Peopling the Americas

[Arrian]

From Blackcat's link:

"Fish are for the most part absent from the assemblages at both Settlements. This presents a bit of a puzzle, for why would the Norse not fish when they were so close to the coast?"

That same link does mention it's possible that fish remains were dumped elsewhere, or back into the sea.

-Arrian

[Dinner]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Oerdin, try read my link - it doesn't exactly describe a society of scattered settlements without government.

Yes I read it. I also have read several other things about Greenland in the middle ages and other then the ecclesiastical order (Catholic Church) there just wasn't much unity. western and Eastern Greenland were practically independent of each other and they only both agreed to accept Norway's sovereignty because both of them were starving to death and hoped the King of Norway would help them. Even then they both died out any way.

Greenland was always sparsely populated and living on the verge of western civilization where European agriculture was difficult in the best of times. That's why they died out.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Arrian

That same link does mention it's possible that fish remains were dumped elsewhere, or back into the sea.

-Arrian

That just doesn't make sense in the least. People are lazy and they dump their trash where they dump all their other trash. To think that over 500 years no one decided "**** it, it is cold, I'll toss my trash in the same heap has all the other trash" is stupid. As is assuming starving people wouldn't have taken advantage of food if they could have.

The more logical explanation is that they would have gotten fish if they could but found they could not. I.E. that the lack of timber meant they couldn't build traditional wooden European ships and, for what ever reason, they never adopted native technology like small bone & skin boats. We're talking about an island which is 90% covered by ice.

[Arrian]

Oh, I agree that it seems unlikely that they disposed of fish remnants in some special manner.

For whatever reason, it does appear they didn't eat fish, and that's just plain odd (especially considering that Icelanders ate a ****load of fish).

-Arrian

[Straybow]

Their pet otters ate the leftovers.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Oerdin


That just doesn't make sense in the least. People are lazy and they dump their trash where they dump all their other trash. To think that over 500 years no one decided "**** it, it is cold, I'll toss my trash in the same heap has all the other trash" is stupid. As is assuming starving people wouldn't have taken advantage of food if they could have.

The more logical explanation is that they would have gotten fish if they could but found they could not. I.E. that the lack of timber meant they couldn't build traditional wooden European ships and, for what ever reason, they never adopted native technology like small bone & skin boats. We're talking about an island which is 90% covered by ice.

But they hunted walrus like 1000 miles to the north in Summer. I'd find it hard to believe they'd do that but be unable to build ships for fishing.

It also doesn't seem to agree with the claim that they went to Markland for lumber occasionally.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Victor Galis


No, Greenland = Cuba

I thought Cuba created gold in another way though, by becoming a valuable sugar plantation colony during the latter part of colonial era.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by MrFun



I thought Cuba created gold in another way though, by becoming a valuable sugar plantation colony during the latter part of colonial era.

And not to forget it's extremely strategic position as supply and relay station for the trade with other parts of Spanish America.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by MrFun



I thought Cuba created gold in another way though, by becoming a valuable sugar plantation colony during the latter part of colonial era.

Yes, but in the context of this story: Cortez launched his invasion of Mexico from Cuba, taking with him a large proportion of the men of the colony at that time. The governor forbid him to do so because the loss of those men could have doomed the colony and it was a super risky venture. Cortez just disobeyed him and sailed off.

Greenland would have been in a very similar situation had they chosen to invade Vinland in force and wipe out the skrælingjar.

That and without the benefit of 500 more years worth of military technology they would have needed more men than Cortez did.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
That and without the benefit of 500 more years worth of military technology they would have needed more men than Cortez did.

The superior military was only a very small part of Cortés's success. Much more it was due to the diplomatic skills and understanding of Mexican power relations by Malinche and gaining tens of thousands Indian aides from Aztec enemies.

The Vikings would never have conquered the region out of numerous reasons: the lack of profitable goods for them (beyond trade, which can be made from the coast just as well), the lack of centralized rule among the Indians of that region (in more barbaric areas of America, the Spanish got kicked their ass quite a bit), the lack of an imperialist policy aided by religious zeal, etc., etc.

[Berzerker]

I thought the Spanish under Cortez had to flee after killing the Aztec leader and when they returned disease had decimated the Aztecs.

Its unlikely but possible the Vikes disposed of fish remains in the ocean to ensure more fishing success, kinda like a ritual to ensure the success of future harvests. I doubt it, maybe they just lacked the materials to build fishing boats so they relied more on the land.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III


The superior military was only a very small part of Cortés's success. Much more it was due to the diplomatic skills and understanding of Mexican power relations by Malinche and gaining tens of thousands Indian aides from Aztec enemies.

Yes and no. By that I mean, without superior military tech Cortez would never have gotten those Indian allies. He got them by providing something they couldn't, which was shock troops that could easily win the mesoamerican-style battles. Apparently when the natives fought they tried to break the enemy center then exploit the rout. Cortez provided men equipped with firearms and steel weapons/armor that were rather well suited to the role of breaking the enemy center, and letting his indian allies clean up. Had Cortez come with 500 men armed like the natives, I'm pretty sure he'd not have been able to convince them to join him in a fight vs. the Aztecs.

the lack of an imperialist policy aided by religious zeal, etc., etc.

Umm... I'm not sure this was lacking, though the probably the religious zeal bit maybe.

I thought the Spanish under Cortez had to flee after killing the Aztec leader and when they returned disease had decimated the Aztecs.

Yeah... that too. I think he actually had several rounds of going at the Aztecs. They almost caught him fleeing the first time, but didn't, and he came back with more indian allies later.

[Addled Platypus]

Originally posted by SlowwHand


The Soul Trains?

ROFLMOL


voted best one liner since I've been on poly

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
Umm... I'm not sure this was lacking, though the probably the religious zeal bit maybe.

The Viking states of the 10th and 11th centuries were surely expansionistic, but their enterprises never had nearly the centralistic impulse the Spanish received from the Crown. Sure, the Conquistadores acted mostly like free agents too but the Spanish immediately sought to control them and to transplant Spanish administration to the conquered territories. They were also able, from the very beginning, to ensure rather safe and steady supply by a far larger number of people than the Vikings with their rather small and individual expeditions to the more exposed lands. Actually, the Spanish Conquest was pretty unique in its size; most other early colonial ventures stayed close to the coast (Brazil), often even completely confined to fortified outposts and coastal cities (Africa) or indirect control with trading posts in foreign cities (as in much of India and many other Asian ports: "Our words are backed by Iron Cannons").

[Lancer]

To bring about the "Peopling the Americas" there had to be alot of ****ing Americans. That's all I have to say.