Native American legends about the Vikings

[Harte]

23 minutes ago, Lord Harry said:

Probably because the location was too remote for that to have been practical.  In an open fight, the Vikings with their steel weapons and armor likely would have made quick work of most of the local tribes, but the trouble would have been bringing in enough man power to conquer and hold onto large amounts of territory.  Viking New World settlements were more suitable for trade than for military conquest.

Also, they didn't have Jim Marshall, Carl Eller, Alan Page, and Gary Larsen with them.

Harte.

[onlookerofmayhem]

4 minutes ago, Harte said:

Also, they didn't have Jim Marshall, Carl Eller, Alan Page, and Gary Larsen with them.

Harte.

Oh. You said Gary Larsen, not Larson. My bad.

[Piney]

8 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

That a native American woman came to Iceland nearly a 1,000 years ago.

Quote

She was probably Naskapi. The Northernmost Algonquians who were there before the Inuit. At least that's what the genes "say". 

We're generally peaceful and didn't war against the Whites unless really pushed.

 

[Hanslune]

15 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

Oh. You said Gary Larsen, not Larson. My bad.

I see your Larson and

 

[Oniomancer]

32 minutes ago, Lord Harry said:

Thanks for the information.  It would have been a fierce battle though.  But it would seem the Norse settlers in the New World were more interested in mercantile activities than in military conquest.

Though the legend of the stone giants is something that may be worth looking into.  It could reflect a cultural memory of warfare between the Native peoples and the Vikings.

At least one legend (tete-de-boule) states that they rubbed against pitched-covered trees and then rolled in the sand, so that it looked like they were made of stone.

21 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Yeah they were probably after wood and perhaps trade.

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/11/101123-native-american-indian-vikings-iceland-genetic-dna-science-europe/

That a native American woman came to Iceland nearly a 1,000 years ago.

 

Possible Thule culture, who were completely displaced by the Inuit around the time the vikings came to Greenland. Inuit legends  describe a culturally primitive race inhabiting Greenland they call tunijuk, who didn't possess fire and dressed in untanned hides. which have been suggested to refer to the Thule.

[Kenemet]

I'm a little leery of some of these "legends", particularly as attributed to the Native Americans.  I think that if we're exploring this, we need to find and name sources.  Many Native American legend books are actually a bunch of hooey.

[Piney]

35 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

I'm a little leery of some of these "legends", particularly as attributed to the Native Americans.  I think that if we're exploring this, we need to find and name sources.  Many Native American legend books are actually a bunch of hooey.

Many? Howabout most! 

[Piney]

2 hours ago, Oniomancer said:

Possible Thule culture, who were completely displaced by the Inuit around the time the vikings came to Greenland. Inuit legends  describe a culturally primitive race inhabiting Greenland they call tunijuk, who didn't possess fire and dressed in untanned hides. which have been suggested to refer to the Thule.

One of the Naskapi groups probably with a bit of exaggeration. Some were not even territorial and just wandered. Others only wore dressed skins with the hair left on that were not fitted or sewn tight, ala 19th century "cave man". 

[Tatetopa]

9 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

so why didn't the early Norse settlers infect the natives with diseases, conquer them with steel and take advantage of all the raw materials and resources of the new world? 

Pre- Black Death, and likely not as many communicable diseases as continental Europeans who lived in closer proximity to more people and livestock.

All they had is what they brought with them on  their ships.  There would not have been sheaves of arrows and spare war gear.  If they ran out of arrows,  apart from flint if they remembered how to work it the available source for more arrowheads would have been bog iron.  I believe in  Egil's Saga, his advice to Icelandic farmers  to increase their prosperity was to spend as much time as they could refining bog iron.  It is tedious and time consuming and not something to do in the face of imminent attack.

I think they blew their trading opportunities by killing the first Skraelings they encountered. 

What do you plunder from a people who keep no livestock, have bone and flint tools, no gold, silver, or other items marketable back in Europe?  The local people could have run a day or two out of reach  and resettle rather than fight a pitched battle.

How do you hunt?  If you go out in large groups, you scare away the game.  If you go out solo, you don't come back.  The Norse were brave and fearsome warriors, but I would bet on Piney's ancestors, especially with any natural cover to winnow them down.  We put way too much stock in the superiority of our weaponry and give not enough credit to diseases to establish a beachhead then sheer numbers to invade.

It was a long way to haul back a profitable cargo of slaves. Scandinavian slaves shared the rudiments of culture and language with their captors.  A farmer could set them to work on familiar tasks, tending livestock, clearing fields, planting, or even crafting.  What do you do with someone who does not speak your language or have even rudimentary skills pertaining to your culture?. Beyond a curiosity or two, not much.

I think there is no evidence of livestock or crops in the Norse settlement.  Middens are mostly fish and seal bones, not cattle brought from home or terrestrial big game.  

Timber and pitch from the New England forests would have been a shipwright's dream, but those could be had closer to home.

The Greenland settlement was far  less than 1000 people, not enough to mount an expeditionary force.  We think about the Great Heathen Army that invaded rich, prosperous Anglo-Saxon England  with 200+ ships, only a few days pleasant sail from home in Denmark.

Vinland expeditions were not of that scale, or even that easy. The Norse were businessmen as well as warriors.  They put their resources toward more immediate gains. and profits.  It only appears short sighted to us with our perspective of history and technology

To paraphrase Gimli in Lord of the Rings, "Small chance of victory. Near certain death.  What are we waiting for?"

[Oniomancer]

1 hour ago, Kenemet said:

I'm a little leery of some of these "legends", particularly as attributed to the Native Americans.  I think that if we're exploring this, we need to find and name sources.  Many Native American legend books are actually a bunch of hooey.

The tete-de-boule legend is sourced to John Cooper, "The Cree Witiko psychosis". 

Main source for the toonijuk stories (correct spelling) appears to be Katherine Scherman, "Spring On An Arctic Island". Granted she's being quoted in turn by Ivan Sanderson in an article speculating on possible bigfoot in the arctic. (as the other legend is quoted in Monsters Of The Northwoods.)

.

[Piney]

6 minutes ago, Oniomancer said:

The tete-de-boule legend is sourced to John Cooper, "The Cree Witiko psychosis". 

Then the pine pitch and sand coating was something their Wiindiigo clowns did. 

 

[fred_mc]

8 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Well, most versions of the tale have it that it's only a small band/settlement of storm lost Norsemen and not a flotilla so the whole rape and pillage agenda would be shelved until reinforcements could Vike (what IS the present tense of "Viking"? Seeing as it's apparently a verb, not a noun) their way to the Americas.

I have in Swedish seen the terms "fara i viking", "gå i viking" and "dra i viking". In a Wikipedia page in Swedish it says that in the Icelandic sagas, "viking" is often used as a part of the term "dra i viking". All of these terms would in English be something like "go in viking" so I guess it wouldn't be "vike" but something like "go in viking".

[Mellon Man]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Pre- Black Death, and likely not as many communicable diseases as continental Europeans who lived in closer proximity to more people and livestock.

All they had is what they brought with them on  their ships.  There would not have been sheaves of arrows and spare war gear.  If they ran out of arrows,  apart from flint if they remembered how to work it the available source for more arrowheads would have been bog iron.  I believe in  Egil's Saga, his advice to Icelandic farmers  to increase their prosperity was to spend as much time as they could refining bog iron.  It is tedious and time consuming and not something to do in the face of imminent attack.

I think they blew their trading opportunities by killing the first Skraelings they encountered. 

What do you plunder from a people who keep no livestock, have bone and flint tools, no gold, silver, or other items marketable back in Europe?  The local people could have run a day or two out of reach  and resettle rather than fight a pitched battle.

How do you hunt?  If you go out in large groups, you scare away the game.  If you go out solo, you don't come back.  The Norse were brave and fearsome warriors, but I would bet on Piney's ancestors, especially with any natural cover to winnow them down.  We put way too much stock in the superiority of our weaponry and give not enough credit to diseases to establish a beachhead then sheer numbers to invade.

It was a long way to haul back a profitable cargo of slaves. Scandinavian slaves shared the rudiments of culture and language with their captors.  A farmer could set them to work on familiar tasks, tending livestock, clearing fields, planting, or even crafting.  What do you do with someone who does not speak your language or have even rudimentary skills pertaining to your culture?. Beyond a curiosity or two, not much.

I think there is no evidence of livestock or crops in the Norse settlement.  Middens are mostly fish and seal bones, not cattle brought from home or terrestrial big game.  

Timber and pitch from the New England forests would have been a shipwright's dream, but those could be had closer to home.

The Greenland settlement was far  less than 1000 people, not enough to mount an expeditionary force.  We think about the Great Heathen Army that invaded rich, prosperous Anglo-Saxon England  with 200+ ships, only a few days pleasant sail from home in Denmark.

Vinland expeditions were not of that scale, or even that easy. The Norse were businessmen as well as warriors.  They put their resources toward more immediate gains. and profits.  It only appears short sighted to us with our perspective of history and technology

To paraphrase Gimli in Lord of the Rings, "Small chance of victory. Near certain death.  What are we waiting for?"

When i have time, next week, I'll go into further details with references. But for now  I just have to ask. Where do you get your information from? Most of it is erroneous  

[Swede]

19 hours ago, Piney said:

The Labrador Eskimos had a account about wiping out a settlement, but I can't find it online.

@Swede  Do you remember the story display at NMAI? or have pics? 

 

One story. It was on display at NMAI. 

Micheal and Kathy Gear was going to tie them in, in one of their historical fiction novels but I haven't been in contact with them for 10 years. 

Sorry, can't be of much help with this one, though there are accounts of the Thule supposedly wiping out a Greenland village.

.

[Piney]

3 minutes ago, Swede said:

Sorry, can't be of much help with this one, though there are accounts of the Thule supposedly wiping out a Greenland village.

 

That's what is was. If I remember correctly it was a series of watercolors on seal skins that was displayed at NMAI during the Inuit exhibit.

 I can't find it in the collection database. 

[Razumov]

America’s Lost Vikings digs deep into Norse clues left across North America

 

[Piney]

@Swede

Never heard of him

https://www.linkedin.com/in/blue-nelson-37805038

[Tatetopa]

3 hours ago, Mellon Man said:

When i have time, next week, I'll go into further details with references. But for now  I just have to ask. Where do you get your information from? Most of it is erroneous  

Good, I must admit my references are scant.  Jared Diamond was certainly one, the Sagas though questionable another.  Some information on Viking slave trade in Dublin, a couple of articles on L'Anse Aux Meadows and newer possible settlement discoveries.

https://en.natmus.dk/historical-knowledge/denmark/prehistoric-period-until-1050-ad/the-viking-age/power-and-aristocracy/slaves-and-thralls/

The thralls from Western Europe were mainly Franks, Anglo-Saxons, and Celts. Many Irish slaves were used in expeditions for the colonization of Iceland. TheNorse also took German, Baltic, Slavic and Latin slaves. The Vikings kept some slaves as servants and sold most captives in the Byzantine or Islamic markets.

 

Viking Sex Slaves – The Dirty Secret Behind The Founding Of Iceland

By Wyatt Redd

Published January 16, 2018

Updated December 18, 2018

Given the genetics of Iceland and the nature of the people who settled it, it’s possible that a large percentage of the first women on Iceland were taken there as slaves. (from Britain btw.)

https://core.tdar.org/collection/58150/captivity-and-slavery-in-viking-age-scandinavia

These people spoke similar languages and had similar technologies, so I think they could be counted in the Viking sphere of influence. 

"In most aspects, L'Anse aux Meadows resembles other early eleventh-century Norse sites in Iceland or Greenland; but its location and layout differ from all other such sites. Its situation on the most exposed bay in the area contrasts with the sheltered areas favoured for West Norse livestock farming. The usual large West Norse barns and byres are missing. Specific archaeological testing showed no sign of enclosures or shelters for livestock of any kind, or of disturbances in the flora caused by grazing and cultivation. Nor were remains of domestic animals found: all the identifiable bones being seal and whale. (A small scapula originally identified as domestic pig has now been identified as seal: A.S. Ingstad 1977: 45, 179, 266; Rick 1977; Spiess 1990.)

Erik sailed from Iceland to Greenland in the 980's with 25 ships and 500 settlers. 14 ships made it.  (about 60% maybe 300 people.?) Others followed.  Are you thinking there were a lot more people in Greeland around 1000AD?   You sure could be right.  I don't know when the next wave followed but a generation or so later, there were 400 farms and 2500 or so people.  Peak population in the 1100's onwards is argued between 2500 and 10,000. I don't know

The l"Anse aux Meadows  site seems to be sized for what - 60 to 150 people, about 3 ship's crews. It seemed to be occupied occasionally at least for 3-10 years.   There is evidence of a carpenter shop and a bloomery  so certainly ship repair or replacement was on their minds, At least one Norse marine historians says it is easier to build a new ship that to replace damaged strakes.  Evidence of nail fragments in fire pits supports the burning of at least some old strakes.

https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/nflds/article/view/140/236

According to this source, slag from the bloom iron furnace and forging slag was pretty limited, likely a single one time event (ship outfitting? maybe).

In any case, I don't want to die stupid or transmit false information, so when you have time, your references would be appreciated.

 

 

[Piney]

5 hours ago, fred_mc said:

I have in Swedish seen the terms "fara i viking", "gå i viking" and "dra i viking". In a Wikipedia page in Swedish it says that in the Icelandic sagas, "viking" is often used as a part of the term "dra i viking". All of these terms would in English be something like "go in viking" so I guess it wouldn't be "vike" but something like "go in viking".

It was a verb that became a noun to English speaking historians. 

[jaylemurph]

11 hours ago, Hanslune said:

I see your Larson and

 

I might frame this and put it up in my office. 

—Jaylemurph 

[+Pettytalk]

The "legend" of Vikings arriving on the American continent before Columbus falls by the wayside because all the effects caused by Virgin Soil Effects originating and spreading from the areas first touched by Columbus' group and the other Spanish following expeditions. No such effects were ever recorded for the supposed northern areas the Vikings are said to have touched. And neither is there any material corroboration for proof of their having been there, which would also have been borrowed/copied by the natives, such as European weapons/technology/food-plants which would have occurred, even on a small scale. Surely some Vikings must have relinquished their steel weapons to the natives, especially those fallen in battle. 

On the same token, the Vikings having reached the American continent before Columbus is just as fictitious as the Atlantians having sailed to Europe and Libya (Africa), and for many of the same reasons. After all, those Viking vessels were no better than the triremes the Atlantians are said to have used.

[Hanslune]

16 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

The "legend" of Vikings arriving on the American continent before Columbus falls by the wayside because all the effects caused by Virgin Soil Effects originating and spreading from the areas first touched by Columbus' group and the other Spanish following expeditions. No such effects were ever recorded for the supposed northern areas the Vikings are said to have touched. And neither is there any material corroboration for proof of their having been there, which would also have been borrowed/copied by the natives, such as European weapons/technology/food-plants which would have occurred, even on a small scale. Surely some Vikings must have relinquished their steel weapons to the natives, especially those fallen in battle. 

On the same token, the Vikings having reached the American continent before Columbus is just as fictitious as the Atlantians having sailed to Europe and Libya (Africa), and for many of the same reasons. After all, those Viking vessels were no better than the triremes the Atlantians are said to have used.

Wow a 'Norse' denier haven't come across one of those in over a decade - congrats.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L'Anse_aux_Meadows

https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/nflds/article/view/140/236

http://www.angelfire.com/nf/mcarey/fullcircle/LAM.html

One of my professors had a teacher who had been against the idea of Norse being here and that the sagas were just stories - when the site above was found he led the fight to denounce it and lost - badly. He felt that the NA had gone to Iceland and Greenland and taken the materials then set up a Norse style settlement........

The Norse in the Americas is a done deal - good luck trying to reverse it.

Edited April 1, 2019 by Hanslune

[Piney]

13 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

Virgin Soil Effects

The technical term is the "Columbian Exchange".

 

13 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

 

No such effects were ever recorded for the supposed northern areas the Vikings are said to have touched. And neither is there any material corroboration for proof of their having been there, which would also have been borrowed/copied by the natives, such as European weapons/technology/food-plants which would have occurred, even on a small scale. Surely some Vikings must have relinquished their steel weapons to the natives, especially those fallen in battle. 

They didn't bring large armies full of disease carrying *****s, laborers and slaves. Nor did they coast up and down the Eastern Seaboard in disease filled slave ships. As for weapons. We rarely find Spanish ones and they brought hundreds of soldiers.  

They were just a small group of healthy people and on the East Coast, iron tools rust pretty quick.  There is only 2 known "trade celts" in existence. Out of hundreds. 

[Hanslune]

2 minutes ago, Piney said:

The technical term is the "Columbian Exchange".

 

They didn't bring large armies full of disease carrying *****s, laborers and slaves. Nor did they coast up and down the Eastern Seaboard in disease filled slave ships. As for weapons. We rarely find Spanish ones and they brought hundreds of soldiers.  

They were just a small group of healthy people and on the East Coast, iron tools rust pretty quick.  There is only 2 known "trade celts" in existence. Out of hundreds. 

Only a handful of iron items exist from the Norse site:

And a bit of bronze

http://www.angelfire.com/nf/mcarey/fullcircle/LAM.html

Edited April 1, 2019 by Hanslune

[Oniomancer]

1 hour ago, Pettytalk said:

The "legend" of Vikings arriving on the American continent before Columbus falls by the wayside because all the effects caused by Virgin Soil Effects originating and spreading from the areas first touched by Columbus' group and the other Spanish following expeditions. No such effects were ever recorded for the supposed northern areas the Vikings are said to have touched. And neither is there any material corroboration for proof of their having been there, which would also have been borrowed/copied by the natives, such as European weapons/technology/food-plants which would have occurred, even on a small scale. Surely some Vikings must have relinquished their steel weapons to the natives, especially those fallen in battle. 

On the same token, the Vikings having reached the American continent before Columbus is just as fictitious as the Atlantians having sailed to Europe and Libya (Africa), and for many of the same reasons. After all, those Viking vessels were no better than the triremes the Atlantians are said to have used.

Why/how would they have borrow/copied something they wouldn't have known how to reproduce, esp. when they had perfectly serviceable if not superior ones of their own?