would have described them as so, if they met them.


Edited by Jams - 09-Apr-2007 at 11:45
Infonor homepage: http://infonor.dk/ RAIPON homepage: http://www.raipon.org/
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.