Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
The Puzzler

The Saami of Lapland Their Place in the World

141 posts in this topic

Since I'm not really into Fey, Cloud People or Sitchin I'm finding the board a bit boring so am going to indulge in a new topic I find highly interesting.

The Saami people of Lapland and their place in history.

If you don't know who they are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_people

This is an amazing Blog dedicated to them and researching their history, I really recommend taking a look to get an understanding of them: http://saamiblog.blogspot.com/

This is Wiki Sami Shamanism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_shamanism Keep in mind how much their culture has been distorted by incoming and more powerful groups around them and I'll go into this more later, I have taken the time to completely disect the mythology between Sami and Finnish, more on that later.

An example: Radien-attje is often portrayed as the main figure in a Trinity, which besides him, consists by the Raedieahkka or Radien-akka (Maadteraahka, the superior mother) and their son Radien-pardne. There are critics who claim, that this Trinity is a consequence of the meeting with the Christian religion, and that it is a match to the God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit. If this is the case, it is interesting, that the Sami have replaced the Holy Spirit with a wife.

Interesting...? Sure is, I hardly doubt the Saami were actually replacing anything they had originally, only changing as people intruded on them. They had a Maadteraahka, a Mother, she wasn't missing. One should really wonder about who was taking who's lore and changing them...

1+Nomad_Sami_late_1800eds_Northern_Sweden_Norway__Credit_Saamiblog.jpg

My own view on them is extreme, I think they are the holders of all the ancient spiritual knowledge of shamanism. They have Noaide's who can communicate with the spirits (Gods) and have possibly been, or at least the ancestors of them before the Asian intrusion, in the Arctic Circle for over 10,000 years.

Living under the Pole Star in the Lap of the Gods. I'll point out Santa lives in Lapland with the Saami and the reindeer. This is not a co-incidence imo. The only people worshipping the Sun were those who needed it's arrival after 6 months of darkness. It's the land beyond Hyperborea. They possess the mythology of the World Tree that reaches up to the Pole Star, an ancient concept.

Starting at the start, I'll give a scenario I find to be logical and can find nothing to really invalidate it, although I'm sure cormac or someone can fix that for me. :rolleyes:

My own opinion is that the Saami were originally part of the Magdalenian Culture of France and after the LGM they moved North with the reindeer.

Reindeer lived all over Europe once, when it was very cold, then they retreated North and I suspect the herders moved with them, and stayed there. Too logical I know.

Since they have a history of the labyrinth, it should not be ruled out how far they took this symbol with them. Recent genetics has shown they possess a connection to ancient Berbers c. 9000BP.

Labyrinten%2Bp%25C3%25A5%2BHolmen%2BGr%25C3%25A5%2Bi%2Bn%25C3%25A6rheten%2Bav%2BKirkenes.%2BArkitektguide%2Bfor%2BNord-Norge%2Bog%2BSvalbard%252C%2Bhttp%2Blenken...%2BFoto%2Bav%2BInger%2BHelen%2BUnstad.%2BBrukt%2Bmed%2Btillatelse..jpg

http://saamiblog.blogspot.com/

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Humans in North America thread:

OK cormac, thanks for the response, I don't think any of it negates anything I said already. They originated in Europe, yes. A male population came in. I'm stubborn sometimes. It might seem I'm not listening but I am, I see holes. Anyway, because this has gone way off topic I started my own Saami topic if you have anything to add there.

You cannot prove they dominated the Komsa Culture, because it appears they WERE part of this culture. There is a continuation through to the Saami. I don't know of any DNA or anything from this Komsa Culture that they tested. If you would like to reply again, maybe you could answer in my New Topic on the Saami to prevent getting OT here.

There's no evidence for a male population coming in to dominate the Sami and take them further north. What there is, is evidence that the Sami and Berber split c.9000 BP. Each going its own way.

Nobody dominated the Komsa Culture, it was incorporated into the Fosna Culture as a continuation thereof IIRC. And one would expect some aspect of the Fosna Culture to ingrain itself into the newly arrived Sami Culture. Particularly over thousands of years and where it's known that Sami merged with the native Z and D5 mtDNA haplogroups. This DOES NOT make the Sami any older than 9000 BP, nor indigenous to Northern Europe. And off-topic for a moment, it DOESN'T validate the OLB either. Every such attempt backfires.

While many claims about them have more holes than Swiss Cheese, they are an interesting people.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I made up to clarify the shamanic spirits as they saw them. Note the difference between some Sami and some Finnish ones, especially Ukko and Tiermes.

wraldaworldsami.jpg

This is their concept - the spirit of Waralden Olmai/Radien Attje, who I will shorten to Wralda for the sake of this thread, was the World - from it a pole or pillar went to the sky and inseminated the Pole Star, the Mother. This was celebrated each Autumn.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Humans in North America thread:

There's no evidence for a male population coming in to dominate the Sami and take them further north. What there is, is evidence that the Sami and Berber split c.9000 BP. Each going its own way.

Nobody dominated the Komsa Culture, it was incorporated into the Fosna Culture as a continuation thereof IIRC. And one would expect some aspect of the Fosna Culture to ingrain itself into the newly arrived Sami Culture. Particularly over thousands of years and where it's known that Sami merged with the native Z and D5 mtDNA haplogroups. This DOES NOT make the Sami any older than 9000 BP, nor indigenous to Northern Europe. And off-topic for a moment, it DOESN'T validate the OLB either. Every such attempt backfires.

While many claims about them have more holes than Swiss Cheese, they are an interesting people.

cormac

It might be you are not understanding me, which I know can be hard sometimes....

1. I never said the male influx took them further north. I already think they were in the Northern parts when the intrusion came in.

2. I understand about the Berber split prior to 9000BP and how the group that split came from what would not have been 'Saami' as such.

3. I speak in terms of the people prior to them being designated Saami as still of the Saami group that formed the Saami core.

4. I never said they dominated the Komsa culture as I believe the cultures just developed and not changed from intrusion at that time.

5. My estimate on the male Eastern population coming into the Nordic countries is around 3000-2000BC.

6. I never said they were completely indigenous to Scandinavia, I said they moved up North from Western Central Europe c. 10,000-9,000BC with the change in Europes weather.

7. I can't believe we agree on something, yay, they sure are interesting regardless what my own thoughts are on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This appears to substantiate my idea their original language was NOT Finno-Ugric.

The Finns and the Sámi maintained their separate language identity even at a time when other Uralic speakers were losing their language to the Indo-Europeans. This still leaves the crucial question that asks ‘how and when did the Finns and the Sámi begin speaking related languages in the first place?’ This is one of the bigger controversies in Scandinavian history. There is argument as to whether the Finns and the Sámi “arrived in their present day locations either as a still undifferentiated ethnolinguistic group or as linguistically and ethnically separate people. [14] Genetic and linguistic data of 1995 seemed to show that the Finns arrived in Sámi territory a mere 2,000 to 4,000 years ago, while at the same time adopting the Sámi way of speaking. This idea was revolutionary. The Finns had always been thought of as the more dominant group but now new theories claiming that it was the Finns who got their language from the Sámi have started to arise. The Sámi, for first time, appear not to have always been the weaker minority. [15]

Sajantila’s ten-year old theory, though empowering to the Sámi, has been suggested to be somewhat false in many of its aspects, as recently as 2002. The new theory, using mitochondrial DNA testing, states that the Finns did not arrive in Sámiland only a short 3,000 years ago but rather came out of the Sámi themselves. When adding genetic evidence to the Baltic-Finnish and the Sámi language relationship, it appears that the two groups did descend from one single genetic and linguistic population, with the Finns diverging because of Baltic and Germanic agricultural influences; however, because of the distinctness between the two groups, the common ancestor may have divided as long ago as 23,000 BP and then reunited at around 8,500 BP. After the divergence of the Finns from the Sámi, the Sámi tended to have offspring within their own group; however, the influence from the Baltic and Germanic people caused the Finns to intermix with other Indo-Europeans, making them more genetically similar to the Europeans than the Sámi are. [16]

It makes sense that the Sámi should be closely tied to the Finns, if at one time they were the same group, even if this did take place many thousands of years ago. They originated from Europe but spoke a Uralic language among themselves. However, if the most recent data is true, the two groups seem to be genetically and linguistically distinct enough to allow them to finally be studied as separate groups, so there is an illogical sense to the Sámi and Finns link as well. So it seems that all the pieces of the Sámi puzzle have almost been put into place; however, with a history as long as theirs, pieces are always bound to be missing.

For example, in Sámiland and throughout Scandinavia, there still exists an obvious residue of an even more ancient unknown language than Uralic in the region. Many of the names of rivers and lakes have no linguistic roots. [17] This mystery still remains to this day and may possibly never be uncovered, but one must not forget how historically wrong science had been about the history of the Sámi. There is still a large amount on new information to be uncovered about the Sámi’s very ancient past.

http://www.utexas.edu/courses/sami/dieda/hist/genetic.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for interest.

ejhg2010179f2.jpg

The Sami are the one with the most green. The yellowish colour is the Asiatic element. The maroon at the top is the small amount of DNA that is the same as Native Americans.

I didn't think the writing would show but it does.

You can find the actual chart here. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/12/the-men-of-the-north-the-sami/

There is a definite “eastern” affinity among the Sami. Interestingly, it is broken down into a major and minor component. The major one (yellow) is what is found among the Han, while the minor one (maroon) resembles Native Americans. The natural interpretation for this is that what one is seeing is the shadow of the circumpolar northern Eurasian populations which spanned eastern Europe to Siberia. In comparison with other European populations the Sami affinity with Russians is clear, though interestingly they lack the “blue” component which peaks in northwest South Asian populations, which the Russians have, and Sardinians and French Basque lack.

They lack the blue component, as do Sardinians and French Basque. There is a tiny amount of it.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be you are not understanding me, which I know can be hard sometimes....

1. I never said the male influx took them further north. I already think they were in the Northern parts when the intrusion came in.

2. I understand about the Berber split prior to 9000BP and how the group that split came from what would not have been 'Saami' as such.

3. I speak in terms of the people prior to them being designated Saami as still of the Saami group that formed the Saami core.

4. I never said they dominated the Komsa culture as I believe the cultures just developed and not changed from intrusion at that time.

5. My estimate on the male Eastern population coming into the Nordic countries is around 3000-2000BC.

6. I never said they were completely indigenous to Scandinavia, I said they moved up North from Western Central Europe c. 10,000-9,000BC with the change in Europes weather.

7. I can't believe we agree on something, yay, they sure are interesting regardless what my own thoughts are on them.

1) And how does that work, genetically, as the males of any group rarely ever go very far without their women? In the least we should see a reduction of either mtDNA V or U5 (particularly U5b1b, which is Sami), yet we don't. Both groups make up the bulk of Sami genetics.

2) Good, we're making progress.

3) Ok.

4) Intrusion by whom, specifically? And based on what evidence?

5) Evidence for the Sami U5b1b dates to c.8600 +/- 2400 BP, so we'll say 6600 BC. So what evidence is there for ANY intrusion of another culture 3600+ years later. Also, that apparently their link with Haplogroup Z appears to have taken place c.2700 BP so for several thousand years their matrilineal lines weren't significantly affected by any outside influence. How is this possible?

6) And I've shown were the evidence suggests that 10,000 - 9000 BC is wrong, since they didn't split from the Berbers until 9000 BP (7000 BC).

7) Yes, they are.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) And how does that work, genetically, as the males of any group rarely ever go very far without their women? In the least we should see a reduction of either mtDNA V or U5 (particularly U5b1b, which is Sami), yet we don't. Both groups make up the bulk of Sami genetics.

2) Good, we're making progress.

3) Ok.

4) Intrusion by whom, specifically? And based on what evidence?

5) Evidence for the Sami U5b1b dates to c.8600 +/- 2400 BP, so we'll say 6600 BC. So what evidence is there for ANY intrusion of another culture 3600+ years later. Also, that apparently their link with Haplogroup Z appears to have taken place c.2700 BP so for several thousand years their matrilineal lines weren't significantly affected by any outside influence. How is this possible?

6) And I've shown were the evidence suggests that 10,000 - 9000 BC is wrong, since they didn't split from the Berbers until 9000 BP (7000 BC).

7) Yes, they are.

cormac

1. I beg to differ. Warrior groups who travelled were more than likely only men, it's well known from myths and stories women were left at home for even more than 10 years while men were off, history gives us numerous large wars where men were off for very, very long periods without women, or their wives and families anyway.

Earlier in time even, as a woman, I know I'd rather be sitting around the warm fire sewing up a seal skin coat than off at war or hunting, which generally is man's game - we produce, not kill. Also, I'm really just going off this:

Anthropologists have been studying the Sami people for hundreds of years for their assumed physical and cultural differences from the rest of Europeans. Recent genetic studies have indicated that the two most frequent maternal lineages of the Sámi people are the haplogroups V and the U5b, ancient in Europe. By contrast, the most common paternal lineage among the Sami indicates an Asian origin, who may represent a Uralic-speaking people.

The paternal group indicates an Asian origin, so what else would you make of that than a group of males entering into the (I'll call them) proto-Saami populace? Only after they came in do we get what we term the Saami imo, which genetics shows us today. This links to Q5. The Saami became so at the time the Asian male population came in.

4. No intrusion by anyone. The Sami show a continuation from this culture archaeologically.

5. Why does this indicate this is when the male Asian group might have come in? Evidence for the Sami U5b1b dates to c.8600 +/- 2400 BP, so we'll say 6600 BC.

Is it because the U5b1b has this MALE Asiatic element in it? I'm not sure on haplogroup evidence, the evidence I had read about was old, the IE language coming in with them c. 3000-2000BC, which may have been the point of an incoming Eastern people but I'm still out on this one really. I'm accepting when need be and will look at this point some more.

6. 7000BC some kind of split happened, you say...eg? Group A was roaming, from then came Group B and C, B being Sami, C being Berber - so Group A could not be Saami?

If this is what you mean, I say Group A could still be a proto-Saami group and seen as being a Saami people.

I don't actually like to go against hard evidence, I try to work with it or I may as well be spouting about ancient aliens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I first said, it's my thought that from about 15,000B-12,000BC the people who had been part of the Magdalenian culture moved North, or some of them anyway, not whole populations, to keep hunting reindeer. I think it's illogical to think they would not have done that.

The reindeer horns seen on Cernunnos and other associated reindeer spirit Gods tells me this animal was core to a belief they had.

From the Humans in America thread:

The serphants phases of the Magdalenian are also synonymous with the human re-settlement of north-western Europe after the Last Glacial Maximum during the Late Glacial Maximum. Research in Switzerland, southern Germany [3] and Belgium [4] has provided AMS radiocarbon dating to support this.

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Magdalenian

Magdalenian sites are contemporary with Chancelade Man. Originally Chancelade Man, before being denoted Cro-Magnon status was relegated to an Eskimo because of some similarities in the skull, this idea has since been disgarded. But it shows that Chancelade Man of France actually may have been fairly similar looking to the Saami.

Magdalenian culture tent:

200px-Pincevent_tent.gif

Sami tents:

l_2bdd8793681345deaa3325e1b68fc739.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I beg to differ. Warrior groups who travelled were more than likely only men, it's well known from myths and stories women were left at home for even more than 10 years while men were off, history gives us numerous large wars where men were off for very, very long periods without women, or their wives and families anyway.

Earlier in time even, as a woman, I know I'd rather be sitting around the warm fire sewing up a seal skin coat than off at war or hunting, which generally is man's game - we produce, not kill. Also, I'm really just going off this:

Anthropologists have been studying the Sami people for hundreds of years for their assumed physical and cultural differences from the rest of Europeans. Recent genetic studies have indicated that the two most frequent maternal lineages of the Sámi people are the haplogroups V and the U5b, ancient in Europe. By contrast, the most common paternal lineage among the Sami indicates an Asian origin, who may represent a Uralic-speaking people.

The paternal group indicates an Asian origin, so what else would you make of that than a group of males entering into the (I'll call them) proto-Saami populace? Only after they came in do we get what we term the Saami imo, which genetics shows us today. This links to Q5. The Saami became so at the time the Asian male population came in.

4. No intrusion by anyone. The Sami show a continuation from this culture archaeologically.

5. Why does this indicate this is when the male Asian group might have come in? Evidence for the Sami U5b1b dates to c.8600 +/- 2400 BP, so we'll say 6600 BC.

Is it because the U5b1b has this MALE Asiatic element in it? I'm not sure on haplogroup evidence, the evidence I had read about was old, the IE language coming in with them c. 3000-2000BC, which may have been the point of an incoming Eastern people but I'm still out on this one really. I'm accepting when need be and will look at this point some more.

6. 7000BC some kind of split happened, you say...eg? Group A was roaming, from then came Group B and C, B being Sami, C being Berber - so Group A could not be Saami?

If this is what you mean, I say Group A could still be a proto-Saami group and seen as being a Saami people.

I don't actually like to go against hard evidence, I try to work with it or I may as well be spouting about ancient aliens.

1) Myths and stories are not fact. And while N1c (formerly N3) is indeed Asian it was in the area prior to the Sami's arrival (and therefore prior to your speculation of 3000 - 2000 BC) while the other groups, namely I, R1a and R1b, are European.

Yes the majority, by a slight margin, indicates an Asian origin. However, once again, there is no evidence of a warrior-style intrusion so therefore nothing to support the OLB's claims. Which it appears you're trying to find.

4). If there was no intrusion by anyone then you can leave out the warriors claim you attempted earlier, as war is rather intrusive. :lol: And the Sami may show a continutation, to greater or lesser degrees, of the cultures originally in the area but again they don't do so prior to 9000 BP.

5) This ISN'T indicative of when a male Asian group came in. It only indicates when the specific subgroup for Sami, U5b1b, dates to. U5b1b has NO male genetic element to it, it doesn't work that way. Also Proto-Indo-European and early Indo-European dates to your 3000 - 2000 BC timeframe, but Sami and other groups were already in the area prior to that. So whatever language they originally spoke, it wasn't PIE/IE.

6) Not any more than they would be Berber. At best they could be seen as a Sami-Berber people. There's no reason to believe the Sami were any more important to the equation that were the Berber people.

/////

As I first said, it's my thought that from about 15,000B-12,000BC the people who had been part of the Magdalenian culture moved North, or some of them anyway, not whole populations, to keep hunting reindeer. I think it's illogical to think they would not have done that.

It's not illogical to think that, however, they wouldn't have been Sami in any meaningful way.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Myths and stories are not fact. And while N1c (formerly N3) is indeed Asian it was in the area prior to the Sami's arrival (and therefore prior to your speculation of 3000 - 2000 BC) while the other groups, namely I, R1a and R1b, are European.

Yes the majority, by a slight margin, indicates an Asian origin. However, once again, there is no evidence of a warrior-style intrusion so therefore nothing to support the OLB's claims. Which it appears you're trying to find.

4). If there was no intrusion by anyone then you can leave out the warriors claim you attempted earlier, as war is rather intrusive. :lol: And the Sami may show a continutation, to greater or lesser degrees, of the cultures originally in the area but again they don't do so prior to 9000 BP.

5) This ISN'T indicative of when a male Asian group came in. It only indicates when the specific subgroup for Sami, U5b1b, dates to. U5b1b has NO male genetic element to it, it doesn't work that way. Also Proto-Indo-European and early Indo-European dates to your 3000 - 2000 BC timeframe, but Sami and other groups were already in the area prior to that. So whatever language they originally spoke, it wasn't PIE/IE.

6) Not any more than they would be Berber. At best they could be seen as a Sami-Berber people. There's no reason to believe the Sami were any more important to the equation that were the Berber people.

/////

It's not illogical to think that, however, they wouldn't have been Sami in any meaningful way.

cormac

This thread has nothing to do with the OLB actually.

Also, you are going on with crap about the warrior intrusion - I was saying that in response to you saying women would have travelled with the men no matter what, well I don't think they would have. I never said anything about any warrior intrusion into anywhere except in that context.

U5b1b - I didn't mean it had a male element in IT. As usual we seem to be unable to communicate with each other.

I think they were a proto-Saami people then, I still think these people developed into the Saami when they moved North. Or should I say, were the people, who once the Asian element came in, became known as Saami.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Post #3 I showed a chart of Sami Shaman spirits. The Father of the Tribe is named Maadteraahja, to me this word sounds like it contains a Father of a Tribe, the Father of Abraham, Terah. Ja at the end, as a male spirit also reminds me of the shortened form of Jehovah's name Jah. Co-incidence? :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never said anything about any warrior intrusion into anywhere except in that context.

But you DID bring the 'warrior' element into the discussion, when there was no real reason to. And, historically speaking, rarely is an 'intrusion' seen as a peaceful occurance.

Also in Post #4; 1) you claimed there WAS an intrusion then in Post #8; 4) you said there WASN'T. So which is it? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

U5b1b - I didn't mean it had a male element in IT. As usual we seem to be unable to communicate with each other.

Well, then you're going to have to explain it better. Because it didn't make sense as written.

I think they were a proto-Saami people then, I still think these people developed into the Saami when they moved North. Or should I say, were the people, who once the Asian element came in, became known as Saami.

Very possible, but the evidence goes no further than that. Which is the problem I've had with past claims up to this point.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very possible, but the evidence goes no further than that. Which is the problem I've had with past claims up to this point.

cormac

I'm not bothering about the rest of your post because it just goes around in circles.

OK, I understand that, there is no evidence. Possible though and that is all I need, after all this is a discussion forum, what point is discussing already evidenced things? Hardly Unexplained Mysteries are they..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about the NOAide? A mediator between the Earthly World and the Spirit World, can't say that's not reminding me of someone else, getting instructions from above.

A noaide or noaidi was a mediator between earthly world and the spirit world for the smallest of community problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_shamanism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We also know the area the Saami lived must have had a huge flooding when the Baltic Sea formed and other land areas became submerged such as Doggerland.

ka, jah, noaides, floods, terahs, Father of the Tribes...of course I'm talking through my hat to even suggest something so absurd I'm sure. :w00t:

Anyways...they have drums and noisy makers, shakers and such, which reminds me of the followers of Dionysus as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not bothering about the rest of your post because it just goes around in circles.

OK, I understand that, there is no evidence. Possible though and that is all I need, after all this is a discussion forum, what point is discussing already evidenced things? Hardly Unexplained Mysteries are they..?

I'm sorry that your use of the word 'intrusion' was ill-advised and that the bit about U5b1b made no sense, but that was solely your doing. If you wish to take your bat and ball and go home, then so be it.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry that your use of the word 'intrusion' was ill-advised and that the bit about U5b1b made no sense, but that was solely your doing. If you wish to take your bat and ball and go home, then so be it.

cormac

Yeah OK, all my fault. I'm not going anywhere except round in circles with you.

Here is what I say:

People moved out of Europe and gradually moved North with the reindeer.

They developed into early cultures of the Nordic countries.

They lived peacefully and happily.

Around 6600BC (accordingly) some group of people came in from the East, it contained a large proportion of males.

At this point they became changed from their original way and developed into who we now know as the Saami.

It's simple, easy, contains no references to warrior intrusions at 10,000BC or any other warriors entering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah OK, all my fault. I'm not going anywhere except round in circles with you.

Here is what I say:

People moved out of Europe and gradually moved North with the reindeer.

They developed into early cultures of the Nordic countries.

They lived peacefully and happily.

Around 6600BC (accordingly) some group of people came in from the East, it contained a large proportion of males.

At this point they became changed from their original way and developed into who we now know as the Saami.

It's simple, easy, contains no references to warrior intrusions at 10,000BC or any other warriors entering.

And it's the highlighted points that I'm talking about. There is no evidence that anyone 'came in from the East' while there IS evidence that there were already people there. And again 'intrusion' is not a peaceful endeavor, although it is the term you've used. And lastly, YOU were the one who brought up the 10,000 BC date for the Sami as if it were meaningful. It's not.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it's the highlighted points that I'm talking about. There is no evidence that anyone 'came in from the East' while there IS evidence that there were already people there. And again 'intrusion' is not a peaceful endeavor, although it is the term you've used. And lastly, YOU were the one who brought up the 10,000 BC date for the Sami as if it were meaningful. It's not.

cormac

1. I never said the male influx took them further north. I already think they were in the Northern parts when the intrusion came in.

I said this in reply to you. The word intrusion is used to say that some kind of people came in to an already existing people. It was probably a bad word to use in that it means unwelcome generally, I could have said arrival. That's it, don't twist it any more.

What does this mean then, don't go on with a heap of stuff to confuse things, say it clearly so I can get it. To me, I understand it as the maternal lineage seems to be European and the paternal lineage seem to be Asian, which to me, seems to say, the women were European and a group of males who came in were Asian so the DNA shows this, mother maternal lines are European. Explain simply how I am wrong and what it means please.

Anthropologists have been studying the Sami people for hundreds of years for their assumed physical and cultural differences from the rest of Europeans. Recent genetic studies have indicated that the two most frequent maternal lineages of the Sámi people are the haplogroups V and the U5b, ancient in Europe. By contrast, the most common paternal lineage among the Sami indicates an Asian origin, who may represent a Uralic-speaking people.[98] Other haplogroups suggest additional input from other populations at various times see main article Population genetics of the Sami.

This tallies with archeological evidence suggesting that several different cultural groups made their way to the core area of Sapmi from 80006000 BC,[99] presumably including some of the ancestors of present-day Sami.

In more recent years the use of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y-DNA chromosomal markers has offered the opportunity for clarification of the origin of the Sami. While their mtDNA haplogroup distribution mainly represents a subset of the European gene-pool, the most common Y-DNA haplogroup among the Sami is of Asian origin. However the second most common haplogroup is I, which is found almost exclusively among those of European ancestry. Thus the Sami appear to have a complex population history, suggesting a mixture of peoples arriving in Fenno-Scandia at different times, from different directions. Their most common physical appearance is northern European like Finns or Scandinavians

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_people

2nd point.

Petroglyphs and archeological findings such as settlements dating from about 10,000 B.C. can be found in the traditional lands of the Sami. The now obsolete term for the archaeological culture of these hunters and gatherers of the late Paleolithic and early Mesolithic is Komsa. A cultural continuity between these stone age people and the Sami can be assumed due to evidence such as the similarities in the decoration patterns of archeological bone objects and Sami decoration patterns, and there is no archeological evidence of this population being replaced by another.

So why is this saying that there is an assumed CULTURAL CONNECTION between the Stone Age people (Komsa) and the Sami?

You seem to be saying no.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm always a bit suss when Governments start 'sterilization' projects on women to prevent new births of that culture.

Some examples of racist research are: the Statens Institut for Rasbiologi compulsory sterilization project for Sami women, which continued until 1975;[102] Sami graves being plundered to provide research materials,[103][104][105] of which their remains and artifacts from this period from across Sápmi can still be found in various State collections.[105][61][106][107] In the late 19th century, colonial fascination with arctic peoples led to human beings exhibited in "human zoos." Sami people were exhibited with their traditional lavvu tents, weapons, and sleds, beside a group of reindeer at Tierpark Hagenbeck[108] and other zoos across the globe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_people

You could literally say they have been treated like animals, especially when you are part of a Zoo Exhibition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL oh God when I first seen the title I misread it as " the salami of Lapland "

Lmao I hate it when only funny things happen while drinking something....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This person has made a statement:

Their orignal homeland was near the Ob River in northwestern Siberia. They arrived in Scandinavia somewhere between 8,000 and 5,000 years ago as the glaciers from the last ice age retreated from the Scandianavian coastline.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110415155310AAAOsUg

How do they know that? cormac, does this seem true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't twist anything. I took the word you used, for what it means, not for whatever you meant. So yes, a poor choice of words.

in·tru·sion

n.

1. The act of intruding or the condition of being intruded on.

2. An inappropriate or unwelcome addition.

3. Law Illegal entry upon or appropriation of the property of another.

4. Geology

a. The forcing of molten rock into an earlier formation.

b. The rock mass produced by an intrusive process.

Source

What does this mean then, don't go on with a heap of stuff to confuse things, say it clearly so I can get it. To me, I understand it as the maternal lineage seems to be European and the paternal lineage seem to be Asian, which to me, seems to say, the women were European and a group of males who came in were Asian so the DNA shows this, mother maternal lines are European. Explain simply how I am wrong and what it means please.

It means that the maternal line is European while the paternal line is split between European and Asian. With the Asian haplogroup N1c (formerly N3) being in the majority by a slight margin. While any native males to the area would have intermingled with the incoming migrants/ancestral Sami, they couldn't have changed the maternal lineages and would most likely have had the same or similar maternal lines in any case as U5 is the oldest mtDNA in Europe/Western Asia. Nor would they have done so to the exclusion of their own women, evidence of which should be exhibited in the local genetics, particularly if it was different from the mtDNA of the incoming women. AFAIK, it's not. None of which makes this an 'intrusion', again your words.

So why is this saying that there is an assumed CULTURAL CONNECTION between the Stone Age people (Komsa) and the Sami?

There is a cultural connection simply because the natives of the Fosna/Komsa Culture passed a good deal of it on to the incoming ancestral Sami, while the Sami brought in their own genetic distinctiveness. Basically, it was a synthesis of cultures. None of which happened until some point between 9000 BP and 6600 BP, making it irrelevant to any NA or OLB claims as we've both seen. It's not the cultural connection that's been the problem here. It's been your speculation of people "coming in from the east" (which never happened as they were already there) and the Sami existing c.10,000 - 9000 BC (which we know is untrue as they date to c.7000 BC), which has been the problem.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This person has made a statement:

Their orignal homeland was near the Ob River in northwestern Siberia. They arrived in Scandinavia somewhere between 8,000 and 5,000 years ago as the glaciers from the last ice age retreated from the Scandianavian coastline.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110415155310AAAOsUg

How do they know that? cormac, does this seem true?

'Brother_in_magic's response was more accurate than the response you quoted. The poster you quoted is just another person with little understanding of Sami genetics and early migration.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.