| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Human migrations
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Human migrations

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Mar 2014 at 09:14
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

 When norse settlers arrived about 1000 yers the lands were they arrived to was not populated by others for a long time.


Thanks for that info, but can you expand on it a bit please?

When did the first Vikings settle Greenland?

Were they Norse, Swedish or Danish?

Was Iceland settled before Greenland?

By whom?

Regards

Ian

Greenland was settled by Vikings from 1000 to early 16th century. The western settlement was even left before 1350.
The settlers were probably im majority from Norway (via Iceland)
Iceland was mainly settled in the last quarter of the 9th century from mainly Norway, but as well from Scotland as genetic research has shown.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Mar 2014 at 11:29
Like beorna says .... Ivar Bardarson in his voyage to the Western Settlement in Greenland (1341–1360), he found only vacant farms.

The Icelanders who wrote narrated the history down in sagas and books, has no mentioning of the event that the western settlement was abandoned,  no one knew about it - not even the eastern settlement.

Probably due to a period of colder climate they couldn't sustain farm life there (only guessing here) so they left - but to where? 

In-lands North America through Hudson Bay perhaps? - not a long journey for Vikings.
Years back I read about two french journalists (1800's) who reported back to their newspaper about a tribe of native Indians where some individuals had blue eyes, blond hair and a cross as an object of worship. I can't find it again.

Anyone knows about this? 
 




Edited by Northman - 02 Mar 2014 at 11:35
   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Mar 2014 at 12:07
My bad, doing a broader search, I can see it's a common theory - borderline facts - so stated on many sites today.

One of them is  www.frozentrail.org

~ North
   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4805
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 02:54
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

My bad, doing a broader search, I can see it's a common theory - borderline facts - so stated on many sites today.

One of them is  www.frozentrail.org

~ North
 
Borderline facts maybe, but nevertheless, it's a plausible scenario.
 
We know about Norse Vinland, it's accepted that the Vikings did in fact have a short sojourn in north east America.
 
So what would be so fantastic if it came to be proven that Vikings, before or after Ericsson, settled on the North American continent and, over time, mixed with the natives. They were certainly aware of the existence of the American land mass, and I think it would be unwise to expect that when Ericsson and his mates left, no one else bothered to have a look.
 
And we don't need to confine that speculation to what is now the USA, Canada is just as likely.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 08:34
Is it not more likely the small norse population (a few thousands at its height) migrated "back". If they went to Iceland and Norway and perhaps the archipelago North of Scotland or even other parts of Europe they would be a small proportion of populations there.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 09:25
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Is it not more likely the small norse population (a few thousands at its height) migrated "back". If they went to Iceland and Norway and perhaps the archipelago North of Scotland or even other parts of Europe they would be a small proportion of populations there.

It isn't a possibility as there are no reports what so ever about people leaving the western settlement. People in the eastern settlement would have known if they came trough there - and then the Icelanders would have known and told the story.
There wasn't much contact between the settlements in the first place - but at some point, nothing was heard at all from the western - and a few years later is was found abandoned.  


   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 10:21
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Is it not more likely the small norse population (a few thousands at its height) migrated "back". If they went to Iceland and Norway and perhaps the archipelago North of Scotland or even other parts of Europe they would be a small proportion of populations there.

It isn't a possibility as there are no reports what so ever about people leaving the western settlement. People in the eastern settlement would have known if they came trough there - and then the Icelanders would have known and told the story.
There wasn't much contact between the settlements in the first place - but at some point, nothing was heard at all from the western - and a few years later is was found abandoned.  


It is not enough to rule out that possibillity I think. Since the greenlanders were for the most not rich and famous their "return" would not cause much attention. Therefore to find any traces in the written resources would require some "detective work". Especially since those who went to "Europe" would most likely have been much the same as the "indigenous", contrary to any norse settlements we may speculate existed in North America. Therefore I tend to disagree.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4805
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 10:37
So are you all saying that it simply isn't possible for any other Scandinavian (include Greenland and Iceland) people to have reached the North American land mass and settled there, apart of course from Leif Ericssen?
 
Not even into Canada?
 
Not ever?
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 11:10
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Is it not more likely the small norse population (a few thousands at its height) migrated "back". If they went to Iceland and Norway and perhaps the archipelago North of Scotland or even other parts of Europe they would be a small proportion of populations there.

It isn't a possibility as there are no reports what so ever about people leaving the western settlement. People in the eastern settlement would have known if they came trough there - and then the Icelanders would have known and told the story.
There wasn't much contact between the settlements in the first place - but at some point, nothing was heard at all from the western - and a few years later is was found abandoned.  


It is not enough to rule out that possibillity I think. Since the greenlanders were for the most not rich and famous their "return" would not cause much attention. Therefore to find any traces in the written resources would require some "detective work". Especially since those who went to "Europe" would most likely have been much the same as the "indigenous", contrary to any norse settlements we may speculate existed in North America. Therefore I tend to disagree.

As do many others - disagree. 
But they cannot come up with a good different explanation either. 
- and I don't quite get what you say...  who went to Europe?
The theories are not about Norse settlements but an absorption into some tribes of the native people. 

The detective work has already been done and if they just went home as you say, there would have been written evidence. If there was any knowledge about it, why would the bishop send out explorers to find out what happened. 400 farms abandoned (western and middle) plus 1000 people disappearing gives food for thought - and remember they had no trees to build boats from. 

There is no proof either way - but I find it likely that they could have gone southwest over the ice to a warmer climate - you don't find it likely (based on what?).  So we differ on that.


~ North


Edited by Northman - 04 Mar 2014 at 11:12
   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4805
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 11:28
 
Imho, the absorption of Nordic people into one of the North American continental tribes is a possibility. Maybe not probable, but possible. Don't forget, all Nordic people are not blonde haired and blue eyed.
 
Perhaps one day it will become clear, after much more intensive research, including DNA.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 03 Dec 2007
Location: Lower Saxony
Status: Offline
Points: 799
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 11:34
Nobody knows, how many people lived there. About 300 farms are discovered. The smaller Vestribyggð was given up before 1350. It seems that even the people in the Eystribyggð didn't know, where they have gone to. I can't say, how many farms existed still between 1300 and 1350, but it seems, that the Vestribyggð declined. There are several possibilities for it. maybe some left to the west, for America and assimilated. Others may have died by Inuit attacks or deseases. maybe some left for Iceland and Norway or other places. The seem not to go to the Eystribyggð, cos then they would have known about their destiny. The Eystribyggð declined as well, maybe because the medieval warm period ended during the 14th century and were followed by the Little Ice Age. I think a remigration to the east is indeed the most probable scenario.
Etiam si omnes, ego non.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 12:12
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

 
But they cannot come up with a good different explanation either. 
- and I don't quite get what you say...  who went to Europe?
The theories are not about Norse settlements but an absorption into some tribes of the native people. 

The detective work has already been done and if they just went home as you say, there would have been written evidence. If there was any knowledge about it, why would the bishop send out explorers to find out what happened. 400 farms abandoned (western and middle) plus 1000 people disappearing gives food for thought - and remember they had no trees to build boats from. 

There is no proof either way - but I find it likely that they could have gone southwest over the ice to a warmer climate - you don't find it likely (based on what?).  So we differ on that.


~ North
Who may have gone to Europe: The population of Greenland, descendants of Norse settlers.
For the  idea of a southwestern migration "over the ice": are You sure there was ice to walk over at any relevant time(meaning in the period norse settlers lived in Greenland)? 
Why I find a return to the East (the "Norse lands" in particular, including parts of modern "British isles"):1: Those lands had a climate and nature more fit for those people than anywhere in the closer parts of the Americas.2: They could return to familiar peoples and societies. Therefore I find that much more likely. In addition epidemics had reduced european populations, so there should be room for "re-settlers".
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 13:59
I don't think it was a matter of pick and choose which way to go - I think it was a question about survival.
They had no boats - no contact to the eastern settlement, they didn't even know if there was an estern settlement  - and no Icelanders saw them coming - let alone anyone on the British isle.
However, I know that the political correct theory doesn't leave room to believe that they went west - and yet, no one can come up with anything but a probability to prove otherwise.

I have no idea what is correct and I don't think anyone else know - but considering the nature of the settlers, I just think we need to leave room for the possibility of a western migration - if we can call such a small group of people a migration....

~ North


   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 16:23
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

I don't think it was a matter of pick and choose which way to go - I think it was a question about survival.
They had no boats - no contact to the eastern settlement, they didn't even know if there was an estern settlement  - and no Icelanders saw them coming - let alone anyone on the British isle.
However, I know that the political correct theory doesn't leave room to believe that they went west - and yet, no one can come up with anything but a probability to prove otherwise.

I have no idea what is correct and I don't think anyone else know - but considering the nature of the settlers, I just think we need to leave room for the possibility of a western migration - if we can call such a small group of people a migration....

~ North


Yes there is room for such a possibillity, but that is not the same that it is a likely scenario. That said I find ideas about what is "political correct" or the opposite, as irrellevant to the question. You write #they had no boats". Well, we should not rule out they may have had. If they did not have materials for them on Greenland (could they not ? What about timber tree brought from North America or elsewhere by currents? What about building materials from their houses and other structures?) there is the possibillity they brought it from elsewhere, perhaps from forested places on the North American coast. If they had the possibillity to go west at all, why not to forested places? If so Your argument  about the "missing boats" is not waterproof.
You the write " no one saw them comming". I admit I have no evidense they did, but how fine.-masked is the written records for that period? If for a moment, we accept the possibillity that a remnant population from Greenland indeed "returned", what would that mean? I think for Europe as a whole, or even for single countries it would appear most insignificant and un - noteworthy, beyond a purely local level.
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
~ Scylding ~

Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 10426
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 17:39
And yes - I'm confident there easily could have been ice to walk upon...

Annual growth and retreat of the polar ice packs from SeaWiFS images.


Source:  Wiki
   
   If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.    (Albert Einstein)
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2014 at 20:06
Originally posted by Northman Northman wrote:

And yes - I'm confident there easily could have been ice to walk upon...

Annual growth and retreat of the polar ice packs from SeaWiFS images.


Source:  Wiki
For me that is not enough evidence. At least for the moment I have no more to say about the fate of norse greenlanders - a small part of the general discussion about human migrations any way.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4805
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Mar 2014 at 00:45
I think all we need to agree on at this stage is that it's possible that there was a western movement.
 
True, there's no evidence either way, but having regard to the skills possessed, the possibility exists, imho.
 
Now, did I tell you about the Viking ship in Australia?Big smile
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  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 0.078 seconds.