Littlestone
|
Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 09:28
|
Did anyone else see this prog on UKTV History last night about, "The epic marine voyage made by a European people to the Americas during the ice age"?
Think the prog is a repeat so apologies if it's already been discussed before.
|
rocknicker
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 10:50
|
was that the one with the obsession about axe heads?
aye saw a bit last night but fell asleep...
|
PeterH
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 11:51
|
I have seen it and was impressed. I like the idea of two way prehistoric Atlantic travel and can never see why the Atlantic has been regarded as a barrier. Today people cross it in row boats and canoes. The real evidence is being uncovered and there are going to be a lot of entrenched views that will have to be dumped. That is if the sites are not covered in concrete first.
There is an interesting article from our American friend, Aluta on the Portal. See http://www.megalithic.co.uk/categories.php?op=newindex&catid=14
|
Moth
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 12:20
|
Taped it but haven't watched it yet....
love
Moth
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 13:04
|
Yes, I read Aluta's post earlier.
I thought the prog was pretty convincing but wondered why no linguistic evidence was offered? Surely even after some 16,000 years there'd be a slight trace of a common linguistic origin; maybe not (it is a long time) or maybe that study hasn't been done yet.
|
Littlestone
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 13:07
|
Be interested to hear what you think, Moth.
There's quite a good summary of the prog and the Clovis Hypothesis at -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2002/columbus.shtml for anyone who missed it last night.
|
PeterH
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 13:13
|
|
Yes, but I reckon the trans-Atlantic people were very much the minority. It is surely the case that most came from Siberia via the Bering Straits. That is clearly where we see very great similarities in ethnic characteristics, clothing, housing, religion. I have just read a book on native Siberians (the Ruskies treated them every bit as badly as the Yanks did the American Indians) the photograpghs are indistinguishable from photos of American Indians. There is the tantalising enigma of Kennewick man still to be resolved and the Native Americans are opposed to archaeology that disturbs the ancestors. They will be even more reluctant if it can be shown that they were not the ONLY First Nation
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 13:36
|
They will be even more reluctant if it can be shown that they were not the ONLY First Nation
Bucky will expand on this no doubt but all these speculations are a political powder keg for the rights and claims of Native Americans.
|
PeterH
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 13:56
|
Powder keg - yes indeed which is unfortunate for all sorts of reasons. Chatting to Aluta, she tells me of the deplorable "red neck" attitude to North American prehistory " Its only Indian stuff" and "Bulldoze the lot - you can pick up Indian arrowheads anywhere"
In a weird sort of way, perhaps the American authorities - local and national - may give more respect to ancient sites if they think they can prove that white "Europeans" got there first or at the same time. Sad and mad, but it won't be the first time racism and politics have distorted and destroyed archaeology. The Chinese are or were pretty hostile to the discovery of the graves of caucasian horse riding warrior women in western China. The stone ruins of Great Zimbabwe just had to have been built by Phoenicians rather than black Africans. So it is with the stone structures of the Oley Hills. The bigots declare that they must be European root cellars because "Injuns jest cain't build in stone" - they obviously haven't seen the pueblos of the south-west or the fantastic cities and pyramids of Mexico.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Stone Age Columbus
Nov 09, 2005, 14:13
|
Not that the British are any better at valuing their "native" prehistoric culture.
The system and the public is pretty laid back about destroying 3,000 ancient sites a year.
It's a shame we don't have a surviving tribe of pure-blooded ancients still around, shouting about it. But would they be listened to any more than we are?!
|
